Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (4296)	9/21/1998 4:34:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I am a lawyer, educated at a top law school, served on its law review, and then practiced at a leading law firm. I'm now doing other things. So now you are going to embark on professional insults? Hopefully not. Re the substantive, as opposed to the insulting, portions of your latest post to me: He could not be compelled to answer because he had appeared voluntarily. Had Starr subpoened him, he would have refused to appear on Fifth Amendment grounds. And also said he had answered all reasonable questions necessary to determine whether he had violated the law, and refused only to give great detail about the details of his intimate relations with Lewinsky. He outmaneuvered Starr on that one, BP, face it. As well as much else in his GJ testimony. Which Starr portrayed in a very biased manner in his report, in true Starr style re: his obsession to GET Clinton. Fundamentalist minister's son, and member of the religious right that Starr is. Doug