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 (4364)	9/21/1998 6:28:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Sure they did. It really was a lousy definition. Parts two and three, which were excluded, were way too broad. Part one was way too narrow. Jones's messed up big. Partly it was because they wanted it to look to the judge as if they were focusing on harassment relevant issues. And I think the judge settled on a definition that might possibly have something to do with the conduct Paula Jones alleged Clinton had comitted with respect to her. (Dishonestly, I believe. Clinton's MO has never been force. He has no need of that. And it isn't how he gets his jollies. He want's to be loved.) I could in five minutes or less write a pretty good definition for Jones's lawyers. One heck of a lot better, that's for sure. Doug