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: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (4920)	9/23/1998 2:27:00 AM
From: John C James	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

This is not about morality, truthfulness or whether or not Clinton is a great guy, the antichrist or something in between.. The constitution says "Treason, Bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors" Treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war and Bribery is the sale of office. Although he is certinly guilty of some very bad behavior, nothing Clinton has done remotely approaches this standard. One of the articles against Richard Nixon in 1974 was that he backdated the deed on some papers he had donated to the Library of Congress in order to take advantage of a tax break. That article was voted down in committee because it was felt that the charge did not have anything to do with the conduct of his office. Also voted down was the charge of conducting a secret war in Cambodia. That was judged to be a political charge. Newt and company are not quite so discriminating. Republicans, unhappy at the results of the 1996 elections and not wishing to wait for 2000, want Clinton gone now. They have the votes in the House to start that ball rolling. A lot, a very lot will depend on the results of the midterm elections in six weeks. Should Republicans sweep, especially in the Senate, they may be able to remove Clinton or force him to resign. This would be unfortunate for our own particular form of constitutional government. It would signal a very profound change in the nature of relations between the legislative and the executive. It would almost certainly come back to haunt Republicans in ways they can scarcely imagine.