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: dougjn who wrote (5007)	9/23/1998 2:40:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 67261

I think in light of the Lewinsky revelations, they (the press) owe Paula Jones an apology. In spite of what you say, (and I'm not going to go over this ground again, it's been thoroughly documented) the Jones case went through every single hurdle to present evidence of sexual harassment and the case was only dismissed because according to Judge Wright, there was insufficient evidence to prove "damages" even if the behavior took place (as described by Jones about the President). Now, the June Supreme Court ruling in the Burlington case highly increases the potential for the case to be re-instated. I notice you do not address the fact that Bill Clinton could still be cited for contempt in that proceeding or even a summary judgement issued in favor of Paula Jones. So all your opining about the validity or the motivatins of the litigants in the case seems somewhat irrelevant to the final disposition of the case. bp

To: dougjn who wrote (5007)	9/23/1998 2:43:00 PM
From: alan w	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

What a surprise. You're a feminist in most things, except for the thing that Clinton had been accused of. Also, I thought Jones offered Clinton the opportunity to apologize. That would have been it. At least that was her claim. "Her story was thin and poorly supported". That is only your opinion. A few months back, you probably said Monica's story was thin. You continue to blindly accept what Clinton says. Why? There is no basis for this. Without proof, Clinton would still be shaking his finger at us. And, you would be saying what a rotten, horrible liar Monica is. Sounds like radical left wing extremism to me. You are every bit the zealot you accuse others of. alan w