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: Who, me? who wrote (5522)	9/26/1998 2:45:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Sure, Who. In 1992, it was a Bipartisan Congress that was all ready to let the Independent Counsel law expire when the Whitewater industry started firing up. Suddenly, there's a new Independent Counsel law, and a new Special Prosecutor (impartial, objective, and non-partisan, needless to say) digging into things he'd been digging into from a different job previously. As to Watergate, I'll repeat, the main parallel seems to be Republican dirty tricks at the core. Cheers, Dan.

To: Who, me? who wrote (5522)	9/26/1998 3:21:00 PM
From: Marty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Actually, you are right about the Independent Counsel law. It is an absolutely terrible law and if I knew which Democrats voted for it, I would vote against them for that issue. As I recall, it flowed from the Nixon Watergate episode. I think that the bad law was made worse with a zealot like Starr getting into that slot. And I am certainly mad that Janet Reno acquiesced to Starr's request to expand his charter to cover Monica Lewinsky. (The way you put it, that this same DEMOCRATIC ATTORNEY GENERAL expanded his investigation, is a bit disingenuous. It was Starr's initiative, based on illegal wiretaps, that precipitated the extension.) Also, thanks for confirming my suspicion that what this is REALLY, is the Republicans' payback time for Nixon. As a matter of fact, Nixon deserved to be impeached over what he did and Clinton does not. There is absolutely no rational comparison.