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 (6695)	10/2/1998 6:51:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Entrapment is not a defense for perjury, obstruction of justice, abuse of office and witness tampering. I want the Dems to put Tripp and Monica before the mic. Should be great. Wanna bet they won't?

To: dougjn who wrote (6695)	10/2/1998 7:02:00 PM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<Oh, I do indeed think that a sort of networked conspiracy was involved here. And I have been very hesitant to come to such views in the past.>> I make no comment regarding your viewpoint on this possible conspiracy. I do ask, however, why this one is any more believable than the one's presented by Gary Aldrich or the guy that wrote Spin Cycle, or any of the other anti-Clinton conspiracy theories. They actually make a lot of sense, and are quite internally logical. Calling this a conspiracy is insulting to the Republicans <g>. Monica could easily have made sure that there was better evidence against Clinton, and would not have needed to try to trap him with perjury. The actual affair, had it been exposed prematurely, could have been far more effective. Using Tripp would also be stupid. She was a holdover from the Bush days, is singularly unphotogenic, obviously has an axe to grind and makes a terrible witness. Couldn't they have found someone better? Wouldn't a savvy agent like Lucienne Goldberg have known that a different client would have resulted in real earnings power? By the way, what was Goldberg's motivation? You've probably mentioned it, but my mind is slipping in my dotage. <<An ideal vehicle for dredging into court, and hence leakable territory, juicy details of the President's philandering>> Why not have Monica sue for harassment then? Why not get an intern that is really on your side to go for Clinton? He obviously has a weakness for the flesh, so why not use an attractive young supporter of the GOP? Why settle for a thin or bogus suit when it should have been easy to get the real thing? Why not have Tripp ask meaningful, really leading questions of Monica (was he trying to buy your silence? Did he ask you to lie? Was his ***** bent to the left?)