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: Bilow who wrote (6919)	10/3/1998 5:03:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Wait until the President gets impeachment charges based on the actions of his secret police. Then bury him. Care to elaborate on this? And BTW, the term "secret police" is reminiscent of the Ceaucescu regime in Romania.... I doubt very seriously any of Clintons security guards are anywhere close to that level of fascism, so Ill just file this in the same file as the "Clinton is a modern day Caligula" diatribe.

To: Bilow who wrote (6919)	10/3/1998 5:09:00 PM
From: Who, me?	Respond to of 67261

<<Wait until the President gets impeachment charges based on the actions of his secret police. Then bury him.>> Bilow, I saw a clip of Dick Morris being interviewed for one of the talk shows. This was part of the discussion. I think Morris testified about this before the Grand Jury, right? Check out Drudge at 9 PM EST. I think Morris is going to be on his show! This is the part of the investigation that will really get down to the nitty gritty!!!

To: Bilow who wrote (6919)	10/3/1998 5:38:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I have said many times that there are levels of misconduct that certainly could lead me to support impeaching Clinton. I've given examples. I haven't seen anything at that level. And it looks to me that I won't. The tide was running against Clinton when it looked like more and more serious offenses were going to be more and irrefutably proved. The opposite now looks like the case, and his numbers have gone up. I think the public has absorbed that while they think Clinton did lie (the idea of misleading without committing perjury is not something that resonates off the bat at all), they also think not only was it only about his private sex life, but also he was only willing to go so far. He MIGH have hinted to Lewinsky, but he certainly never told her directly to lie. Nor did he threaten her. Nor did he clearly tie big benefits to doing just as he said. At worst, he was only willing to go so far. Same thing, or even more so, in his discussions with Betty Currie. You can say its because he was too smart to go further. And yes, that is part of it. But he also was willing to push it that far. He WAS willing to skate too close to the edge. But again, it was about a relatively trivial matter, that he should not have been compelled to answer. I.e., he was wrongly cornered. Doug