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 (6984)	10/3/1998 7:18:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

It was a sum that people felt roughly appropriate, and which could be tied to some benchmark out there. (Most Repubs. felt the same. The Repubs. were running the House at that point, after all.) Clinton is already out millions on this scandal quest. It is not at all clear to me why, if we have set up the independent counsel as almost a fifth branch of government (after the press), that that branch should have nearly unlimited funding. And yet the President not have his defense costs funded through the public purse as well. Those costs would seem to me to be plenty of punishment. Not to mention the need to settle the bogus Jones suit as well. But I'd settle for some sum similar to Newt's. Maybe twice as much. For appearances, largely, or put differently, appeasement of the opponents. The real nature of Clinton's punishment has been elsewhere. And severe. Doug