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: Borzou Daragahi who wrote (8074)	10/8/1998 2:32:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 67261

Because Walsh's charges had no genuine merit. That's why he issued them on the eve of the election. That was a real crime because it may have altered an election. Walsh should have waited a week if he had any other intention. That's the difference between Starr and Walsh. A prosecutor can indict anyone but unlike Walsh, Starr has been very careful and wouldn't issue an indictment w/o great evidence of prevailing. Walsh was a failure and a disgrace, unlike the very successful and ethical Starr. btw, unlike Starr, Walsh leaked w/ abandon and the WH didn't launch attacks on him.