SI
SI
discoversearch

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: jbe who wrote (8362)10/9/1998 1:30:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
Sorry, but I thought I went to lengths to explain my point. Let me try again: The Republican-backed proposal *is* "Rodino-rules". Which the Dems designed and thought was good for the Nixon Inquiry, which was also about lying under oath, obstruction of Justice, and public lying. So if the Democrat-designed Rodino rules are so unjust, inappropriate, etc, (thought by some of today's Dems), then why did the Dems design them that way back during the Nixon inquiry? The only difference is that it's a Democratic President on the hot-seat?

I'm saying that the rules were good then, and they are good now, so cut the fussing.



To: jbe who wrote (8362)10/9/1998 1:36:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen  Respond to of 67261
 
the other point I was making was that you refer to the "Republican proposal", which is in the essense of its rules the same rules as the Democratic-designed Rodino rules.

I'm sure you are aware that the Dems were in charge of the Rodino committee? And indeed Mr. Rodino was a Dem also of course? Just so we're on the same wave-length.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News