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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (8279)	10/15/1998 12:30:00 PM
From: Borzou Daragahi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

Ultimately, as has been said before, an impeachable offense is whatever the House and Senate say it is. When it was gleefully invoked against Andrew Johnson, it was obviously a partisan assault. Nixon's alleged crimes were so glaring and extreme that Congress almost had no choice but to launch an impeach process against him. There's really no use arguing about an objective criteria for what is impeachable. The constitution is maddeningly vague on this question. Teleological questions of should Clinton be impeached are almost moot. It's a political power game and the Republicans call almost all the shots.The big questions, IM very HO, are: Can the Republicans convince enough swing voters to come along with them for this ride or at least shut up? Do the Republicans really want Al Gore as in incumbent in 2000? Can Republicans convince enough Democratic Senators to jump ship and vote against Clinton?

To: pezz who wrote (8279)	10/15/1998 12:36:00 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

How many convicted but not serving any time for perjury, must be thousands. I've never heard of one conviction of perjury that has not resulted in jail time. Have you? Perjury in a civil case that has been dismissed. It was dismissed BECAUSE the defendant perjured himself, thus turning the whole case into "he said/she said." Lewinsky's appearance changed all that. The case may be reinstated, now that Clinton's own lawyer has admitted that Clinton knowingly allowed a false affidavit to be entered into evidence. Now please don't say that perjury is perjury and all must face the same penalty.You know that doesn't apply. Sorry; can't do that. Federal and state laws say perjury is a felony and makes no distinction on what the lying is about, and I'm not going to ignore the law. That's up to the Senate in the impeachment hearings. RS

To: pezz who wrote (8279)	10/15/1998 1:36:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Pezz - re: "Perjury in a civil case that has been dismissed. This must fall on the low end of the serious scale." Only if you want to defend the indefensible which you seem to keep attempting to do. One - you're incorrect - at the time of the first perjury (in the deposition) the case had not yet been dismissed. According to Clinton's own attorney, even he had been lied to about the affidavit and as an officer of the court, has had to present that information to the judge in order to avoid penalties for himself. Two - If you are ever unfortunate enough to be deposed or face testifying in a civil matter, try asking your attorney for advice on perjury before you attempt to position it as on the "low end of the serious scale." Not to be redundant, but lying is a behavioral trait, and Mr. Clinton is a very good example of one who has been able to get away with it for most of his life. He cannot be trusted. Mr. K.