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: jbe who wrote (15344)	11/20/1998 1:12:00 AM
From: Borzou Daragahi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Why did the Republicans insist on going into executive session at the end, to discuss (and vote on) issuing subpoenas to three witnesses connected to nothing but the Willey incident (which Starr himself had said did not involve anything impeachable)? Joan, I'm not sure why, but I think it was a tactical mistake, and part of a larger pattern of the committee taking important votes in secret. Maybe they're worried that dissent about their strategy within their ranks will spill out on national television. Maybe there are genuine privacy issues that they wish to discuss. I think maybe you're right in your suggestion ("Hyde & Seek) that they're going on some kind of fishing expedition with regard to the Willey matter. I also don't understand why they're calling everyone but Willey. I thought Barney Frank was pretty good in forcefully laying out the Dems objections to the executive privilege session. It's playing right into the Democrats hands, because the move lets the Dems portray the Republicans as secretive and conspiratorial, rather than soberly concerned about the public good. But hey we're journalists, and we always get angry and self-righteous whenever the SOBs go into executive session, whether its the House Judiciary Committee or the local Water Board. It's like a biological reaction. ;-)