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: pezz who wrote (16721)	12/2/1998 3:27:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>>I don't know but because he lied under oath given questions that I believe should have been asked it self does not give me cause to think he would<< You see Pezz, this is where I think you really miss the point. Clinton had several "honorable" options before him in that situation. He chose none of them. Instead he chose to subvert the justice system and deny the constitutional rights of an individual. So where do we go from here, next time you go to court and testfy, you plan to "decide" which questions are reasonable (not the judge of course) and then lie under oath when the answers don't suit your sensibilities? You think you'll be "censured" by the court if your lie is discovered? bp

To: pezz who wrote (16721)	12/2/1998 3:27:00 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 67261

I am not aware of any other perjury on his part are you? Yes as a matter of fact. Two witnesses ( Hale and McDougal ) testified that Clinton lied in his sworn testimony in the Jim McDougal fraud trial about being at a meeting that an illegal loan was discussed. Starr went so far as preparing an impeachment count on the matter but decided Hale and McDougal weren't credible enough. There was a forth person at the meeting but he has so far refused to cooperate with Starr's investigation. Susan McDougal probably knows about the meeting too but went to jail rather than answer any questions about it. pbs.org

To: pezz who wrote (16721)	12/2/1998 3:45:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<I say this is what we get when we elect politicians it comes with the territory. >> I say, when we apply measures designed to keep the above in check we establish a mechanism to manifest truth and justice. Adherence to the principles of the Constitution of the USA guarantees us a just system. Winking at politicians caught up in their own lust for power enables them to corrupt the process and deny my confidence in the system. Of the people, by the people, and for the people. That's what my ticket says. Give truth a chance, please. Give our system a chance to fulfill itself, and remain strong.