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: mrknowitall who wrote (17829)12/9/1998 1:53:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
You're dismal, K. Take up the earnest lecture business with JBL if you want. How many people go down for perjury in dismissed civil cases, for testimony ruled inadmissible anyway, and where the case gets settled out of court before the appeal is heard? Maybe it happened, sometime. Then, there's the technical issue of alleged perjury, which is only simple in the political context. Evasive testimony under deposition is common, and nobody is talking about sending Bill Gates up for perjury. Then we have the issue of the political motivation and funding of the Jones suit, and Starr's set-up tactics with Tripp and Lewinsky. So, do you think it's a good idea to have a special prosecutor working in concert with a politically motivated civil suit, all to take down the President by whatever means, after 4 years of leaks about the various stuff he couldn't pin on Clinton?

jimpit started a thread for you all to go whine about the subtle press bias issue. I've stated my views, if you agree with it, it's objective, if you don't, it's biased. It's not like there hasn't been more coverage of all this stuff than anybody ever wanted to see. It's all politics to me, and I don't think the moral reformation front is any more honest about it than anybody else. Witness Hyde's Iran-contra statements. Historical dodge? Didn't have any problem with that on the draft business, did you, K?