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: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/11/1998 7:37:00 PM
From: iandiareii	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

As the Paris summit approached, the cautious Eisenhower allowed one last flight--the longest and most daring to date. On May 1, 1960, pilot Frances Gary Powers left Pakistan and started his overflight across the Soviet Union. Hours later, Eisenhower was informed that the plane was missing. His worst fears were coming true. A belligerent Khrushchev announced to the world that the Soviets had shot down a "bandit" US spy plane. He then went on to charge the US with willfully sabotaging the upcoming Paris summit. Since no proof of pilot or plane was presented by Khrushchev, Eisenhower denied the charges, saying only that a US weather plane may have accidentally strayed into Soviet air space. Days later Eisenhower was stunned to learn that the Soviets not only had the downed U2, but that they had captured the pilot. Eisenhower's denials had been revealed to be duplicitous. pbs.org

To: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/11/1998 7:40:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<<<Not quite. What scares me is that the Republicans are lowering the impeachment bar to include "political purposes" and "lying".>>> Once again, you twist the facts. No where in the letters of impeachment is "lying" mentioned. However perjury is rightly condemned and mentioned throughout. <<<Just about all politicians lie.>>> Translation : "I want to give Al Gore an out in 2000!" <<<<We probably have not had one President that has not deliberately lied, sometimes concerning issues of significant national interest.>>> Leave it to liberals to compare John F. Kennedy lying to the Russians about our nuclear capability to William Jefferson Clinton lying about his unwelcomed advances on Paula Jones! <<<The Republicans are hardly being truthful, themselves, about the reasons that they are going thru with the impeachment. <<<I don't justify lying,>>> No..."embrace" would be a better word. <<<but the Republicans are setting a precedent that Presidents may be impeached if they are caught lying, even if that lie is a result of a political trap.>>> Well folks here we go with the Blame Game....and Monica is a stalker...and Jennifer is a user...and Kathleen is a opportunist..blah...blah... blah <<<The Republicans are releasing a cancer on our constitutional system by doing this.>>> Yeah, Democrats for so long have gotten by without bothering with that tumor called the Constitution. If you aren't careful it kind of grows on you. <<<And noone in the Republican ranks has the balls or backbone to stand up and stop it from happening! It's a sad time.>>> Yawn....you're pathetic. A very large contingent of Congress people have decided to stand up to the lawlessness of the most politically powerful man in the world and you say they have no backbone or balls. I suggest you lean down and take a look between your legs.

To: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/11/1998 7:41:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I don't justify lying, but the Republicans are setting a precedent that Presidents may be impeached if they are caught lying, even if that lie is a result of a political trap. Wrong. You are not listening. Nobody said a president should be impeached for lying. Nobody said a president should be impeached for cheating on his wife. Nobody said a president should be impeached for having kinky sex. Every impartial observer has said the president should be impeached for trying to destroy the American legal system. Period. If you take your blinders off or if you actually read the articles of impeachment, even you can figure this out.

To: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/11/1998 7:50:00 PM
From: melinda abplanalp	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

It's very sad and very scary.

To: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/11/1998 8:09:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

Not quite. What scares me is that the Republicans are lowering the impeachment bar to include "political purposes" and "lying". Actually, Trent Lott wants to impeach a President even for bad table manners! And, of course, there are a lot of people from the RR who want to impeach any President that is pro-choice... Gee! It would be fun to see poor GW Bush walk the tight-rope during the primaries. If he so much as even considers allowing abortion in some cases, the RR will be all over him!

To: Machaon who wrote (18585)	12/14/1998 4:27:00 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

By the by, it was a Federal Appeals Court that ruled the Clinton perjury may have materially affected the outcome of the Jones case. Kathryn Crier of Fox News threw this fact in the face of a Democratic Congressman Sunday when he stated "the Jones case is irrelevant since it was dismissed!" To her further query as to whether future perjuries in sexual harassment cases should go unpunished, he replied that there "WAS" a remedy for the Jones case- "Clinton paid 850grand he didn't have to pay." I feel this last is laughable. History will recognize that had Clinton's perjury gone undiscovered he would have achieved an obvious desired result- NO PAYMENT TO JONES! So if the case against Clinton is Sexual McCarthyism, then what do you call Clinton's perjury proffered against the Jones case- a righteous act of self-defense? Should perjury and witness tampering by defendants in sexual Harassment cases go unpunished in the future? Do you really want to defend actions such as this when committed by a President or anyone? Ok, fine! Enjoy your liberal enlightenment- I just think the train of liberalism left you sitting at the station somewhere back there... . The man went to elaborate lengths in an attempt to squash the Jones case. :-) Clintons ultimate removal would be a great victory for the anti-sexual harassment cause. Piggy men(and being a pig may not be impeachable in and of itself) may think twice before acting on their instincts in the future. But if we allow Clinton's Perjury to slide...should men not fear being caught perjuring themselves in such cases? The Lewinsky testimony could scarcely be more pertinent to an attempt to corroborate the Jones testimony relating his actions in her presence- thus bolstering greatly the notion that she testified knowledgeably and truthfully of his particular proclivities/actions. Hence and fittingly polls show most people now believe the Jones testimony. This also may make his denial of remembering her as implausible as his denial of inhaling marijuana and then some! The public change of heart concerning the Jones testimony must be a major factor in CNN poll results indicating over Half of the people don't care if he is impeached- whether they want him to be or not.