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: Bill who wrote (19144)	12/14/1998 2:52:00 AM
From: uu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Bill: you state: > Clinton committed perjury Yes, he did lie about having sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. You state: > He, hid evidence Yes, he did not want anyone to know that he had a sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. You state: > he, forced others to lie, No, he did not ask anyone to lie. He lied to people about his sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. People, then interpreted his statements as being the truth and reported back to others as him not having a sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. You state: > denied a plaintiff in a harassment suit her civil rights No, he did not deny a plaintiff in a harassment suit her civil rights. Paula Jones by the very definition of the sexual harrassment was not denied of any job, promise to work, or any other of her rights even if one believes what she claims to have happened. The judge in the case threw out her claims stating that even if her claims that president clinton displayed himself to her and asked her to kiss his genitals were true, did not suffer any set back in her professional career or her other civil rights as an American citizen. Now, I ask you for one second to read what I have to tell you and to your other fellow hard core republicans, and for one minute make an attempt to keep your mind OPEN, FAIR, and Reasonable: What are the common words you see in above statements?! It is Sex. Yes, President Clinton lied. He lied about having a sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. Lets assume technically he in fact did lie. Now lets seek the punishment that is proposed to be imposed upon him by the republicans. The proposed punishment is impeachment. yes, the man lied about having an extra marital affair. Republicans (who all have had a personal hatered toward him ever since he was elected in 1992) have proposed that his punishment is to be thrown out of the office and over turn a national election (despite the fact that 70%+ Americans continue to support him strongly and do not want him out of the office). You can go ahead and use fancy words such as perjury, but the fact remains President clinton lied about his extra marital affair. In Saudi Arabia, if someone steals something the pubishment is to cut off his hands. It does not matter what is stolen. Wether it is a pack of gum, a car, or $100 million dolalrs! I ask you is this a reasonable, fair punishment for someone who steals something?! Similarly, I ask you: is over turning a national election a proper punishment for the President's lies about his sexual relationship with Lewinsky?! I am not defending the President, but rather the country and what we all have to go through. Just scan through this thread and read the polarization that exists. Do you have any idea the division that the impeachment is going to have if it actually goes thorugh. Had there been a broad national support for the impeachment, the situation would have been different. But 70%+ of Americans oppose the impeachment and the congress is totally divided on a partisan basis over the issue. If the crime is perjury, lets have Clinton finish his duties as demaned by the majority of Americans, and once he leaves the office Kenn Starr, and his gang can go after him and prosecute him for his lies about his sexual relationship with Monika Lewinsky. Fairness, and Reasonable thinking seem to have vanished when it comes to republicans in the congress. And for that they will pay dearly in the year 2000 (regardless of Clinton being impeached or not). They may already think since they would be slaughtered in the next national elections they may do whatever they can to harm the democrats anyway. And this I can understand. You can mark this post and come back to it in the year 2000 and watch how Republicans will be running around asking for mercy of the people to forgive them for what they did in 1998 (and possibly 1999). Regards, Addi Jamshidi