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.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (85400)	12/15/1998 2:29:00 PM
From: Matt Kaarlela	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

<and deprive one woman of her day in court by lying to a grand jury and then lie again to another> Your comment "There is not one shred of evidence to support any of those statements" Would your wife agree that activity as reported with Monica is not considered sexual relations? Come on now, nobody is stupid enough to buy that! In my opinion, to impeach or not impeach is secondary to Clinton admitting he lied and what he did was wrong! If he doesn't, I guarantee he (Clinton) will be responsible for adding a new slang phrase to Webster's so I'll even help them out: "pull a clinton" definition - to twist words with intent to deceive or manipulate.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (85400)	12/15/1998 3:15:00 PM
From: SecularBull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuzzlewit, we're not getting anywhere with this debate. The battle lines are drawn, and we all have our opinions about right and wrong. And this, being a representative democracy, entitles us to each have an opinion. It also, through the Constitution and legislation, permits the impeachment of the President by the House. If the representatives are doing what the American people are really against, then the American people will have their opportunity to correct that in 2000. Anyone who would suggest that these last two sentences are incorrect is just as guilty of subverting the rule of law as they claim the Republicans to be. Certainly, we are all tired of hearing about this. But if we shirk our responsibility to the rule of law, then we might as well just pack it all up and stick our heads in the sand. If Clinton is worthy of being thrown out of office, it will only occur after a group of Democrats cross the isle in the Senate and vote to make it happen. That being the case, what are you so worried about??? That they may actually vote their conscience?! Ha! If they don't throw him out, then the Republicans in the House will have done the duty that they believe was necessary within their constitutional authority, and the White House will paint them as a bunch of losers. Sounds like the Comeback Kid might just do it again. Then again, some Democratic Senators might call perjury by its name (see what the definition of the word "is" is...), and boot a shameless person who has cast dishonor on the Office and made the Executive Branch a shameful place to be. Let's just shelve this debate until this matter hits the Senate (at the very least). Neither of us is going to convince the other of anything on this issue. BTW, I think that any person, Republican or Democrat, who commits perjury for any reason, has committed a crime. If this person happens to be President, then he/she should be subject to an impeachment inquiry. PERIOD. Please don't take this debate personally. I respect your right to have an opinion, too. Regards, LoD