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: JAMES BORECKI who wrote (85486)	12/15/1998 8:14:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Respond to of 176387

JimB: Good show,very well said.<eom>

To: JAMES BORECKI who wrote (85486)	12/15/1998 8:14:00 PM
From: SecularBull	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 176387

~OT~ The Senate is not a court of law. It should be viewed as a potential termination of employment, without criminal ramifications. The question is should this man be allowed to work for the American people after lying to them, and breaking one of the primary requirements of his job- to faithfully uphold and execute the Constitution and laws of this country. Anyone that suggests that perjury has greater and lesser degrees (and therefore greater and lesser punishments) should go out and perjure themselves in a civil suit and see what happens to them. No one should be above the law, otherwise there is no purpose for obeying them any longer. R, LoD

To: JAMES BORECKI who wrote (85486)	12/15/1998 9:08:00 PM
From: Stockjet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

OT James Borecki: I appreciate your input. No need to "forgive a foreigner for trying to help." I don't consider Canadians to be foreigners. We're all here together enoying this beautiful continent and living peacefully on it. I love to meet Canadians in Florida and I inhabit your wide open spaces and enchanting coastlines every chance I get. The only complaint I have is the 17% VAT. I think you speak some wisdom about law. I cannot agree, however, that the prohibition against perjury is a "questionable law." It is basic to our system of justice. If our witnesses are free, without fear of consequences, to commit perjury at their discretion, then we might as well choose up champions and have trial by combat. Many would argue that's what we already have with armies of lawyers clashing with each other. Nevertheless, lawyers don't generally give testimony; they only argue the testimony. It is the witnesses who testify and commit the perjury. Lawyers who subourn perjury or commit perjury, if they are called as a witness, don't deserve the privilege of practicing law and they don't deserve the privilege of serving as President of the United States. Stockjet