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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (22326)	12/18/1998 7:33:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<<As for what's admissible and what's not, I don't know, and I don't really care, given the political motivation lurking behind the case right from the start>>> Quite a change of heart for someone who was acting as the authority on materiality. <<<Never happened before, but now there are all kinds of court rulings saying it's cool. >>> Yeah...thanks Anita.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (22326)	12/18/1998 11:50:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Limbotic thing? <<has BOB proven himself deserving of more respect? Or is this the Limbotic thing again, where it only cuts one way?>> It cuts both ways. I started out giving Bob his due on the name calling. Bob knew what subject he was talking about -and put SOMETHING in his post relevant to it. You just posted name calling without even having an awareness of the topic Dipy chastised him as being stupid over. Is that limbotic of me to say? It cuts both ways with me. And Daniel, Jones accepted the only backers she could get. With all the witnesses saying she'd been in there with him, and his denials, ya put two and two together and she needed help. Did you expect HIS side would help her prove he was lying about not remembering her- and that nothing happened between them? Doesn't matter the source when the tale is true. This is the way it always works. Those on your side are free to help you- and it's a good thing, or everyone would get railroaded by whoever is in power. Her evidence WAS strong, or it would never have made it into court. Strong evidence like that won't exist against innocent Presidents.