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: Zoltan! who wrote (23508)	12/21/1998 12:03:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Zolt! I had a long conversation with my son last night about the Clinton impeachment and I was amazed that he had completely reversed his position on Clinton and now believes that not only should he have been impeached, he thinks the Senate will have a trial and based on the evidence they may be forced to vote guilty. People like Moynihan have said that perjury is an impeachable offense, and now that the charges are brought, they now have the responsibility to look at the evidence. Do you think that finally Clinton's lawyers will try to make a case that he did not commit perjury or obstruct justice now that the "presidents' actions do not rise to the level of impeachment" defense was taken out of their hands? If they follow the same strategy they would be saying what he did, doesn't "rise to the level" of removal from office. It seems to me the Senate doesn't really have that option. They will have to rule on guilt or innocence of the charges. If they decide that he did commit perjury and/or obstruction, they vote guilty and he then has to be removed from office. If enough decide that he is innocent he will escape removal from office. The question is how many Senators are willing to go down in history guilty of jury nullification? bp