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.

Pastimes : Impeachment=" Insult to all Voters" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (1265)	1/5/1999 11:47:00 AM
From: pezz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

<< The Supreme Court voted 9-0 to proceed with it.>> Is this the decision where they said that it(the suit) would not interfere with his running the country?....Ahhh ..himmm..I guess there is no interference.... If they say so. pez

To: Bill who wrote (1265)	1/5/1999 11:54:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

Right. Mr. Clinton-is-the-antichrist is just the guy to give me a lecture about putting politics above the law. Want to tell me more about Henry Hyde's professional, non-partisan handling of this? On a par with his predecessor Newt? The case was dismissed, then settled out of court. This has nothing to do with the Supreme Court ruling on hearing the case in the first place. Remember, the case is settled now. And before it was settled, it was dismissed, though the dismissal was under appeal. And, of course, the House voted down the Paula Jones perjury article anyway. 3 levels of mootness there. How many do you need? How many do YOU need, Bill? Of course, when you're trying to remove the antichrist from office, "substantive debate" or "rational debate" doesn't have much to do with it, does it? I'm sure your legal scholarship is on a par with, oh, nevermind.