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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DD™ who wrote (19742)	1/14/1999 6:49:00 AM
From: jimpit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

DD, here's the latest Washington Times Editorial... jim ------------------------------ THE WASHINGTON TIMES Thursday, January 14, 1999 EDITORIAL The Senate's responsibility Today begins the impeachment trial of President William Jefferson Clinton. And it is worth noting that, for this spectacle, the nation has but one person to thank. It isn't independent counsel Kenneth Starr. It isn't House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde. It isn't Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp or Lucianne Goldberg. It isn't Paula Jones or even Matt Drudge. The one person responsible for today's adventure in the lesser-used parts of the Constitution is none other than Bill Clinton himself. The next time one of the president's lackeys protests that the process isn't fair, just remember that there would be no process at all if Mr. Clinton hadn't comported himself like a bounder and a lout in the first instance, and if he hadn't then broken the law in an effort to cover up his pathetic philanderings. At any point along the way the president could have averted this outcome -- all he had to do was act like an adult. We wouldn't be in this place if Governor Clinton hadn't been in the habit of using Arkansas State Troopers as panders. We wouldn't be in this place if Gov. Clinton hadn't put the moves on Paula Corbin. We wouldn't be in this place if President Clinton had been willing to apologize to Paula Corbin Jones. Nor if Mr. Clinton had rebuffed the sex-addled Monica Lewinsky; nor if he had been honest when confronted under oath about Ms. Lewinsky; nor if he hadn't leaned on Monica to lie under oath too. We wouldn't be in this place if Mr. Clinton hadn't wagged his finger at the American public and told them to listen up. We wouldn't be in this place if the president hadn't lied before the grand jury; nor if Mr. Clinton had chosen to 'fess up before the House Judiciary Committee. And perhaps most striking: The Senate would not be trying this disgraced president if he had had the rudimentary decency to resign. Which is why the Senate should think twice about winkling out some compromise with Mr. Clinton. Given the president's demonstrated capacity for perpetuating and exacerbating this fiasco, he can hardly be trusted to have a hand in putting it to an end. It is up to the Senate to behave with the dignity and decorum Mr. Clinton has done so much to banish from the Capitol. It is up to the Senate to hear and decide this case with the honesty Mr. Clinton lacks. The president brought us to this ugly and embarrassing place in our national life. The members of the United States Senate can transform it into an edifying moment by honoring the particular oath they swore last week, and the oath of office they swore when they joined that body. Is it really possible, for example, for Sen. Barbara Boxer (who is related to Hillary Rodham Clinton by marriage) to act as an impartial juror? Is it really possible for Republicans to make up their minds based on the evidence rather than being driven by ideology on the one hand, or the fear of losing in 2000 on the other? We will find out. Let's hope against hope that the Senate lives up to this high moment. After a year in which Mr. Clinton demeaned and abused his own office, the Senate can demonstrate what honorable public service means. All Senators have to do is fulfill their constitutional responsibilities. Copyright © 1999 News World Communications, Inc. ------------------------------------------- washtimes.com

To: DD™ who wrote (19742)	1/14/1999 8:17:00 AM
From: lorrie coey	Respond to of 20981

LOL! drudge! LOL!!! Okay...can somebody send that guy some Propecia!!!

To: DD™ who wrote (19742)	1/15/1999 3:12:00 AM
From: Intrepid1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

REPUBLICANS WON'T EXPOSE WILLEY TO SENATE House Republicans Won't Seek Willey's Testimony By Susan Schmidt Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, January 15, 1999; Page A21 House Republicans managing the impeachment trial of President Clinton have decided not to seek public testimony from former White House volunteer Kathleen E. Willey if the Senate decides to call witnesses, Republicans said yesterday....... etc.