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: Peter O'Brien who wrote (28035)	1/14/1999 7:29:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

For starters, how about discovery of a truthful answer to the question of whether there were "sexual relations" as defined by the court in the Paula Jones deposition? Despite what Clinton would have you believe, this was actually a quite simple definition devoid of graphic details. The definition was a botched one. That is why Clinton was able to answer it truthfully. Don't blame Clinton for the blunders committed by Paula Jones' lawyers! (By the way, I wonder how such a "brilliant" man as Clinton who we are to believe is solely responsible for the great economy in the U.S. can also be so incapable of reading and understanding such a simple definition?) See above.

To: Peter O'Brien who wrote (28035)	1/14/1999 7:37:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Well, no thats not what I mean either. I have answered this question AD NAUSEUM about a hundred times. I have said that his answers to the sexual relations questions were not truthful, however it was the right thing to do to answer in the way he did under the circumstances. Certainly preferable to telling the "whole truth" so to speak. There were better ways to handle it of course, than to hide behind the definition of sexual relations. The better ways to handle it would have been 1) Tell Ken Starr to blank off, 2) Fire Ken Starr. Politically, neither of these was possible at the time because the public at large hadnt seen the perverse Ken Starr in his entirety yet. I feel the same way about those stupid questions posed by Hyde et al. Evasion is the way to handle these zealots, those questions were out of line. The entire republican party is out of line, and they will be blasted into oblivion into 2000 and I can stop answering these questions. BTW if I had a son who was dating your daughter, and my son was questioned by the school board about intimate details regarding his relationship with your daughter, I would expect my kid to lie to protect his friends and family and tell the inquisitors to blow. And this is why my family and yours will never entertwine hopefully.