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: sea_biscuit who wrote (29331)	1/22/1999 9:38:00 PM
From: John Lacelle	Respond to of 67261

Dipy, You are a little bit behind the times. I believe the argument given by David Kendall in his defense of Clinton was: Bill Clinton cannot be removed from office for perjury before the Grand Jury because the President does not have to meet the same high standard that a Federal Judge does because: 1) Federal Judges are appointed for life. 2) The President must be re-elected. I say this because it is all boiling down to "The People vs William Nixon". The case is interesting because it involves a Federal Judge who was impeached by the Senate and those voting to remove included Al Gore, and 33 Democratic Senators who are still in the Senate. The case against Clinton is boiling down to this because Kendall must show that somehow, the President cannot be removed for the same reason that a Judge was recently removed. His argument is good, but not great. First, there is nothing in the Constitution that says the President operates under less law than a Federal Judge. Further, his claim that the President can only serve two terms is sort of weak because it was only a tradition started by President George Washington and did not become law until the 23rd Amendment (might be another amendment but it was recent) due to Franklin Roosevelt serving 3 1/2 terms (the only President who decided to stay for life). Anyhow, Dipy, if I can so inquire as to what you actually like so much about Clinton? I think that this century has seen some great Democratic Presidents...Wilson, FDR, Kennedy. Personally, I liked Jimmy Carter a lot but it seems that he has really taken a beating from history so far. Carter was honest, and an environmentalist (unlike Clinton who claims to be a tree hugger but could care less), and we needed him to restore faith in Government at that point in history. He is still a Saint. The guy spends his days building houses for Habitat for Humanity. Is that a special person or what? -John