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: DMaA who wrote (30818)	1/29/1999 1:58:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

From the McLaughlin Group, Jan. 16, 1999 John McLaughlin- MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are there reasons to remove Bill Clinton from office beyond the felonies detailed in the Articles of Impeachment, if that's what they are? Should senators consider the collateral damage stemming from Clinton's criminal conduct? Okay. Let us move beyond the criminal predicate to the collateral fallout. One, disgrace. "On January the 20th, 1993, William Jefferson Clinton took the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States 'faithfully to execute the office of president.' Implicit in that oath is the obligation that the president set an example of high moral standards and conduct himself in a manner that fosters respect for the truth, and William Jefferson Clinton has egregiously failed in this obligation and, through his actions, violated the trust of the American people, lessened their esteem for the office of president, and dishonored the office which they have entrusted to him." These are not the words of Republicans, the loyal opposition; these are the words of Clinton's friends -- the exact words, indeed, of the House Democrats in their proposed resolution of censure against Mr. Clinton. This is the judgment of the president's most ardent backers. The question that the Senate jurors may wish to ask themselves is: Should a president who has disgraced himself, his family, and the nation's citizens, and who has become a laughingstock throughout the world, be judged to be too flawed to govern?

To: DMaA who wrote (30818)	1/29/1999 2:03:00 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 67261

From the McLaughlin Group Jan. 16, 1999 John McLaughlin- Number two, Robo-Starr, a second extra-criminal basis for conviction. "There's a palpable sense in the United States that we are nearing the end of the Monica matter. It's not going to happen. The president intends to stay in office until the last hour of the last day of his term. There's every reason to believe that Starr intends to dog him to that very hour. Starr has refused to rule out the possibility that he will seek to indict Clinton for perjury, false statements, or obstruction of justice, perhaps even while the president is still in office." So reports journalist Marianne Lavelle, writing in the Washington Post. Even if he is acquitted, the president faces potential legal entanglements from Lewinsky, from Whitewater, from Filegate, et cetera, for the remainder of his term. In other words, if Clinton is acquitted, the nightmare will not end. The question that Senate jurors may wish to ask is: Which will cause more damage to the republic, the trauma of Clinton going or the trauma of Clinton staying?