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: Kilgore Trout who wrote (36062)	2/26/1999 4:59:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (8) \| Respond to of 67261

Kilgore, I don't know - I definitely think her allegations are credible, but of course they are not provable, which means this is not grounds for impeachment in my book. I don't believe in judging by innuendo. Before this I think most would have said that Clinton is a womanizer only, and this changes things, but again it isn't provable so what can you do? The other problem we have here is that the right has embraced all kinds of stupid charges against Clinton, such as the entire Monica episode, and the public didn't buy that there was really any legal wrongdoing there. So there is this history of outrageous allegations by the right, and now we have this Broadderick thing which looks like it could be factual, except for the huge issue of the affidavit that she signed which negates everything. The public is tired and doesn't want to waste time and money on another perjury trap. So, we have a stalemate. Tell me, what would you propose on this matter? Surely you don't think this Broadderick case is grounds for impeachment do you?

To: Kilgore Trout who wrote (36062)	2/26/1999 6:37:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<<Clinton has been absolutely shameless in claiming that unless he explicitly denies such an allegation, he has not actually denied it.>> On Imus this morning they had a lawyer who pointed out 4 outs on the Kendall reply to the Broaddrick story. President Clinton--- No he was AG Clinton at the time. Didn't assualt--- No, he raped her. Juanita Broddrick---- No, she was married to her first husband at the time and had a different name. 20 years ago--- Might have been 19 years and 11 months. This is what we get from having to define the meaning of is. Thanks to you know who.