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: JBL who wrote (36234)	3/1/1999 2:19:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Sooner or later, members of his cabinet will have to ask him for an explanation. I suspect they are not doing so, because most of them believe he is in fact guilty. I'm sure you remember how Clinton dealt with his cabinet members as the Lewinsky story was unfolding. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could tell that Lewinsky's story (aided in no small part by the Tripp tapes -g-) was most probably the truth. Clinton's spokesman however, blandly told news reporters that Lewinsky was more likely "delusional". And after that, Clinton told his cabinet members that he did not do what Lewinsky/Tripp said he did. And Albright said she accepted that, and believed it. That is how that happened. Meanwhile, I wondered how Albright could retain her own credibility by saying that she believed Clinton over Lewinsky. Here now with the Broaddrick story, Clinton's word is suspect. The fact is, if he decides in his mind that he has to "protect his family", we and all his cabinet members know that he will not hesitate to lie, and forcefully so. They won't bother to ask, JBL. They know they won't be able to trust him to tell them the truth, so they will have to make up their own minds. If it remains a simple case of he-said/she-said, then Albright and the rest of them will probably decide that since they can never know for sure, they can just ignore the whole thing, like it was a bad dream they had the previous night.

To: JBL who wrote (36234)	3/1/1999 3:45:00 AM
From: Johnathan C. Doe	Respond to of 67261

"Because there are tremendous implications to having a potentially criminal-minded US President."; We all are potentially anything; it is not a question of what we are potentially, but what we in fact are. Without proof that is better than he MIGHT be guilty which really isn't enough for any action, nothing is going to come of this. It has hurt his image some; it is taken the joy out of beating the Republican's at the impeachment game, but I don't see this leading to any action by the Dem's. Why would they want to force this issue and make it more sensational? How would that help Dem's? He isn't going to resign; how could the Dem's force him out of office. They could never back an impeachment with the flimsy facts and really no evidence of anything. You're just lost in wishful thinking. The only thing this is going to do is tarnish Clinton with some segment of the voters. The women's groups surely aren't going to start declaring support for Republican's that are sworn enemies of their agendas. As for the soccer Mom's; they are going to be voting for some other Dem; not Clinton. It will be more whether Clinton is out stumping for the next Dem and I don't think he will be with this, but hey, this might all blow over and nothing comes of it. Like I say; there was barely enough to even go to press with it; way less than the slightest minimal amount to go to any kind of serious pressing of the issue as if he were assumed guilty. I think most Dem's think something probably happened between Clinton and her, but what, who knows????