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: Johnathan C. Doe who wrote (37374)	3/9/1999 5:06:00 AM
From: JBL	Respond to of 67261

McDougal says trial is 'personal vendetta' by Starr March 8, 1999 Web posted at: 6:03 p.m. EST (2303 GMT) LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, March 8) -- Jury selection began Monday in the trial of Whitewater figure Susan McDougal on contempt and obstruction of justice charges, an effort she labeled a "personal vendetta" by Independent Counsel Ken Starr. "It's become more than political," McDougal told reporters as she arrived at the federal courthouse. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In this story: McDougal could return to prison What do prosecutors want to know? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ She has insisted she has no information on the Clintons' business dealings in Arkansas, but said she was "scared" as the trial began. "Anyone who goes up against Kenneth Starr ought to be worried," McDougal said, urging the people of Arkansas to follow the trial which she said would expose the ugly nature of the Whitewater investigation. The intense controversy over Starr's investigation permeated jurors' responses to questions from lawyers and a federal judge during jury selection, both pro and con. "If I was in Mrs. McDougal's shoes, I would not want me on the jury," said a female juror who was excused. But other dismissed jurors sympathized with McDougal. "I don't have a high opinion of Ken Starr," said one. Another said, "I have those opinions too; I would like to do this to help her." McDougal could return to prison If convicted, McDougal could return to prison. She already has served 18 months on a civil contempt citation. Susan McDougal, after a hearing March 6, 1998, in Santa Monica, Calif. The trial is based on a three-count indictment alleging criminal contempt and obstruction of justice for McDougal's refusal to answer Starr's questions about McDougal's former business partners, President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton. But deputy Whitewater prosecutor W. Hickman Ewing Jr. said the trial will be about her failure to follow a judge's direct order. Two jurors from McDougal's previous trial in California came to Little Rock. They voted to acquit her on unrelated embezzlement charges and claim local officials were cooperating with Starr to persecute McDougal. "It's like there's collusion going on and we feel used and we are convinced there is collusion going on," said Nancy Dale Nieman. Starr's grand jury was investigating whether McDougal, 44, had improper financial dealings with the Clintons when the president was governor of Arkansas. McDougal and the Clintons were business partners in the failed Whitewater real estate development. McDougal has said she refused to answer questions because she believes Starr would twist her words to suit his purposes and may charge her with perjury if he doesn't get the testimony he wants. But prosecutors say they will introduce evidence that will show McDougal has relevant information about the Clintons. What do prosecutors want to know? U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. said last week he would consider allowing evidence of "prosecutorial misconduct or outrageous government conduct," specifically whether Starr wanted Mrs. McDougal to lie about the Clintons. But Ewing said prosecutors have already gotten the judge to restrict some testimony. "Hopefully, they'll be very vigilant and the judge will limit the proof to what's relevant," he said. According to the indictment, prosecutors want to know: •ÊWhether Clinton was aware of a $300,000 loan to McDougal from David Hale, who pleaded guilty to mail fraud and conspiracy. Hale said Clinton pressured him to make such a loan in 1986. The government claims McDougal used the money for purposes other than what it was intended for. •Whether Clinton testified truthfully during the 1996 trial of McDougal, her late husband James McDougal and then-Gov. Jim Guy Tucker. •ÊWhether Clinton knew about Lorance Heights, an 800-acre tract south of Little Rock that the Clintons' and the McDougals' Whitewater Development Corp. purchased in 1986. Prosecutors say the company used money from the $300,000 loan to secure the land. The Clintons have said James McDougal never told them about Lorance Heights or the loan. •Why the words "Payoff Clinton" were written in the notation section of a $5,081.82 check drawn on a McDougal account and payable to Madison Guaranty, which the McDougals owned.

To: Johnathan C. Doe who wrote (37374)	3/9/1999 11:25:00 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 67261

Frankly, I don't know. It was a link I found from the New York Times web site, and the rest of the site appeared to be pro- abortion, so I just went with the story.

To: Johnathan C. Doe who wrote (37374)	3/10/1999 8:20:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I still have not found out what EP is, but it turns out that I was mistaken. I came at the page through a link at the Times, and it summarized a Times article, but the site is a pro- life site. One couldn't tell from the page I was had been on, so it took nosing around. Anyway, I have no reason to doubt that they are adequately summarizing the Times article, and as it costs money to go into the Times archive, I think I'll leave it there, unless I can nail down the precise meaning of EP somewhere.