New Page 1

<CLINTON'S NAUGHTYGATE>

<Messages posted to thread: >

<he'll survive 22-Jan-98>

<Wow! 22-Jan-98>

<Wow! 22-Jan-98>

<Wow! 22-Jan-98>

<Wow! 23-Jan-98>

< 26-Jan-98>

<Subject: CLINTON'S NAUGHTYGATE>

<From: >Truth
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Anybody have any opinion on President Clinton's latests worries?

Subject: CLINTON'S NAUGHTYGATE
<From: >Truth
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Anybody have any opinion on President Clinton's latests worries?

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Jim D
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Obviously, this man's morals are suspect. But they're not indictable. However, witness tampering is. But then again, do the republicans want Al Gore to be Pres until 2000? Or are they better off politically with a damaged Clinton?? They have the majority in both houses and if Clinton's indicted for a crime, they have a decision to make.

The impeachment process: The house draws up articles of impeachment based on evidence and votes. 50% majority needed. Then house members go to Senate and act as prosecutors, with Pres or whomever defending himself with his attny. Senate acts as jury and votes (2/3) to convict (impeach) or not.

It will be interesting to watch.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >he'll survive
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Slick Willie will survive this too. And they say Reagan was the Teflon president.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >how many others?
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

If all of the politicians/beltway bigshots who dropped their pants and then gave out "presents" to their friends were sent to jail the next State of the Union Address would be given in Levenworth.

Let's face it, Democrat, Republican or Socialist, they're all the same. They're no different from other power hungry, egotistical types. They get what they want and don't really care about whether it's proper or not.

Another thing to think about is to look at the polls. I don't believe that the population has become jaded. I think that with the divorce rate so high and morality in general at such a general low, that people really don't care what he does below the waist, just what he knows above the neck. Besides he's not doing anything that they aren't.

Quite a world.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Wow!
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Jim D, you must have a really big reference library in your office, with all of the stuff you know. Wow!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Fran - XYZ
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

I find it hard to believe that Clinton would actually be so stupid. He knows that his zipper has been under the microscope since his first campaign for president. Would he really be dumb enough to carry on in the White House?

If so, he SHOULD be impeached - not for his dalliances: personally I don't care if he's slept with every woman in 6 states - but just for stupidity.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Wow!
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Alan
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Clinton's antics don't surprise me at all. He never really knew how to be careful about where to dip his wick.

This time, he may have put his wick someplace where it will be very hard to extract!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Wow!
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Hey, Jim D, how's this?

Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution specifies the procedures to be used to remove the president, vice president or other officials for "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Was his behavior "treasonous"? And what the hell is a "high crime"? Did he bribe someone? Or did he commit a misdemeanor (whatever that is) of some sort?

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Think About it
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

Think about this - how is it possible for an intern to even get NEAR the President of the US? It's nearly impossible to see the President if you are an intern - you are in a totally different building...........I personally believe that this is a stunt to make him look even wrose.....and was paid off by some angry GOP's to make all of this up.....and I am a Republican.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Ray
<Date: 22-Jan-98>

The facts are : Clinton admits that he knows the girl and had a personal relationship with her. He also has already admitted to sending her gifts.

When asked if he had a romantic relationship, he responded that he never had a SEXUAL relationship. He never denied a romantic one, just ducked the question.

The fact that it has gotten to this point, that the White House was not prepared to show any evidence contradicting the girl's statements on tape -- logs, appointment books, anything -- seem to indicate there is a STRONG possibility this is all true ...and certainly inappropriate. I could care less about Gennifer Flowers. I really didn't buy much of what Paula Jones said either. But this thing is definitely a different animal altogether.

If it is true that he urged her to lie or to cover this up, I think we're watching the first stages of what will eventually be his dismissal from office.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Keen Observer
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

I somehow think that a majority of the posts in here are from Ray Lehman (with the exception of posts by Jim D & Fran).

Does anyone else see the possibility?

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Ray
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

Not true. I always post with my name. And believe it or not, I really don't mind Clinton that much, as far as Democrats go. I have a much bigger problem with Linda Stender than Bill Clinton.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Jim D
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

To WOW - Thanks, but don't give me too much credit. I heard the impeachment process on the radio and just repeated it.

As to treason, NO, high crimes, I doubt it, bribary could maybe be construed as obstruction of justice, and misdemeanors are usually classified today as minor law infractions like disorderly persons, etc. But that was written a long time ago and some of those phrases may have an entirely different meaning in today's courts. I'll leave it for the lawyers to figure out.

Certainly obstruction of justice is a crime which is indictable, which I believe is the guidleine used. But again, I'm not a lawyer.

Another problem is this as viewed internationally. We are talking about the leader of the free world. This will weaken him in all international circles, both politcal and non-political.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Outraged Father
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

If Bill Clinton were the CEO of a major corporation in this country, he would be tendering his resignation this morning.

Remember Bill Agee and Mary Cunningham?

This young lady was, at 21, hardly a match for the President of the United States. He should be gone, and soon!

I feel sorry for his daughter. How does he explain this away to her?

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Wow!
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

Jim D, I did the same. Looks good, though.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >hal
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

keen observer watch what you say about ray he sometimes bits

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Ray
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

Mmmmm, halburgers. How tasty!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >hal
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

thanks ray i needed that,

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >If Clinton were a CEO
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

If Clinton were the CEO of some large corporation he'd be boffing his secretary as we speak. At least he had the good sense not to get a heart attack while in the act like Nelson Rockefeller.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Steve Kuchen
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

What does Jerome Petti "allegedly" know about this Clinton Naughygate???

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Ray
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

From what I hear, Steve, Monica Lewinsky's best friend's sister's uncle's gardener's gay lover once drank a beer in the Sports Section Cafe. And I can't prove it, but I'll bet Jerome Petti was there!!! Just goes to show, huh? : )

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Ray
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

I got forwarded this earlier today:

---------- TOP 11 CLINTON's EXCUSES ---------------------------------------------------

11. Excuse me "Your Honor", but she was on top

10. I didn't want people to confuse me with the Pope on TV

9. She's not THAT young. In Arkansas, the age of consent is only 16

8. Hey, At least she's prettier than Paula Jones or Gennifer Flowers

7. I had to show the American People that I WASN'T impotent for my second term in office

6. I was jealous of Nixon with his 'Tricky Dick" nickname

5. I didn't leave a message on her voicemail. Get with it. This is the 90's, I sent her E-MAIL!

4. See I'm not a Lame duck. She said I was pretty GOOD!

3. My real name is not William Jefferson Clinton. It's William KENNEDY Clinton.

2. I couldn't control myself. It was genetic. I was in her jeans -- oops, I mean it was in my genes.

AND for those of you who remember the famous "I DIDN'T INHALE" comes the now soon to be famous #1 excuse.......................

1. "I didn't insert"

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Bill Clinton
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

Fellow Americans, this is your President speaking to you from the Oval Office.

From today, all women in America belong to me.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >To Bill Clinton
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

Bill,

I had always thought your nickname, Slick Willie, meant that your name was William and you are a slick politician.

Now, after all the sex scandals, naughtygate, etc., I am convinced that your willie must always be slick!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Angry Republican
<Date: 23-Jan-98>

I would remind all of you that voted for that womanizer and draft dodger that we could have had someone like George Bush. Clinton is a loser.

Shame on you! I guess it is fair to say, though, that hindsight is 20/20.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Liz
<Date: 24-Jan-98>

President Clinton's private life should remain so. If everyone in the workplace today, came under such scrutiny about morality, half the people (low estimate) would be out of a job. Let the man be allowed to do his job.

We, the general public, should be allowed to vote on this matter before more of our money is wasted on the investigation of such nonsense. Plenty has been wasted on the Whitewater business. Now there, ladies and gentlemen, is the real crime. Is anybody at the Whitehouse reading this??? I think the people of this nation should be allowed to vote on whether or not we really want more time and money wasted on yet another bogus issue. Plenty of other citizens share this view.

Mrs. Clinton is right -- someone must have had an old vendeta.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >BAD ATTITUDE
<Date: 24-Jan-98>

SCREW HAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW HIS LIFE EVEN IF HES A TWO TIMING LOSER

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >lileve
<Date: 24-Jan-98>

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Anne
<Date: 24-Jan-98>

TO LIZ I disagree! If the President committed a crime he should be punished as any other citizen would be. The allegations at this point in time is not that he sleep around but more importantly that he LIED under oath and that he used his position of Governor to sexually harassed Paula Jones.

The American citizens knew at election time that he was a "womanizer" but it was never proven that he committed a CRIME. Bogus issue? let the courts decide. He should not get any special treatment because he is President. Investigations could also prove his innocence.

I don't like that our country is but to shame by HIS ACTIONS. To hide, cover or turn the other way at this point would also prove that we as a nation are as immoral as he is. Did the nation forget the actions of Nixon? If I recall his actions (regarding watergate), at the time, were reported for over two years in the press as well as major govermental investigations . Is this any different? Lets hope that this is not traged out that long!!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Liz to Anne
<Date: 24-Jan-98>

Dear Anne,

You brought up some good points, however, Paula Jones should have brought up the charges when Bill Clinton was still Governor --- why wait until later when he has already become President?

The day when this country is not so hung up on being so two-faced about the moralities of sex, is the day someone would not HAVE to lie.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >zipper gate
<Date: 25-Jan-98>

? how about chichen head gate. Then again with a female like the Mrs. to share the White House I can almost see his reason.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >RJ
<Date: 25-Jan-98>

I think this country should worry about whats going on in the Middle East rather then who the President has slept with.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >three scoops
<Date: 25-Jan-98>

I was reading a new story from the NY Times web site. I would suggest that everyone interested check it out at http://www.nytimes.com.

Apparently, even if Ms. Lewinsky doesn't testify Clinton encouraged her to lie, Clinton is in trouble if she testifies that they had a sexual relationship.

Clinton testified in the Paula Jones case, under oath, that he never had an affair with Ms. Lewinsky. If Ms. Lewinsky accepts the deal, she will testify that there was an affair, and the semen soaked dress the FBI seized under court order backs that up.

Clinton may be in big trouble, not for having the affair or subjourning perjury, but for committing perjury himself in the Paula Jones affair. He even might be impeached!

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Morgana
<Date: 25-Jan-98>

Angry father was right on target. I cannot imagine how young Chelsea must be feeling. Unless she is really tough, it's hard going to class and knowing that people are talking about your father. She must be in tremendous pain.

Angry Republican: We would not be better off with Bush. Remember how much his precious children stole from the now defunct Savings and Loan Corps.? There is little difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans, of course, have the Christian Coalition and all the other fanatics on their side. How does this help our economy? How does this help American workers? They are all SOBs.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >mid nite swim
<Date: 25-Jan-98>

How much longer will it be until we read "two female bodies found floating down the Patomic River? With his record, it shouldn't be very long.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >
<Date: 26-Jan-98>

I don't think that last posting was close to reality. if you want bodies floating you need G. Gordon and the rest of Tricky Dicks (and what was he doing all those hours with BB Rebozo anyway) boys.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Anne
<Date: 26-Jan-98>

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Mollie
<Date: 26-Jan-98>

What is the fuss with billie's willie

Should we conclude that Bill's been silly?

For something reported to be quite small

It's obviously BIG enough to make Bill fall.

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >Anne
<Date: 26-Jan-98>

Dear Liz, You were right to question why Paula Jones didn't bring forth her alligations while the President was Governor. I had the same thoughts regarding Antia Hill. I guess we will never know the real motivation for her accusations.

Now that the President has come out publicly with his denial of a relationship with "that women" it should be interesting to see if there is any evidence that would support his possible perjury.

Another thought ... remember the women that was released from the service for having an affair with a married man? As Commander-and-Chief of the services isn't he accountable to the same rules? I'm not sure that I agree with the above.

Did you think Jordon interceded for the President and encouraged her to lie? This will also be interesting to see if any evidence developes

<Subject: RE: CLINTON’S NAUGHTYGATE>
<From: >A Good Idea
<Date: 26-Jan-98>

I heard an idea on the radio that might merit consideration. The idea came from an Iranian newspaper.

Put a chastity belt on Slick Willie's little willie, and give the key to Mrs. Clinton.

I haven't heard much from Iran that I like, but this idea should definitely be considered. Slick Willie doesn't seem able to avoid thinking with his head (no, not that one, the other one).