what difference does it make when it happened? but if you must know,
it establishes a pattern of behaviour.
no, it wouldn't have made him guilty, but you've seen movies of
trials, haven't you? it's not always the smoking gun that convicts,
it's the preponderance of evidence. the monica affair was only one
instance in a long, established and well known standard of behavior.
On 11/30/07, Michael <michael2938@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rick,
You also seem to keep conveniently forgetting what Clinton was being
investigated for.... it wasn't a blow job, it was for rape and sexual
assault allegations from multiple women.
I never understood how an affair that happened 6 to 8 years after the
alleged rape and harassment is relevant to the case. Suppose he told the
truth about his affair with Monica, does that make him guilty of rape from 8
years ago?
-Mike
--
This is the Open discussion among iSeries Users (CPF0000) mailing list
To post a message email: CPF0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/cpf0000
or email: CPF0000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/cpf0000.
