|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Earl,
They don't call him "Slick Willie" for nothing. And with Larry Flint as the
wildcard; who purports to have more revelations as this "thing" goes deeper.
Who can really say, how much more pain Republicans in the Senate can take
and further destroy the facade of a very august and righteous party. The
more revelations, the more sentiment will shift to the Democrats and they'll
be able to cut a deal. Stay tuned.
Russ
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Adamy <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, December 18, 1998 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Current Events and the Markets - LONG POST
>Consider that many House members appear to be willing to take a stand on
>principal which is clearly contrary to public opinion. I think it would be
a
>mistake to assume that the Senate will acquit on a party line vote.
Consider
>that the Senate serves the role of Jury, that the public takes jury duty
>seriously, and that the Senate considers itself to be more deliberative and
>serious than the House. Most Senators consider themselves to the at the
>pinnacle of their careers and are unlikely to be swayed by public opinion
>when viewing a matter of such serious proportions. There is no provision or
>tradition of plea bargaining the impeachment process and I doubt that the
>Senate would allow itself to be sullied by such a procedure - expect a
trial
>and an up or down vote based on more than politics. Further, consider that
>a) the public does not want the status quo (prosperity) changed, b) the
>public generally believes the President is amoral or worse, and c) the
>public wants the President to be punished in some manner. Thus, one should
>not read unqualified and unlimited public support for the President into
the
>poll readings.
>
>I suspect that the dynamics of this entire process as well as public
>perception will undergo a radical change as the process moves from
>indictment by the House to trial by the Senate. I would rate the odds of
>resignation as far higher than 50/50. I vividly recall Nixon denying any
>intention to resign right to the very end. Consider further that the
>Clintons must look forward to the day when they will leave office. They
will
>surely need the pension and office support privileges which are denied to
>ex-presidents who have been impeached. Not to mention the fact that they
>will need to find a way to earn livings and pay off millions in debt.
>
>Now look forward from that point and the outcome (Clinton or Gore) probably
>will have little impact upon domestic or foreign policy. It is many of
those
>outside the US who will not fully understand this and may very well have a
>prolonged aversion to US markets until the smoke clears.
>
>Earl
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: charles meyer <chmeyer@xxxxxxxx>
>To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Friday, December 18, 1998 1:49 PM
>Subject: Fw: Current Events and the Markets - LONG POST
>
>
>>> Impeachment Proceedings:
>>>
>>> Even though the analysis of military operations and the markets above
>>seem to
>>> favor the odds of an increase, it's difficult to say what effect an
>>> impeachment proceeding may have because we've never had one in our
>>lifetimes.
>>> It seems to me the markets have already assumed that a vote for
>>impeachment
>>> will be approved and go to the Senate where it will not pass the 2/3
vote
>>> needed. Yesterday's IBD had some statistics showing how stocks have
>>reacted
>>> to recent crises (some of the S+P returns may be off a couple percentage
>>> points as I interpolated them from graphs):
>
>
>
|