Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Sue
I wonder if this political, masked as legal, affair is just a reflection of
what has occurred in other areas--the idea of winning justifying any measures
to get there, Now I know why the statue of justice wears a blindfold. She is
embarrassed by how the law is being used, not only in the Clinton affair : )
Did anyone hear that our friend Tripp also accused Bush of some things but that
it was never made public?? You know how those rumors go--just thought I would
check if anyone else had heard that.
jackief
Sue Hartigan wrote:
> Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hi Bill:
>
> No matter how one feels about Clinton himself, or his wife, if you
> really look at the whole picture you can see where this country isn't
> all that bad off, IMO. Now I know that congress has more to do with
> that actually than the President, but still.
>
> I can see really strange things that have happened in the WH that don't
> make any sense. And I wonder about a lot of it. But so far, as far as
> I know anyway, there has been nothing that anyone can actually pin on
> Clinton. And there have been numerous grand jury investigations trying
> to do just that.
>
> I honestly feel that most of the American public is just tired of the
> whole thing. They are sick of hearing Monica's name all over the place.
> I know I am. :)
>
> As for Starr, that man is scary. He seems to be able to do things that
> no one else would ever even think of. I can't imagine any other lawyer
> or whatever he is, calling in a persons private lawyer and questioning
> them. And of course there are other things too.
>
> I just wish that we could be privy to what is real information and what
> is just dream information.
>
> I honestly don't think anything will ever come of any of this. At least
> not until Clinton is out of office. And then who will even care.
>
> Sue
>
>
> > Hi Jackie,
> >
> > One thing is for sure. You can take any fact and if it's pertinent to a
> > political issue there will be spin doctors on both sides who will convert
> > that fact into a fairy tale that supports their side of the issue.
> >
> > Yeah, McDougal had a lot of baggage, including lying about things during
> > the course of the investigation. As with any other witness who lies, the
> > question becomes what are they lying about and when are they telling the
> > truth. Also he had a lot of emotional problems as well as his physical
> > problems. And of course, he was going to receive benefits from Starr for
> > his testimony.
> >
> > I think the biggest benefit of McDougal involves any documents he may
> > have turned over to Starr as opposed to what he may have testified to.
> >
> > I'm amused at how quickly the right wing radical jump up to say the White
> > House has paid off someone to say something when they are just as quick
> > to defend anything said against Clinton as an honest person telling the
> > truth. It is that type of transparency that tends to sway unbiased
> > people to fall in on the side of the Clinton camp.
> >
> > Bill
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
--
In the sociology room the children learn
that even dreams are colored by your perspective
I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
