Re: L&I Whitewater Witness Goes on Trial in Arkansas

[Sue Hartigan]

Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


Hi Bill:

I never even thought of that, if he has evidence why does he even need
her in the first place.  Unless he needs to back up that evidence.  But
if that were the case then it would be her word against his.

Sue
> HI Sue,
> 
> Yep, and the Clinton haters can't stand it.  If Starr had evidence to
> impeach McDougal's testimony then he wouldn't need her testimony, would
> he?  He wants to force her to lie and implicate Clinton because he has NO
> evidence to do this on its own merits.
> 
> Bill

-- 
Two rules in life:

1.  Don't tell people everything you know.
2.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues