moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Mac, > > Don't you think that might depend partly on whether Starr's Republican > friends can be surgically removed? Starr has been very solicitous of such > concerns in the past. Afternoon Terry, From what I understand the House Judiciary Committee headed by Mr. Hyde is well respected by both sides of the aisle. The recent attempt by Newt to create a special select group to have a peak into the investigation by Starr was a blunder IMO, and his talk of impeachment is a tad premature. I'm starting to believe he wants to have impeachment hearings regardless of any evidence to stengthen his parties upcoming elections. I think he blinked and it didn't go unnoticed. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
- L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 William J. Foristal
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 DocCec
- L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 William J. Foristal
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 DocCec
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 hallinan
- L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 William J. Foristal
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 hallinan
- L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 William J. Foristal
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 hallinan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 moonshine
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 DocCec
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 DocCec
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 hallinan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 DocCec
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 hallinan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 Sue Hartigan
- Re: L&I Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695 moonshine