LI Jokes for Thursday
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I REST MY CASE STATEMENT 1: Judge: I know you, don't I? Defendant: Uh, yes. Judge: All right, tell me, how do I know you? Defendant: Do I have to tell you? Judge: Of course, you might be obstructing justice if you don't tell me. Defendant: Okay. I used to be your bookie. STATEMENT 2: From a defendant representing himself ... Defendant: So you say you got a good look at me when I stole your purse? Victim: Yes, I saw you clearly. You are the one who stole my purse. Defendant: I should have shot you while I had the chance. STATEMENT 3: Judge: The charge here is theft of frozen chickens. Are you the defendant? Defendant: No, sir, I'm the guy who stole the chickens. STATEMENT 4: Lawyer: How do you feel about defence lawyers? Juror: I think they should all be drowned at birth. Lawyer: Well, then, you are obviously biased for the prosecution. Juror: That's not true. I think prosecutors should be drowned at birth too. STATEMENT 5: Lawyer questioning his client on the witness stand... Plaintiff's Lawyer: What doctor treated you for the injuries you sustained while at work? Plaintiff: Dr. J. Plaintiff's Lawyer: And what kind of physician is Dr. J? Plaintiff: Well, I'm not sure, but I remember you said he was a good plaintiff's doctor. STATEMENT 6: Judge: Is there any reason you could not serve as a juror in this case? Juror: I don't want to be away from my job that long. Judge: Can't they do without you at work? Juror: Yes, but I don't want them to know it. STATEMENT 7: Defendant: Judge, I want you to appoint me another lawyer. Judge: And why is that? Defendant: Because the Public Defender isn't interested in my case. Judge (to Public Defender): Do you have any comments on the defendant's motion? Public Defender: I'm sorry, Your Honour. I wasn't listening. STATEMENT 8: Judge: Please identify yourself for the record. Defendant: Colonel Ebenezer Jackson. Judge: What does the "Colonel" stand for? Defendant: Well, your Honour, it's like the "Honourable" in front of your name. It doesn't stand for a darned thing. STATEMENT 9: Judge: You are charged with habitual drunkenness. Do you have anything to say in your defence? Defendant: Yes, your Honour. Habitual thirstiness. STATEMENT 10: Defendant (after being sentenced to 90 days in jail): Can I address the court? Judge: Of course. Defendant: If I called you a son of a bitch, what would you do? Judge: I'd hold you in contempt and assess an additional five days in jail. Defendant: What if I thought you were a son of a bitch? Judge: I can't do anything about that. There's no law against thinking. Defendant: In that case, I think you're a son of a bitch. A police officer had a perfect hiding place for catching speeders. But one day, everyone was under the speed limit. The officer found the problem: a 10 year old boy was standing on the side of the road with a huge hand-painted sign which said: "RADAR TRAP AHEAD" A little more investigative work led the officer to the boy's accomplice,... Little Johnny, about 100 yards beyond the radar trap with a sign reading: "TIPS" and a bucket at his feet... full of change. --- -- The Top 16 Signs Baseball Spring Training Has Started 16 The air is filled with the gentle "twang" of pulled groin muscles. 15 48 states dealing with shortage of hookers and cliches. 14 Police abandon strict enforcement of harsh "No Pepper" laws. 13 A lonely Marge Schott once again combs Florida bars for an eligible White Supremacist to bed. 12 South American drug cartels shift to round-the-clock production schedules. 11 Bat construction industry shifts from "spouse beating bats" to "baseball bats." 10 Business up 4000% at the Ft. Lauderdale Hooters. 9 Morganna the Gumming Bandit is sighted doing wind sprints. 8 Thirty injured in whirlwind created by frenzy of sports reporters sucking up to Ken Griffey, Jr. 7 El Nino floodwaters: clear. Tobacco juice floodwaters: brown. It ain't rocket science, Chester. 6 Pete Rose sends Hall of Fame voting members the FTD "Let-Me-In" Bouquet. 5 The Florida Marlins trade Gary Sheffield for Harry Caray. 4 Your hubby can't get aroused unless you "bend over and sweep home plate" first. 3 Stadium hot dog vendors gleefully skim the scum off last year's weenie water. 2 Dwight Gooden finally begins to stir from his New Year's Eve stupor. and the Number 1 Sign Baseball Spring Training Has Started... 1 George Will's sphincter relaxes to nearly-human dimensions. --- Great Truths About Life That Little Children Have Learned * No matter how hard you try, you can't baptize cats. * When your Mom is mad at your dad, don't let her brush your hair. * If your sister hits
LI Jokes for Wednesday
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Top 15 Signs You Read Too Many Comic Books 15 More than a little disappointed you didn't get invited to Superman's wedding. 14 Keep memorizing words like "SSPPLLAATT", "KAPOW", and "BLAO" for school spelling bee. 13 Your resume lists your last three jobs as Defender of the Galaxy, Sidekick to Defender of the Galaxy, and Assistant Manager of Inter-Galactic 7-11. 12 You shout "Curses! Foiled again" when they forget the catsup at the drive-through. 11 You whack your boss over the head with a hammer and are surprised when his skull doesn't pop back into shape. 10 Despite repeated attempts to stop speeding cars with your bare hands, neighbors still think you're just a suicidal lunatic. 9 At age 43, you set the regional subscription record for Grit Magazine. 8 Your compulsive self-narrative renders you too transparent for a career in real estate or car repair. 7 You're the only one wearing a cape at step aerobics. 6 "Holy 40-year-old virgin, Batman!" 5 Wife is getting tired of you introducing her as "My trusty sidekick." 4 Most of your sick days are due to "the effects of the earth's yellow sun." 3 Refusing to admit you're drunk, you vow revenge on the evil "Flaccidus" for your inability to "perform." 2 Your secret identity keeps drinking all the beer. and Top5's Number 1 Sign You Read Too Many Comic Books... 1 Your attempts at becoming "Danger Cloud" are proving hard on the underwear. - Top Ten Signs You Might Be A Sysadmin 10. You see a bumper sticker that says "Users are Losers" and you have no idea it is referring to drugs. 9. Your sleep schedule is similar to that of the great horned owl. 8. You make more than all of the MBAs you know who actually finished college. 7. You have enough computing power in your house or apartment to render obscene pictures of upper management people. 6. Your idea of a social event is going to a Non-Disclosure Discussion. 5. The last time you wore a tie was your high school graduation. 4. The last time you kissed someone was in high school. 3. "What? No raise? No Backups, then!" 2. You have a vanity plate on your car that names part of the Unix File System. And the number one sign you might be a Sysadmin... 1. You have ever uttered the phrase "I will be working from home today so I can avoid wearing pants." Top 25 Explanations by Programmers when their programs don't work: 1. Strange... 2. I've never heard about that. 3. It did work yesterday. 4. Well, the program needs some fixing. 5. How is this possible? 6. The machine seems to be broken. 7. Has the operating system been updated? 8. The user has made an error again. 9. There is something wrong in your test data. 10. I have not touched that module! 11. Yes yes, it will be ready in time. 12. You must have the wrong executable. 13. Oh, it's just a feature. 14. I'm almost ready. 15. Of course, I just have to do these small fixes. 16. It will be done in no time at all. 17. It's just some unlucky coincidense. 18. I can't test everything! 19. THIS can't do THAT. 20. Didn't I fix it already? 21. It's already there, but it has not been tested. 22. It works, but it's not been tested. 23. Somebody must have changed my code. 24. There must be a virus in the application software. 25. Even though it does not work, how does it feel? - There's this guy on a bar, just looking at his drink. He stays like that for half-an-hour. Then, this big trouble-making truck driver steps next to him, takes the drink from the guy, and just drinks it all down. The poor man starts crying. The truck driver says: "Come on man, I was just joking. Here, I'll buy you another drink. I just can't see a man crying." "No, it's not that. This day is the worst of my life. First, I fall asleep, and I go late to my office. My boss, outrageous, fires me. When I leave the building, to my car, I found out it was stolen. The police, they say they can do nothing. I get a cab to return home, and when I leave it, I remember I left my wallet and credit cards there. The cab driver just drives away. I go home, and when I get there, I find my wife in bed with the gardener. I leave home, and come to this bar. And when I was thinking about putting an end to my life, you show up and drink my poison . . ." --- Three boys are in the schoolyard bragging of how great their fathers are. The first one says: "Well, my father runs the fastest. He can fire an arrow, and start to run, I tell you, he gets there before the arrow". The second one says: "Ha! You think that's fast! My father is a hunter. He can shoot his gun and be there before the bullet". The third one list
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: I solved the National Cancer question. I didn't mention the name it is in the report from the National Cancer Society. :) Here is what it says: "Information on these clinical trials is available from the National Cancer Institute (1-800-4-Cancer)." Sue Hi Sue, The report you printed said it came from the National Cancer Institute. As I mentioned I was careless in not noticing that the American Cancer Society was used in the report. The names seemed to be used interchangeably in the article when I reread it. You yourself mentioned the article came from the NCI in one post. -- 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
LI Speech Law Rejected in Conn. Case
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speech Law Rejected in Conn. Case HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut's second-highest court ruled private employees do not have the right to speak out on the job about company policies. The Appellate Court ruled Wednesday that the state's free-speech law does not protect a defense worker who said he was fired for refusing to display an American flag at his workstation. The court said private employees have the right to speak out at work on issues of public or social concern, but that a company policy on flag-waving was not such a concern. ``The issue of whether the employer should have `expected' the plaintiff to display a flag may be the subject of a grievance involving a condition of employment, but it is not a matter of public interest,'' Judge Antoinette Dupont wrote. The case involved Gonzalo Cotto, who sued Stratford-based Sikorsky Aircraft, complaining that he was fired in 1992 for refusing to put up the flag during a Gulf War celebration. He also claimed he was singled out for speaking out against the company for allegedly pressuring employees to display the flag. But Sikorsky officials said the company had no policy requiring employees to display the flag, and that Cotto was fired for creating a disturbance after employees were asked to display flags at their workstations. ``He threw the American flag on the floor, and he was sent home,'' company spokesman William Tuttle said. ``On return to work, he wore the flag hanging out of his back pocket and used it as a handkerchief.'' Cotto's attorneys argued that his firing violated a state law passed in 1983 that expanded free speech rights to private workplaces. A lower court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that the state and federal constitutions do not extend free speech rights to activities ``on private property, against the wishes of the owner.'' The three-judge appeals panel ruled unanimously Wednesday to uphold the dismissal. Cotto's attorney said she planned to appeal. ``My position is that you can be a good machinist without being willing to wave a flag at a workstation or support the particular war going on at the time,'' Karen Lee Torre said. Sikorsky, a division of United Technologies Corp. of Hartford, makes military helicopters. -- 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
LI Gephardt Wants Rep. Burton Fired
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gephardt Wants Rep. Burton Fired WASHINGTON (AP) -- The firing of a top Republican investigator into 1996 campaign fund-raising irregularities is not sufficient, and the chairman of the House committee conducting the probe should end his role as well, House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt said today. Gephardt, D-Mo., said Democrats would try to force the House to vote next week on a resolution ordering Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, to step aside as the chief of the investigation. Democrats would likely lose such a vote in the Republican-controlled House, but it would call continued attention to the controversy over the tapes and transcripts Burton has released of jailhouse conversations involving Webster Hubbell, a friend of President Clinton. In a letter to House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., Gephardt also renewed his call for the speaker to remove himself from the deliberations, citing recent reported statements that Gephardt said show Gingrich is biased. He made a similar demand last week. ``In both Mr. Gingrich's case and in Mr. Burton's case, I believe they have disqualified themselves from being able to carry out a fair, objective, impartial investigation of the facts that they're supposed to be investigating,'' Gephardt told reporters. Gephardt cited a report in today editions of The Washington Post in which Gingrich reportedly told Republicans that when discussing the fund-raising probe, ``forget the word 'scandals' and start using the word 'crimes.''' ``Your statements, which prematurely reach conclusions in this matter, diminish your constitutional role as speaker,'' Gephardt wrote to Gingrich. In the wake of the tape furor, Burton attempted to win back the confidence of fellow Republicans by apologizing to them in a letter Wednesday. ``I want to apologize to you if this matter has caused you any embarrassment,'' Burton wrote. He admitted ``a mistake was made'' in omitting from the Hubbell transcripts material that was favorable to the former associate attorney general and to his former law partner, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Burton risks losing jurisdiction over a portion of the inquiry because Democrats have blocked an effort to give immunity from prosecution to four witnesses whose testimony the chairman has sought. The fallout over the tapes quickly claimed one victim, the House committee's chief investigator, David Bossie, who supervised the transcript release. He was fired Wednesday on orders of Speaker Newt Gingrich, but allowed to write a letter of resignation. Unrepentant, Bossie blamed the uproar on Democrats subjecting Burton ``to never-ending and unjustified attacks'' and stonewalling by the White House. ``I want to emphasize that no one on the staff ever intentionally left anything out'' of the transcripts, Bossie said. GOP sources said Burton fought to retain Bossie, but Gingrich demanded to know Tuesday night why he hadn't been fired. Burton then told the speaker that Bossie would resign. The House Republican sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Burton had sided with Bossie, a longtime Clinton antagonist, in a furious internal committee dispute last week over whether to release Hubbell's conversations. Bossie was in favor of the release. Committee chief counsel Richard D. Bennett was not, arguing that nothing in the recordings would aide the investigation. After releasing the selective transcripts last Thursday of Hubbell's 1996 prison conversations with his wife, Suzy, Burton the next day began making the actual recordings public. Release of the tapes made it possible to compare Burton's transcripts with the conversations -- and in several key instances, they didn't match. Omitted from the transcripts were Hubbell's comments that there was no wrongdoing by Mrs. Clinton in a Whitewater land deal and that he did not take jobs from presidential friends in order to buy his silence to protect the Clintons. Hubbell, who knew his jailhouse calls
LI Ala. Footing Viagra Medicaid Costs
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ala. Footing Viagra Medicaid Costs MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- Taxpayers are temporarily footing the cost for impotent men on Medicaid in Alabama to get as many as four Viagra pills each month, a benefit the agency is scrambling to stop. The benefit is more generous than some insurance companies provide, and a doctor who helps decide which drugs are subsidized by the state said Wednesday that Viagra is a ``luxury'' that Medicaid can't afford. Dr. Rick Bendinger of Abbeville also said the drug may be only temporarily available to Medicaid recipients. Officials in the agency agreed. They are already taking steps to get the benefit stopped. About 650,000 Alabamians, mostly poor women younger than 21, children and elderly people, are eligible for Medicaid-subsidized health care. Dr. John Searcy, medical director for the agency, said Wednesday that so far only a ``few'' Viagra prescriptions have been filled for Medicaid-eligible men. He said it's not known how many men on Medicaid might be eligible to receive the impotence drug. Bendinger said Medicaid had no choice but to approve Viagra when it hit the market. He said the drug's developer, Pfizer Inc., is involved in a rebate program with the national Medicaid program. The rebates benefit taxpayers, and federal law requires that as part of the rebate agreement, when Pfizer puts a new drug on the market, it is automatically covered by Medicaid. Searcy said Medicaid agencies in all states are trying to decide what to do about Viagra, which some pharmacists say has become the hottest drug on the market. He said Medicaid officials in some other states are classifying Viagra as a fertility drug and are not paying for the prescriptions. Medicaid officials from around the country discussed Viagra this week in Washington and are awaiting ``further guidance'' from the federal Health Care Financing Administration, Searcy said. Andy McCormick, a spokesman for New York-based Pfizer, said he was unsure how many Medicaid agencies are paying for Viagra prescriptions. He said some private insurance companies are ``covering it in total ... some up to 10 pills a month,'' and others are not covering it at all. Industry researcher IMS Health reported recently that 51 percent of the 113,134 people who picked up new prescriptions for Viagra in the week that ended April 17 were repaid at least in part by their insurance companies, a figure less than the 76 percent coverage insurers offer for prescription drugs overall. ``In general, we think erectile dysfunction is being recognized as a medical condition and Pfizer is emphasizing that Viagra is only for those men with a diagnosed condition. It is not to be used recreationally,'' McCormick said. Bendinger said if the new drug becomes abused, or if there is an over-the-counter alternative, it can be restricted for Medicaid. One possible abuse is by men looking to enhance their sexual performance instead of needing Viagra to produce an erection. ``I'm not going to be prescribing it to 20- and 30-year-old people for improvement reasons,'' Bendinger said. Searcy said the Alabama agency has notified Pfizer that there is a potential for abuse or misuse of the drug, a procedure that a state can use to remove drugs from coverage. He said that if the company agrees, Medicaid intends to either stop paying for Viagra or to require advance approval for each prescription to avoid misuse. If Pfizer disagrees, it then has up to eight months to show Medicaid officials why Viagra should be covered. Searcy said the limit of four pills a month would apply during such an appeal. Bendinger said the $10 cost of the pills makes it ``not a drug that we want to make a priority for Medicaid recipients when the agency is struggling to provide drugs for diseases such as hypertension, heart disease and diabetes.'' A co-chairman of the Legislature's Medicaid Oversight Committee, Rep. Ron Johnson, R-Sylacauga, said that even though some people consider Viagra to be a luxury, ``the sex drive
LI Nobel Scientist Denies Cancer Claim
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nobel Scientist Denies Cancer Claim NEW YORK (AP) -- Nobel laureate James D. Watson denies telling a reporter that a researcher whose experiments have rid mice of maligant tumors ``is going to cure cancer in two years.'' Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, was quoted as having made that prediction in a front-page story in Sunday's New York Times about research by Dr. Judah Folkman. The Times said it stood by its story and the quote, which were picked up by The Associated Press. Watson, in a letter to the editor published in today's Times, called the experiments ``the most exciting cancer research of my lifetime.'' But he also cautioned that ``the history of cancer research is littered with promised treatments that raised people's hopes, only for them to be dashed when the treatments were put to the test in humans.'' Watson's letter said he told Times science writer Gina Kolata at a dinner party six weeks ago that the drugs, endostatin and angiostatin, ``should be in National Cancer Institute trials by the end of this year and that we would know, about one year after that, whether they were effective.'' Times spokeswoman Lisa Carparelli said, ``We're confident of the story we ran and don't wish to be in a position of quarreling with a respected source and authority. We're glad we were able to let Dr. Watson further explain his view.'' Watson was unavailable for comment today at his laboratory in Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y., but an aide, Wendy Goldstein, said he remains cautiously optimistic about the drugs. He wrote the letter ``just looking to set the record straight,'' she said. Goldstein said Watson spoke with Kolata at the dinner party while attending a scientific meeting in California. Meanwhile, Random House confirmed today it has signed a deal for a book about Folkman's research to be written by Newsday science writer Robert Cooke, said Tom Perry, a spokesman for the publishing house. Perry declined to say how much money was involved for the book, tentatively titled ``Conquering Cancer.'' Cooke has been given access to Folkman and has his cooperation, said Random House senior editor Scott Moyers. -- 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
Re: LI Ala. Footing Viagra Medicaid Costs
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Doc: It simply amazes me. I don't know about other states, but in California the people on MediCal have to pay for such things as diapers, toilet paper, etc. But I guess they can get their Viagra free, if it is like Alabama. What I don't get though is once this Viagra kicks in how are they going to pay for all the babies, and the STD's. There is no money for BC. Sue One has to wonder -- if Medicaid is doing this, can Medicare be far behind? Doc -- 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
LI Terry-National Cancer research
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: I found the National Cancer Research page, and here is what they said, hope that it helps: National Cancer Institute May 4, 1998 FOR RESPONSE TO INQUIRIES NCI Press Office (301) 496-6641 Backgrounder NCI Statement on Animal Studies of Endostatin and Angiostatin The National Cancer Institute (NCI) is encouraged by results from animal studies that suggest that compounds isolated by researchers in the laboratory of Judah Folkman, M.D., of Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, Mass., may be potent anti-cancer agents. NCI has made it a high priority to move research forward on these compounds, endostatin and angiostatin, so that clinical trials in humans can begin. It is important to note that such human studies will not begin for many months, most likely not until 1999. Once testing has begun, the compounds, which are anti-angiogenesis agents, must be tested separately for safety and efficacy in humans before they can be tested together. Production of these compounds is one part of the process that must take place over the next several months. At this time, it is not possible to produce the large quantities of endostatin or angiostatin necessary for human trials. NCI is working with Entremed, Inc., on production issues for endostatin and with Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., on production issues for angiostatin. It is very important to emphasize that while the possibilities raised by these studies in mice are encouragaing, it is not known whether endostatin or angiostatin will be effective in people with cancer. Clinical trials of other anti-angiogenesis agents are under way both by individual drug companies and by NCI. Patients interested in information about ongoing trials listed in NCI's PDQ database can contact the NCI's Cancer Information Service at 1-800-4-CANCER or search PDQ themselves via the Internet (http://cancertrials.nci.nih.gov -- under "more" choose Introduction, then choose "finding specific trials"). -- 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
Re: LI Terry-National Cancer research
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: No I do not have cancer, but so far it hasn't missed a generation in my family..all have died. All have gotten it around my age, and that is why I am so interested in this. I agree patients need to know the truth. They want the truth also. That is why I am trying to find out everything I can about this. None of my family members were given any chance of survival, that is why this is so interesting and important to me. Sue Hi Terry: I think I already posted that one. I'm just gathering information to see if this is for real or not, because I do have a vested interest in finding out. :) I do appreciate your help. Sue Hi Sue, I guess you would have revealed your interest if you had wanted to. I hope you aren't talking about having cancer yourself. I have talked to many people with cancer about the amazing progress that has been made and the many people who are surviving apparently cancer-free today that would have simply died years ago. One of my sisters was given a 40% chance of survival of throat cancer some eight years ago. That was probably most optimistic but she never read the playbook. She was lucky to have looked elsewhere when she was told that she would lose her ability to speak. Even people with disseminated cancers have responded to some treatment. But a drug that kills cancer in mice is hardly reason for wild optimism. It is little more meaningful than the drugs that kill in testtubes. It seems to me the first thing to tell people with cancer is the truth. Best, Terry -- 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
Re: LI Passive Smoker To Make Legal History
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I think that there was, and I do remember the one about the nurse who lost, because that one just happened recently. Sue Hi Sue, Wasn't there a similar class action suit brought by former flight attendants who worked during the days when smoking was allowed on airplanes? 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
LI The Hubbell Tapes and Political Squabbling
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Hubbell Tapes and Political Squabbling Evidence of a Cover-Up May Be Lost Amid Spats Tuesday, May 5, 1998 (This is an unedited, uncorrected transcript.) ANNOUNCER May 5, 1998. TED KOPPEL, ABC NEWS (VO) The Hubbell tapes seemed to hint at a coverup. WEBSTER HUBBELL So I need to roll over one more time. SUZANNA HUBBELL No. TED KOPPEL (VO) But Congressman Burton only released excerpts and that gave the White House the ammunition it needed. REP HENRY WAXMAN, (D), CALIFORNIA, GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Its editing for political purposes and thats what is so offensive. TED KOPPEL (VO) What wasnt heard was Hubbells support for the First Lady. WEBSTER HUBBELL She just had no idea what was going on. She didnt participate in any of this. EJ DIONNE, THE WASHINGTON POST A lot of people have said that President Clinton is blessed with great enemies and that in Mr Burtons case, he makes it very easy for the White House to say this is not a fair guy. TED KOPPEL (VO) Tonight, the bumbling of the Hubbell tapes, how evidence of a coverup may be lost amid political squabbling. ANNOUNCER From ABC News, this is Nightline. Reporting from Washington, Ted Koppel. TED KOPPEL We return tonight to the Hubbell tapes150 hours of telephone conversations recorded at a federal prison in Cumberland, Maryland. Webster Hubbell, who had been serving as associate attorney general under Janet Reno, was serving out his term for defrauding clients while he was a partner at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas. He could probably have avoided prison by cooperating more fully with independent counsel Kenneth Starr in his investigation of the Whitewater affair. Publicly, Hubbell has insisted all along that he knows nothing that might incriminate his old friend and law partner, Hillary Clinton, or his friend and golfing partner, the President. But in those prison telephone conversations subpoenaed by Republican Congressman Dan Burtons committee, there appeared to be hints, suggestions and intimations that Hubbell was covering up for his friends. Then, over this past weekend, those tapes themselves came into question. Had they been selectively leaked, doctored, edited? Was there, in fact, material deliberately held back that might have actually been helpful to the Clintons in their ongoing legal battle with Kenneth Starr? Heres the latest from Nightline correspondent Chris Bury. WEBSTER HUBBELL Im not telling anybody what I did or who, what they paid me. CHRIS BURY, ABC NEWS (VO) Last July, the Justice Department turned over tapes of Hubbells calls from prison. Last week, Congressman Dan Burton, whose committee had subpoenaed those tapes, released partial excerpts of 54 conversations. The headlineHubbells, apparent reluctance to say anything that might expose the Clintons to prosecution. WEBSTER HUBBELL I wont raise those allegations that might open it up to Hillary. CHRIS BURY (VO) On Nightline, where the tapes were first broadcast, Congressman Burton insisted they had been edited only to protect Webb Hubbells private life. (clip from Nightline, 4/30/98) REP DAN BURTON, (R), GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Yes. We went through the tapes to make sure that we edited out as much personal information as possible, personal conversations between Webb and his wife and his family and so forth. TED KOPPEL But has anything that we had, for example, and that we had on this program tonight, was that taken out of context? Might it have been interpreted in a different way if wed heard the entire conversation? REP DAN BURTON No, and if Mr Hubbells attorney or anybody complains about the content that you put on the air, well be happy to divulge the whole tapes and let him and you look at them and listen to them. CHRIS BURY (on camera) Sure enough, the complaints came fast and furious. The White House, Democrats in Congress and Hubbells lawyer accused Congressman Burton of playing dirty pool. They made three fundamental chargesthat Burton had doctored the tapes, selectively released material most damaging to the White House and violated Hubbells privacy. RAHM EMANUEL, SENIOR ADVISOR
LI Politicians have taken to trolling
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON, May 5 Political campaigns have traditionally provided a stage for the theater of the absurd. Candidates are routinely made to perform the equivalent of stupid human tricks in the vain attempt to connect with voters. Now the absurd becomes insane as politicians begin spamming potential voters with unwanted political junk e-mail. WIRED CALIFORNIANS received a blast of unwanted political e-mail recently in the form of what is called an electronic slate, which is a plea for support from a group of like-minded candidates. The idea behind the e-slate comes from a group called Informed Voter Network, which bills itself as a full-service, campaign-oriented, non-partisan voter contact service, run by Robert Barnes Associates in California. The Informed Voter Web site boasts: We can provide your campaign with a full Cyber strategy that will reach millions of voters across the state of California and hundreds of thousands within your own county. What the IVN doesnt tell potential clients is that this e-slate strategy also has a good chance to alienate millions of potential voters and backfire at the ballot box. CYBERPOLITICS ON THE ROPES While it is doubtful that any candidates will win a campaign because of the Internet this year, says Ken Deutsch, vice president of Internet Strategic Communications for Issue Dynamics, Inc., it is clear that some will lose because of it. While it is doubtful that any candidates will win a campaign because of the Internet this year, it is clear that some will lose because of it. KEN DEUTSCH Issues Dynamics, Inc. Deutsch knows his stuff. He was the first full-time paid Internet political consultant; unpaid, he developed the first major political party committee and candidate Internet sites in 1994 for the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee. Hes not pleased with where his efforts have led. Campaigns are about creating a message and image that stays with voters on Election Day, Deutsch says, and spam will leave a bad taste in voters mouths. Infamous online junk mail kings can afford to alienate millions; a 1 percent return rate for their efforts can produce enough cash flow that allows them to float around in the Bahamas on a yacht, says Jonah Seiger, co-founder of Mindshare Internet Campaigns. However, if a politician or organization trying to gain support for an issue tries that and ends up alienating 99 percent of the potential voters, you havent done anything to serve your ultimate objectives, Seiger says. SPAM OR FREE SPEECH? The Informed Voter Network didnt respond to a request for comment, but founder Robert Barnes told the San Francisco Chronicle last month that the political mailings werent spam because he wasnt selling anything. Were not trying to get you to buy anything, Barnes told the Chronicle. This is political free speech, he said. Free speech, yes, but Barnes had to gin up some real pretzel logic to make the statement that hes not selling anything. But selling is what a political campaign is all about. The free-speech issue is a non-starter, says Seiger. As a politician, Im trying to get people to like me and if I do something I know they dont like, regardless of whether its legal or whether its protected by the First Amendment, if I push them away, my objectives are lost, says Seiger. I am in fact selling something: my ideas. Im selling my brand, my candidates brand, he says. VOTERS MIGRATING ONLINE As a politician, Im trying to get people to like me and if I do something I know they dont like, regardless of whether its legal or whether its protected by the First Amendment, if I push them away, my objectives are lost. JONAH SEIGER Mindshare Internet Campaigns Politicians who dont wake up and begin to use the online medium wisely are doomed. Recent studies show that a large majority of registered voters also are wired and are seeking political information from the web. A survey by Field Poll of California voters found that 42 percent of some 14.3 million registered voters use e-mail on a regular basis. And as other studies have shown, the demographics of the Net are nearly a mirror image of Americans not online, according to David Birdsell, who co-authored the study for Lou Harris. That holds tremendous potential to affect the political process. Its very likely by the 98 elections, certainly by the 2000 elections, a majority of voters will be online, Birdsell says
LI Starr Launches Counter-Offensive
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Starr Launches Counter-Offensive WASHINGTON (AP) -- Launching an unusually blunt public counteroffensive, Whitewater prosecutors accused President Clinton's private attorneys Thursday of filing reckless accusations in court and threatened to request punishment by the chief U.S. district judge. Jackie M. Bennett Jr., second-in-command to Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, reacted harshly in response to accusations from the Clinton lawyers that prosecutors leaked a ruling rejecting executive privilege invoked by the president. The Clinton lawyers had filed a court motion asking prosecutors to show why they should not be held in contempt for revealing a secret ruling. ``Although we owe you no courtesy after yesterday's abusive filing, we demand that you withdraw your motion by noon on Friday, May 8, 1998,'' Bennett wrote four private lawyers representing Clinton on executive privilege matters, and two presidential aides. ``Otherwise we will seek appropriate relief from the court, including sanctions against each of the persons under whose names the motion was submitted.'' The White House has gone to court before, accusing Starr's office of leaking sealed grand jury material to the news media. That matter also was kept secret by Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson. In ratcheting up the feud, Bennett separately wrote private Clinton lawyer David Kendall that the court motion was filed even though ``you now have perfect knowledge of the source of the reports.'' In a separate letter to the four attorneys, who joined the Kendall motion, Bennett wrote that ``the allegations are reckless, irresponsible and false'' -- adding that Kendall knew ``these reports (on the executive privilege ruling) emanated from the White House.'' House Democrats and the White House, meanwhile, tried to prolong Republican embarrassment over the handling of a campaign fund-raising investigation. They pounced on Speaker Newt Gingrich for telling Republicans to ``focus on crimes'' at the White House. The Democrats tried to make Gingrich the villain, contending he prejudged the probe's findings, a day after directing the brunt of their criticism toward Rep. Dan Burton, head of a House committee investigation. Next week, the Democrats plan to offer a resolution calling for Burton, R-Ind., to step down as head of the probe by the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee. House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt, in a letter to Gingrich, asked the speaker to have no role in the investigation. In response, Gingrich spokeswoman Christina Martin said, ``Mr. Gephardt hopes the media will focus on the wallpaper and ignore the hippo standing in the middle of the room. This letter is just another hollow prop to distract attention from the Democrats' inexcusable stonewalling and obstruction.'' Two dozen Democrats in New Hampshire Legislature walked out of a speech by Gingrich Thursday, when he criticized Clinton for doing too little in the face of wrongdoing in his administration. ``If a crime has been committed, the American people have a right to know,'' he told the GOP-dominated Legislature. Gingrich added that Clinton should take an active role in uncovering any wrongdoing in his administration. ``It's not enough to be passive,'' he said. As the first of 20 to 30 Democrats in the 400-member House headed up the aisles, Gingrich said, ``People can walk out, but what I'm saying is a fact about a crime.'' Republicans responded with a long and sustained applause. Presidential press secretary Mike McCurry responded, ``If he's got evidence of crimes, I think that would probably be news to Mr. Starr, and he probably should go see Mr. Starr. He has not done so, so that would indicate to me that this is hollow rhetoric rather than factual information.'' While the political fallout continued on Capitol Hill over the Burton committee's selective release of Webster Hubbell's recorded prison conversations, Clinton's secretary, Betty Currie, testified for a second consecutive day
LI Democrats Show Unity on Lewinsky
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Democrats Show Unity on Lewinsky WASHINGTON (AP) -- Rallying around their embattled leader, Democratic activists from across the country said Thursday that President Clinton's executive privilege claim is necessary protection against ``maniacal'' opponents -- and a smart delaying tactic politically. With the party's Washington elite stressing party unity at the White House, rank-and-file members of the Democratic National Committee arrived in town to open three days of meetings. They said Clinton's assertion of executive privilege is not stirring interest outside the Beltway, news sure to ease the jitters of some presidential political advisers. ``I honestly can't say I recall any one person mention the executive privilege issue to me,'' said Ed Marcus, chairman of the Connecticut Democratic Party. ``Nobody cares,'' said Gary LaPaille of Illinois, president of the party chairmen's association. Though no decision has been announced, sources close to the matter say a federal judge has rejected Clinton's attempt to invoke executive privilege to shield White House aides from grand jury testimony. An appeal is expected. A few Democratic activists suggested a possible Clinton motive in claiming executive privilege: It delays Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr's investigation into his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. ``It's probably good strategy if you can get beyond the election,'' said Rosalind Wyman of Los Angeles. Besides, she said, ``I just think they are so tired of Ken Starr and his friends pushing them around that they want to make his life as miserable as theirs.'' ``He's got to use whatever tool he can. He's up against some maniacal people,'' said Yolanda Caraway, a national committee member from Washington. While committee members gathered at a downtown hotel, Clinton met with House and Senate Democratic leaders at the White House to iron out a campaign fund-raising strategy. Officials who attended the meeting said the president agreed to be host for six events outside Washington and three to six events inside Washington between August and November, raising about $18 million. The money would be split evenly between the DNC and the party's House and Senate campaign committees. Some Democrats, especially Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, wanted less money for the DNC, but they fell in line Thursday. ``I want to do what I need to do to raise $18 (million) to $20 million,'' the president told the leaders, according to two Democrats at the meeting. Afterward, the leaders told reporters outside the White House that Republican bungling is helping Clinton survive the Monica Lewinsky investigation. ``Newt Gingrich has become hysterical on the issue,'' said Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J. According to a Democratic poll due to be unveiled at a DNC news conference Friday, 75 percent of people surveyed May 5 said they viewed the House speaker's recent criticism of Clinton unfavorably. Nearly 400 people were contacted in the survey conducted by Mark Penn. Republicans questioned the Democrats' show of support. ``If there is any unity, it is born of desperation because they don't know when the next shoe will drop on any of a dozen presidential scandals,'' said GOP spokesman Mike Collins. Despite confident talk from the White House, some of Clinton's political advisers are concerned that voters will come to link his executive privilege fight to Richard Nixon's effort to keep White House recordings secret in 1974. In fact, several advisers don't want to delay Starr's investigation; they want it to end while Clinton is still high in the polls. One adviser outside the White House is even discussing pulling together a few like-minded supporters and making a personal pitch to get Clinton to stop trying to shield his staff from grand jury testimony. There is a split -- described as respectful and not contentious -- between the president's legal and political teams over whether Clinton should allow top aides such as Bruce Lindsey and Sidney Blumenthal
Re: LI Dems Walk Out of Gingrich Speech
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Yvonne: He has been very vocal on his daytime show about this whole thing. Sue Yes. He anounced last night that today's show would be his last on commercial TV. His cable/satellite show is altogether different. Quasi serious and pinpointing today's "stories" for an in depth discussion. Strong Clinton apologist on the brink of switching sides (imo). -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men/Sue
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L; No I didn't see it, but thank you for tell me, because they always repeat them on the weekend. I will definately be watching. Sue Sue - shamefacedly I admit I missed the Insight Edition report on the polygraph test failure. And yet I dare to ask: did you catch the MSNBC news broadcasts re/"Hype or Hope" concerning the cancer treatment announcements? Best wishes, :) LDMF. -- 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
Re: LI Judge rejects $10 million lawsuit over student's F
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: The only reasons that I can come up with would be that the kid thought that he could handle it, and insisted, and they gave in. Or that they thought that perhaps he would be able to handle it if he really tried hard. Sue Query: sany speculation as to why they'd do this? Sue wrote:-- West may be able to show that school officials put her son in the class knowing it was beyond his ability. -- 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
LI Clinton Loses Executive Privilege
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Clinton Loses Executive Privilege WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge rejected President Clinton's effort to use executive privilege to block certain testimony by his senior aides in the Monica Lewinsky investigation, The Associated Press learned Tuesday. Meanwhile, prosecutors finished their work with an Arkansas grand jury that had investigated Whitewater for two years and turned their attention back to presidential friend Vernon Jordan, questioning him a third time before a grand jury in Washington. The White House could appeal the executive privilege ruling, confirmed by several lawyers familiar with the legal dispute between the administration and Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. Any decision to appeal would further delay Starr's investigation into whether Clinton had sex with Ms. Lewinsky, lied about it or urged others to lie. The White House and Starr's office declined comment, citing the fact that the issue is under court seal. At the height of the Watergate scandal in the summer of 1974, the Supreme Court took about six weeks voted to uphold U.S. District Judge John Sirica's decision against President Nixon, who invoked executive privilege to deny access to tape-recorded conversations in the White House. Nixon resigned five weeks after the Supreme Court ruled amid impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives. One lawyer familiar with the new decision, speaking on condition of anonymity, said U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson concluded that prosecutors' interest in obtaining testimony outweighed the president's interest in keeping confidential the advice he received from his aides. The ruling means that, absent an appeal, aides like Bruce Lindsey and Sidney Blumenthal must answer the questions they earlier refused to answer before the grand jury on executive privilege grounds, the lawyers said. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the lawyers also said the judge's ruling left open the possibility the White House could make a separate claim of attorney-client privilege in trying to block testimony by Lindsey. Lindsey, the president's closest adviser, is a White House deputy counsel. Clinton has publicly refused to even acknowledge he invoked executive privilege. Aides speaking on condition of anonymity have said the claim was limited: It pertained to grand jury questioning about White House strategy, not about the president's relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. Prosecutors, meanwhile, moved their investigation forward on two fronts. In Arkansas, they bid farewell at a brief courthouse pizza party to 24 grand jurors in Little Rock who had investigated Whitewater the past two years. The grand jurors wrapped up their work by indicting former Whitewater business partner Susan McDougal on Monday, and were dismissed Tuesday -- two days before their term expired. Prosecutors indicated they would shift the Arkansas evidence and any remaining decisions to Washington, where the Lewinsky probe and separate inquiries into possible obstruction of justice by the White House are ongoing. Charles Bakaly, Starr's spokesman, said it was still possible that prosecutors could seek a new grand jury in Arkansas to hear additional evidence. ``That is a possibility, but there's been no decision about that,'' he said. Mrs. McDougal issued a defiant statement promising, ``If they expect to see the same passive woman'' who was convicted in a previous Whitewater trial, ``they are in for a surprise. I intend to fight these charges There is a great deal of information that has not yet come to light.'' The federal grand jury investigating the Lewinsky case called Jordan, a Washington power broker and frequent golfing partner of Clinton, for testimony a third time. In addition, sources familiar with the investigation said that Clinton's personal secretary, Betty Currie, will testify this week. She and Jordan have testified previously and both befriended former Ms. Lewinsky, a onetime White House intern, raising
LI Lewinsky Case May Reach High Court
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lewinsky Case May Reach High Court WASHINGTON (AP) -- If President Clinton pursues his executive privilege claim in the Monica Lewinsky inquiry, it quickly could get to the nation's highest court. That's what happened 24 years ago to Richard Nixon's ill-fated assertion of authority to withhold information from Congress. The Supreme Court had been silent on presidential claims of executive privilege for nearly 200 years before rejecting Nixon's arguments and paving the way for his resignation in 1974. Judge John J. Sirica ruled against Nixon on May 20, 1974. The Supreme Court's landmark decision came 55 days later, on July 24. Nixon filed an appeal to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the same route Clinton's lawyers must take if they appeal U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson's denial of the privilege claim. Watergate special prosecutor Leon Jaworski and later Nixon's lawyers asked the Supreme Court to hear the case even before any appeals court opinion, and the highest court on May 31 agreed to do so. The case was argued July 8 and decided 16 days later -- remarkable speed for a court that sometimes takes nine months to announce a decision in a case once it has been argued. Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr is investigating a possible presidential affair and cover-up, but the legal wrangling over executive privilege has remained under seal. Clinton has refused to even acknowledge publicly that he invoked the privilege. But aides who spoke on condition of anonymity told The Associated Press that the president's claim was limited -- pertaining to grand jury questioning about White House strategy, not about the president's relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. Although the Supreme Court's 1974 decision is best known for forcing Nixon to surrender damaging White House tape recordings, the ruling also recognized for the first time that a limited privilege is constitutionally based. The court's unanimous ruling said a presidential assertion of the privilege must be justified on a case-by-case basis, adding: ``The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.'' -- 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
LI Tuesday's Jokes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Top 16 Signs Your Gene Therapy Isn't Going Well 16 Six appearances in six weeks sets a new record on the Jerry Springer Show. 15 While your 7'11" height has the NBA calling, that "maximum of two arms" rule ruins everything. 14 "Hey, Four-eyes!" no longer just a cruel taunt. 13 The drooling, twitching, and incontinence are long gone, yet you're *still* mistaken for Pauly Shore. 12 Your HMO declined payment for treatment due to the high cost of silver bullets. 11 You begin regurgitating acid on Geena Davis, and you haven't even seen "Cutthroat Island." 10 You're definitely starting to look like Elvis -- Elvis Costello. 9 You wake up with bloody pajamas, and the morning paper's headline has to do with a rampaging wolf-like creature biting off Karl Malden's nose. 8 You can now count the number of allegations of sexual impropriety against President Clinton on one hand. 7 You regret not being more specific when you said you just wanted to get more tail. 6 Your unicorn horn keeps poking your Cyclops eye. 5 You're now the owner of the world's most beautiful breasts. If only they were in the front. 4 Your desire to return to your ancestral roots has manifested itself in your new hobby of fashioning tools from your own excrement. 3 Let's just say that in the size department, you now give both Pamela and Tommy Lee a run for their money. 2 On your last trip to the zoo, the baboons were laughin' at *your* big red butt. and Top5's Number 1 Sign Your Gene Therapy Isn't Going Well... 1 When someone tells you to "Go screw yourself," you just smile knowingly. --- A little list of "Doc-isms" What doctors say, and what they're really thinking: "This should be taken care of right away." I'd planned a trip to Hawaii next month but this is so easy and profitable that I want to fix it before it cures itself. "Welll, what have we here...?" He has no idea and is hoping you'll give him a clue. "Let me check your medical history." I want to see if you've paid your last bill before spending anymore time with you. "Why don't we make another appointment later in the week." I'm playing golf this afternoon, and this a waste of time. ---or-- I need the bucks, so I'm charging you for another office visit. "We have some good news and some bad news." The good news is, I'm going to buy that new BMW. The bad news is, you're going to pay for it. "Let's see how it develops." Maybe in a few days it will grow into something that can be cured. "Let me schedule you for some tests." I have a forty percent interest in the lab. "I'd like to have my associate look at you." He's going through a messy divorce and owes me a bundle. "I'd like to prescribe a new drug." I'm writing a paper and would like to use you for a guinea pig. "If it doesn't clear up in a week, give me a call." I don't know what it is. Maybe it will go away by itself. "That's quite a nasty looking wound." I think I'm going to throw up. "This may smart a little." Last week two patients bit off their tongues. "Well, we're not feeling so well today, are we...?" I'm stalling for time. Who are you and why are you here? "This should fix you up." The drug company slipped me some big bucks to prescribe this stuff. "Everything seems to be normal." Rats! I guess I can't buy that new beach condo after all. "I'd like to run some more tests." I can't figure out what's wrong. Maybe the kid in the lab can solve this one. "Do you suppose all this stress could be affecting your nerves?" You're crazier'n an outhouse rat. Now, if I can only find a shrink who'll split fees with me ... "There is a lot of that going around." My God, that's the third one this week. I'd better learn something about this. "If those symptoms persist, call for an appointment." I've never heard of anything so disgusting. Thank God I'm off next week. --- THE 9 TYPES OF WEB PAGE CREATORS Joe/Jane Average College Student Traits : Owner of a new university-supplied computer account with http access. Complete lack of originality. Multiple references to beer/Disney movies. Several photos of Student with college buddies (high school, if freshman Student). The Good News : They don't know how to get their page linked to the outside world, so only they and their friends download their 16.7-million- color pictures from the last party. The Bad News : They, their friends and their 16.7-million-color pictures might be on your server. Mr. "Enhanced For Netscape" Traits : The second thing you see on his page is a Netscape logo and a link
LI Simpson is holding a pity party.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't know if any of you watched Hard Copy last night and tonight, but they had an interview with Simpson. The poor guy is really having a rough time. He can't date the millions of women throwing themselves at him because it is difficult to go anywhere where people don't know him and want his autograph. Therefore when people ask him if he is dating again, he tells them that he is dating his kids. The evenings are really rough, because that is the time when the kids are in their bedrooms on their respective computers and he doesn't have anything to do. So all he does is watch television and read books. The poor guy spends his days on the golf course because there isn't any thing else to do, but he doesn't really mind because he loves to golf. When asked, if he was getting bored, he replied yes he does, but his life is full, and he can handle it for now. Asked if he planned to marry again, he said that he would be married right now to Paula, but she wanted to live in Florida and he couldn't at the time because of legal problems. He has been involved with a few other women who wanted to get married, but he just didn't. He will be married again though, because he loves married life and wants to have the picket fence again. When he got out of jail, he returned to the coffee shop and book store in Brentwood, 1 block away from where Nicole and Ron were murdered, where he hung out before his legal problems and found that he was as welcome as before, and continues to do so. People greeted him with open arms and just asked, "How's it going, OJ? Missed you." To tell you the truth the whole thing was sickening. But then what did I expect. Sue -- 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
Re: LI Thanks and Solutions :)
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well don't swallow till I get there. They say the stuff acts fast but wears off just as fast. Doc One hour to act, up to 6 hours to resolve. How long does it take from DC to MO? Should have plenty of time. Did Bill's insurance carrier deem this a medical necessity? Ron Hi Ron: The medication may not be a medical necessity, but the results of Doc's pinning more than likey will be. :) Sue -- 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
LI GOP Aide in Hubbell Probe Resigns
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON--A top House Republican aide involved in the probe of President Clinton's 1996 campaign resigned today as the panel's chairman sought to contain criticism of his own handling of the politically-charged investigation. Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., told reporters that investigator David Bossie had "chosen to resign" in the wake of the controversy over the release of edited excerpts of Webster Hubbell's jailhouse phone conversations. Democrats have pummeled Burton in recent days, alleging the tapes were edited to put Hubbell in the worst possible light, and that exculpatory material had been edited out. Republicans, too, have expressed unhappiness over the way Burton's committee handled the issue. -- 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
Re: LI Thanks and Solutions :)
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DocCec wrote: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-06 02:23:31 EDT, you write: Hi Kathy: Does that mean he has to wear *The Uniform*, and only *The Uniform*? I hope. BG Hey Doc...another pinning ceremony. LOL I'm ready and willing! Just hope he's up for it. Doc Hi Doc: There is always Viagra. VBEG Sue -- 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
Re: LI Lawyer Sees Simpson 'Confession'
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Yvonne: If I remember correctly you said the same thing right after that interview he had on the sports station. :) The guys interview on Hard Copy for the past two days shows a man who is dying inside. He wants to believe his own hype, but even he is beginning to wonder. I honestly think that this is worse than any prison sentence for him, and no one deserves it more, IMO. I just feel sorry for the kids. Especially if he does ever come out with a confession. How in the world are they ever going to be able to handle that. And I honestly think that day will come. Sue I was at Danial Petrocelli's book signing this past Monday night. Besides just signing his new book, he also gave an hour lecture on the back ground of the civil trial insofar as not more than 16 members of the public were allowed to watch the proceedings on any given day. He explained the concept of double jeopardy and why it doesn't apply to this civil process, Simpson's conscious lying during the depositions and while on the stand and, of course the subject of Sue's article: his (Petrocelli's) belief that Simpson is on the road to a confesion, as seen in the Esquire article and the banana scene in Ruby Wax's interview. While many of us see Simpson's quasi confession vis a vis "What if I did kill her. I did it out of love," to which Petrocelli said "Oh. Ok. That makes the murders alright then," hearing it out of the mouth of Danial Petrocelli validates my similar belief. P mentioned the price around one million dollars while I see a larger sum, something covering the 33.5 million indemnity which would be propelled by a package consisting of a book, audio, video and ppv. All those avenues which were inexplicitly closed to him after the criminal trial. -- 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
LI LA Sheriff's Dept. Must Pay $15.9M
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LA Sheriff's Dept. Must Pay $15.9M LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The sheriff's department must pay a $15.9 million judgment to a family brutalized by deputies during a raid on a bridal shower, an appellate court ruled. California's 2nd District Court of Appeal on Tuesday upheld a lower court ruling in favor of the 35 mostly Samoan-American members of the Dole family who attended the 1989 party. With interest and legal fees, the department must pay more than $23 million. Los Angeles County Sheriff's spokesman Bill Martin declined comment, saying the department hasn't seen the appellate ruling. On Feb. 11, 1989, deputies in riot gear responded to a complaint of loud music at a house in Cerritos. Some family members attending the party were beaten and suffered permanent injuries. Deputies claimed they were provoked by rock- and bottle-throwing guests, but a videotape made by a neighbor didn't show that and no evidence was found to support the claims. The family's lawyer, Garo Mardirossian, said deputies uttered racial epithets. ``Virtually every officer who showed up was white,'' Mardirossian said. ``If you (had) a sufficient mix of officers -- someone who had been racially sensitive -- they could have avoided the whole fiasco.'' Thirty-six family members or friends were arrested, and charges of resisting arrest and assaulting an officer were filed against seven people. Three were acquitted and charges against the rest were dropped. The Doles sued, and in 1995 a jury awarded them $15.9 million for false arrest and use of excessive force. The three-judge appellate panel said Tuesday that the trial produced substantial evidence to show that the deputies ``simply entered the Dole house and arrested everyone in it, without individualized probable cause.'' -- 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
LI Doc: Drugs Won't End Chemotherapy :((((
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Doc: Drugs Won't End Chemotherapy BOSTON (AP) -- Even if two drugs that have eliminated tumors in mice are effective in humans someday, they will not replace other cancer treatments, says the researcher whose lab is credited with the discovery. ``However they will be used, they will be added to chemotherapy and radiotherapy and gene therapy and immunotherapy and vaccine therapy,'' Dr. Judah Folkman told The Boston Globe. Folkman, a doctor at Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, said he canceled a keynote speech scheduled for today at a Boston symposium on prostate cancer because he was concerned about the recent media attention on the drugs -- the proteins angiostatin and endostatin. He noted that their elimination of cancer is only in mice. ``It's got a ways to go to get into people, but there is hope to get there,'' he said. It will be 12 to 18 months before the company licensed to develop the drugs will have enough to begin human trials. The two proteins are called angiogenesis inhibitors because they block the growth of new blood vessels that feed tumors. They were discovered in Folkman's laboratory by Dr. Michael O'Reilly. Reports about the research gained wide attention after The New York Times published a front-page story about it in its Sunday editions. -- 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
LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON--The scientific process has given birth to many medical miracles over the years. But sometimes it can be a cruel parent. As a result of a New York Times story Sunday trumpeting news that two chemicals discovered by a Boston researcher can cure cancer in mice, oncologists across the country have been overwhelmed by patients seeking this remarkable new therapy. But the doctors have told them that it won't be available for years, if ever. "They are desperate to find something that is an easy way out of a difficult situation," said Dr. Philip DiScaia, deputy director of UC Irvine's Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. "I get very concerned for the patients who have a false sense of hope that something can come of this immediately, when that is just not the case." Researchers note that as many as nine other drugs acting on the same basic principle--and that also cure cancer in mice--are in clinical trials in humans. So far, the results haven't overly impressed physicians. "This is not penicillin," said Dr. Lee Rosen of UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center. The widespread reactions from patients have raised questions about how the media report word of preliminary medical advances. Those questions were deepened in the current case by confirmation from several publishing houses that the New York Times reporter whose story kicked off the current fever had circulated a book proposal about the alleged cancer cure--only to withdraw it Tuesday. Nearly every week, researchers report that they have found new compounds that kill HIV in the test tube or that eradicate tumors in mice. Most often, these stories are downplayed by the media, which recognize that the path from test tubes or mice to humans is both long and strewn with potholes and land mines. "The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse," said Dr. Richard Klausner, director of the National Cancer Institute. "We have cured mice of cancer for decades--and it simply didn't work in humans." Recent medical history is rife with stories of cancer "cures," such as interferon, interleukin and taxol, that produced exciting results in animals and later proved disappointing in humans. Dr. LaMar McGinnis, an oncologist and medical consultant to the American Cancer Society, agreed. "We thought interferon was 'chicken soup' in the early '80s," he said. "I remember how excited everyone was; it seemed to work miracles in animals, but it didn't work in humans." The new miracle cure involves a phenomenon called angiogenesis. More than 30 years ago, a young physician named F. Judah Folkman at Children's Hospital in Boston discovered that tumors secrete chemicals that stimulate the growth of blood vessels into the mass of tumor cells, or angiogenesis. Without nourishment from these blood vessels, the tumors are unable to grow beyond microscopic clumps of cells. Some Drugs Are Tested in People Folkman reasoned that drugs that blocked the production of these angiogenesis factors might prevent tumors from growing larger. But it took him more than 25 years to persuade the cancer community that his concept would work. Recently, however, the idea has gained popularity among cancer researchers. Current counts suggest that more than 100 academic laboratories and 40 biotechnology companies are developing such drugs. Some of these are being tested in humans. One is the tranquilizer thalidomide, notorious for causing severe limb defects in children whose mothers used it during pregnancy. The breast cancer drug Tamoxifen also is thought to act, in part, by restricting blood vessel growth. UCLA's Rosen and Dr. Timothy Cloughesy are testing two different anti-angiogenesis drugs developed by the Northern California firm Sugen. Cloughesy is testing them in brain tumors, and Rosen in a broad spectrum of cancers. Dr. David Cheresh of the Scripps Research Institute has been testing another drug, Vitaxin, in patients with terminal cancer. Cheresh was the first to show that the anti-angiogenesis drugs could actually make tumors shrink both in mice and people. But the results in humans thus far have been in Phase I safety trials and require confirmation in larger studies. All are hopeful that the drugs someday will represent a major advance in cancer therapy. "We're beginning to see results that are clinically meaningful," Rosen said. Cloughesy noted that the brain tumors had stabilized or even shrunk in some patients. Brain tumors are notoriously difficult to treat, he said, and "finding responses in any treatment setting is remarkable." Researchers are particularly enthusiastic because most of these new agents, unlike traditional cancer drugs, have no side effects. And because they exert their effects on blood vessels rather than the tumors themselves, cancer cells do not se
Re: LI Passive Smoker To Make Legal History
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve: The family of a nurse here in the States just tried this. They lost. Sue Passive Smoker To Make Legal History A nurse is due to make legal history by suing her employers over damage to her health that she claims was caused by passive smoking. Chronic asthma sufferer Sylvia Sparrow, 60, blames her condition on the smoke she says she inhaled while caring for elderly patients at a nursing home in 1986. Mrs Sparrow, from Swinton, Greater Manchester, who has been off work sick since February 1992, is suing St Andrew's Homes for injury, loss of earnings and not being able to continue in the job. Her case, to be heard at the High Court in Manchester, is based on claims that she worked in the communal lounge at the Worsley Lodge home, which was used by heavy smokers among the elderly patients. It will be the first time that such a claim for damages has come before the courts in England and Wales. Lawyers and employers will be watching the outcome, which it is claimed could open the way for thousands of similar claims and have far-reaching effects on employment legislation. A council worker in Stockport, Greater Manchester, Veronica Bland, made legal history when she won an out-of-court settlement of 15,000 in a case brought against her employers. A judge in Scotland last year rejected another case, ruling there was a lack -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: It didn't say the thing is a hoax. What I basically got out of the story is that they should have held off a little longer until they had more definative answers before telling the public. I do understand where this news can give the people who are undergoing the horrible treatment for cancer now false hope. I also don't think that the news should have been released until there was something definative to the idea of a cure. But to say it is a hoax, isn't right either. Just because something hasn't been proven or is in the process of being proven doesn't make it a 'cold fussion' hoax. I still feel we are on the brink of a big breakthrough. Sue Gee whiz. Don't these lying, ignorant idiots know like Mac and Bill that "leaders in this field" have found that we have a breakthrough? Seems to have a bad smell to me. Guess not hereabouts. Thanks, Sue. Best, Terry -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Ron: They aren't saying that the work, or the cure is the problem, it is the way it is being reported. "The widespread reactions from patients have raised questions about how the media report word of preliminary medical advances." And you as a doc should know more than anyone that as soon as a new drug, etc is put into the media you are overwhelmed with phone calls. Look what is happening to the docs and pharmacy's with the Viagara. I think that the reporting of these things should really be done with a lot more caution. But it doesn't mean that the study is a hoax. Sue "The widespread reactions from patients have raised questions about how the media report word of preliminary medical advances. Those questions were deepened in the current case by confirmation from several publishing houses that the New York Times reporter whose story kicked off the current fever had circulated a book proposal about the alleged cancer cure--only to withdraw it Tuesday. " It sounds to me as if two soldiers in their bunkers, should think about eating a little crow and apologizing to Terry Hallinan. The critics of the media even use the world cruel, but since cruel is an adjective, hoax may be implied. The hoax was not from the researchers, but from the media...a deliberate attempt to deceive. Ron -- 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
LI Betty Currie back before grand jury
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON, May 6 (UPI) _ President Clinton's personal secretary Betty Currie is back in U.S. District Court for more testimony before Kenneth Starr's grand jury. Currie faces further questions about President Clinton's relationship with former intern Monica Lewinsky, and her own role in helping Lewinsky find a job in New York. With a desk just outside the Oval Office, Currie is privy to those who meet Clinton. According to White House logs turned over to Starr's office, Lewinsky visited the White House three dozen times after she left her job in the White House congressional liaison office. The Clinton Administration has not discussed the nature of those meetings. Starr might also question Currie about statements by the president's confidant Vernon Jordan that he helped Lewinsky find a lawyer and a job at Currie's request. Starr wants to know if the noteworthy, high-powered help for a low-level employee was an attempt to buy Lewinsky's silence about her alleged affair with Clinton. Prior to his deposition in the Paula Jones case, sources close to Currie said Clinton called her in for a private weekend meeting to check if her memories of his contact with Lewinsky matched his own. -- 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
LI Steve-Biggest bang recorded
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON, May 6 (UPI) _ Astronomers report they have witnessed the largest explosion ever recorded in the universe, and may rival most other releases of energy since the big bang. In the space of a few seconds, the far-distant, mysterious explosion hurled out more than 100 times the energy the sun will emit during its entire 10-billion-year lifetime. Shri Kulkarni, the leader of one of several teams that have analyzed the discovery, says even space scientists used to thinking in universe- scale numbers find that energy ``mind-boggling.'' Kulkarni's California Institute of Technology team and another based at Columbia University present their findings in Thursday's issue of the British journal Nature and at a press briefing Wednesday at NASA headquarters in Washington. The explosion is called a gamma-ray burst, a phenomenon known since the 1950s. Two features of this discovery in particular, however, are likely to force scientists to redefine previous theories about origin of these bursts: _First, its almost unimaginable energy. Gamma Ray Burst 971214, named after the date last December when it occurred, was hundreds of times more powerful than scientists predicted possible. In its lifetime, estimated at two to 10 seconds, the gamma ray burst emitted energy roughly equal to that generated in a similar short period by all 10 billion trillion stars in the entire universe. _Second, its distance. The burst occurred about 12 billion light- years away. A light year is the distance light travels in a vacuum in a year, or 5.88 trillion miles (9.46 trillion kilometers). Only last year did the Caltech team definitively prove that gamma-ray bursts come from outside the Milky Way galaxy, which is only about 100,000 light-years across. The two features _ energy and distance _ are actually related, says astronomer Charles Meegan of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. The Huntsville, Ala.-based expert points out that ``you'd have to hold a light bulb awfully close to your eye before it started looking as bright as the sun.'' Meegan says of the discovery, ``Realizing now how powerful and distant these bursts are is like when people realized that the points of light in the night sky were really stars like our own sun.'' Pinpointing these bursts is a recent accomplishment because gamma rays are so powerful they simply pass through a telescope's mirror like sunlight passes through window glass. The explosion itself is also over in a matter of seconds. GRB971214 was first captured by the Italian-Dutch satellite called BeppoSAX, which for the first time can at least narrow down the location of a gamma-ray burst to a region of space smaller than the size the moon. David Helfand of Columbia University received the alert from Rome at 11:15 p.m. on a Sunday night last December. He told United Press International, ``It was probably the first time I've been in my office at that hour in 20 years. If I hadn't been there, we would have missed it.'' He quickly called colleagues at the Kitt Peak Observatory in Tucson, Ariz., who happened to have a camera attached to the 2.4-meter telescope that night. Over the next two nights, infrared images revealed an object in the constellation Ursa Major that was quickly fading. As the burst's energy receded, Kulkarni's team at Mauna Kea, Hawaii, began to see a very faint, fuzzy body. The huge light-gathering ability of the 10-meter Keck II telescope had found ``not just a star-light object, but a host galaxy at the exact position,'' Kulkarni says. With the explosion's source in sight, the Caltech team could calculate its distance, and thus energy. NASA's Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory spacecraft, which detected GRB971214, has picked up about 2,000 gamma-ray bursts so far. The phenomenon was unknown until military satellites, launched to monitor nuclear testing in the 1950s, detected the bursts. They had not been observed before that, because the Earth's atmosphere blocks gamma rays. -- 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
LI Judge rejects $10 million lawsuit over student's F
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: GREENSBORO, N.C., May 6 (UPI) _ A judge has thrown out a $10 million lawsuit filed by a North Carolina woman because her son got a failing grade in his high school physics class. Madison West filed the lawsuit against the Guilford County school system saying the failing grade would hurt her son's chances of being admitted into Appalachian State University. She says her 17-year-old son, Stephen Edwards, was placed in an honors advanced physics class at Ragsdale High School that was too far advanced for him. School officials wouldn't let him drop the class. West says the school system doesn't have a clear policy on withdrawing from classes. Her lawsuit asked for Edwards' F to be removed from his high school transcript. School system attorney Allison Grimm told Judge Howard Greeson Jr. that ``at least 50,000'' of the school system's 60,000 students ``have some beef over a grade they've gotten.'' Greeson dismissed the lawsuit on Tuesday but allowed West to refile it within the next year. He said West may be able to show that school officials put her son in the class knowing it was beyond his ability. -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac, moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Afternoon,I guess the American Cancer Society are nothing but a bunch of fools. The American Cancer Society is a charity that raises millions of dollars. They probably are not fools. Have they said anything? The National Cancer Institute put out a blurb. They are an entirely different outfit. They are not fools either. They know the value of publicity even when it is nonsense. Hi Terry: Yes the American Cancer Society did say something. Here is a copy of my post from yesterday. Sue http://www.cancer.org/bottomnews.html New drug combination eliminates cancer in mice Two new drugs are found to kill cancer in mice - human trials given top priority A combination of two new drugs has been proven to completely destroy cancers in laboratory mice. Now the question is: Will it work in humans? Nearly three decades of research have gone into this discovery, hailed as "the single most exciting thing on the horizon" of cancer treatment by Dr. Richard Klausner, National Cancer Institute Director. Human studies of the two drugs, angiostatin and endostatin, are expected to begin within a year. Decades of research Nearly thirty years ago, Dr. Judah Folkman, now a Harvard Medical School professor, realized that growth and spread of cancers seemed to depend on their ability to cause formation of nearby blood vessels to bring nourishment to the cancer cells. Folkman called this process angiogenesis, from the Greek words angio for vessel, and genesis, for beginning. Without angiogenesis, cancers could still form but would not be able to grow larger that about 1/16 inch, and would not be able to spread to other parts of the body. Over the following years, Folkman and his colleagues working at Boston Children's Hospital slowly unraveled most of the details of how cancer cells secrete substances that promote angiogenesis. More recently, Folkman's team and several other groups of angiogenesis researchers have identified and begun preliminary testing of several drugs that slow or prevent angiogenesis. Several have shown very promising results in animal tests and early stages of clinical trials in cancer patients. The discovery of angiostatin and endostatin In 1991, Folkman and research trainee Dr. Michael O'Reilly began a search for substances naturally produced by the body that might inhibit angiogenesis. They discovered that plasminogen, an enzyme important in breaking up blood clots, naturally splits into fragments, one of which is a potent angiogenesis inhibitor. They called this substance angiostatin. Their team soon discovered an even more powerful angiogenesis inhibitor, endostatin, that is formed when a type of collagen breaks into fragments. Collagens are a group of related proteins that give strength to bones, tendons and the walls of blood vessels. The most recent and exciting finding from Folkman's research team is that combining angiostatin and endostatin causes mouse cancers to disappear without a trace, even when examined under a microscope. Balanced with caution The atmosphere of hope and excitement these breakthroughs have generated needs to be balanced with caution, warns Folkman. Several experimental treatments have been highly successful in animals but have proven to be of limited value to humans. "We have to be careful with expectations" said Folkman. Next step: Clinical Trials The next step is clinical trials, which are expected to begin within a year. "I am putting nothing on higher priority than getting this into clinical trials" said Klausner. Because clinical trials of angiostatin and endostatin are not yet underway, patients may consider clinical trials of other anti-angiogenesis drugs such as TNP-470, carboxyamidotriazole, anti-VEGF, or thalidomide, says the American Cancer Society. Information on these clinical trials is available from the National Cancer Institute (1-800-4-Cancer). In addition to anti-angiogenesis drugs, several other promising new treatments are also being tested in clinical trials. The American Cancer Society spends over 91 million dollars on cancer research each year, including several angiogenesis research projects. Dr. Folkman received an American Cancer Society grant from 1964-1966 to support his cancer research training, and was awarded the ACS Medal of Honor in 1993, the organization's highest award. -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: I am only familiar with the American Cancer Society. I don't know anything about the National one. I'm sorry. The address at the end of this post, after yours, is for the American Cancer Society. Sue Hi Terry: Yes the American Cancer Society did say something. Here is a copy of my post from yesterday. Sue I had read your report, Sue, and did not separate American Cancer Society from National Cancer Institute. I was going to look up NCI to see what it is. Can you tell me if is just an arm of the American Cancer Society or what? http://www.cancer.org/bottomnews.html -- 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
Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: Did I? If I did I made a mistake. I got the report off the American Cancer Society's web site at http://www.cancer.org/bottomnews.html I'll have to go back and look again at my old post in the archieves Again I'm sorry if I made a mistake. I really am not familiar with the National Cancer Society, although Ron just did say what and where it is. Sue Hi Sue, The report you printed said it came from the National Cancer Institute. As I mentioned I was careless in not noticing that the American Cancer Society was used in the report. The names seemed to be used interchangeably in the article when I reread it. You yourself mentioned the article came from the NCI in one post. -- 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
LI McDougal attorney files motion requesting her freedom
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Whitewater convict Susan McDougal, imprisoned for 20 months, should be freed because she has done more time than her co-defendants and may have her conviction overturned, her lawyer said Wednesday. In court papers, lawyer Mark Geragos asked a federal judge to reduce Mrs. McDougal's two-year prison sentence to probation. ``Susan has done more time than anybody connected with this investigation,'' he said. ``It makes sense to re-sentence her and let her out at this point.'' His motion argued that Mrs. McDougal deserves leniency because of recent reports that Whitewater prosecutors knew a key witness against her received payments from a conservative publisher. ``The allegations, if true, would undoubtedly lead to the overturning of her conviction,'' Geragos said. Geragos also argued that Mrs. McDougal, 43, deserved a break because of failing health and the ``barbarous conditions'' she endured for seven months in a Los Angeles County jail. He said she was kept in leg and arm shackles while visiting with her attorneys, chained to a toilet for hours and housed with convicted murderers and molesters. Mrs. McDougal was sentenced in 1996 to two years in prison for fraud relating to an illegal $300,000 loan she received. She began serving that sentence in March after completing an 18-month civil contempt term for refusing to talk to the Whitewater grand jury. She has served more time than her ex-husband James McDougal, who died after less than a year in prison, and former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, who was sentenced to home detention. All three were convicted in the same trial. On Monday, Mrs. McDougal was indicted on an obstruction of justice charge and two criminal contempt counts for refusing to talk to grand jurors about the 1980s business dealings of President Clinton and the first lady. The criminal contempt charges carry an open-ended prison term set by a federal judge. Obstruction of justice carries a maximum 10-year prison term. Debbie Gershman, a spokeswoman for Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr, said prosecutors had not seen a copy of Geragos' motion. ``We will be responding by pleading in court,'' she said. -- 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
Re: Topic Change was Re: LI Cancer Drugs Face Long Road From Mice to Men
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Doc: I think you can go to bed early on that one. :( Sue And unfortunately it's not the Orioles! I'm watching their game right now -- would you believe it's 14-3 Cleveland in the eighth? Doc -- 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
Re: LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yep it's still early. :30. I have often wondered what it would be like to have the ocean on the other side. And more so what it would be like not to have an ocean at all. It would really be weird, IMO. Can't get over how the Padre's are doing. They usually don't. It's early though. What, and leave my team to do it without me? Never happen! (anyway, how much longer can it be?) Of course you're quite right, especially since tomorrow is my long work day, but I just don't seem to be able to do that. It's still early where you are, isn't it? Sometimes I miss being in that time zone. And if I live to be 100 I'll never get used to the ocean being on the wrong side! Doc -- 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
Re: LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yep I put it in code so no one would know BG Didn't you feel kinda lost without an ocean around. I don't think even a lake like one of the Great Lakes would be the same. Don't know though never been away from the ocean. I hated having no ocean at all. Can;t live without an expanse of water. Is :30 the same as 7:30? Doc -- 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
LI Monday's Jokes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: God's Will I was at the beach with my children when my four-year-old son ran up to me, grabbed my hand, and led me to the shore where a sea gull lay dead in the sand. "Mommy, what happened to him?" the little boy asked. "He died and went to Heaven," I replied. My son thought a moment and said, "Why'd God throw him back down?" Cigar Insurance - Supposedly True A Charlotte, North Carolina man, having purchased a box of 24 rare and very expensive cigars, insured them against... fire. Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of fabulous cigars, and having yet to make a single premium payment on the policy, the man filed a claim against the insurance company. In his claim, the man stated that he had lost the cigars in "a series of small fires." The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason: that the man had consumed the cigars in a normal fashion. The man sued, and won. In delivering his ruling, the judge stated that the man held a policy from the company in which it was warranted that the cigars were insurable. The company, in the policy, had also guaranteed that it would insure the cigars against fire, without defining what it considered to be "unacceptable fire," and so, the company was obligated to compensate the insured for his loss. Rather than endure a lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the judge's ruling and paid the man $15,000 for the rare cigars he had lost in "the fires." However, shortly after the man cashed his check, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of arson. With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case used as evidence against him, the man was convicted of intentionally burning the rare cigars and sentenced to 24 consecutive one-year prison terms. --- Abbot and Costello Meet Windows 95 Costello: Hey, Abbot! Abbot: Yes, Lou? Costello: I just got my first computer. Abbot: That's great Lou. What did you get? Costello: A Pentium II-266, with 40 Megs of RAM, a 2.1 Gig hard drive, and a 24X CD-ROM. Abbot: That's terrific, Lou. Costello: But I don't know what any of it means! Abbot: You will in time. Costello: That's exactly why I am here to see you. Abbot: Oh? Costello: I heard that you are a real computer expert. Abbot: Well, I don't know- Costello: Yes-sir-ee. You know your stuff. And you're going to train me. Abbot: Really? Costello: Uh huh. And I am here for my first lesson. Abbot: O.K. Lou. What do want to know? Costello: I am having no problem turning it on, but I heard that you should be very careful how you turn it off. Abbot: That's true. Costello: So, here I am working on my new computer and I want to turn it off. What do I do? Abbot: Well, first you press the Start button, and then- Costello: No, I told you, I want to turn it off. Abbot: I know, you press the Start button- Costello: Wait a second. I want to turn it Off. I know how to start it. So tell me what to do. Abbot: I did. Costello: When? Abbot: When I told you to press the Start button. Costello: Why should I press the Start button? Abbot: To shut off the computer. Costello: I press Start to stop. Abbot: Well Start doesn't actually stop the computer. Costello: I knew it! So what do I press? Abbot: Start. Costello: Start what? Abbot: Start button. Costello: Start button to do what? Abbot: Shut down. Costello: You don't have to get rude! Abbot: No, no, no! That's not what I meant. Costello: Then say what you mean. Abbot: To shut down the computer, press- Costello: Don't say, "Start!" Abbot: Then what do you want me to say? Costello: Look, if I want to turn off the computer, I am willing to press the Stop button, the End button and Cease and Desist button, but no one in their right mind presses the Start to Stop. Abbot: But that's what you do. Costello: And you probably Go at Stop signs, and Stop at green lights. Abbot: Don't be ridiculous. Costello: I'm being ridiculous? Well. I think it's about time we started this conversation. Abbot: What are you talking about? Costello: I am starting this conversation right now. Good-bye. "Personal Ad" SBF Seeks Male companionship. I love long walks in the woods, riding in your pickup truck, hunting, camping and fishing trips. Cosy winter nights spent lying by the fire. Candlelight dinners will have me eating out of your hand. Rub me the right way and I will respond with tender caresses. I'll be at the front door when you get home from work. Kiss me and I'm yours. I'm a svelte good looking girl who loves to play. Call 565-2121 and ask for Daisy. The number is X SPCA and I'm an eight week old black Labrador. Work got you down? Life stressing you out? Then put a little humor in your day. Try "Rodney And Cathy's Joke List". FREE daily humor sent
LI Sunday's jokes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Proper Diskette and Care Usage (1) Never leave diskettes in the drive, as the data can leak out of the disk and corrode the inner mechanics of the drive. Diskettes should be rolled up and stored in pencil holders. (2) Diskettes should be cleaned and waxed once a week. Microscopic metal particles may be removed by waving a powerful magnet over the surface of the disk. Any stubborn metal shavings can be removed with scouring powder and steel wool. When waxing a diskette, make sure the surface is even. This will allow the diskette to spin faster, resulting in better access time. (3) Do not fold diskettes unless they do not fit into the drive. "Big" Diskettes may be folded and used in "Little" drives. (4) Never insert a diskette into the drive upside down. The data can fall off the surface of the disk and jam the intricate mechanics of the drive. (5) Diskettes cannot be backed up by running them through a photo copy machine. If your data is going to need to be backed up, simply insert TWO diskettes into your drive. Whenever you update a document, the data will be written onto both disks. A handy tip for more legible backup copies: Keep a container of iron filings at your desk. When you need to make two copies, sprinkle iron filings liberally between the diskettes before inserting them into the drive. (6) Diskettes should not be removed or inserted from the drive while the red light is on or flashing. Doing so could result in smeared or possibly unreadable text. Occasionally, the red light remains flashing in what is known as a "hung" or "hooked" state. If your system is hooking, you will probably need to insert a few coins before being allowed to access the slot. (7) If your diskette is full and needs more storage space, remove the disk from the drive and shake vigorously for two minutes. This will pack the data enough (data compression) to allow for more storage. Be sure to cover all openings with scotch tape to prevent loss of data. (8) Data access time may be greatly improved by cutting more holes in the diskette jacket. This will provide more simultaneous access points to the disk. (9) Periodically spray diskettes with insecticide to prevent system bugs from spreading. -- Chemistry Humor 1. Two hydrogen atoms walk into a bar. One turns to the other and says, "I think I've lost my electron." The other asks, "Are you sure?" "Yes," the first says, "I'm positive." 2. A neutron walks into a bar. He asks the bartender for a drink. When it's served, he asks how much it will be. "For you," the bartender answers, "no charge." - MURPHY'S LAWS OF COMPUTING 1. When computing, whatever happens, behave as though you meant it to happen. 2. When you get to the point where you really understand your computer, it's probably obsolete. 3. The first place to look for information is in the section of the manual where you least expect to find it. 4. When the going gets tough, upgrade. 5. For every action, there is an equal and opposite malfunction. 6. To err is human . . . to blame your computer for your mistakes is even more human, it is downright natural. 7. He who laughs last probably made a back-up. 8. If at first you do not succeed, blame your computer. 9. A complex system that does not work is invariably found to have evolved from a simpler system that worked just fine. 10. The number one cause of computer problems is computer solutions. 11. A computer program will always do what you tell it to do, but rarely what you want to do. -- *** Fun With Unix *** If you type these in from the csh (c shell): in Unix you really do get these responses. % make love Make: Don't know how to make love. Stop. % got a light? No match. % sleep with me bad character % man: Why did you get a divorce? man:: Too many arguments. % make 'heads or tails of all this' Make: Don't know how to make heads or tails of all this. Stop. % make sense Make: Don't know how to make sense. Stop. % make mistake Make: Don't know how to make mistake. Stop. % make bottle.open Make: Don't know how to make bottle.open. Stop. % \(- (-: Command not found. % make light Make: Don't know how to make light. Stop. % date me You are not superuser: date not set Thu Aug 25 15:52:30 PDT 1988 % man rear No manual entry for rear. % If I had a ) for every dollar Clinton spent, what would I have? Too many )'s. % * How would you describe Clinton *: Ambiguous. % %Vice-President %Vice-President: No such job. % ls Meese-Ethics Meese-Ethics not found % "How would you rate Clinton's senility? Unmatched ". % [Where is Jimmy Hoffa? Miss
LI It is not a hoax--American Cancer Society Report
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.cancer.org/bottomnews.html New drug combination eliminates cancer in mice Two new drugs are found to kill cancer in mice - human trials given top priority A combination of two new drugs has been proven to completely destroy cancers in laboratory mice. Now the question is: Will it work in humans? Nearly three decades of research have gone into this discovery, hailed as "the single most exciting thing on the horizon" of cancer treatment by Dr. Richard Klausner, National Cancer Institute Director. Human studies of the two drugs, angiostatin and endostatin, are expected to begin within a year. Decades of research Nearly thirty years ago, Dr. Judah Folkman, now a Harvard Medical School professor, realized that growth and spread of cancers seemed to depend on their ability to cause formation of nearby blood vessels to bring nourishment to the cancer cells. Folkman called this process angiogenesis, from the Greek words angio for vessel, and genesis, for beginning. Without angiogenesis, cancers could still form but would not be able to grow larger that about 1/16 inch, and would not be able to spread to other parts of the body. Over the following years, Folkman and his colleagues working at Boston Children's Hospital slowly unraveled most of the details of how cancer cells secrete substances that promote angiogenesis. More recently, Folkman's team and several other groups of angiogenesis researchers have identified and begun preliminary testing of several drugs that slow or prevent angiogenesis. Several have shown very promising results in animal tests and early stages of clinical trials in cancer patients. The discovery of angiostatin and endostatin In 1991, Folkman and research trainee Dr. Michael O'Reilly began a search for substances naturally produced by the body that might inhibit angiogenesis. They discovered that plasminogen, an enzyme important in breaking up blood clots, naturally splits into fragments, one of which is a potent angiogenesis inhibitor. They called this substance angiostatin. Their team soon discovered an even more powerful angiogenesis inhibitor, endostatin, that is formed when a type of collagen breaks into fragments. Collagens are a group of related proteins that give strength to bones, tendons and the walls of blood vessels. The most recent and exciting finding from Folkman's research team is that combining angiostatin and endostatin causes mouse cancers to disappear without a trace, even when examined under a microscope. Balanced with caution The atmosphere of hope and excitement these breakthroughs have generated needs to be balanced with caution, warns Folkman. Several experimental treatments have been highly successful in animals but have proven to be of limited value to humans. "We have to be careful with expectations" said Folkman. Next step: Clinical Trials The next step is clinical trials, which are expected to begin within a year. "I am putting nothing on higher priority than getting this into clinical trials" said Klausner. Because clinical trials of angiostatin and endostatin are not yet underway, patients may consider clinical trials of other anti-angiogenesis drugs such as TNP-470, carboxyamidotriazole, anti-VEGF, or thalidomide, says the American Cancer Society. Information on these clinical trials is available from the National Cancer Institute (1-800-4-Cancer). In addition to anti-angiogenesis drugs, several other promising new treatments are also being tested in clinical trials. The American Cancer Society spends over 91 million dollars on cancer research each year, including several angiogenesis research projects. Dr. Folkman received an American Cancer Society grant from 1964-1966 to support his cancer research training, and was awarded the ACS Medal of Honor in 1993, the organization's highest award. -- 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
Re: LI It is not a hoax--American Cancer Society Report
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: That wasn't a news story, it came off the American Cancer Society home page. Sue Hi Sue, No hype, huh? Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: New drug combination eliminates cancer in mice ...hailed as "the single most exciting thing on the horizon" of cancer treatment by Dr. Richard Klausner, National Cancer Institute Director. [Is this anybody's idea of a considered scientific evaluation of a possible future cancer treatment? Can anybody spell hyperbole? I assure you many others are sure they have the best thing available.] Because clinical trials of angiostatin and endostatin are not yet underway, patients may consider clinical trials of other anti-angiogenesis drugs such as TNP-470, carboxyamidotriazole, anti-VEGF, or thalidomide, [Some may remember that last drug. In its previous incarnation it was, of course, an anti-nausea drug that had some rather notable side effects that weren't discovered quickly.] The American Cancer Society spends over 91 million dollars on cancer research each year, including several angiogenesis research projects. [Several, huh? New idea?] I deleted all the usual cautions that not everyone reads but are indisputably included in news stories. Warnings on a pack of cigarettes would have stopped smoking if people always paid attention to the fine print. Best, Terry -- 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
Re: LI A Very Cruel Hoax
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: The stock I wish I had bought is in the company who came up with the Viagra. Now there is where the money is. BG Sue Hi Mac, For what it's worth I think you and Ron are absolutely correct on this one. The newspaper stories I've been reading clearly present the reality of the situation with respect to this issue. A lot of time and additional research must be conducted before they will be close to determining that this drug will be effective in curing some types of cancer in humans. But the breakthrough in the animal testing is certainly a tremendous achievement and is deserving of a lot of medial coverage. I wish I had bought Entremed the day before this was announced and then sold it when it hit $80 a share. Timing is everything. 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
Re: LI A Very Cruel Hoax
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Ron: There is a list in Newsweek regarding just what you are saying: Health plans cover some "quality of life" treatments, but they often impose limits. Some typical policies: 1. Accutaine: Acne medication. Most HMO's cover it, but special approval is often required. COST: about $5 for a 20 mg capsule. 2. Caverject: Injectable impotence drug. Usually covered, but a medical review and prior approval are needed. COST: about $18 for a 10-meg injection kit. 3. Clomid: Fertility drug. Not covered unless your employer buys a benefit-rich insurance package; other infertility treatments may be covered. COST: about $8.50 for a 50-mg tablet. 4. Meridia: Diet drug. Not usually covered. If the patient's obesity is life-threatening, doctors can successfully appeal. COST: about $3 for a 10-mg capsule. 5. Muse: Penile suppository for impotence. Usually covered, but a medical review and prior approval are required. COST: about $1.50 for a 1-mg tablet. 6. Proscar: Treatment for benign prostate enlargement. Same drug as Propecia, but with a different name and a lower price. Covered for this use. COST: about $2 for a 5-mg tablet. 7. Protropin: Recombinant growth hormone for short children. Considered a medical procedure, not a pharmaceutical benefit. Coverage depends on benefits package. COST: $210 for a 5-mg vial. 8. Prozac: Antidepressant. Usually covered. COST: about 42.50 for a 20-mg capsule. 9. Retin-A: Topical skin rejuvinator. Covered for acne but not for wrinkles. Some HMO's flag prescriptions to women over 35 to verify they're using it as authorized. COST: about $1.50 for one does of the cream. I know for a fact that HMO's will not cover the anti smoking pill either. I still wish I had stock in Pfizer. Sue Hi Bill: The stock I wish I had bought is in the company who came up with the Viagra. Now there is where the money is. BG Sue The "Pfizer Riser". Their stock doubled in one month. Research is underway to see how Viagra may help women...something in the realm of lubrication. Some feminists think that the double standard is really at work here. Many insurance companies are paying for Viagra, but some of the same companies still refuse to pay for contraception. I personally think that it is the anti-choice people that keep insurance companies from paying for contraceptives, as many incorrectly consider these to be abortifacients. Ron -- 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
Re: LI A Very Cruel Hoax
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Doc: The way I understood it last night was the primary gives off a human hormone which prevents the mets from growing. When the primary is removed via surgery the mets grow because the hormone is no longer. One of the drugs prevents the blood flow to the primary, thus killing it. the other is the hormone which prevents the mets from growing, thus making the first drug effective in killing them. Ron...did I get that right? Sue So it's either catch the primary before it metastisizes or get one of the other kinds of cancer? Ah well, who ever said life was perfect? Still, to me, that's a far cry from shouting hoax. Doc -- 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
LI McDougal: 'not yet begun to fight'
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LITTLE ROCK, Ark., May 5 (UPI) _ Susan McDougal, speaking through her fiance, says if independent counsel Kenneth Starr ``wishes to bring me back into a courtroom to test my beliefs, then he will get more than he bargained for.'' Pat Harris, reading a statement by McDougal, who is in jail for her refusal to testify before Starr's grand jury, says she will not perjure herself ``for leniency,'' and quoted John Paul Jones, ``I have not yet begun to fight.'' McDougal was indicted Monday on two charges of criminal contempt and one of obstruction of justice for refusing to testify before the Whitewater grand jury. McDougal will face a criminal trial on new charges after already having served an 18-month sentence for civil contempt for refusing to testify in September 1996 before the Whitewater grand jury. Arraignment has been set for May 14. She was indicted Monday on more serious charges of criminal contempt for failing to testify in 1996 and then again last month after being admonished each time to do so by U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright. The obstruction of justice count is also for refusing to answer questions in the grand jury. Mark Geragos, McDougal's attorney, says his client will not be ``bullied'' by Starr. He says filing criminal contempt charges against a person who has already served 18 months for civil contempt is ``unprecedented.'' McDougal said she chose not to defend herself and to not take the stand in her own defense in her first trial, adding, ``in retrospect I realize these were mistakesIt is a mistake that will not happen again.'' McDougal said if Starr ``expects to see the same naive, passive woman from the previous trial they are in for a surprise. I intend to fight these charges with every ounce of strength I have.'' McDougal, who was convicted in May 1996 of fraud and conspiracy in the Whitewater investigation, has been jailed in Little Rock in the final weeks of the grand jury that is set to expire on Thursday. -- 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
LI Flight Attendant Tale Lands With a Thud
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tabloid Show Touts Story, Then Shoots It Down By Howard Kurtz Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, May 5, 1998; Page C01 Last night, the syndicated program "Inside Edition" aired eye-popping charges by Cristy Zercher, a former flight attendant, that Bill Clinton groped her on a 1992 campaign flight. Tonight, in Part 2 of the "world television exclusive," the program adds crucial details of how Zercher flunked a lie detector test administered by "Inside Edition." In fact, "she failed miserably," says Jan Murray, a spokeswoman for the King World show. Which raises the question: Why air the story at all? "You have to set up the premise of what her story is in order to thoroughly examine the results," says Marc Rosenweig, a King World vice president. Since "we didn't want to withhold the headline from people," he says, last night's show included a sound bite "that there's a 99 percent probability she's not telling the truth." "Inside Edition" did not plan to disclose the polygraph results in Part 1 until what Murray called a "last-minute change" in programming. The mention came in the final minute of last night's report. The show's first press release last Friday avoided spilling the beans. "Cristy Zercher Claims Presidential Candidate Bill Clinton Groped and Fondled Her While Hillary Slept Just Feet Away," it roared. The release urged viewers to "stay tuned for the results" of the polygraph exam in Part 2. A second release announcing the polygraph results went out yesterday afternoon, too late to be published before last night's program. It said that in the examination, Zercher had negative ratings for truthfulness on four questions asked last week. "She's not telling the truth," Bob Brisentine, a former president of the American Polygraph Association, told the show. Zercher is quoted as saying, "I want everybody to know that I'm not lying. . . . I had no resistance in doing the test because I knew I was telling the truth." If Zercher's tale sounds vaguely familiar, that's because she sold it to the Star supermarket tabloid in March. Apparently she also made a financial deal with "Inside Edition," which pays for interviews but would not confirm that it bought Zercher's story. In an account largely ignored by the mainstream press, the "stunning blonde," as "Inside Edition" calls her, said that Clinton fondled her breast for 40 minutes on the plane and she accused him of other lewd behavior. (In a 1994 interview with The Washington Post, Zercher made no mention of being harassed by Clinton.) Rosenweig says that "Inside Edition," which airs locally on WBDC-TV (Channel 50), interviewed another former flight attendant who challenges Zercher's account. "We feel this is an important story," he says. "We made sure we did it right." But White House spokesman Joe Lockhart sees it differently: "It used to be, you checked your facts first and did the story second. Now you do the story and then you check your facts. Anyone can see a problem with that." As for the allegations themselves, Lockhart says: "We don't comment on tabloid stories -- especially this one." Bye Bye Fred Barnes and Mort Kondracke, two longtime mainstays of the "McLaughlin Group," are jumping ship to launch their own political show for Fox News Channel. Adding insult to injury, the still-unnamed Saturday night program, which debuts next month, will appear on the cable network opposite McLaughlin in the Washington market. Barnes, executive editor of the Weekly Standard, and Kondracke, executive editor of Roll Call, are the latest to defect from McLaughlin, the high-decibel former priest who essentially invented t
LI Boulder DA asks for Ramsey expense money
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BOULDER, Colo., May 5 (UPI) _ Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter is asking for $150,000 to cover expenses associated with the 16-month- old JonBenet Ramsey case. Most of the money would be spent on a grand jury specialist and a research prosecutor who would help decide whether to present the case to a grand jury, which was empaneled amid unprecedented hoopla last month. The 6-year-old kindergartner was found strangled and battered in a basement room at her parents' home in Boulder on Dec. 26, 1996. Hours earlier her mother, Patsy Ramsey, told police she found a ransom note demanding $118,000. Police, unable to put together enough evidence to make an arrest, asked Hunter to give the case to a grand jury. Detectives later this month will present Hunter with a formal summary and sometime after that he will decide whether a grand jury probe is warranted. Also included in Hunter's request are travel expenses and fees for consultants who will help with the police presentation, as well as document preservation costs and money for computers, telephones and pagers. Patsy Ramsey and her husband John, who sold their Boulder home and moved to the Atlanta area, have never been named as prime suspects but detectives late last year said the couple remain ``under the umbrella of suspicion.'' -- 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
Re: LI Flight Attendant Tale Lands With a Thud
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L. Actually I thought the whole thing was funny. But then I do tend to have a weird sense of humor. BG They didn't show the part where they confront her with the results. That is suppose to be on today. If you have nothing else to do and want to get some laughs, take a look. Sue Hi Sue -- sniff sniff sniff go the legal begals: is this a new twist on libel defenses? You never know who will bring suit, but forget publish and retract, now its publish and crow? I dunno, seems very odd... but then again a 40 minute fondling, that seems odd too, but then I missed the show. Was she complaining, bragging, or none of the above? wink LDMF. -- 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
LI Whitewater grand jury dismissed
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: LITTLE ROCK, Ark., May 5 (UPI) _ The second Whitewater grand jury impaneled in Little Rock to investigate President Clinton's business dealings has been dismissed after indicting only Susan McDougal during its two-year term. Court personnel brought in pizzas for a goodbye party today and members of the grand jury smiled and hugged as they left the courthouse. A federal mandate forbids them from talking about what they heard on the jury panel. Although the 23 members of the grand jury reportedly examined the business of the Clintons in the Whitewater and Castle Grande land deals, they only indicted McDougal for refusing to answer questions during the investigation. Charles Bakaly, the spokesman for independent counsel Kenneth Starr, told reporters Monday that information gathered by the Little Rock grand jury could be passed on to the grand jury based in Washington, D.C. The first grand jury indicted James McDougal, his ex-wife, Susan, and former Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, on fraud charges in 1995 and former deputy Attorney General Webster Hubbell on mail fraud and tax evasion in 1994. The McDougals and Tucker were convicted in 1996 and Hubbell pleaded guilty to his charges 1994, agreeing to cooperate with independent Kenneth Starr. He served most of a 21-month sentence, but is now facing new charges. Hubbell, his wife, a tax lawyer and an accountant were charged last Thursday in a 10-count indictment with tax violations and mail fraud. -- 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
LI 5th-Graders Using Steroids
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kids As Young As 10 Using Bodybuilding Drugs Some boys and girls as young as 10 are taking illegal steroids to do better in sports, according to the first survey to look at use of the bodybuilding drugs as early as fifth grade. The survey found that 2.7 percent of 965 youngsters questioned at four Massachusetts middle schools are using anabolic steroids. Experts said that represents a significant problem. "We have thought that it has been a problem primarily of high school and college students," said Dr. Robert W. Blum, professor of pediatrics and director of adolescent health at the University of Minnesota. Besides building muscles, steroids can harm the liver, stunt growth and cause a host of other long-term ailments. In some cases, coaches and parents may be buying steroids on the black market and then passing them along to the child athletes. "A cycle of steroids costs a few hundred dollars," said University of Massachusetts researcher Avery Faigenbaum, whose study was published Monday in the journal Pediatrics. "I don't know a lot of 10-year-olds who have a couple of hundred dollars. I think we have to look at brothers and sisters, I think we have to look at parents, I think we have to look at youth coaches," he said. Dr. Charles E. Yesalis, a Pennsylvania State University expert on steroids, said: "This sounds the klaxon. It's a warning to parents, doctors and school administrators." While high school students have been surveyed, and Yesalis has surveyed seventh-graders, researchers said this is the first survey to focus on the problem down to fifth grade. Experts said that there was no reason to doubt that the results of the anonymous survey taken with teachers absent were accurate. Yesalis said they were consistent with his own observations. "I'm not shocked, I'm sorry to say," he added. A major finding was that use among middle-school girls was almost as prevalent as it was among boys. Steroid use was reported by 2.8 percent of boys and 2.6 percent of girls. Surveys of high-school students have found steroid use more common among boys than among girls. For example, a study published last year by Penn State University researchers found that 2.4 percent of girls in ninth to 12th grades nationally about 175,000 teen-agers had used steroids at least once. The numbers for boys were twice as high. Faigenbaum said more emphasis on girls' sports may have evened the amount of use. He said programs to fight steroid use are in place in high school and college, "but I think we have to start younger." -- 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
Re: LI Whitewater grand jury dismissed
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I bet they have a news conference on Dateline or Nightline, one of those shows. :) How much money did this thing cost us and what did we get out of it, is what I would like to know. Are we going to be told all that, I wonder. Sue Sue Hi Sue, How long do you think it will be before we read leaks coming from anonymous former Grand Jury members? G 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
LI Anti-Clinton fanatic issued Hubbell tapes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: By Anthony Lewis\ BOSTON If there has been a slimier political act in Washington in recent decades, I do not remember it. Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., reached depths of degradation in publishing transcripts of telephone conversations that Webster Hubbell had, from prison, with his wife, friends and lawyers. The Federal Bureau of Prisons tapes prisoners' calls to guard against threats to security. Its regulations forbid disclosure of their contents, as does the Privacy Act. Burton, chairman of a House committee that is investigating campaign finance, subpoenaed the Hubbell tapes. He said he needed them to pursue an inquiry into whether Hubbell had been paid hush money for silence. But he edited out exculpatory remarks by Hubbell, including a denial of the hush-money notion. In turning the tapes over, the Justice Department said, "We understand the committee appreciates (their) sensitivity and will safeguard them accordingly." Burton ignored that, an aide explained, because "the American people had a right to know what happened." The real purpose was of course to smear Hubbell's friend, President Bill Clinton. Burton once fired a bullet into a melon to prove that Vincent Foster did not commit suicide. He is a fanatic ready to believe, and propagate, anything that will hurt Clinton. When Hillary Rodham Clinton said her husband was the target of "a vast right-wing conspiracy," she was much mocked. The word conspiracy evokes the unlikely picture of men plotting in secret meetings. But no one can doubt that many people and institutions on the political right are dedicated to destroying Clinton. Like Burton, they need no instructions from a conspiracy. Richard Mellon Scaife reportedly funneled $2.4 million through a right-wing magazine, The American Spectator, for what was called the Arkansas Project. It was a secret operation to find evil about the president - or invent it, like the tale that he helped to fly drugs in through an airport at Mena, Ark. Kenneth Starr's principal deputy in Little Rock, W. Hickman Ewing Jr., was the subject of a recent profile by Jeffrey Toobin in The New Yorker. His record, and his own words, portray a prosecutor who sees himself as the sword of God and who has decided, as Toobin put it, "that the president and his wife are crooks." Starr, the Whitewater independent counsel, is not in the fanatical category of a Burton, Scaife or Ewing. But he has gone very far in his effort to find something that he can report to the House as a possible impeachable offense by the president. Last week Starr had a grand jury indict Webster Hubbell on numerous charges, principally obstructing tax administration. Hubbell's wife, accountant and lawyer were also indicted. "That's very hardball," a U.S. attorney in New York under President George Bush, Otto Obermaier, said. It is unusual to bring a criminal rather than a civil case on such tax matters, and this was brought without the customary review by the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service. Starr hopes to pressure Hubbell into saying damaging things about President and Mrs. Clinton. Starr is trying, for the first time in our history, to make Secret Service agents who guard the president testify about his personal life. He is taking that dangerous step in hopes of getting evidence that Clinton lied about a sexual relationship - lied in a deposition found to be immaterial, in a civil case that has been dismissed. Clinton has made what I regard as grave mistakes of policy, and he may have done private wrongs that are the subject of so much innuendo. But the behavior of his enemies seems to me - and I think to much of the public - far more dangerous. At his press conference last week one reporter after another asked the president about his "moral authority." They might start asking about the moral authority of Burton, Scaife and the other haters. And they might st
LI Beating verdict was predictable
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Beating verdict was predictable Tuesday, May 5, 1998 By Sylvester Brown Jr. One year ago, Gregory Bell, a mentally retarded young man, was severely beaten by the police in his home in the 3400 block of Oregon. As many as 12 police officers were in his home during the beating, which included five blows to the head with an ASP baton. To many people in St. Louis, Bell's case offered irrefutable proof that, when it comes to African-Americans, the use of deadly force is not a last resort but the force of choice. Despite the fact that neighbors, white and black, came forward to tell the police and the media of the horrors they had witnessed (the slapping of high-fives among officers once Bell was outside his home, for instance), only one officer, police Sgt. Thomas Moran, was charged with a crime. On Friday, he was acquitted of all charges. There has been no justice in the Bell beating case. It was the usual system of coverups that allows police officers to act without fear of punishment. The Police Department's code of silence, the circuit attorney's insulting pre-trial antics and the judge's in-your-face rulings against the prosecution made Moran's case the clearest example of how ill-equipped (and uninterested) St. Louis is in handling police brutality cases. The outcome of the case against Moran was predictable. No one could have been so foolish as to believe that the Police Department would find evidence powerful enough to withstand reasonable doubt against one of its own decorated veteran officers. Such faith would be better placed elsewhere - but not in St. Louis Circuit Attorney Dee Joyce-Hayes, either. Media watchers have become accustomed to prosecutors who act out their disgust, pain and anger on behalf of victims of crime. That was not the case for victim Bell. In an interview with my magazine last year, Joyce-Hayes said of Bell's injuries, "They weren't that severe. I mean they look horrible when that happens, but there was no permanent, long-term injuries." It is clear that Joyce-Hayes' office was, at best, ill-prepared to proceed in the case against Moran. An internal memo leaked to the media from within her office disclosed that one of her own assistants, Douglas Pribble, believed there were far too many inconsistencies in the case to proceed to trial. Pribble's "concerns" about the strength of the people's case against Moran offers the only possible explanation for his sudden incompetence earlier in the case when he failed to oppose Moran's defense motion for a change in venue. The "error" resulted in the trial being moved to Kansas City, where it was heard before an all-white jury. Moran seems to have friends in high places. His strongest ally, however, seems to have been seated on the bench. Retired Circuit Judge Jack Koehr ruled that Bell's mental retardation could not be a matter brought before the jury. In essence, the ruling tied the prosecutor's hands. No victim profile could be offered nor could an explanation be made for why Bell could not take the stand to tell his story. Comments about Bell's sweetness, childlike innocence and inability to understand what was happening during the April 14, 1997, police incident could not be made because those characteristics are intricately connected to his retardation. In stark contrast, officers were allowed to testify as to Bell's behavior and comments at the time of the beating. Most astonishing is that one officer, Richard Booker, testified that while trying to subdue Bell, Bell said, "You're making me mad" and "I'm not going to jail!" The jury wasn't told that a retarded young man opened the door to the police, dressed in only jogging pants, dog at his side; and that a melee ensued. If the jury believed that this was just another young black suspect refusing to cooperate with the police, instead of a frightened retarded youth, there was no allowable testimony to refute it. So
LI Rape victim bill advanced
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: SACRAMENTO, May 5 The Assembly Public Safety Committee has approved (Tuesday) legislation that excludes a victim's manner of dress in the trials of accused rapists. The bill says the style or length of a victim's dress or skirt is irrelevant should the defendant try to use it as evidence showing she invited a sexual act. Assemblyman Scott Wildman, D-Burbank, said his bill expands present law that already excludes evidence about the reputation or past sexual conduct of a rape victim. -- 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
LI 12-year-old set for adult murder trial
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: PONTIAC, Mich., May 5 (UPI) _ A judge has ordered a 12-year-old boy with a 2-year-old criminal record to stand trial as the youngest person in Michigan history tried as an adult for murder. In setting a Monday trial date for Nathaniel Abraham of Pontiac, the judge today rejected defense arguments that a new state law allowing adult-court trials for children is cruel and unconstitutional. If convicted in the shooting death of an 18-year-old man last fall, Abraham could be sentenced to life in prison without parole. Abraham is charged with first-degree murder, assault with intent to murder, and two felony firearms counts. Assistant Prosecutor Lisa Tomko says Abraham's two dozen run-ins with police before the shooting _ many for serious crimes including arson left prosecutors with little choice but to seek an adult conviction. Speaking of the shooting, Tomko says, ``We had a situation where a boy said he was going to shoot somebody. He got a weapon and then he sat on a hill like a sniper and waited for someone to go by.'' Defense attorney Dan Bagdade says he plans to argue in court that the boy was playing with the gun, aiming at trees, when the victim was shot outside a party store. He also says Abraham is incapable of intent to kill, and plans to call psychologists to testify to his child-like mental capacity. The NAACP is also offering to help Abraham, who is black. Probate Judge Eugene Arthur Moore ordered Abraham tried in circuit court. A hearing on the admissibility of Abraham's police confession is set for Wednesday but officials say it's unlikely to delay the trial. -- 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
Re: LI Interesting Starr tidbits
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy: From what I understand Susan McDougal refuses to answer *any* questions that Starr asks, but does say she will answer any and *all* questions if given the chance to do it for someone other than Starr. This question is amongst the rest. As to why anyone would leave the country or take the 5th rather than answer anything Starr has to ask, I have heard the same story, but have never heard the 90 names. I know of one, Miss Arkansas, and she has told the entire story already and says that she has nothing that will help Starr, and doesn't want to become involved in this mess in any way. Some of the people who refuse to talk are secret service people. Sue Hi All :) Today while taking care of some business, I was driving along and Paul Harvey was on, he mentioned two interesting things about this whole Starr investigation they were: 1. Susan Mcdougal (sp), there is one question she has refused to answer and many are wondering about a check she wrote in 1985 to Clinton, the check was in the amount of $5081.00 in the memo section she had written "Clinton Payoff", I am wondering about that and what it was for. 2. In the course of this investigation 90 people have either claimed the 5th or fled the country in order not to answer questions by Starr. My questions are, why would you flee the country if your not trying to cover anything up? Why the 5th? Doesn't that raise suspicion? It does with me. Why won't Susan explain that check? Sure it could simply mean she payed off money she borrowed or something totally meaningless, but if that is so, why not just say it? Why suddenly turn completely mum about that check? IMHO by remaining quiet about that she herself is causing some serious doubts about the relationship of her and the Clintons being on the up and up. I am not convicting them of doing anything wrong, let me ensure you realize that, but this does make me wonder and question why? -- 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
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve: LMAO Goes to show you what the different meanings of a word can do. LOL Sue Marge Simpson has always done if for me lol, Oh that blue hair, I wonder how many fag buts there are in there bg (Opps just thought I might add that a fag in England isn't a fag its a cigarette) phew nearly caused an international incident with that one lol. Steve ^ ^ )o( -- 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
Re: LI Whitewater grand jury dismissed
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Aren't they disbanded now? If so can't they talk to anyone that they want to talk to once the case is over and done, like an ordinary jury. Sue Hi Sue, The Grand Jury members have to be careful that they are not caught leaking information about what went on in the proceedings. It is against the law and a person could go to jail for leaking things. Of course, an anonymous source could make some good pocket change if he/she wanted to take a chance. 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
Re: LI Viagra hits the legal scene/divorce
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: I can see where this could become a problem. Seriously. Sue Hi Folks - Psychologist tells me there is this new thing, a side-effect (humor) of Viagra, called "Viagra Divorce" (not funny). Subject finds himself able to sustain erections, begins to feel his oats, wants to go out on the range. I discussed with my friend that this camn be said of anti-depressants or other psychopharmaceuticals. Without blinking, psychologist friend began to expound upon" prosac-divorce". So there you go! :) Best wishes, LDMF. -- 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
Re: LI Flight Attendant Tale Lands With a Thud
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: We have it on CBS at 7:30 PM here, but I think it is a syndicated show. I hope that you can see it as it really is funny, in a very sad way. Sue Hi Sue - do you happen tho know time and channel? I guess we are a few hours different but I can probably figure it out. Thanks, LDMF. :) -- 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
LI Hubbell tapes to be released in their entirety
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON, May 3 Responding to charges he doctored tapes of a Clinton allys jailhouse conversations, Republican Congressman Dan Burton said all the tapes would be released starting Monday. The controversy exploded Sunday over the disclosure that Republicans edited out material from the Webster Hubbell tapes which appear to exonerate the first lady of wrongdoing at an Arkansas law firm. BECAUSE OF BASELESS claims made by White House operatives, the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee will make public the entirety of 54 conversations made by the former associate attorney general during his imprisonment for the commission of federal crimes, said Burton, the committee chair. I believe this will once and for all put the lie to any accusations of editing, doctoring, or out of context quotation, he said. Appearing on NBCs Meet the Press on Sunday, Burton said his staff edited the tapes to preserve the privacy of the Hubbells and denied the committee edited the tapes to keep anything from the American public. He said his staff wanted the American public to know that the former justice department official was under pressure not to say certain things because he feared his wife would lose her job. The reason we released these tapes is that they showed very clearly that there is intimidation by this White House with certain people, Burton said. Burton said Hubbells comment to his wife that he has to rollover one more time shows that he was worried about his wife losing her job. NBCs Meet the Press host Tim Russert played sections of the tapes Sunday, showing that key passages, including some in mid-conversation, had been omitted that were favorable to Hubbell and the Clintons. In one conversation, Hubbell is heard telling his wife, Suzanna, that Hillary Clinton didnt know about overbilling at the Rose Law Firm or much about what happened at the firm. Former White House Counsel Jack Quinn told Meet the Press that by deleting key passages of the tape that are favorable to the White House, Burton has blown any perception that he can conduct fair and impartial hearings on the president. NBCs Lisa Myers on the Hubbell tapes The House Government Reform and Oversight Committee chaired released the tapes and transcripts Thursday and Friday after Hubbell, his wife and their attorney and accountant were charged with tax evasion. It is the second time independent counsel Kenneth Starr has targeted Hubbell in his Whitewater investigation into land deals in Arkansas when President Bill Clinton was governor of the state. Burton said the committee went through 150 hours of tape and released about an hour accompanied with a 27-page transcript. The committee subpoenaed the tapes from prison officials and transcribed them as part of its broad investigation into campaign fund-raising irregularities. While the Justice Department had made it clear that it wanted to keep the tapes private, Burton said the American people have a right to know what the (Clinton) administration is doing to cover up this investigation and Mr. Hubbell is a part of it. Webster Hubbells attorney John Nields said on ABCs This Week that it was wrong to release the tapes of the former associate attorney general and said he would not agree to any more releases
LI Better than Disneyland BG
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Titanic finder wants to block ship tour NEW YORK, May 4 (UPI) _ The American company that owns the salvage rights to the sunken Titanic has filed suit in federal court hoping to scuttle plans by a tour operator to offer deep-sea trips to the famed wreckage. The New York Times reports that RMS Titanic is filing a motion in Norfolk, Va., today against Deep Ocean Expeditions, hoping to block plans for its first tour in August. RMS Titantic hopes to send researchers to the ship in August, when waters are calmest, and wants to keep guided tours away. Tour entrepreneur MIke McDowell, founder of Quark Expeditions of Darien, Conn., wants to run 60 trips to the wreckage, charging $32,500 per person for a run in a small submersible. The deep water mini-subs carry a pilot and two passengers. RMS Titanic has held salvage rights since 1987 and has recovered thousands of items, which it exhibits at various locations around the world, and has made several films. The salvor went to court in 1996 when it found the wreckage had been disturbed and some of it damaged by Russian submersibles used by James Cameron, director of the movie ``Titanic,'' to film the ships remains for his blockbuster. No immediate decision is expected from the court. -- 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
LI Kaczynski makes last court appearance
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: SACRAMENTO, Calif., May 4 (UPI) _ Theodore Kaczynski gets perhaps his last chance today to explain in public why he became the notorious UNABOMber. Then he will be sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison without release or legal appeal. The 55-year-old former math professor, who went to Evergreen Park High School in Illinois, accepted the terms in January to avoid the death penalty. In return, he pleaded guilty to 13 charges involving five of the 16 serial bombings, three of them fatal. Justice Department spokeswoman Leesa Brown says U.S. District Judge Garland Burrell Jr. will give victims the opportunity to speak at today's formal sentencing proceeding in Sacramento, Calif. Kaczynski also will be allowed to speak, either directly or through his lawyers. His own published ``manifesto'' and writings seized from his Montana cabin in April 1996 offer a conflicting picture of the hermit. They portray him as an anarchist dedicated to attacking university researchers, airlines and other symbols of industrial society. But other writings show Kaczynski was motivated mainly by personal revenge against people whose ideas, lifestyles or jobs he hated beginning while he was a graduate student in 1966. The Harvard University product wrote before he took a teaching post at the University of California, Berkeley: ``I will kill, but I will make at least some effort to avoid detection, so that I can kill again.'' Prosecutors have asked the judge to recommend incarceration in a maximum security prison, with the exact site to be determined by the U. S. Bureau of Prisons within the next few weeks. -- 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
Re: LI Did Simpson have help in cover-up?
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: He may be lurking. BG And if he is and this pisses him off, I am all for it. LOL Sue Hi Jackie, IMO, the only reason the subject of latent homosexuality ever came up with respect to Simpson is because people thought this would be a way to really get to him and cause him much anger and distress. Many experts in this field refer to this as psycho-babble. As you, Terry and others have pointed out, something like this is impossible to define, impossible to measure and impossible to prove under true scientific conditions. It also falls under the "who gives a shit" category. And since Simpson is not on the law list I doubt if we're succeeding in pissing him off much either. BG 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
Re: LI New Trial for the list, locally tried
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: That is really sad too. I remember when the Tammy and what's his name thing was going on. There were old people who couldn't even afford to buy themselves decent food, sending money to them. I think that they still are. Tammy and what's his name both have new ministries. :( I never could get into this tel-evangelical thing, or even these new born again churches. But that is just me. If they help someone then good, but it just isn't my thing. Doesn't Oral Roberts have a big university? There is one of them that has big, huge crusade thing here in So California all the time. In fact his son is taking over for him. And he has a huge church here in Riverside. The cops have to direct traffic every Sunday around the church. Harvest Festival is the name of the thing. The guy with the glass church in Orange County is another one. He got into trouble on an airplane recently for attacking one of the flight attendants. A whole bunch of them came forward and said he was always really rude and crude all the time. :( He does have a beautiful church though, and the Christmas pageant he puts on is awesome. Sue HI Sue, Naw, he only gambles on sure things. :) As far as I know he eventually made his goal as there are still millions of gullible people willing to send in their hard earned money. Oral Roberts and his family are quite wealthy, you know. Of course, they had to sell the City of Faith hospital and the university is in big financial difficulty. But they do take care of their personal priorities. Oral is in failing health these days and his son Richard is running things. 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
Re: LI televanelists!
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kelly: Billy Graham is the guy who has the big Harvest Festival church here in Riverside. His son has pretty much taken it over. That church takes over two city blocks, and ties traffic up on Sundays for hours. As for Schuller, I don't know anything about the man myself, but I do know that he has a beautiful church and an awsome Christmas show as well as an Easter one (I haven't seen that one though). Didn't he plead guilty and get probation and a fine on that plane incident? I don't know why the other people who came forward, but I remember them doing so. I'm really not into this type of thing so I can't make any expert comments on any of it. I don't go along with the idea that a person can buy his or her way into heaven, and that seems to me to be the thing that these guys on television keep saying. As for Graham and Schuller, I don't know enough about either of them to say anything, except if they help someone, then more power to them. Sue Dr. Robert Schuller is the man you are talking about. He is a Dutch Reformed preacher who was heavily influenced by Norman Vincent Peale's "Power of Positive Thinking" train of thought. In fact, Robert H. Schuller and Peale became close friends. About one year ago (perhaps it was two, I'll have to check my research notes) Schuller had some difficult times with a brain tumor that had to be removed. Since then, his son Robert A. Schuller, has been doing the majority of the work at the Crystal Cathedral. Dr Schuller has an impeccible record as far as integrity and financial honesty goes. His ministry is one of very few that is virtually scandal free. The incident that you are referring too, where he struck the airline attendant, was a combination of a mis-communication between the two individuals and some lingering problems from Dr Schuller's brain surgery. My guess, from what I know of Dr Schuller, is that the other attendants that came forward did so in an attempt to cash in on a possible windfall. The only criticism one can make of Schuller is that his brand of pop-psychology religion is rather watered down and simplistic. However, many seem to find comfort and help in his "God Loves You and So Do I" type sermons. As for Oral, he never did raise the amount of money he claimed to need in order for God to keep him on the earth, but apparently God forgave him and let him live on. To the best of my knowledge, Oral never did return the money that he did get in his fund raising campaign. ANd yes, Oral Roberts does have his own university. As does Pat Robertson: Regent University (well, "own" is a strong word, but Regent was created by Pat's religious organization) Schuller is more along the same religious evangelical strain as Billy Graham-however Graham focuses more on encouraging people to become "born again" where Schuller and the late Norman Vincent Peale focused more on positive thinking for positive living. It has been joked by Schuller that he was the first "Calvinist Methodist" Kelly -- 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
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Vi: I have to leave that answer up to the psychiatrists and psychologists. I am not at all knowledgeable in that science. I have read just about everything that has come out about Simpson in the past few years, and just guessing I would say that a lot of it may have to do with the fact that he has never had to take responsibility for anything that he has done in his whole life. He also has been the king in everything that he has ever done, with people falling all over themselves to please and placate him. He has always called the shots. He has always controlled everyone and everything around him. But whether this has anything to do with his control over Nicole I don't know. I tend to stick with my original dx, he is a SOB who thought of Nicole as another possession that he owned. I'm sorry I can't answer your question. Actually you know more about this than I do. :) Sue Sue Hi Sue, I certainly appreciate your point of view and do not disagree with all that you have said. however, there remains a question: Why was it so important to him to control her and don't tell me it's because he's a mean,egotistical SB. He's all of that, but I'd appreciate having a scientific explanation, or as close to it as you can get based on your knowledge and what you have read of human behavior and its motivations. Vi -- 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
LI Hillary Clinton wont be indicted
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Evidence found lacking against first lady, but McDougal indicted again for contempt WASHINGTON, May 4 Hillary Rodham Clinton will not be indicted in the Whitewater investigation, sources close to the investigation told NBC News on Monday. The sources said the decision was not a close call. Independent counsel Kenneth Starr found the evidence was simply not strong enough for what would have been an unprecedented indictment of a first lady, they said. BUT WHITEWATER business partner Susan McDougal did not escape. She was indicted on new charges related to her refusal to tell a grand jury what she knows about President Bill Clintons and Hillary Clintons business dealings. The indictment, handed down by a grand jury that is completing its last week of work, charged McDougal with two counts of criminal contempt of court and one count of obstruction of justice. The charges come nearly two years after she first refused to testify before a federal grand jury after being convicted by a jury on fraud charges related to the failed savings and loan at the center of the original Whitewater investigation. Legal observers said that just because Hillary Clinton was not indicted doesnt mean shes out of trouble. Former independent counsel Michael Zeldin told MSNBCs Internight that though the Arkansas grand jury found no wrongdoing on Whitewater matters, the first lady will still need to justify the missing FBI files and the firings in the travel office to a separate Washington, D.C., grand jury. Other attorneys said Starr may have foregone an indictment against the first lady in part so that prosecutors can focus their attention on allegations against the president. Starr is learning to go after what he thinks is important, criminal defense attorney Pam Metzger told MSNBC. In the past, she said, Starr has had a political tin ear. But Zeldin told MSNBC that Starr should get some credit for his exercise of judgment. In the end, he did what he was empowered to do, which is to hear the evidence, Zeldin said. MCDOUGAL: 18 MONTHS AND COUNTING McDougal has already served 18 months for civil contempt for refusing to answer questions before the grand jury, the maximum time a federal judge can order. She was freed in March and is currently serving a prison sentence for the fraud charges stemming from her 1996 trial. She was brought back before the grand jury again last month and again refused to answer prosecutors questions. U.S. Marshals escort Susan McDougal to the Little Rock, Ark., federal building in April. William Henley, Susan McDougals brother, said before the indictment that she expected to take any new charges to trial so that she can present evidence concerning recent allegations that a key prosecution witness may have received financial assistance from conservative critics of President
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Yvonne:
What is even more interesting to me than Simpson, which I know you know
how I feel about him, is why these people stayed with him after the way
he treated them.
I'm not only referring to his wives, I also mean men and women who still
held him in the highest regard throughout his life before the murders,
and some that still do. They will not even face the truth that he
killed these two people and would fight to the death even now for him.
Paula kept coming back and even lied to protect him at the end.
And his lawyers didn't even get paid, yet they still hang around.
Bailey still goes to bat for him, and they fought for him in the civil
trial.
Look how he treated his own family after the criminal trial and during
the civil trial. They were no longer needed so send them back to where
they belong. Without jobs or other such things to survive, now that
they had given this all up to help him.
It sure is an interesting thing. I bet a psychologist would have a
field day with this bunch.
Sue
"Urban myths," by definition, are decades old canards keyed into a
culture's fears. As such, a family's catastrophe (the senior Mr Simpson's
homosexuality and ultimate death from AIDS) doesn't even enter into the
realm of "urban myths."
More to the point, the fact is that Simpson's father was a haphazard entity
in his son's early life and interesting shadow figure in creating what
matured into his son. Added to that is "Ms Eunice's" role at head of the
family and how she attempted to raise her second son.
Any out-of-kilter family modalities can and are used to analyze why a kid
grows up to beat up women. Why Orenthal grew up to lord it over his
sisters and his former (living) wife.
Shut off a person's prologue for politically correct sentiments
("homophobia," current cultural mores) and you miss all the fun of solving
the puzzle. Unless, of course, some of you out there think that his
baterring, abuse, beating and kicking of wives is not all that important.
--
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
LI Live death is win-win
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Live death is Live death is win-win By Dan Bernstein The Press-Enterprise The very day Jerry Springer's producers agreed to delete fistfights and chair-throwing from his highly rated, highbrow show, a sick man blew his brains out on an LA freeway, and TV covered it live. Just like that, we made the seamless, inevitable transition. Springer's Chicago was just too small a burg for the new level of televised news-o-tainment we have been building toward since the early '90s. TV and its vast, voracious audience badly needed to ditch that Windy City studio in favor of a signature, on-location landmark: a curvaceous ribbon of SoCal freeway. What better stage for a televised suicide? Jerry Springer seems almost silly now. Kidstuff. Quaint. Yes, TV has rocketed to a brave new level, though there is still a ways to go. We're right on track for a televised homicide, and I'm hoping we can get there before the new millennium. True enough, a guy single-handedly shutting down a SoCal freeway is news. To Los Angeles TV stations, though, freeway action is not just news. It's the best news there is. It launches the choppers. It holds the promise of an unchoreographed chase with guaranteed results. Ever since the riots, the local TV stations have just gotten so good at live hoverage. They weren't bargaining on a suicide, though. Some stations actually pulled back. Loss of nerve, I guess. They'll do better next time. The thing we have to realize (and here I pause to acknowledge that newspapers, too, have been purveyors of illustrated death) is that televising live death is an absolute win-win proposition. The TV stations win-win because they can telecast live death, then tell viewers, "We've shown you some pretty graphic images. Now, we're going to talk about whether we should have done it." TV stations can thus get the unfiltered story (and the revenue-generating ratings) and convey a sense of somber, responsible introspection. Win-win! Viewers win-win because they can watch the live death, then call the TV stations and raise holy hell with them for putting it on the air. Win-win! Hollywood win-wins because these real-life dramas tend to stir the will-it-make-a-movie juices. And when TV airs live death, it gives Hollywood a certain amount of cover from critics who say there's too much violence in regularly scheduled programming. Win-win! There are a few losers, I suppose, including kids who, their cartoons pre-empted, get sucked into watching a guy blow his head off; and the poor saps who get stranded on the freeways. By the time they get home, it's merely taped death. But we must press on. We've been preparing ourselves for live death for years. We're bored with taped death. We see it on the news night after night. It is sanitized, dull. So is the nightly slaughter on regularly programmed TV, even if it is accompanied by luscious soundtracks. So are the body counts on the big screen, even though movies have unselfishly done as much as they could to get us ready for the next frontier in TV viewing: live death. A few cautionary notes: The transition from taped to live death might not be that easy. It will be more like an acquired taste. Ideally, we'll get a few more live suicides under our belts before we move onto to the big daddy: the televised homicide. But if we just remember to draw on our collective viewing experience, to remember that we've put in a great deal of time diminishing the value of life and blurring the line between pretend, taped and actual death, we should be fine. And even though raising holy hell with the TV stations is just part of the equation that makes live death so win-win, let's not go overboard because, darn it, TV wouldn't show it if we didn't watch it. (That doesn't mean we like to watch it. Why, we can hardly stand it.) Finally, to you history buffs who say we rung up a live homicide in '63 when Jack Ruby snuffed Lee Oswald, I say you may be technically correct. But you'll recall there were no choppers in Dallas. And, if memory serves, they only got it in black and white. Our best days of live death are ahead of us. Ladies and gentlemen, click your remotes. -- 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
Re: Sue, Jury selected was Re: LI Jones Appeal Difficult, But Not Impossible
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Do you think that maybe all the publicity that the kids in Jonesboro and in the other two shooting, could maybe be a part of the reason that there is more of it lately than usual. There was another incident of it in LA yesterday. One kid was hurt, and none were killed thank God. But it seems like it is becoming a daily occurrence lately. Florida had one yesterday too. :( Then we had the guy shoot his head off on the freeway in front of millions the other day. Now that was weird. I was just kinda listening to the chase, not paying any attention, when they said he had a gripe with HMO's and was laying a sign out on the freeway. I started watching to see what was going on (big mistake) and the next thing I knew his truck caught on fire, and he blew his head off. I really don't think it was necessary for some of the cameras to be right up there in his face when he did it either. They had plenty of warning that this guy was going to do something. The part that really got to me though, was I had it on a cartoon channel so Steven could watch the motions on the screen, and they went away from the cartoons to show this. I know it won't effect Steven in any way, he only likes to watch the colors and movement, but how about the thousands of older children who were watching those cartoons. The public has a right to know, but just how much do they need to see? And how much of this stuff is causing more, and more of it to happen because of the "publics right to know". I wonder. Sue Hi Sue The jury was selected and opening remarks will begin. Nothing in paper today about this at all. Read about the selection process for hiring a new president for the college and that the state university faculty belonging to IFO have voted to authorize a strike. Our union has already settled ours so here we don't worry. Yes it is nice not to have the headlines filled with violence and in some respects to read about the positive things happening in the community. But, sometimes it seems like they think if they put their head in the sand, all the unpleasantness will go away. I wish there was a better balance in the newspapers. I would know nothing about the Clinton, little about Jonesboro, etc. if I relied on this paper for my news. jackief -- 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
Re: LI SUSAN MCDOUGAL IMPLICATES NEW YORK TIMES
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I put the Hubbal tapes on here that I heard last night. They are really something. I have noticed in all of this stuff that I hear, read, and find on the web about Whitewater that it is always Hillary that they are talking about. Never Clinton himself. Have you actually heard his name brought into any of it? I think I heard one of the talking heads on MSNBC say that the President had to be impeached before he could be indicted. So I think you are right about this. I was so glad to see Susan McMillian jump ship. She should have done that a long time ago if she really wanted to help her friend Paula, IMO. She was part of the reason that Paula didn't get much sympathy. I wonder if all the talk about them attending that WH dinner had anything to do with it, or if she just didn't want to be part of a "losing battle". One thing for sure, friendship amongst the Washington elite doesn't seem to mean much. :( Sue Hi Sue, I missed the press conference but I read about it. My question about the Grand Jury was because everyone is wondering whether Ken Starr will indict Hillary and I was thinking that if the Grand Jury hands down the indictments then Starr would not be the one doing it. I don't think a sitting President can be indicted until he has been impeached and convicted. 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
LI Thursday's Jokes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: THE WORLD's 20 SHORTEST BOOKS --- 20. "The Book of Virtues" by Bill Clinton 19. "My Plan To Find The Real Killers" by OJ Simpson 18. Human Rights Advances in China 17. America's Most Popular Lawyers 16. Career Opportunities for Liberal Arts Majors 15. Detroit - A Travel Guide 14. Different Ways to Spell "Bob" 13. Dr. Kevorkian's Collection of Motivational Speeches 12. Easy UNIX 11. Al Gore: The Wild Years 10. Everything Men Know About Women 9. Everything Women Know About Men 8. French Hospitality 7. George Foreman's Big Book of Baby Names 6. "How to Sustain a Musical Career" by Art Garfunkel 5. Mike Tyson's Guide to Dating Etiquette 4. One Hundred and One Spotted Owl Recipes by the EPA 3. "Things I Wouldn't Do for Money" by Dennis Rodman 2. The Amish Phone Directory And the number one World's Shortest Book: 1. The Engineer's Guide to Fashion -- The Top 16 Signs of Trouble During Your Final Exam 16 In the hope of extra credit, you color in the center of every e, o, p, q, d and b in different jaunty colours. 15 Teacher enters room to the sound of the SNAP of a latex glove. 14 You're naked, you can't find the room, you don't know the subject and pinching yourself is starting to leave welts. 13 The BAD news: Your Blue Book has no trig calculations at all. The GOOD news: It says your '83 Civic is worth over $750. 12 Crammed all night for French History, but today's final is actually Chemistry, and "Napolium" isn't really an element. 11 Even though you're female, 5' 2", and weigh 105 lbs, the instructor takes one glance at your paper and asks if you're on the varsity football team. 10 Your teacher keeps interrupting with requests to have another baby with you. 9 Either (a) you're still feeling the effects of those 'shrooms; or (b) Cindy Crawford is sitting across from you, wearing only a black leather apron and stiletto heels. 8 Although sounding good then, your plan to bong hit your way back through time didn't quite work. 7 The Good News: You just successfully regurgitated everything you studied into your Blue Book. The Bad News: The only thing you studied last night was beer and pizza. 6 During your oral exam, Professor Trebek keeps screaming, "No! You didn't answer in the form of a QUESTION!" 5 The guy you've been copying from just shot himself. 4 After wiping your sweaty brow with your palm, you are now the unwitting owner have of one very inky forehead. 3 All your carefully written crib notes are now completely obscured due to last night's drunken Mehndi session. 2 Getting "Breakfast at Tiffany's" out of your head by humming "The Girl from Ipanema" all morning *seemed* like a good idea at the time. and Top5's Number 1 Sign of Trouble During Your Final Exam... 1 Thanks to your dog, *all* of the pencils in your book bag are now "Number 2" pencils. --- A local business was looking for office help. They put a sign in the window, stating the following: "HELP WANTED. Must be able to type, must be good with a computer and must be bilingual. We are an Equal Opportunity Employer." A short time afterwards, a dog trotted up to the window, saw the sign and went inside. He looked at the receptionist and wagged his tail, then walked over to the sign, looked at it and whined. Getting the idea, the receptionist got the office manager. The office manager looked at the dog and was surprised, to say the least. However, the dog looked determined, so he lead him into the office. Inside, the dog jumped up on the chair and stared at the manager. The manager said "I can't hire you. The sign says you have to be able to type." The dog jumped down, went to the typewriter and proceeded to type out a perfect letter. He took out the page and trotted over to the manager and gave it to him, then jumped back on the chair. The manager was stunned, but then told the dog "the sign says you have to be good with a computer." The dog jumped down again and went to the computer. The dog proceeded to enter and execute a perfect program, that worked flawlessly the first time. By this time the manager was totally dumb-founded! He looked at the dog and said "I realize that you are a very intelligent dog and have some interesting abilities. However, I *still* can't give you the job." The dog jumped down and went to a copy of the sign and put his paw on the sentences that told about being an Equal Opportunity Employer. The manager said "yes, but the sign *also* says that you have to be bilingual." The dog looked at the manager c
LI The Hubbell Tapes Broadcast for the First Time
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Hubbell Tapes Candid Conversations Broadcast for the First Time Thursday, April 30, 1998 (This is an unedited, uncorrected transcript.) ANNOUNCER April 30, 1998. TED KOPPEL, ABC NEWS (VO) Webster Hubbell and his wife talked often while he was in prison and the phone conversations were taped by prison authorities. WEBSTER HUBBELL I wont raise those allegations that might open it up to Hillary. TED KOPPEL (VO) They knew they were being taped, but at times the conversation drifted into tantalizing areas. SUZANNA HUBBELL Thats an area that Hillary would be vulnerable. WEBSTER HUBBELL Not if I did ... SUZANNA HUBBELL Not unless she over billed by time, right? WEBSTER HUBBELL No, thats not what I want to say, Suzy. Youre talking and youre not listening. Were on a recorded phone. TED KOPPEL (VO) Today, the Hubbells were indicted for tax fraud, but Webb Hubbell seems no closer to compromising his good friends in the White House. WEBSTER HUBBELL And Im not going to lie at all no matter what they do or try to do to my family, my friends. TED KOPPEL (VO) Tonight, the Hubbell tapes, candid conversations broadcast for the first time. ANNOUNCER From ABC News, this is Nightline. Reporting from Washington, Ted Koppel. TED KOPPEL There is no reason to believe that Webster Hubbell and Monica Lewinsky have ever met, but each of them represents an important thread in the net that independent counsel Kenneth Starr is trying to draw around the President and the First Lady. Each of them, Mr Starr clearly believes, was granted favors by friends and associates of Mr Clinton to keep them from testifying against the President. In the case of one presidential friend, Vernon Jordan, the allegation is that he helped Ms Lewinsky find a job so that she would sign an affidavit denying any sexual relationship with Mr Clinton. Thats been denied by everyone involved, but a court ruling has just cleared the way for a possible indictment of Ms Lewinsky. Vernon Jordan was also active in helping Webster Hubbell get some highpaying work at a time when Hubbell first came under pressure to testify against the President and the First Lady in matters relating to the Whitewater land deal. Hubbell went to jail and a halfway house for more than 18 months rather than give Mr Starr the information he wanted, but today, Hubbell was indicted again, as was his wife, Suzy, on charges of tax evasion. Ken Starr is cranking up the pressure on all fronts, as is the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which acquired tapes of telephone conversations that Webster Hubbell made while he was in prison. Committee Chairman Dan Burton, who made some of those tapes available to Nightline, will be joining us a little later on this program, but first, this report from Nightline correspondent Chris Bury. WEBSTER HUBBELL My wife and I are innocent of the charges that have been brought today. CHRIS BURY, ABC NEWS (VO) Tonight, his wife, Suzy, at his side, a defiant Webster Hubbell, once among the Clintons closest friends, insisted the indictments would not pressure him into giving Kenneth Starr what he really wants. WEBSTER HUBBELL I want you to know that the Office of Independent Counsel can indict my dog, they can indict my cat, but Im not going to lie about the President, Im not going to lie about the First Lady or anyone else. CHRIS BURY (VO) Hubbell, his wife, accountant and tax lawyer were indicted on 10 counts for avoiding taxes since 1989. The Hubbells allegedly owe the IRS nearly $1 million. CHARLES BAKALY, SPOKESMAN FOR INDEPENDENT COUNSEL The indictment alleges that in or about April of 1994 Webster Hubbell began a consulting business and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees. The indictment further alleges that he performed little or no work for some of these payments. JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL Is this indictment excessive? Yeah, it probably is. Is it designed to coerce testimony? You bet it is. Will it stand up in court? Im afraid it will. Webb Hubbell is at the very center of a hurricane and he has no protection. CHRIS BURY (on camera) In March, 1994, Webb Hubbell resigned from the Justice Department
LI Sheriff Kills Wife at School
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sheriff Kills Wife at School BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) -- One woman was shot to death at an elementary school today, allegedly by her deputy sheriff husband, and a second woman was wounded as terrified children cowered nearby. The deputy sheriff, identified as Juan A. Roman, was later arrested. None of the children at Public School 18 was injured. Eight-year-old Jominique Tarver was in the school office to drop off attendance sheets and sharpen her pencil when the shooting happened about 9:20 a.m. ``A man, he told his wife he had a gun and she screamed,'' the girl said. ``He said, `I'm going to get my gun,' and she screamed again.'' ``I want to get out of this school,'' Jominique said, crying and clutching her mother. She said a woman took her into a bathroom to safety. Adam Garcia, also 8, heard what he thought were three shots. ``I ran into my class and my teacher said, `Stay down!' She loves us very much and wants to protect us,'' Adam said. He said he hid under his teacher's desk as other students screamed. The first sign of trouble came when a bus driver spotted a man carrying a gun on the street leading to the school, police Lt. Duane Rizzo said. Police said the woman who was killed was Roman's wife. Her name was not immediately released. There were conflicting reports on whether she went into the school to try to escape her husband or was just dropping off her children. Two of the couple's children attend the school. The wounded school worker was in good condition. Roman 37, joined the sheriff's office in November 1987 and worked at a Buffalo jail. Parents began gathering outside the school minutes after the first radio reports of the shooting. About an hour and a half later, Mayor Anthony Masiello told a crowd of 300: ``I want everybody here to know all our children are safe. No children have been harmed.'' One parent yelled from the crowd: ``Not safe enough!'' -- 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
LI Steve: Stargazers Set Distance Record
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stargazers Set Distance Record WASHINGTON (AP) -- Astronomers have detected a small galaxy 12.3 billion light-years from Earth -- the most distant object ever seen -- and say they are on the brink of seeing things even farther away and closer to the big bang beginning of the universe. ``We've already got some candidate objects that are even farther away,'' said Esther M. Hu, a University of Hawaii astronomer and co-discoverer of the most distant object. ``We are looking about 94 percent of the distance back to the big bang.'' The discovery was first announced in Science News, a weekly journal of research reports. The journal is to publish the story on Saturday. The big-bang theory holds that the universe started with a huge explosion and has been expanding ever since. In the billions of years since, the hydrogen and helium in the big bang have been processed through stars to form other chemicals. Just when the big bang happened is controversial, but most astronomers say it was about 13 billion years ago. Just six weeks ago, another team of astronomers found a small galaxy about 12.2 billion light-years away to establish a most-distant mark. Both teams used the Keck telescopes in Hawaii. A light-year is the distance light travels in a vacuum in one year, about 5.8 trillion miles. ``The records for most distant galaxies have become really fragile,'' said Bruce Margon, a University of Washington astronomy professor. ``Once they would stand for six or seven years. Now it changes in a matter of months.'' Margon said the latest discovery is important because it continues to push back the time when it is known that stars and galaxies formed after the big bang, giving more understanding of the developmental history of the universe. Hu and her colleagues, Lennox L. Cowie of Hawaii and Richard G. McMahon of the University of Cambridge, England, sighted the distant galaxy by analyzing a particular wavelength of light emitted by hydrogen atoms. This technique, said Hu, will enable the group to probe even farther back in time and distance. One way astronomers measure distance and time is by a value called the redshift. This is the amount that a wavelength of light has been stretched, or shifted, by the expanding universe. The new most-distant galaxy found by the Hu team is at a redshift of 5.64. This is about 60 million years earlier than the previous mark, which was a redshift of 5.34. ``We already have candidates at redshift 6.5 and I think we'll eventually push it back to a redshift of 7,'' said Hu. This would push the viewed universe back to within 4.4 percent, or about 500 million years, of the big bang, she said. Galaxies at that distance, said Hu, will all be young, only a few tens of millions of years old, since the universe at that point is also very young. Margon said there is a physical limit on just how far back toward the big bang astronomers will see. For about the first million years after the big bang, when the universe was just beginning to expand, the matter was still so dense that if there was light it could not travel very far before being absorbed. Additionally, it is believed that it took several million years for stars to form, and without stars, said Margon, there was no light to be seen. One question to be solved, he said, by looking for fainter and fainter starlight is to discover how soon after the big bang galaxies began to form. -- 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
LI Researchers Find How Anthrax Kills
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Researchers Find How Anthrax Kills WASHINGTON (AP) -- Researchers are moving closer to finding drugs to disarm anthrax and make the deadly bacteria useless as a weapon. In a study published today in the journal Science, researchers report they have discovered how anthrax toxin destroys cells and rapidly causes death. This puts science closer to finding an antitoxin, or inhibitor drug, that would block the deadly work of the bacteria, said Dr. George F. Vande Woude of the National Cancer Institute. ``An inhibitor drug would make anthrax as a weapon as useful as a water pistol,'' said Vande Woude, a co-author of the study in Science. Experts consider anthrax-based biological weapons to be major threats to military personnel and civilians. Bioterrorism weapons using anthrax or other bacteria are easier to make and distribute than nuclear weapons, and anthrax bombs are a major concern of U.N. weapons inspectors working in Iraq. Attorney General Janet Reno and FBI Director Louis J. Freeh warned Congress last week that U.S. civilian targets are vulnerable to biological terrorism. Some in Congress have said classified studies suggest such an attack on American civilians could occur within a decade. The military is inoculating all of its troops against anthrax, using a vaccine that would prevent infection from the disease. However, the vaccine is not 100 percent effective and most civilians do not receive these shots. Anthrax is a rapid and highly effective killer. When it infects, the bacteria produces a toxin, or poison, that attacks cells. ``The only treatment now for anthrax is to give massive, massive amounts of antibiotics,'' said Nicholas S. Duesbery of the cancer institute. ``You have to give it almost immediately after exposure. If you give it 24 hours later, it is too late. Your patient is dead.'' Anthrax toxin consists of three proteins, and early research showed that one of the proteins, called lethal factor, or LF, was the major cause of cell death. But what science didn't know until now is how LF killed the cells. Vande Woude, Duesbery and their colleagues found that LF disrupts a signaling system in cells called the MAP-Kinase-Kinase (MAP-K-K) pathway. When this system is blocked, said Duesbery, a cell ``is cut off from the world.'' Its metabolism shuts down and it can no longer divide. The toxin also causes the massive release of an inflammation protein and destruction of immune system cells called macrophages. The result, said Duesbery, is rapid shock and death. In laboratory experiments, he said, ``rats are quite dead within just 40 minutes'' when injected with anthrax toxin. Now that researchers know the MAP-K-K target of lethal factor, said Duesbery, ``This gives us the first clues of what we need to develop an antitoxin. We can look at the protein structure of the target and come up with (a protein molecule) that will block lethal factor from chopping up its target.'' Col. Arthur M. Friedlander, an Army anthrax researcher, said the discovery is significant in understanding how anthrax kills, but he cautioned that it may take more than a single antitoxin to disarm the disease. ``It is not just that toxin that kills in this disease,'' he said. ``But this offers a new approach that may lead to other inhibitors that would work.'' Ironically, the anthrax cell target was found while NCI researchers were searching for a way to block the spread of cancer. Vande Woude said the cell-signaling system that the anthrax toxin turns off is permanently turned on in some cancers. The goal now is to use lessons learned from the anthrax research to find a way to selectively shut down the cell signals that promote cancer, he said. -- 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
LI Knife Found Near O.J.'s Old Home
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Knife Found Near O.J.'s Old Home LOS ANGELES (AP) -- A construction crew found a folding-blade knife in O.J. Simpson's former neighborhood, but police said the knife cannot be linked to the killings of his ex-wife and her friend. ``The evidence that we have is basically that there is no detectable evidence to show that this knife was related to any particular crime whatsoever,'' said Lt. Anthony Alba, a Police Department spokesman. The latest knife was found encased in mud April 24 by a residential construction crew in the area of Rockingham Estates, a small section of Brentwood that includes Simpson's former house on Rockingham Avenue. The precise location wasn't disclosed. Former LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman and then-partner Brad Roberts said they saw an empty Swiss Army knife box in Simpson's bathroom while they were investigating the killings. Detectives Tom Lange and Philip Vannatter, who also investigated the case, said they never saw a Swiss Army knife box. On Thursday, Fuhrman told listeners of his weekly radio show on KXLY-AM in Spokane, Wash., there was a ``high probability'' that the knife found was the weapon used in the murders -- ``unless they can explain it some other way.'' He said he believes the murder weapon was a lockback Swiss Army knife with a serrated blade, which he said was the type that was excavated. Alba said he didn't know if the newly found folding knife was a Swiss Army type. Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were knifed to death on June 12, 1994. Jurors in a criminal trial acquitted Simpson of murder charges in 1995, but jurors in a civil wrongful death trial last year held him liable and ordered him to pay $33.5 million in damages. The weapon used in the killings was never found. Several knives have been found in Simpson's former neighborhood over the past few years, but technicians couldn't find any blood, hair or any other evidence to link them to any crime, Alba said. Fuhrman said a lack of evidence wouldn't be surprising, given the passage of time. He stressed he didn't know how deeply the knife was buried. Simpson moved from Brentwood last year; the home was sold at a foreclosure auction. -- 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
LI Handcuffed Suspect Bites Drug Dog
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Handcuffed Suspect Bites Drug Dog WAGONER, Okla. (AP) -- A drug dog is recovering from three bites from a handcuffed suspect trying to run away on U.S. 69. Oklahoma Highway Patrol troopers and their dog, Dak, chased Marvin Stemmons after the dog sniffed out four kilos of cocaine in the car Stemmons was driving late Wednesday seven miles north of Wagoner. Stemmons, 26, broke one of Dak's teeth with a kick and bit the dog on its shoulder, head and underneath the chin. ``He assaulted the drug dog and the drug dog did not appreciate it,'' said District Attorney Dianne Barker Harrold. ``The suspect pretty much said they were not going to take him alive. This guy wanted to get away.'' Dak went to the vet. Stemmons was taken to a hospital -- with a small part of his ear missing, one trooper said -- and then to the Wagoner County Jail. Stemmons and passenger Laquitis Williams, 22, both of Columbia, Mo., were being held on complaints of cocaine trafficking. Stemmons also is accused of attempted escape, resisting arrest and assault and battery on a police dog, which is a felony. -- 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
LI MORLEY SAFER PROBES STARR ON '60 MINUTES' THIS SUNDAY
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CBS' Morley Safer tells the stories of the locals this weekend -- locals in Arkansas who say they have suffered deeply at the hands of Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr. "Behind all the big-name targets of Special Whitewater Prosecutor Ken Starr's investigation lie some you may never have heard of: People like Sarah Hawkins resent his hardball tactics and say they suffered deeply because of them," reports 60 MINUTES. The segment centers on what some locals feel are overzealous tactics of the independent counsel. Safer [who stayed at Arkansas Excelsior Hotel while building the story a few weeks back] focuses on one Sarah Hawkins of Little Rock, an African-American woman who rose to a top administrative position at Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan. The crew interviewed her and her lawyer, Rick Holiman, and even accompanied her to church. Hawkins tells a long and winding story spanning nearly two year of what she claims was her personal Starr nightmare. She tells how Starr's prosecutors threatened her with "a multi-count indictment based on undisclosed information from undisclosed sources" unless she talked and turned on Gov. Tucker and the McDougals. Demanding that she had done nothing wrong, she refused to give testimony or pass evidence on anything Madison. Hawkins tells why she took the Fifth Amendment in the McDougal/Tucker Whitewater trial: Starr's prosecutors began playing hardball, threatening to indict her if she testified in favor of McDougal's side, she says. Chief producer of the segment, Catherine Olian, was desperately looking for some of those locally conceived bumpers stickers telling Starr to go home, according to Little Rock reports. "Starr is going to take a hit on the piece," a CBS NEWS source tells the DRUDGE REPORT. "He was given every opportunity to respond." The piece is tied to the expect Whitewater grand jury next Thursday. -- 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
LI Excerpts From Starr's Address
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Excerpts From Starr's Address Excerpts from Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's address Friday to the San Antonio Bar Association: As the Supreme Court said in United States vs. Nixon, a decision that I'll say more about shortly, the public has a right to every man's -- we would, of course, say man and woman's -- evidence, except for those persons protected by a constitutional, statutory or common-law privilege. A witness is free to talk about what happens before the grand jury; indeed, to hold a news conference on the courthouse steps, and to repeat his or her testimony before the television cameras, as some choose to do. But jurors and prosecutors cannot disclose matters occurring before the grand jury. So, I will not say anything about the grand jury's investigation. That obligation of confidentiality is a serious and solemn one on our part, imposed by law to protect the reputation and the dignity of individuals summoned to appear. -- Executive privilege, although no one used that terminology then, first rose around that same time -- at the founding of the republic, as part of the give and take between the legislative branch and the executive branch. In 1792, the House of Representatives sought documents related to military matters. President Washington convened his Cabinet to decide: How should we respond to Congress's request? Cabinet officers agreed that the House could appropriately conduct investigations and that it could call for papers from the president of the United States. But whether in fact, to accede to such request would be up to the president. In the words of then-Cabinet member Thomas Jefferson, secretary of state, ``The executive ought to communicate such papers as the public good would permit, and ought to refuse those the disclosure of which would injure the public.'' -- Now, for some time, as we know from history, President Jefferson had thought that Chief Justice Marshall was getting a bit highhanded. At one point, Jefferson told the United States attorney who was prosecuting Aaron Burr, ``Stop citing Marbury vs. Madison as authority.'' Has a contemporary ring to it, doesn't it? The words of Mr. Jefferson. Remember when he dined alone -- ``I have long wished for a proper occasion to have the gratuitous opinion'' -- this is Marbury vs. Madison he's talking about -- ``the gratuitous opinion in that case brought before the public and denounced as not law.'' Even Mr. Jefferson the genius could be wrong. Nonetheless, the president sent the documents to the prosecutor. He wanted, President Jefferson later wrote, his words, ``to avoid conflicts of authority between the high branches of government which would discredit (the government) it equally at home and abroad.'' Mr. Jefferson believed that presidents are free to hold back documents from Congress, but when it came to the courts, he was reluctant to provoke a confrontation. -- In the end, Chief Justice Marshall's series of rulings established three important principles. First, a president is subject to a subpoena in the proper circumstances. He is not above the law. Second, the decision to withhold subpoenaed information or documents must be made by the courts, and not unilaterally by the president. And third, only the president can assert executive privilege. -- President Eisenhower, interestingly enough, set a record by invoking executive privilege against congressional committees more than 40 times during his eight-year tenure. But no 20th century president tested executive privilege in court until President Nixon, in what came to be known as Watergate. Then, as with the Burr prosecution, executive privilege reached the courts several times. -- Following Chief Justice Marshall's admonition, the president asserted the privilege himself by letter to Chief Judge John Sirica. For the White House to comply with the subpoena, the president wrote in his letter, would be inconsistent
Re: LI Wife wins $45 Million
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: And unfortunately some of the time the woman has to force child support. Sue HI Sue, Oh, I agree that in most cases the woman's life style suffers after a divorce, especially when small children are involved. Simply because in most cases the earning power of the woman is less than the man's. Child support and/or alimony rarely makes up the difference. 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
LI Gingrich Continues Attack on Clinton
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gingrich Continues Attack on Clinton WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt called on Newt Gingrich today to stay away from the probe into alleged violations by President Clinton's 1996 campaign, saying the House Speaker's recent comments ``demeaned the office which he is privileged to hold.'' ``There is more to the rule of law than after-dinner rhetoric,'' Gephardt said in remarks on the House floor. ``The rule of law requires impartial and competent investigations. It assumes the speaker will not prejudge the results of these investigations. It requires, if not charity towards all, at least an absence of malice.'' ``Don't you love him,'' Gingrich replied dismissively. ``Chutzpah is a word that apparently means Democrat,'' he added, using a Yiddish word that means ``nerve.'' Gephardt's comments marked an escalation of the rhetorical battle that began when Gingrich accused the White House and congressional Democrats earlier this week up covering-up wrongdoing in the 1996 campaign. ``There is a ``fairly large and growing scandal in this country. It is not going away,'' Gingrich, R-Ga., said on Wednesday. For the first time, he linked the fate of legislation, a measure to to privde additional support to the IMF, to the administration's cooperation with GOP investigators. In a letter dispatched to Gingrich today, Gephardt urged him to recuse himself from ``any consideration of matters connected to the inquiry into campaign financing irregularities and related matters.'' Aides said that was a reference to the possibility that independent counsel Kenneth Starr will submit a report outlining evidence of impeachable offenses by Clinton, and the House will investigate them. Gephardt sharply criticized Gingrich's recent comments about administration officials and congressional Democrats. ``Apparently, Mr. Speaker, you did not perceive that your unfortunate remarks demeaned not those against whom they were directed, but the high office which you are privileged to hold,'' he said. In his own comments on Wednesday, Gingrich mentioned the IMF legislation. ``If the Clinton administration does not turn over documents and information, if they don't make witnesses available, they're not in a very strong position to demand that we give them any money for anything,'' Gingrich said Wednesday in comments about proposed $18 billion support for the IMF. It marked the third consecutive day that the leader of House Republicans had spoken out forcefully about allegations of fund-raising abuses by Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign. And Democrats eagerly joined the fray against a man who admitted violating House rules in a celebrated ethics case more than a year ago. The Democratic National Committee issued a statement saying Gingrich -- a handy target for Democratic campaign ads in 1996 -- had ``continued his re-descent into the gutter of American politics'' with his new criticism of Clinton. And the president's chief spokesman, Mike McCurry, suggested the White House might not be able to do business with Gingrich until ``he comes back to his senses.'' For months, Gingrich has refrained from commenting about the allegations of sexual wrongdoing and cover-up that surfaced about Clinton, even though other GOP leaders have been willing to speak out. And in his comments to reporters Wednesday, he stressed that he was talking about alleged fund-raising abuses and Democratic refusals to assist the Republican investigation. ``This is about lawbreaking. This is not about sex. This is not about gossip. This is not about soap operas,'' he said. In comments Monday night to GOPAC, a political action committee he once headed, Gingrich outlined two principles: that Americans have a right to know the facts and that no person, ``including the president, is above the law.'' Gingrich's decision to attack Clinton also comes at a time when he is weighing a possible run for the White House in 2000, and when Republicans are growing restless about the upcoming
LI Police Stop Alleged McCartney Thief
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Police Stop Alleged McCartney Thief TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) -- Authorities say a man took things from Paul McCartney's ranch house and videotaped the break-in. John Cowie, 31, of Thornton, Colo., was held here this week on suspicion of burglary. Officers who arrested him Friday said Cowie jumped over McCartney's gate last week and recorded his 30-minute tour of the property. Police say he was found with two stolen rubber rats and a gate opener. Reporters and others have besieged the ranch outside Tucson after it was learned that Linda McCartney died there rather than in Santa Barbara, Calif. A search warrant obtained by Pima County sheriff's deputies said Cowie and a brother were at McCartney's property on April 23, then watched the video later that day. -- 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
LI Poll: Teens Get Along With Parents
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Poll: Teens Get Along With Parents NEW YORK (AP) -- Today's teen-agers get along with their parents, believe in God and trust the government, according to a nationwide poll published today by The New York Times. The poll of 13- to 17-year-olds also showed strong majorities who said they never drink alcohol and never smoke cigarettes or marijuana, the Times reported, without citing percentages. Teens' worries for the future could come straight from a 1950s stereotype: a good job (28 percent), money (11 percent) and being successful (9 percent). Three percent worried about the environment. The New York Times/CBS News Poll of 1,048 U.S. teen-agers was conducted by telephone from April 2 through April 7 and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Other responses: -- Six in 10 say distributing condoms in schools is a good idea. -- Almost half say sex before marriage is ``always wrong.'' -- Just 1 percent said that teens' biggest problem is AIDS. Yet 18 percent said they personally knew someone who had tested positive for HIV, had AIDS or had died of AIDS. -- Ninety-four percent say they believe in God. -- Nearly four in 10 say a member of their household owns a gun, and 15 percent say they themselves own one. Thirty-one percent have had instruction in shooting. And when asked what they considered the biggest problem in their schools, 16 percent gave the most frequent response: violence. The survey followed shootings involving schoolchildren in Arkansas, Mississippi and Kentucky. Many of the responses on behavior -- smoking, drinking and sex, for example -- varied widely between younger and older teens. Only 13 percent of 13- to 15-year-olds said they had ever had sex, compared with 38 percent of 16- and 17-year-olds. The poll showed that most teens do get along with their parents: 51 percent said ``very well'' and 46 percent said ``fairly well.'' On politics, however, teens' views diverged sharply from those of their parents. Six in 10 teens said that ``when there has been discrimination against blacks in the past,'' blacks should be given preference in the workplace and in college admissions. Only 35 percent of adults held that view in a Times/CBS News Poll in December. And 51 percent of teen-agers said you could trust the government to do what is right always or most of the time; only 26 percent of adults agreed with that in January. -- 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
Re: LI Woman Accused of Endangering Sons
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: Thanks. I *thought* that Indian reservations had their own laws. We have a lot of them around here, and that is why they can have gambling when the rest of the state can't. But is it really because they are under federal law, and not state law. Sue Crimes committed on Federal installations are federal crimes. The same is also true of crimes committed on Indian reservations if they are not handled by tribal authorities. Best, Terry -- 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
LI Mom says charges endanger 900-pound-man
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: HAMILTON, Ohio, April 30 (UPI) _ The mother of a 900-pound, 47-year- old southwest Ohio man who is accused of showing pornographic videos to children says prosecution of her son may endanger his life. Denny Welch's trial has been moved to Cincinnati because he can't fit through the courthouse doors in Hamilton. -- 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
LI Whitewater Jury Has One More Week
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whitewater Jury Has One More Week WASHINGTON (AP) -- Facing a final week of work, a Whitewater grand jury in Arkansas is examining the testimony of first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton while a separate panel in Washington focuses on the first lady's former law partner, Webster Hubbell. The grand jury here is investigating possible tax violations stemming from more than $700,000 in payments that Hubbell received in 1994 and 1995 after his resignation from the Justice Department. Many of the payments were arranged by friends of the president and first lady. Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr went to the federal courthouse in Little Rock, Ark., for 45 minutes Wednesday where the grand jury was shown five hours of testimony Mrs. Clinton gave by videotaped last weekend. Her testimony involved her work for the failed savings and loan at the center of the probe. The grand jury in Little Rock is scheduled to meet four days next week before it goes out of business next Thursday. Mrs. Clinton declined to answer two questions in Saturday's five-hour White House session -- ``conversations that plainly fell under the long-standing common law privilege for marital communications'' -- attorney David Kendall disclosed on Wednesday. Three prosecutors questioned Mrs. Clinton in the videotaped testimony, according to lawyers familiar with the probe. Deputy Whitewater prosecutor W. Hickman Ewing Jr., head of the Little Rock office of Starr's operation, conducted most of the questioning of Mrs. Clinton. Other questioning was done by deputy prosecutors Robert Bittman and Sol Wisenberg. Bittman has focused on allegations that there has been obstruction of the Whitewater probe. Wisenberg has been handling the grand jury probe in Washington of an alleged presidential affair and cover-up involving former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Mrs. Clinton's decision to invoke the marital privilege is the latest instance in which Whitewater prosecutors have been unable to get answers to questions in the investigation. Former Whitewater partner Susan McDougal has refused to answer their questions before a grand jury. The president has invoked executive privilege to protect the confidentiality of some conversations with top aides in the investigation involving Ms. Lewinsky. And the Justice and Treasury departments are seeking to bar Starr from questioning Secret Service officers about Clinton's relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. The Whitewater probe ``is a great investigation for the law of evidence,'' said New York University law professor Stephen Gillers. ``We've got executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, spousal privilege, a brand-new Secret Service persons' privilege, and all that's left'' that hasn't been invoked ``are clergyman's privilege, physician-patient privilege and the privilege against self-incrimination.'' Regarding conversations between Mrs. Clinton and her husband, Starr was pressing into an area where he should have expected to be rebuffed, said Bruce Yannett, a white-collar criminal defense lawyer. ``It is pretty unusual for a prosecutor to ask a married spouse about confidential conversations with the other spouse and expect to get an answer,'' and ``I don't think anyone should be particularly surprised or offended'' by invoking the privilege, said Yannett, a former Iran-Contra prosecutor. -- 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
LI Texas killer put to death
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: HUNTSVILLE, Texas, April 29 (UPI) _ Texas prison officials have carried out the state's sixth execution of the year, putting Frank B. McFarland to death by injection for the rape and murder of a north Texas woman in 1988. McFarland was pronounced dead at 6:27 p.m. CDT. McFarland's final statement was: ``I owe no apologies for a crime I did not commit. Those who lied and fabricated evidence against me will have to answer for what they have done. I know in my heart what I did. I call upon the spirits of my ancestors to clear a path. I'm coming home.'' McFarland was condemned for the Feb. 1, 1988, murder of Terry Lynn Hokanson in Hurst, a suburb of Fort Worth. Hokanson was sexually assaulted and stabbed 25 times, but still managed to stumble out of some woods and seek help from three teenage boys. A second man allegedly involved in the crime turned up dead later in another Texas city. The accomplice's girlfriend told police he had confessed to the crime before his death and told her he had acted with McFarland. At McFarland's sentencing, state prosecutors offered evidence of his violent history, including an attempted sexual assault with a knife. The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to block the execution. McFarland had contended that he was denied effective counsel at trial and on appeal. McFarland was the 150th Texas inmate put to death since capital punishment resumed in 1982. A small group of protestors gathered outside the prison to mark the milestone and call for an end to capital punishment -- 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
Re: LI Woman Accused of Endangering Sons
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: Perhaps you can explain something to me then. Right now we are having an election coming up and on the ballot there is a thing where you can vote as to whether the Indians should be allowed to keep gambling on the reservations. If they are a soverign nation, or if they fall under the government, how can we decide as a state if they should or should not have their gambling? Personally I think we should just leave the Indians alone. But then again I don't know that much about this gambling thing. Sue Hi Terry: Thanks. I *thought* that Indian reservations had their own laws. Hi Sue, They do indeed. The problem arises mostly with their jurisdiction over us forked tongues. :-} There are many battles here in New York with state authorities. At times the state has even threatened to blockade the Indian reservation to attempt to get its way. It is really the federal government that has jurisdiction in disputes. We have a lot of them around here, and that is why they can have gambling when the rest of the state can't. But is it really because they are under federal law, and not state law. Sue Yes. Supposedly the reservations are sovereign nations. It is honored only in the breach, of course. Crimes committed on Federal installations are federal crimes. The same is also true of crimes committed on Indian reservations if they are not handled by tribal authorities. Best, Terry -- 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
LI FBI probes alleged Diana extortion
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON, April 29 (UPI) _ The FBI says it is looking into whether any U.S. laws may have been broken by a man charged with trying to extort 10 million pounds ($16.7 million) from Mohammed Al Fayed, the father of Dodi Al Fayed and owner of Harrods in London. The man, who has been arrested in Vienna, Austria, allegedly claimed to have evidence that Dodi and Diana, Princess of Wales, were murdered. The ``evidence'' was alleged to have been documents showing British intelligence had asked the CIA help to murder Diana. The princess and Dodi Al Fayed were killed in a Paris traffic accident last August. Meanwhile, the CIA released a statement today saying, ``Any assertion that the CIA played any role in the death of the Princess of Wales is absurd.'' A spokeswoman for the FBI field office in Washington confirmed the U. S. investigation but declined to give further details, such as whether the probe is limited to the suspect in custody or includes alleged accomplices. The spokeswoman, Elisa Martin, did issue a statement saying: ``The FBI assisted the Austrian police in the investigation of the alleged extortion of Mr. Al Fayed by an individual who claimed to have information concerning the death of Mr. Al Fayed's son Dodi and Princess Diana. The U.S. Department of Justice is reviewing the case in an effort to determine if a violation of U.S. laws may have occurred in this matter.'' An Austrian report in the newspaper Kurier said the suspect in the case, 68-year-old George Mearah, allegedly accepted 1,500 pounds ($2, 500) to attend a meeting with Al Fayed and Harrod's security official John Macnamara in Vienna. Al Fayed had notified Austrian police and the FBI when first contacted by the man, and Austrian police arrested Mearah after monitoring the meeting. He appeared before a magistrate in Vienna last week. -- 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
Re: LI Woman Accused of Endangering Sons
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Terry: I understand what is going on with the legalized pot issue. But I don't understand what you mean by the blockading the Indian gambling. How can they do that? Sue Technically you can't. Legislatures can pass any laws they want but they can be unenforceable. The same is true of ballot initiatives. You might remember Oregon twice passed assisted suicide law initiatives before it was permitted. The battles over medical use of marijuana continue in San Francisco. If it is determined enough to do it, a state could end nearly all gambling on reservations simply by blockading it. -- 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
Re: LI New Trial for the list, locally tried
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I have never been able to figure out how these religious leaders get into the political arena in the first place. I thought that one of the things that we didn't want in this country was politics and religion to be mixed. I certainly don't think that morals should be legislated, and that is what most of these guys try to do. I also don't understand the nontaxation of these groups that use their money to get into the political arena. It just doesn't seem right to me. Sue HI Kathy, He has that bad combination of being a politician as well as a religious zealot. He is probably incapable of learning anything and certainly incapable of keeping his mouth shut. :) 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
Re: LI SUSAN MCDOUGAL IMPLICATES NEW YORK TIMES
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I don't know if they actual indict or they just recommend it. It is my guess that they actual indict. Hillary evoked privilege during her testimony this time. But it was spousal privilege, which makes perfect sense to me. There is no way that they are going to toss her in jail. That would really make the US look like some kind of fools to the world. I can't even imagine them doing that. Can Starr reopen everything once the President leaves office? If they are really serious about all of this, and have the evidence to throw Hillary into jail, that would be the time to do it, not while Clinton is President, IMO. Did you watch the press conference this morning? Danielson wouldn't let the Prez off easily with the Monica questions. LOL But Clinton kept his cool and told him he wouldn't talk about it. Sue HI Sue, Yeah, I agree with the pundits who are saying that he'd have to have a slam dunk case against the First Lady before he'd indict her. Can a Grand Jury indict on its own? Or do they simply recommend an indictment and it's up to the prosecutor to bring the indictment against a defendant? I see that they are playing the 5 hour tape of Hillary's testimony to the Grand Jury today. The Grand Jury's term expires a week from tomorrow. 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
LI State bar closes door on gripes
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dues debate leaves group nearly broke The State Bar of California announced yesterday that it has stopped accepting complaints from the public about dishonest or incompetent lawyers because it's nearly out of money. The announcement came two days after some 500 layoff notices were handed out to the bar's staff, which handles more than 200,000 complaints and inquiries a year. The notices to about 75 percent of the bar's remaining staff were necessary because of a stalemate between the bar and Gov. Pete Wilson. In October, Wilson vetoed a measure allowing the state bar to continue mandating attorneys to pay up to $458 a year in dues, which are the bar's sole income. Payments slowed to a trickle, and the bar is now almost broke. The organization, which licenses, disciplines and lobbies on behalf of California's 160,000 lawyers, says it will be broke by early July unless a dues agreement is reached. Yesterday, callers to the bar's 800 number got a taped message announcing the shutdown and saying the bar was working with the Legislature and the governor to solve the funding crisis. Written complaints will be returned to sender. The bar said it will do its best to handle the 1,600 complaints already in the system. Chief prosecutor Judy Johnson said only complaints that could lead to disbarment or serious suspension would be flagged for further investigation. University of San Diego law professor Robert Fellmeth, who spent five years as a watchdog and reformer of the bar, is incensed about the political impasse. "I would urge all clients who have problems with their attorneys to immediately contact Gov. Wilson, who must have some alternative strategy in mind," Fellmeth said yesterday. "We did a lot of work from 1987 to 1991 to clean up that system and make it work, and California now has the best system for disciplining lawyers by far," he said. San Diego attorney Marc Adelman, president of the state bar, said the bar always has relied on its own money to police its ranks, Now, however, he fears the burden will fall on the taxpayers. "It really is a crisis that people really haven't paid a lot of attention to, because they don't see the harm that taking away the discipline system will cause," Adelman said yesterday. "With our discipline system shutting down, who is left to go after the bad lawyers -- the City Attorney or the District Attorney?" he asked. "I'm certain they're not equipped to handle this. "If they do, it's your tax money that's funding it." Fellmeth pointed out that in the mid-1980s, it took nearly five years for a a complaint to translate into discipline of a wayward lawyer. Now the time is closer to 18 months. He said the number of attorneys who were reproved, suspended or disbarred also has increased greatly, from about 180 to about 900 a year. "What the governor's doing is posturing here, because they're mad at some positions taken by the bar," Fellmeth said. "They're basically throwing the baby out with the bath water . . . I think it's really a shame." When Wilson, a longtime bar critic, vetoed the annual dues authorization bill, he said the bar was bloated, unresponsive to members and too involved in politics. Among other things, he cited the bar's support of a bill that would have allowed higher damage awards in medical malpractice cases, and resolutions passed by the bar's Conference of Delegates supporting legalization of same-sex marriages, shorter drug sentences and more racial diversity in law schools. In the aftermath, the bar has cut expenses and continued operating on reserves and voluntary dues payments while trying to reach an agreement with Wilson and legislative Republicans to limit the organization's scope and restore its dues authority. Some Republican support is needed for a tw
