Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uh Bill read what I said again, I said It's up to each person to decide,
I myself feel Clinton is lying about some of this. You may think
different. So I don't understand your statement what did you mean?
William J. Foristal wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wil
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kathy E wrote:
> Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Bennet's first spin was that the President didn't remember the meeting
> with Kathleen, the president said the opposite, he said he had a very
> clear memory of the meeting. I haven't read Ms. Steel
Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bennet's first spin was that the President didn't remember the meeting
with Kathleen, the president said the opposite, he said he had a very
clear memory of the meeting. I haven't read Ms. Steele's depo as of yet,
I'm going to try to read those this weekend :)
Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Kathy
I may be wrong but didn't she, at first, deny that this had happened. I
thought that this is partly where some of the problem has been. I may be wrong
on this, so many have changed their stories that it is hard to keep track.
But, if as I th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
HI Kathy,
But didn't you decide that Clinton had lied?
Bill
On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 16:41:05 -0500 Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>And according to what he said on Cochran last night he said that the
>r
Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Dr. L.:
LOL It sure can get hot and heavy can't it. :)
Sue
>
> doncha love it doncha love it (breathe here) doncha love it doncha?!?!?!
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Kathy,
LOLher contributions came from her husband's money. You're certainly
entitled to think that anything has been proven to you, but based on what
we have learned in the past few days I think that you'd have to admit
that Ms. Willey's cred
Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
And according to what he said on Cochran last night he said that the
reason he didn't take up their offer is he didn't realize the potential
of her story, he now says he is more than ready to negotiate with her.
So which is true of his statements? Who among u
"dr. ldmf [ph.d, j.d.]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
doncha love it doncha love it (breathe here) doncha love it doncha?!?!?!
- Sue Hartigan wrote:
>It's very easy to sling mud, the problem
>is make sure your tossing it the right way and that you
Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bill what I believe is what I have seen proven to me, I have proven to
me that Clinton lied about his meeting with her. He has since changed
his story. I have not seen her lie. I'm waiting for someone to point out
to me where she lied, I'm also waiting for som
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
William J. Foristal wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
>
>
> HI Mac,
>
> I agree. It was HER attorney who approached the publisher about a book
> deal that would be an autobiography and WOULD INCLUDE HER ACCOUNT OF
> CLINTON'S SEXUA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 07:09:46 -0500 moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>
>
>Kathy E wrote:
>
>> Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Hi Mac :)
>>
>> I have been watching the news on the book deal a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Hi Sue,
Incredible! I think Carville was right!
Bill
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998 14:20:16 -0800 Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>Hi Bill:
>
>Paula did too. :) In fact there are pictures in there
DocCec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In a message dated 98-03-17 23:48:56 EST, you write:
<< I have been watching the news on the book deal and such, yet I am stuck
again does writing a book automatically cast doubt on a person? I never
thought it did and I can't help but wonder why it suddenly
DocCec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In a message dated 98-03-17 23:48:56 EST, you write:
<< I have been watching the news on the book deal and such, yet I am stuck
again does writing a book automatically cast doubt on a person? I never
thought it did and I can't help but wonder why it suddenly
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kathy E wrote:
> Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hi Mac :)
>
> I have been watching the news on the book deal and such, yet I am stuck
> again does writing a book automatically cast doubt on a person? I never
> thought it did and I can't help but
Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Mac :)
I have been watching the news on the book deal and such, yet I am stuck
again does writing a book automatically cast doubt on a person? I never
thought it did and I can't help but wonder why it suddenly does now? Do
all authors have credibility prob
Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Bill:
Paula did too. :) In fact there are pictures in there of her and her
boyfriend having sex. :(
The woman who was having it out with Susan Carpenter, on Geraldo, showed
the article, not the pictures though. :(
Sue
> Hi Sue,
>
> The attorneys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Hi Sue,
The attorneys chose not to use them as witnesses. It wasn't a case of
their not being allowed to testify. And considering the verdict they
sure couldn't have hurt the case if they HAD testified.
Did Paula have a spread in Penthouse? I
Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Bill:
I know Ito didn't stop it, but they were still not allowed to testify.
:( And to be honest I think that both Shivley and Resnick could have
helped.
While we are getting at being publicized what about Paula's spread in
the Penthouse magazine?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
HI Sue,
I caught part of that Geraldo show and then got so sick of Susan
Carpenter McMillan that I turned it off. I thought it was an old show.
Those people in the Simpson trial were not prevented from testifying by
Ito, but the attorneys decide
Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Bill:
We have come a long way since the Simpson saga as far as book,
television, and movie deals go haven't we? They wouldn't allow Faye
Resnick, or Jill Snively to testify because one wrote a book and another
went to Hard Copy. Then there was the k
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
HI Kathy,
It seems to me that you make similar assumptions in your choice to
believe Willey. I thought she was the most credible accuser of Clinton so
far, but the recent information we have seen after her 60 Minutes
interview has really posed som
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mornin' Kathy,
According to an avadavit signed by her friend Ms. Steele she did lie. So someone
is lying here. Ms. Willey, IMO, was following a script that apppears to be a little to
cozy with
the Paula Jones allegations. He distraught appearence was a
Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Mac :)
I'm gonna have to disagree with you here. This is why. First off you
have taken as truth something we don't know is truth at all. Your saying
she defiantly asked someone to lie, I don't think she did. If you
remember in the interview the one person
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote:
> "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hi Mac - concerning the underlying politics, do you or does anyone here
> know anything about Web Hubbel (spelling?) being a common link between
> Whitewater and these pa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
>
>Afternoon Bill,
> What cross-examination? I have serious doubts that she will ever be
>called to testify.
>As a matter of fact I don't believe there will ever be a trial in the
>case of Jones v.
>Clinton
>nor in the Starr investigation, whi
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Mac - concerning the underlying politics, do you or does anyone here
know anything about Web Hubbel (spelling?) being a common link between
Whitewater and these particular "witnesses?" Best to you, :) LDMF.
--moonshin
moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
William J. Foristal wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
>
> Hi Mac,
>
> Great post! I agree with you 100% I also wondered why, after being
> dragged kicking and screaming into the Grand Jury, that Ms. Willey was so
> willing to appe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Hi Mac,
Great post! I agree with you 100% I also wondered why, after being
dragged kicking and screaming into the Grand Jury, that Ms. Willey was so
willing to appear on 60 Minutes. The question is whether she has any
ulterior motives of her ow
30 matches
Mail list logo
