It's very clear that the commission is a very partisan group looking to unseat the president. However, someone correct me if I'm wrong here - the owner of the pharmaceutical plant successfully sued the U.S. and won for wrongful damages claiming the evidence against the plant was false - i.e. - the samples the CIA took of the soil to justify the attack was in error.
However, someone correct me if I'm wrong here - the owner of the pharmaceutical plant successfully sued the U.S. and won for wrongful damages claiming the evidence against the plant was false - i.e. - the samples the CIA took of the soil to justify the attack was in error.
Not exactly.
If I recall correctly, the man’s lawyer convinced him to settle with the government for money but with no admission of wrong doing on the part of the Clinton Administration.
The taxpayer’s paid the bill, the man got a bunch of money (as did his lawyer, of course), and the whole episode was dropped by everybody with no satisfactory answers demanded by anybody, including the media and the owner of the factory.
BTW, the owner of the factory had a very famous lawyer – Vernon Jordan.
They don't call him "Mister Fixit" for nothing.
Every news story starts with an apology that the topic is very complex and, as a unstated corollary of that, we should all sit back, not try to understand it but allow the geniuses to explain everything to us. In fact the issue is quite clear and understandable if anyone has an IQ above 100 and is literate.