==== And here you qoute the rantings of a newspaper reporter and insist it is fact.
Hold on there, Partner ...
How do you know that, unlike Miss Marple, I give more credence to the words of commonfolk than the liberal press and have simply "bought into" the Big Lie my fellow FReepers are promoting herein where the Gentlemanly and Clever concealment of the indictment was concerned?
Please don't tell me that you are suggesting the media is lying or "covering up" the REAL reason the Bush Administration delayed this news!
Because, if so, I will be on the edge of my seat awaiting your and Miss Marple's best possible Conspiracy Theories in this regard.
LYING liberal media ... we should have known better than to believe they were telling the truth about the Bush Justice Department's covering Clinton's butt.
Bring it, baby ... I'm all ears for the truth of the matter (as you see it)!!
How sad it is to have views as yours. You are never happy and distrust almost everyone.
Well, I know enough about politics and life to discount your opinions.
Good night!
How do you know that,
I do not know your mind, I can only attest to what you posted.
unlike Miss Marple,
I don't even know what the reference to MM is doing in this sentence.
I give more credence to the words of commonfolk than the liberal press
I didn't make reference to commonfolk, nor compare their words to yours or the media.
If , like most Freepers, you follow your own judgment and the knowledge and judgement of others you trust, and distrust the liberal press, OK. But it sounded like you meant the opposite, the way the sentence was constructed. I can't read the words you have in your head, but don't put on paper.
My point was you have been arguing WHY BUSH KEPT THE document sealed by using a direct qoute from the LIBERAL MEDIA.
and have simply "bought into" the Big Lie my fellow FReepers are promoting herein where the Gentlemanly and Clever concealment of the indictment was concerned?
OK, who are you now referencing? YOU bought into this, or Miss Marple, or me?
You must have a lot on your mind, and quite a prolific informational background, but it tends to hurt your communications as you veer this way, then that, losing the rest of us in trying to figure out which noun applies to what verb, and which adjectives go with what.
I am sure you know what you meant to convey, but frankly, I am lost.
My previous post was very simple.
I assume you do not trust the MSM, just like I don't.
But you keep harping on the reason Bush kept the indictment sealed.
Which would be OKAY, except that info is not FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE, it is not AUTHORIZED INFORMATION by a member of the WH staff, and it is not words from the mouth of the President. It is the ramblings and opinion of a REPORTER.
So, why are you qouting it as if it were FACT?
Please don't tell me that you are suggesting the media is lying or "covering up" the REAL reason the Bush Administration delayed this news!
I didn't, because that would be illogical, considering past practices of the media, and it isn't true.
Because, if so, I will be on the edge of my seat awaiting your and Miss Marple's best possible Conspiracy Theories in this regard.
LYING liberal media ... we should have known better than to believe they were telling the truth about the Bush Justice Department's covering Clinton's butt.
I guess this last paragraph is a sarcastic redress of the one before it. But it is hard to be sure. Are they lying, or not?