Skip to comments.
O'Connor details half-baked attempt to kill Supreme Court
CNN.com ^
| POSTED: 2028 GMT (0428 HKT), November 17, 2006
| Kevin Bohn - CNN
Posted on 11/17/2006 2:50:00 PM PST by PeterFinn
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-108 next last
To: Sam Hill; Anti-Bubba182
"Every member of the Supreme Court received a wonderful package of home-baked cookies, and I don't know why, (but) the staff decided to analyze them," the Fort Worth Star-Telegram quoted O'Connor as saying Knowing what you are talking about is not a prerequisite for a Supreme Court Justice, I guess. From the government sentencing memo:
On or about April 22, 2005, Barbara Joan March mailed fourteen threatening letters, each containing either a baked good or a piece of candy laced with rat poison, to the Supreme Court Justices, ... Each envelope contained a one page typewritten letter stating either "I am" or "We are," followed by "going to kill you. This is poisoned."
Gosh, I wonder what would give them the idea that those cookies needed to be examined? /sarcasm
61
posted on
11/17/2006 6:08:16 PM PST
by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
To: johnny7
Yes. It's supposedly bi-partisan. We know what that means don't we?
The old bag is on a Court in NY now. Briefly filling in for a vacancy or some such. Guess her hubby didn't want her around or she has a new squeeze.
62
posted on
11/17/2006 6:14:14 PM PST
by
OldFriend
(WEAKNESS IS A PROVOCATION, AN INVITATION TO OUR FOES TO CONFRONT US)
To: PeterFinn
I'm guessing the perp is a registered Democrat.
To: Recovering_Democrat
64
posted on
11/17/2006 6:17:14 PM PST
by
Cinnamon
To: PeterFinn
Nobody here can criticize the Supreme court now, unless you've
been sent rat poisoned sugar cookies!
You couldn't ever remotely understand...
65
posted on
11/17/2006 6:32:07 PM PST
by
MaxMax
(God Bless America)
To: PeterFinn
who would eat cookies they got in the mail from a stranger?
To: paudio
What's O'Connor trying to do now at this late date, elicit some kind of ridiculous sympathy or something, or confirm to the world how stupid she really is? Come on, really, what's the point? I think O'Connor is "half-baked" on this one, lol.
67
posted on
11/17/2006 7:19:45 PM PST
by
khnyny
(God Bless the Republic for which it stands)
To: PeterFinn
She sent 14 threatening letters in April 2005 -- each with a baked good or piece of candy laced with rat poison -- to a variety of federal officials... So, if the cookies had been sent with a complimentary note, they would not have been analyzed? goes to show that you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
68
posted on
11/17/2006 7:34:05 PM PST
by
Ruth A.
(we might as well fight in the first ditch as the last)
To: Responsibility2nd
I played one of those batty old aunts in my Junior Play. It was FUN.
69
posted on
11/17/2006 7:42:32 PM PST
by
therut
To: Psycho_Bunny
"if I could go back in time and kick any one person's ass, it would be the editor who first came up with this idea."
That would be "Headless Body Found in Topless Bar";)
To: Psycho_Bunny
Ya mean ya ain't yet figured out how shallow the news pukes are?
When some Jihadi directly bombs their houses, they might figure it out. But even that's not a given.
71
posted on
11/17/2006 9:29:05 PM PST
by
FlyVet
To: PeterFinn
"She sent 14 threatening letters in April 2005 -- each with a baked good or piece of candy laced with rat poison -- to a variety of federal officials: the nine Supreme Court justices . . . ."
""Every member of the Supreme Court received a wonderful package of home-baked cookies, and I don't know why, (but) the staff decided to analyze them," the Fort Worth Star-Telegram quoted O'Connor as saying"
Gee, Sandy Dee, maybe they decided to analyze the cookies because they had come in a package that also included a "threatening letter." And this idiot was the swing vote in the Supreme Court for 25 years?
72
posted on
11/17/2006 10:47:38 PM PST
by
AuH2ORepublican
(http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/)
To: PeterFinn
Maybe it's just me but I always assumed that people of such stature receive this kind of stuff from crazies all the time? I don't see this as news.
73
posted on
11/17/2006 11:17:04 PM PST
by
RushCrush
(HAL for president!)
To: PeterFinn
If she could have appealed this case all the way to the Supreme Court, would all the justices have to recuse themselves? What would happen?
To: Stultis
Sandy not sounding too bright here!It's not the first time she's had a brain freeze moment out in public. And her constant whining about how people don't have any respect for judges could use a little analysis too. She could, for example, ask herself WHY people have lost respect for our courts, and she could answer herself by looking in the mirror.
75
posted on
11/17/2006 11:38:49 PM PST
by
hsalaw
To: paudio
I don't know why, (but) the staff decided to analyze them,"
I'm wondering if that's because somebody had a second thought...
The Hartford Courant has an article about this in Saturday's paper. It includes an interesting tidbit:
The typewritten notes contained threatening statements about killing the recipients, but also warned that the treats were poisoned ...
So, as usual, Sandy O is just lying. She was never in danger.
76
posted on
11/17/2006 11:44:34 PM PST
by
SWake
To: AnAmericanMother
77
posted on
11/18/2006 2:49:33 AM PST
by
PghBaldy
(Reporter: Are you surprised? Nancy Pelosi: No. My eyes always look like this.)
To: PeterFinn
I am glad no one was harmed, and the perp was caught and soon to be punished.
78
posted on
11/18/2006 2:50:19 AM PST
by
PghBaldy
(Reporter: Are you surprised? Nancy Pelosi: No. My eyes always look like this.)
To: PeterFinn; floriduh voter
79
posted on
11/18/2006 4:08:58 AM PST
by
8mmMauser
("We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will give you no rest.")
To: OldFriend
Maybe she's gonna' get a part-time job with the... 'bipartisan'... 9/11 Omission.
80
posted on
11/18/2006 4:54:01 AM PST
by
johnny7
("We took a hell of a beating." -'Vinegar Joe' Stilwell)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-108 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson