Posted on 07/04/2002 4:36:49 PM PDT by AJFavish
Thanks to Billy Beck for finding the following excerpt from Ann’s new book:
"Even if Christopher Ruddy's 'The Strange Death of Vincent Foster' was considered a conservative hoax book, it was also conservatives that discredited it. The New York Post fired hm over the Vince Foster business. The American Spectator's Byron York took apart Ruddy's book in a series of articles and TV appearances. Regnery Publishing paid a liberal journalist, Dan Modea [sic], an atypically large advance of $100,000 to write a book discrediting the conspiracy theories surrounding the Foster's death, resulting in 'A Washington Tragedy: How the Death of Vincent Foster Ignited a Political Firestorm'. See, e.g., Philip Weiss, 'The Clinton Haters; Clinton Crazy,' New York Times, February 23, 1997."
(Chapter Six Endnote 105, pp. 224-225, "Slander", Ann Coulter)
I have some questions for Ann:
Since she states that Ruddy’s book was “discredited,” I wonder whether that includes the portion that tells the alleged story of one of Ken Starr’s top prosecutors on the Foster investigation, Miquel Rodriguez, who worked for Starr’s OIC in late 1994 to early 1995, quitting, without publicly giving a reason. He quit with his assistant at the OIC, Lucia Rambusch. According to Ruddy, and Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in “The Secret Life of Bill Clinton: The Untold Stories,” Rodriquez and Rambusch quit because they did not want to be part of a cover-up. You can read the relevant excerpts from those books in the Foster section of my web site because in the subsection that has the documents for my Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to get some of the Foster investigation photos, I asked the court to allow Rodriquez and Rambusch to be deposed, under oath, so that we can learn if the accounts in the books are true, and therefore, whether there is an additional reason to distrust what the government is showing the courts in my case. You can read the book excerpts in the motion I filed on January 19, 2001. The district court did not allow the testimony and the 9th Circuit upheld the district court without giving a comment on the issue.
My question for Ann is whether she has talked to Rodriquez and Rambusch. None of the sources she cites have reported on any such conversation with either of them. Rodriguez is an Assistant United States Attorney in Sacramento, California. Ann is an attorney. I assume that if Ann had spoken to either of these people, then she would have so stated in her book. She knows better than to state that somebody’s account of another person’s alleged experience has been “discredited” without hearing from that other person. This is especially true when the other person is, presumably, still available to talk to.
Perhaps Ann does not find it curious that nobody in Congress or at the OIC or at any other governmental investigative agency, as far as I know, has talked to these two people after the alleged accounts of their experience appeared in two books in 1997.
I do.
Ruddy’s book is far from perfect. In contains errors about Pat Knowlton’s story, and it omits much information about FBI participation in the “investigation.” However, the Rodriquez and Rambusch part of the book, if true, is explosive, and it can be easily verified, if these two people will talk. Ann should withdraw her characterization of Ruddy’s book as “discredited” unless she has real evidence to justify the charge.
I have more questions for Ann. Is she aware of the following: On July 12, 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, said that "Favish, in fact, tenders evidence and argument which, if believed, would justify his doubts" about the official conclusion that Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park. Has Ann read the appellate briefs in that appeal that presented the facts, from the government’s own documents, that led these two judges to make this statement? (My briefs were based largely on the work of Hugh Sprunt and Hugh Turley.) Is Ann aware that on June 6, 2002, those same two judges, ordered the OIC to release 4 Polaroids of Foster’s body as it laid in the park. Has Ann read the appellate briefs in Appeal II, that add more facts establishing that the Fiske and Starr Reports on the death are completely untrustworthy? Has Ann read the OIC’s appellate briefs in my case, that fail to credibly refute any of my factual points?
Ann’s audience deserves to hear Ann’s opinion on matters after she has personally analyzed the evidence. If Ann is going to forego doing that analysis, and merely cite what others have said, she is not worth listening to or reading. Ann is very smart. There is no excuse for her conduct on this matter. Until she rectifies this situation, I can no longer trust her judgment.
Regards,
Allan J. Favish
http://www.allanfavish.com
That makes more sense. Hope you've shot your load. Feel better now?
Only a right wing lunatic would even worry about whether this was true or not?
A bullet would enter the right or left ear hole of your helmet, complete the circumference of your helmet, and then depart; it would sometimes depart on the same axis it had entered your helmet.
On another occasion, the bullet would enter, but instead of completing the circumference of your helmet, it would enter your ear, then complete the circumference of your skull, leaving out your other ear, then departing that side of your helmet's ear hole ... and still manage to depart on the same axis it had entered.
In the former case, it may feel as though your head had been smacked by a sugar cane; or, you may not feel anything until you return to the flight line and noticed smoke upon removing your helmet.
In the latter case, I know that it was a real headache; and there was, shall we say "debris" caused by the bullet's exit. (Aspirin did not relieve.)
Now, the federal government did not find exit debris from the wounds to Vince Foster's body.
If anybody would like a graphic example, take a .38 wadcutter and shoot it via the snubnose of your choice, into the carved out hulk of a watermellon upon which outer surface you have layered 1/16th inch thick laminations of fibreglas/epoxy, using appropriate gunnery range protection procedures; report back here, your findings.
To wit: the U.S. Government lied about the death of Vince Foster and they are still lying.
Besides which, in the event or your death, so ignobly, let us say in St. Louis, would you mind if the local transport cops instead of the St. Louis Police Department did all the investigating, the St. Louis police having been ordered not to by the Mayor?
Not to mention, that if the lowest cook and bottle washer of the current White House staff, were to so ignobly expire, what pages of The Washington Post would be left to anything but Woodward and Bernstein Part II?
No "close sarcasm: < / sarcasm > " because I meant every word to the doubters who would not suffer the gunnery range to find out.
That makes more sense. Hope you've shot your load. Feel better now?
It's sad to see you commenting, again, like a small person on the left.
Are you one of those people, like The Great Stainmaker, who thinks "we'll never know what drew Vince away from us"?
Ann, and Rush, and others have done good work to be sure, but when they are called for acting as if they were Ted Kennedy by long time Freepers, it is they who deserve the criticism.
Let me know if there is anything that Favish has said about the Foster case that you find inaccurate or misleading. Otherwise I would suggest that an apology is in order.
ML/NJ
Read the books or at least the relevant excerpts in my motion on my web site. I am not saying I believe in the books 100%. I am saying that these two people should have been put under oath by Congress or somebody else and simply asked what part of the books' alleged accounts of their stories is true.
I think we can agree that such questioning is called for. Can't we?
Regards,
Allan J. Favish
http://www.allanfavish.com
That we have no statement either way looks odd - thanks for pointing this out.
I agree. And since Illbay and gcruse disagree -- I agree doubly.
Avenge 9-11!
Allan,
I have always been, and continue to be, extremely appreciative of your efforts to get to the truth in the Foster scandal. At this point in time, a person would have to be a blithering, blubbering idiot to believe that Vince Foster went to Fort Marcy Park and killed himself. Whatever happened to him, that was not it. Ann Coulter surely knows this.
So I am a little surprised that you would post a stinking footnote, for crying out loud, from Ann's new book and use that to speculate about what Ann Coulter thinks about the Foster scandal. I believe you may have read more into the footnote than is actually there.
Regards,
LH
That suicide produced some of the ugliest rumors I have ever heard. I think it is time to let it go unless there is some credible new evidence of foul play.
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.