To: billybudd
So...the guys a proven liar...so Ashcroft sucks. Sounds familiar! Clinton lied...so Ken Starr is the antichrist! Makes perfect sense!
3 posted on
08/26/2002 3:43:22 AM PDT by
gr8eman
To: gr8eman
His accusers happen to be proven liars too. So what exactly did he lie about?
4 posted on
08/26/2002 5:38:26 AM PDT by
piasa
To: gr8eman
The NYTimes presstitute said he failed three lie detector tests, when he wasn't even given three lie detector tests. He was given one in January and he passed. These other idiots invented a magic bloodhound that can sniff anthrax yet doesn't come down with inhalation anthrax. Pretty cool- how did they do that, genetic engineering?
6 posted on
08/26/2002 5:40:42 AM PDT by
piasa
To: gr8eman; *Anthrax_Scare_List; Fred Mertz; Nogbad; Mitchell; eno_; The Great Satan
He may have embellished some facts on a resume -- he claims he was just mistaken, not lying. But even if he was lying on a resume, do you think that makes it any more likely that he lied about his noninvolvement in the anthrax attacks?
By the way, this is the first time I noticed the claim that he lied on the resume about belonging to that British society. Looks like the FBI is continuing to leak.
To: gr8eman
What did Hatfill lie about? Yes, Asscroft sux because he launches this inquisition against an American citizen with NO evidence, and NO charges, only the hearsay of some ultra-liberal arms-control fanatic.
9 posted on
08/26/2002 10:45:10 AM PDT by
billybudd
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson