To: HISSKGB
Clinton should have been nailed for those things too. But I would like to ask why we should ignore the fact that this pretend public servant is having illicit sex in the oval office of the White House.Now we've gone from splitting hairs to false dichotomies. No, I didn't say, "Let's ignore the sex." I said, "Let's not ignore the treason."
Now, does anyone else have any more arcane justifications for why Ken Starr didn't mention treason in his book?
123 posted on
06/29/2003 3:59:07 PM PDT by
JoeSchem
(Okay, now it works: Knight's Quest, at http://www.geocities.com/engineerzero)
To: JoeSchem
You make an interesting point here.
124 posted on
06/29/2003 5:16:13 PM PDT by
HISSKGB
To: JoeSchem
Now, does anyone else have any more arcane justifications for why Ken Starr didn't mention treason in his book? He didn't investigate it is the reason I guess. Eric Holder and Reno were very careful about where they let Starr look around. "Career civil servants at the DOJ" were handling the China charges. They ended up pleading everyone out.
126 posted on
06/29/2003 5:49:53 PM PDT by
DPB101
To: JoeSchem
I believe he could only investigate as directed by Janet Reno? It started with Whitewater and evolved.
127 posted on
06/29/2003 7:02:55 PM PDT by
MEG33
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson