Bush Administration Lawyers Defending Hillary

Well, what a SURPISE!!!!!!

Look what I found on the Judical Watch home page:

If you follow the links to the page normally reserved for reprints of court documents filed in this case, you will see that Larry has conveniently omitted any true and correct copies of briefs filed in this matter.

This leads me to believe that he does not want any casual independent interpretation of true documents filed by the White House and therefore refute his upshot of the case.

In the past, any time he felt he was actually on solid ground with a case, he has dutifully posted all briefs filed by the parties.

Hate and divisiveness is just one of those unfortunate side effects of dirty business. Divided we most certainly will fall.

You forgot to mention how "dreamy Dubya looks",or how "he is a gift to this country by God". The other Bush-Bots are likely to pull your membership card and not let you sit at the lunch tables with the "cool kids" if you keep doing this.

"That's what the press release says."

Uh, hate to bring this up but just because Judical Watch issued a sensational press release and NewsMax covered it doesn't mean it's accurate. It just means that is the only way Klayman et al could generate a little self-promoting heat. Must have been a slow week.

Can you define HillaryCare? It goes something like this:

"But I, for one, believe that the one thing this country can and should do is provide GOOD health care for us -- all of us."
16 Posted on 09/23/2000 09:09:07 PDT by Howlin

"Are you just too dense to realize that there ARE some things that the government should do?"
24 Posted on 10/06/2000 11:47:14 PDT by Howlin
Source

All this does is make it that much harder for anyone to attack him politically when he has these small things to bring up to the contrary that he can use to counteract attacks.

What you are saying is that "it's all about what is best for Dubya,and to hell with what is best for the country,the US Constitution,and for justice." You are also saying you approve of this.

I'll tell you what I think of this,I think it's amazing.

I happen to like ALL sides of a story before I personally damn Bush to hell.

Howlin,admit it. There are NO circumstances that in YOUR mind would justify criticising Bubba-2. There just ain't that many sides to any story. As for "damning him to hell",you probably think saying he is "SLIGHTLY less than 100% perfect" is damning him. You ARE a Bush-Bot.

And while we have your attention, perhaps you can explain why Bush/Ashcroft have done NOTHING in the Riady non-refund?

I'd also like to hear why nobody has been prosecuted for possession of FBI files,or why Bubbette! was never forced to return the ones she has on computer discs.

Bush Administration Lawyers Defending Hillary - Gratis

There is a saying in power politics: Keep your friends close. Keep your enemies closer.

I have watched Bush do this in the past. And he is not kind to those who cross him.

I am not worried about this.

Holy Howlin! Was she on the super secret undercover Task Force?

LOL. Oh, I see. I'm the one who has fallen victim because I trust the President's judgment therefore my judgment is questionable. That's interesting. Well, try this on for size... I think you're the victim and I question your ability to make a rational statement. How can you possibly believe that anything Larry Klayman says is written in stone or that he has any credibility anywhere except with a dwindling number of JW kool-aid drinkers. Klayman has become just another spin machine. I'll grant you this much, I have no doubt that somewhere in that press release there is a shred of truth.

BTW, I admire, respect and trust President Bush and have little patience with Bush Bashers. President Bush is a decent and honorable man but he isn't a God. He knows that, I know that but I guess you don't get it. Pssst, the President and I have something in common, we both worship the same God.

Stop it, you guys! You're too rational!! You have to react hysterically to anything Larry Klayman claims, or you're not "objective". WHEN WILL YOU LEARN?

Folks, years ago a lady came forward and revealed that there was a WhoDB inside the White House. Her name was Hall. She felt that punitive action was taken against her and she filed suit.

Have we on this forum made it a basic policy to support whistle blowers? If we haven't please fill me in, because I'm way behind the program if we don't support them. Perhaps I missed that thread.

If we do support whistle blowers, and I'm going to act like we do until informed otherwise, Ms. Hall deserves our support. If it were Janet Reno's Justice Department we'd be howlin' long and loud about it.

Hillary Clinton is the person who directed the WhoDB to be developed. Not being an elected member of our government, she is NOT covered by Executive Privilege. If Ms. Hall feels that she was wronged, she has a right to seek monetary compensation.

We're not talking about a principle that affects the Presidency. We're not talking about a legal act that all President's wives have done in the past. This was an illegal act perpetrated by a non-elected individual in violation of the law. And that person is the person who Ms. Hall filed a suit against, based on percieved subsequent actions against her.

It's one thing for our current President to decide that he is not going to persue Bill Clinton's misdeeds. (Even though I fault Bush for adopting this policy) It is another thing to block legal action by a private citizen trying to seek compensation for personal loss.

If Reno's Justice Department was protecting Clinton's back side by blocking Hall's legal action before Clinotn left office, there is no reason that Bush's Justice Department has to continue that policy. Bush could ask his Justice Department to back off this case. All he would have to do is say that they have other priorities and after a careful review this Justice Department has determined that they have no legal standing.

In my opinion this is yet another case where Bush is looking more like a Democrat than a traditional Republican. Folks, I don't think Bush is a crook. I don't think he's a degenerate or a traitor. I do think he is wrong. And I'd find it rather refreshing if people from every spectrum would agree to just one thing. Let's measure Bill Clinton and George Bush using the same yard stick.

If you didn't like it when Clinton's Justice Department blocked full disclosure and protected Hillary's a--, then don't give Bush's Justice Department a pass for doing the same thing. I mean seriously, can't we agree on something this elemental?