[habs4ever]

Palo, you wrote this in post #1388:

"He never left his fingerprints anywhere near his crimes but everything he did in the dark must be brought to the light of Law I no longer think this will happen and I don't see it as a positive but perhaps others do"

How, if he did so much in the dark, can Slick's malfeasance be discovered and proven in a court of law? Here's the rub I have in your case you make.Maybe, just maybe, DOJ lawyers have been looking, and can't find enough to even indict.Do they then hold a press conference and say "Folks, sorry, we think the Clinton's are criminals, yet we've looked far and wide, and can't find evidence to indict.Have a good day".

Just how do you go from there??

[palo verde]

lol oh wow habs
you really caught me
guess I'll change my mind 'bout everything
heck with Rule of Law fofl
honey, there's something I see, you don't see
and something you see, I don't see
we've each given the other a chance to express ourselves
and gone back and forth
As I said from the beginning
President Bush will do what he wants to do
and we will live out the results
Good decisions solve problems
if the decision is not a good one, it makes problems
We will know by the outcome whether his decisions were the best he could have made
Love, Palo

[exodus]

>************************

To: palo verde
"...Maybe, just maybe,
DOJ lawyers have been looking,
and can't find enough to even indict...."

Just how do you go from there?? # 1401 by habs4ever
************************

The Department of Justice
was involved in Clinton's crimes, habs4ever.
That's why Dan Burton wants their records.

The Department of Justice is corrupt.
That fact is the premise of this thread.

If a group of lawyers who worked for the Justice Department
investigated crimes involving their department,
and found no violations,
would you be surprised?

Why would anyone believe them?