Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FBI SEIZES DOCUMENTS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OF HILLARY CLINTON SENATE CAMPAIGN
judicialwatch ^ | 6/22/2002 | For Immediate Release

Posted on 06/20/2002 3:33:10 PM PDT by TLBSHOW

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 501-509 next last
To: Clara Lou
"FJIC, if you were "scared" by the email you received from Howlin, why didn't you forward it to Jim Robinson? He will warn or ban any poster who sends threatening Freepmail. Did you do that? Or are you just creating a big deal about nothing and trying to sully a Freeper's good name?"

That is none of your business.

"As far as I'm concerned, you, FreedominJesusChrist, use Free Republic for nothing but advertisement for Larry Klayman and Judicial Watch."

That is very far from the truth. I support Judicial Watch, yes, that is true, but if you did a search on my screename, you would also find that I comment and debate various other topics.

321 posted on 06/21/2002 11:25:46 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
There is NO way to interpret that statement other than the way in which it was intended.

I suppose with the clairvoyancy exhibited by some here you must be right. How narrow minded of me. Sheesh.

Face it, people here want to burn FIJC at the stake because of their hatred of Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman.
322 posted on 06/21/2002 11:25:51 AM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: All
TEN BUCKS SAYS MR. PAUL HAS A CONVENIENT HEART ATTACK IN PRISON
323 posted on 06/21/2002 11:26:34 AM PDT by cake_crumb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Try answering a couple of simple questions okay?

If the DOJ was not providing lawyers free of charge to Hillary, who would have to hire an attorney, Hillary or the office of the first lady?

If the plaintiff in this case prevails, and is awarded damages, who will have to pay the damages, Hillary or the office of the first lady?

Both of these are simple questions and require only simple responses. I will even help you with the answers. The answers will be either Hillary or the office of the first lady.

324 posted on 06/21/2002 11:32:50 AM PDT by gunshy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW

A bewigged, dejected, haggard -- and urine soaked -- Hillary Rodham Clinton is seen being led into Central Booking at the Washington, DC jail. Indicted for federal campaign funding violations, she had eluded authorities for several weeks. She was apprehended while attempting to jump an Amtrak freight train in the switching yards behind Union Station.

325 posted on 06/21/2002 11:33:18 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple; Howlin; Amelia; Clara Lou; RedBloodedAmerican
I am just going to answer all of your accusations at once.

Howlin, I did not mean to offend you by my statement and I still see nothing offensive with it. You, among many others, have constantly told me that I am young and immature. If I am young and immature, you, having been a mother, should understand that in trying to persuade me to your point of view concerning David Keene, would not not be through threatening me with Freepmail, insinuating that you were going to make it hard for me to get a job in DC. By doing this, you automatically turned me off to your point of view. You, having been a mother, should understand that kids do not respond well to that type of "correction."

I did not bring up the mention of your threatening Freepmails Howlin, you did. So I felt the need to explain myself publically on the forum, because you brought it up publically, on the forum.

Ever I have made it known that I am a staunch defender of Judicial Watch, you, among others, have been seeking to destroy my future. Sorry, but that isn't going to happen.

326 posted on 06/21/2002 11:35:27 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: drypowder
I'm only guessing, but given the FBI's record on securing Clinton erea documants and the current "lets move on mantra in DC", it seems more likely that the FBI is seizing them before Larry Klayman or someone else subpoenas them.

Likely a very good guess.

327 posted on 06/21/2002 11:36:29 AM PDT by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
Post #322... Face it, people here want to burn FIJC at the stake because of their hatred of Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman.
Now who's being clairvoyant???
328 posted on 06/21/2002 11:38:22 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

This whole thing is going nowhere. Unfortunately, the Clinton's are well protected by the Democrat Party, several spinless Republicans, and a liberal media.

IMHO, the Clintons will stall, deny, and play the victims in all of this until it goes away. That's their M.O.

The only way this will ever get somewhere is if the media digs into it. But without a smoking gun (i.e. a stained dress) we are just wasting our time with this one. Sorry to be so pessimistic, but I've learned a lot about how Washington works in the last 10 years.

329 posted on 06/21/2002 11:41:53 AM PDT by willgetsome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
Personally, all I want is civil discourse. That means that those who do not support President Bush refrain from the attacks of Bushbot, cheereleaders, bootlickers, goat sodommizers, Kool-aid drinkers, etc. etc.

I also means that personal references to family tragedies are out-of-bounds.

I swear on all that I believe in that I will not use the phrase "Bush-bashing" again, but will instead direct my comments to the topic at hand. I cannot do any more than that.

330 posted on 06/21/2002 11:42:20 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW

Hoping for justice; not holding my breath, however.

331 posted on 06/21/2002 11:42:42 AM PDT by TheGrimReaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: stevemitch
What? what? There's no santa claus?????
332 posted on 06/21/2002 11:43:01 AM PDT by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
That seems palatable.
333 posted on 06/21/2002 11:44:15 AM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Registered; All
I would rather not. I would rather everyone stop the inane back and forth flame wars and baiting each other and tweaking each other. Although it was made about a totally different ongoing flame war/spat/embarrassment, my feelings on the matter are summed up here.

Regarding the particular case in question, I think that FIJC was pretty tactless, but I can't be sure it was intentional, and I can't be sure it wasn't. I do know that this place would be better off if people were more considerate, but that seems at times to be too much to ask.

It would also be a better place if someone who asked to have their account removed would not have just signed back up under a new name. But that is a whole other point (and no, that is not you Registered).

334 posted on 06/21/2002 11:44:45 AM PDT by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
I'll raise you 20! Prison arkincide...
335 posted on 06/21/2002 11:45:40 AM PDT by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I swear on all that I believe in that I will not use the phrase "Bush-bashing" again
It's sort of sad not to be able to call a spade a spade. =(
336 posted on 06/21/2002 11:51:34 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Registered; Admin Moderator
That is ENOUGH. I don't know why you are deliberately baiting people with comments which have no apparent motive but the hateful and vile harassmant of an innocent poster.

This thread is valid and there is no reason to pull IT summarily, because it is potentially valuable to the FR archives....but your individual POSTS, which have no BEARING ON THE CONTENT OF THE POSTED ARTICLE can sure be pulled.

337 posted on 06/21/2002 11:51:40 AM PDT by cake_crumb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
"It would also be a better place if someone who asked to have their account removed would not have just signed back up under a new name. But that is a whole other point (and no, that is not you Registered)."

If you would rather I wouldn't post anymore, all you had to do was just tell me.

338 posted on 06/21/2002 11:56:22 AM PDT by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb; Admin Moderator
Is that the kinder more gentler cake_crumb?


Good grief, this forum is going looney tunes. Thanks for the comments Admin Moderator.
339 posted on 06/21/2002 11:58:46 AM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Well WHY didn't you SAY so!
340 posted on 06/21/2002 11:59:22 AM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 501-509 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson