[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
On Thu, 23 Apr 1998 12:01:19 -0700 "Ronald Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>"Ronald Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>. If he is not guilty, however, he does not need to take any
>chances with public sentiment and opinion that might be turned against
>him if he issues a pardon to McDougal.
>Bill
>
>Now you got me ROTFLMAO, because you just stuck your foot in your
>mouth with
>the above statement. If he is not guilty...., she could testify, tell
>the
>truth and no pardon would be necessary! Ron
Hi Ron,
Gee, you must have forgotten that she has already been convicted and
sentenced to serve two years in prison. So a pardon would be necessary
regardless of what she decided with respect to the Grand Jury. And what
a sweet deal that would be for Clinton. McDougal takes the stand and
covers up for him and then he pardons her and she doesn't have to serve
any time.
See how your obsession with Clinton causes you to forget about the facts?
LMAO!
Bill
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
