Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Kathy
I may be wrong but didn't she, at first, deny that this had happened. I
thought that this is partly where some of the problem has been. I may be wrong
on this, so many have changed their stories that it is hard to keep track.
But, if as I think happened, then she lied somewhere either at the beginning or
at the interview with 60 minutes.
I guess I feel like some do that we know Clinton has been lying or
stretching/narrowing the boundaries on definitions and he is constantly being
called on it. The same then should hold true for the women--all of them. And
I am sorry but her demeanor did not send out a message of credibility to me,
even before all the later stuff came out. I don't know of too many women who
haven't been harassed if they have been in the workforce, military, or public
service. And all the women I have talked to years later after the incidents[s]
do not sit there like simpering idiots and sound like it is so difficult to
discuss that they needed to be handled with "kid gloves." Also, she traveled
in circles where her livelihood did not depend on getting and keeping a job
with only one person or place of employment. There are many women who do not
have choices in employment or bosses. She did--but continued to fawn on ole'
Bill until it seems she saw greener pastures on the other side of the fence.
jackief
Kathy E wrote:
> Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Bill what I believe is what I have seen proven to me, I have proven to
> me that Clinton lied about his meeting with her. He has since changed
> his story. I have not seen her lie. I'm waiting for someone to point out
> to me where she lied, I'm also waiting for someone to show me where she
> has changed her story so often, as I have seen people here say she has.
> I haven't seen that at all. Now I'm ready to back up what I believe with
> consistent news articles all saying the same thing she has said. And I
> can easily show where Clinton has not been consistent.
>
> Yes you can easily try to allege she was a no talent nothing, but Bill
> the facts don't back you up, beleive it or not most no talent nothings
> are not able to donate thousands of dollars to a campaign or donate a
> lot of volunteer time. Watch what you allege, especially when your
> allegations can be proven to be false quite easily.
>
> You have jumped on the bandwagon of people who are guessing at things
> and instead of geussing you have now decided to turn those guesses into
> facts. I am surprised. Since when did you decide her motive for this
> interview? She clearly stated her motive but that wasn't good enough for
> some people they had to come up with something to draw blood, so what do
> they say, oh yes! She is a women who is mad she wants to get Clinton for
> NOT getting her a job like she asked. But here is my problem he did do
> that, and she did do the job. So what's the deal here folks? Attack
> anyone you can and make up things and state them as fact even though you
> have nothing to back you up? Nope I don't buy that.
>
> So now the new line is she did this to write a tell all book, well folks
> guess what she already did the tell all it was on TV I saw it along with
> a lot of people, she gave her story away for free folks. Last time I
> heard 60 minutes doesn't pay for interviews.
>
> Whats the next line going to be? That he rejected her and she was so
> enraged that she made this up? It's very easy to sling mud, the problem
> is make sure your tossing it the right way and that you have the right
> to sling it.
>
> I guess I could follow along like some and look at all the gossip and BS
> that is circulating, there is a lot of it. Yet I think I'll still refuse
> to do that. I'm going to go with the known facts and let others wallow
> in the juicy stuff. And my last line is for both sides of this issue,
> Clinton and Willey, I don't want to hear the gossip or guessing on
> either side of the issue, I want the facts. So far the facts aren't
> looking good for the prez so his team is tossing in the BS and that
> really stinks IMHO.
>
> BTW do you think Clinton has had any coaching? Or is he a naive little
> child in this whole thing?
> William J. Foristal wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
> >
> > HI Kathy,
> >
> > It seems to me that you make similar assumptions in your choice to
> > believe Willey. I thought she was the most credible accuser of Clinton so
> > far, but the recent information we have seen after her 60 Minutes
> > interview has really posed some questions with respect to her
> > credibility.
> >
> > It is just as easy to make assumptions that she was disappointed that
> > Clinton had not taken care of her better in the sense of getting her a
> > high paying job so she found a better way to make money by lying to hype
> > up a book she is writing.
> >
> > It seems that there are numerous people like Willey in both major parties
> > who have no real talents of their own but somehow latch on to the power
> > politicians in each party and try to get into lucrative positions as a
> > result of their working on campaigns.
> >
> > I would like to see these accusers subjected to hostile cross examination
> > in court before I really draw a conclusion about whether they are telling
> > the truth. It's very easy to construct body language and other
> > believable traits during a gentle and sympathetic interview on 60
> > Minutes. Especially if they have been coached.
> >
> > Bill
> --
> Kathy E
> "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow
> isn't looking too good for you either"
> http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law & Issues Mailing List
> http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
--
In the sociology room the children learn
that even dreams are colored by your perspective
I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
