[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>moonshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hi Mac,
>>
>> In brief that Governor Clinton lured Jones to his hotel room and
>> propositioned her. The evidence is that it was in a most lewd manner.
>
>A state tropper says it was Jones who initiated contact.
Danny Ferguson is the trooper and he is a target of the lawsuit for lying
about the details. His story that he worked for Clinton in gathering phone
numbers and procuring women has been substantiated. The story about Paula
Jones is precisely what initiated the lawsuit. He was the source of the
article in "The American Spectator." Not exactly a cogent argument, Mac.
>> Jones was a government employee and Clinton was her boss. His denials all
>> around have been farcical.
>Maybe to you but not to others.
Have it as you will. All the witnesses for Jones, all the witness for the
President are lying. How the hell does that make sense? If it makes sense
to you then there is little more to say.
>> It is proven by his lies and his vicious attacks on the women and reporters.
>Attacks on what women? What reporters?
I printed excerpts from a long article discussing the "free-speech" hero,
Sidney Blumenthal, in particular who made claims various prosecutors and
reporters were homosexuals or involved in illicit relationships. The
incredible attack machinery operating out of the White House has shown
itself once again against Willey. It is really no secret. People just hide
their eyes. If you don't have the article, if you want it, Mac, I will be
glad to look it up and email it to you.
>> The attacks themselves by a highly sophisticated publicly-funded hit
>>operation should shock people.
>
>He is not allowed the same rights as any other American.
Not every other American has private investigators digging up dirt on
reporters and blackmailing them over access to the White House. Not every
American has been able to attack the personal lives of prosecutors. I
didn't know there was such a right.
>What about the Republican funded smear campaign against him?
Tsk, tsk. The imaginary crap from Falwell has fallen flat for obvious
reasons. If you want to simply call these wingnuts and religious fanatics
Republicans, I suppose. But they simply don't have the platform of the
President of the United States. Since James Carville toured the country
calling Paula Jones trailer-park trash, people are often shocked to learn
she never lived in a trailer park. How many people are intiamately familiar
with Falwell's charges? I have only the vaguest concept of what they are.
Now would you like to discuss which smear campaign you are talking about?
Jerry Brown's original charges about a certain land development in Arkansas?
Is Jerry Brown a Republican?
>> The intimidation and evasion has been pervasive and wide-ranging.
>Maybe so but it's working and so far there is no proof that he has done
anything illegal.
Yes there is. The evidence is overwhelming. The denials are equivalent to
the denials by OJ's fans.
>> Elizabeth Ward, a woman who told a friend about an encounter according to
the >>friend, is busily occupied dodging a subpoena in Europe. Got any idea
why?
>Maybe she doesn't really have anything to say. Also it sounds alot like
>hearsay.
It is hearsay. I didn't know we were in court. Everything I am saying is
hearsay.
>If Ken Starr can find a friend of Monica's in Japan I'm sure he could track
her >down if her testimony was relevant.
Uh, Mac, we were talking about Paula Jones' lawsuit. Paula Jones has been
trying to serve a subpoena on the former Miss America for many months.
>> >From the very beginning Clinton has shown himself to be a liar. He told the
>> nation in a tear-jerking appearance on "60 Minutes" with Hillary that he had
>> done wrong but he never had an affair with Gennifer Flowers. It was a
>> performance that put to shame Nixon's wonderful "Checkers" speech or the
>> tearful confession of Jimmy Swaggart. Later Flowers was the "woman I never
>> slept with."
>Then got reelected!
So? Nixon had a tremendous landslide. Better than Clinton's as I recall.
>> Even Jones' sister has confirmed the encounter Clinton had with Jones. She
>> has toured the daytime sleaze shows telling about how Jones is just trying
>> to make money and is used by Clintonites as a supposed refutation.
>So she is only lying about part of the story!
Probably. At least five other people confirm her story. Only Our Beloved
President denies it. I have no real idea if Jones told her she was going to
make money off the encounter, if she was excited by it. That you can judge
yourself but you are denying the encounter. That is what I am talking about.
>> There are actually six witnesses to the aftermath of the event as well as
some who
>> saw were witnesses preceding the event. Clinton just can't seem to
>> recollect any of this except he can remember he didn't do it.
>But no witness to the event.
There rarely are in such events. Does that mean they are not provable?
>> The attacks on the women and Clinton's selective leaks and studied silences
>> says it all.
>I do believe in one's right to defend themselves.
Do you believe in the right to threaten to name people as homosexuals? Do
you believe that the White House should be in the business of trying to get
unfriendly reporters fired?
>If their stories hold up youmay have a case.
>> Oh, yeah. Jones has passed a lie detector test. Clinton would not lower
>> himself, of course.
>
>Anyone can pass a lie detector.
Hogwash. They are the most effective means known of showing lies. Police
agencies and security agencies have great faith in them. Why would they do
that?
>...Mac
Best, Terry
"Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
