Zepp sed/Pat sez re: Ollie

[Robert P. Kelso]

...
>> But he lied. AND about evidence material to the issue.
>>
>> He also used the oft maligned technicality defense and skated on the
>> punishment, which you loons are so keen on.
>>
>> But remember this, he ACTUALLY DID COMMIT A CRIME.
>

Note: > = earliest "Pat sez:"

>Pat sez:
> A review of the North facts is in order. First and foremost,
>North was not convicted of, nor was he even indicted for,
>perjury.

Zepp sed: Perjury was one of the three charges that North was convicted
of on
May 4th, 1989. He recieved 3 years (suspended) two years' probation,
a fine of $150,000, and was ordered to perform 1,200 hours of
community service.

Pat sez after research:

"At the conclusion of the probe, former national security adviser
Robert
McFarlane pleaded guilty to withholding information from
Congress.
Iran-contra's most notable figure, Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North
was
convicted of accepting an illegal gift, shredding documents and
obstructing
Congress. Vice Adm. John Poindexter, who succeeded McFarlane,
was
also convicted of conspiracy, submitting false statements, destroying
and
removing records, and obstructing Congress. North's and
Poindexter's
convictions were overturned on appeal." ... Washington Post

Note no mention of perjury.

>
>Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh investigated
>Iran-Contra for six years following the 1987 hearings and
>did not indict North for his congressional testimony.

Zepp sed: Perhaps because he couldn't. The North convictions had been
turned
over on a technicality.

Pat sez after research: Say wha? The convictions came because of and
after Walsh.

>Further, he never accused North of being less than truthful
>during those proceedings or during his own investigation,
>when North was questioned under oath for dozens of
>hours.

Zepp sed: No, but Reagan himself called North a liar.

Pat sez: A liberal would quote a man with altheimers(sp?)!

>What North did was to withhold certain details
>from an INFORMAL group of congressmen and their staff
>members about his help to the Contras during a single,
>off-the-record meeting AT THE WHITE HOUSE, Aug.6,

Zepp sed: No, he directly and deliberately lied to a full committee of
the
House. For a major laugh, watch CNN, which is showing footage of a
much thinner Hypocrite Hyde (not an ounce over 300 pounds) praising
North for lying in his country's service.

Pat sez: I am interested in the facts as given in your post and will
research same.
But don't ask me to watch CNN. I had rather be uninformed than
misinformed.

Pat sez after research: I can find no evidence of this. Do you have a
citation? A
citation for North's perjury, that is, not your bigotry.

>1986. North had previously promised to hold the
>information in confidence to protect the lives of those
>affected by it. Congress did not use the standard procedure
>for obtaining such information: closed door briefing before
>the Intelligence Committee, under a strict set of rules.

Zepp sed: Such a promise has no legal standing in the face of a
subpoena.
Didn't you know that?

Pat sez: I suppose, but then I am not one of those loyal to the US who's
life
might have been put in danger by the Congressmen of your party.

>
>On the basis of the 1986 meeting, Ollie was indicted for
>something covered by an old, never enforced law called
>"Obstruction of Congress." North became the first person
>in the history of the country to be charged with a crime as
>a result of an unsworn, informal exchange between
>congressional and executive branch officials.

Zepp sed: Utter horseshit.

Pat sez after research: My reference above shows that "Obstruction of
Congress" is
correct. Do you have a citation stating otherwise? Maybe you are just
mistaken but
it looks very much like you are going to join the ranks of Clinton,
voltair and
gdy5...@prairie.lakes.com in the voracity department.

Zepp sed: The most famous photo of the Virginia traitor is
that of him being sworn in at the House hearings.

Pat sez: I'll have to research that but I don't think his testimony to
the committee
was untruthful. As I recall, his lawyer sed North would take the fifth
if not given
immunity -- which he was.

Pat sez after research: I guess that pix has some relevance, but I can't
see it
>
>The indictment was one of 16 returned by a grand jury on
>March 16,1988, at the hehest of Lawrence Walsh. The
>original 16 were pared down to 12 by the time of the trial,
>and on May 14, 1989, the jury found North guilty on three
>counts and not guilty on nine others. On the count
>resulting from the 1986 meeting, the jury's verdict was not
>guilty. Thus, on the charge most closely related to the
>allegation that North "lied to congress," Ollie was cleared,
>not on a technicality, but by a jury of his peers.

Zepp sed: Except, of course, for the one of perjury.

Pat sez: We'll see.

Pat sez after research: I must challenge this again. If you have the
evidence, post
the citation.

>
>An examination of the actual convictions helps to further
>vindicate Ollie.
>
>The first concerned the preparation of an inaccurate
>chronology in a document for Congress that was never
>used. The second was for destroying documents, an action
>that North described to the 1987 television audience of tens
>of millions of people. The third was for accepting an illegal
>gratuity, namely a security fence at his home after threats
>from Mideast terrorist, a far cry from what is normally
>thought of as felonious behavior.

Zepp sed: One and two both involve lying to conceal criminal misconduct.

Pat sez: Under oath?

Pat sez after research: If -one- was never used how can it involve
anything? And
shredding may or not be wrong, but it ain't perjury.

Zepp sed: My, but right wingers love those little lawyerisms, don't
they?

Pat sez : Like the definition of "is"?

>
>In any case, the convictions were overturned by a
>three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals on July 20,
>1990, because of Walsh's use of immunized congressional
>testimony at the trial. In the end, our legal system worked,
>The Bill of Rights is not the Bill of Technicalities. As one of
>the three judges put it, "We do not countenance political
>trials in this country." Which means, the community
>service he eagerly performed before his conviction was
>overturned means he paid a debt to society he turned out
>not to owe.
>
Zepp sed: In this case, it was most certainly a technicality--one of the
judges
was the same whore who worked to get Starr appointed grand inquistor.

Pat sez: Right. Like all the democratic whores that voted to select
Starr as the
investigator.

Zepp sed: The testimony in question was given by North himself and on
his own
behalf. How much of a technicality can you have?

Pat sez after research: The Bill of Rights?

>Our judicial system has cleared Oliver North. His civil
>rights will only be restored, however, when those who
>disseminate the lies about him stop.

Zepp sed: He's still a traitor, a liar, and a coward, and he always will
be. He
can't change that.

Pat sez: My friend you just showed your colors: red. Everything North
did he
considered for the good of his country and no other country and for no
selfish
interest. Coward? Like all our other decorated cowards in VietNam?
Perhaps
your side didn't like his heroism but that doesn't make him a coward.