Vote Independent Vote Democrat Kick Out Falwell's Republicans!!!!!
jerry_f...@hotmail.com
> JERRY FALWELL MUST DIE!!!
Hey everyone, I'm baaack and I hope y'all had a smashing Hannukah/Christmas/
Kwanzaa/New Year's! My wife and I just returned from visiting family and
friends in Paris and London. {sigh} I guess it's back to teaching these
future American lawyers, eh? ;-)
"Let me ask you, did you ever see the Vice President ever so fired up? I'll
tell you that in the room backstage, he had a quick hit of chicken wings and
Flutie Flakes." —President William Jefferson Clinton, 20 January 1999,
Buffalo, New York
Boy, Al Gore can speak. Go Albert 2000. Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan
hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry
"Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob
"Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin'
Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causes—
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=
[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
"perjury," because he DID ADMIT to having "inappropriate contact" with Monica.
So where's the "perjury"?! Remember this when a non-lawyer (or worse, a
Republican lawyer / liar) farts about "perjury."
In the words of Homer Simpson: Doh!
Ciao!
P.S. Do ya think I'm Jerry's Antichrist? Vote early, vote often, vote
DEMOCRAT!!! Or Independent!!!
Barisic, Sonja. "Falwell: Antichrist May Be Alive." Yahoo! News/AP. 1999
January 16, 2:02 AM ET.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/ap/ap_us/story.html?s=v/ap/
19990116/us/falwell_antichrist_3.html.
Schmitt, Eric. "Impeachment Controversy Heats Up on Several Fronts." _The New
York Times on the Web_. 1998 October 30.
http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?getdoc+site+site+10028+0+
wAAA+impeachment%7Eand%7Ehistorians
WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of constitutional scholars and historians, and the man
who presided over the Watergate impeachment proceedings, on Thursday
criticized the inquiry into President Clinton, as House Democrats and
Republicans became entangled in a request for more documents.
Democrats asked Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr for material they said could
shed light on Starr's decision to expand his inquiry to Clinton's affair with
Monica Lewinsky, and on whether audiotapes that Linda Tripp provided to Starr
had been altered.
With elections that could fuel or dampen Republicans' appetite for impeachment
less than a week away, the maneuvering by Republicans and Democrats reflected
how they are gearing up for the end game.
The confusing and contentious exchange came as more than 200 constitutional
scholars said the accusations against Clinton did not warrant impeachment.
Among those signing a petition circulated on the Internet were well-known
legal experts like Ronald Dworkin of New York University and Laurence Tribe
of Harvard University, as well as conservative-leaning academics like Stephen
Macedo of Syracuse University and Douglas Laycock of the University of Texas.
The scholars' sentiment was echoed by former Rep. Peter Rodino, D-N.J., who
as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee in 1974 presided over the
impeachment proceedings against President Richard M. Nixon.
Rodino, who has said little about the current scandal, told a New Jersey
television program this week that if no new evidence emerged, "I would say
that this does not rise to that level where we have to consider it to be a
ground to remove from office the president of the United States."
Hyde has repeatedly invoked Rodino, who is now 89, as a paragon of fairness,
and intentionally patterned the committee's procedures after those the House
Judiciary Committee adopted for the Watergate proceedings.
In other academic quarters, more than 400 historians, including Stephen
Ambrose and Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., released a statement Wednesday calling
on the public to oppose the impeachment process.
"If carried forward, they will leave the presidency permanently disfigured and
diminished, at the mercy as never before of the caprices of any Congress," the
statement said.
Republicans have rescheduled a hearing for Nov. 9 to discuss the history of
impeachment. But Democrats want the hearing to focus on what constitutes an
impeachable offense.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Mosl Roland
news:78g966$ept$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
>
>> JERRY FALWELL MUST DIE!!!
>And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the
polls?
>What's that? 76% approval rate?
I am full Your oppinion.
I hate this Republican hypocrits.
I am happy, that they had at the last German election only 1.3% :-)
Hope this will be also their future election results in the US.
Only problem is: You posted this in the wrong newsgroups ;-)
Mosl Roland
http://pege.org/ clear targets for a confused civilization
joe_r...@hotmail.com
"Mosl Roland" <fou...@pege.org> wrote:
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
> IT'S RELEVANT AND MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP!!!
Hey everyone, I'm baaack and I hope y'all had a smashing
Hannukah/Christmas/Kwanzaa/New Year's! My wife and I just returned from
visiting family and friends in Paris and London. {sigh} I guess it's back to
teaching these future American lawyers, eh? ;-)
"Let me ask you, did you ever see the Vice President ever so fired up? I'll
tell you that in the room backstage, he had a quick hit of chicken wings and
Flutie Flakes." -President William Jefferson Clinton, 20 January 1999,
Buffalo, New York
Boy, Al Gore can speak. Go Albert 2000. Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan
hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry
"Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob
"Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin'
Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causes-
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. งง 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case, and,
indeed, Judge Wright DISMISSED Paula's case.
But wait there's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
alcy...@hotmail.com
joe_r...@hotmail.com wrote:
> (snip political rant)
What the hell does this have to do with LINUX?!!?
Damn I hate cross-posting.
david....@dynetics.com
> "Mosl Roland" <fou...@pege.org> wrote:
> > PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> > UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> > JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
> > IT'S RELEVANT AND MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP!!!
>
> Hey everyone, I'm baaack and I hope y'all had a smashing
> Hannukah/Christmas/Kwanzaa/New Year's! My wife and I just returned from
> visiting family and friends in Paris and London. {sigh} I guess it's back to
> teaching these future American lawyers, eh? ;-)
>
> "Let me ask you, did you ever see the Vice President ever so fired up? I'll
> tell you that in the room backstage, he had a quick hit of chicken wings and
> Flutie Flakes." -President William Jefferson Clinton, 20 January 1999,
> Buffalo, New York
>
> Boy, Al Gore can speak. Go Albert 2000. Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan
> hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry
> "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob
> "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
> Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin'
> Adulterer" Chenoweth.
I would have included the whole thing, but it exceeded the capacity of my
paste buffer (j/k). However, it's refreshing to see such an unbiased
dissertation on this controversial subject. I can hardly wait for the
followup post where he discussed HOW THIS IS RELEVANT TO THE ALT.LINUX
NEWSGROUP. I guess he can't help it...sounds like he's a lawyer.
Cajun
under oath? Congratulations! You've earned the moron award! I wasn't
aware that anyone that stupid existed. Even the Clinton supporters
admit that he lied under oath. We are WAYYYYY beyond that. Apparently
you have been away for a long time. Why don't you catch up on the
news, and post again afterwards.
None
Wrong newsgroup fuck head.
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999 23:09:00 GMT, jerry_f...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> JERRY FALWELL MUST DIE!!!
>
>Hey everyone, I'm baaack and I hope y'all had a smashing Hannukah/Christmas/
>Kwanzaa/New Year's! My wife and I just returned from visiting family and
>friends in Paris and London. {sigh} I guess it's back to teaching these
>future American lawyers, eh? ;-)
>
>"Let me ask you, did you ever see the Vice President ever so fired up? I'll
>tell you that in the room backstage, he had a quick hit of chicken wings and
>Flutie Flakes." -President William Jefferson Clinton, 20 January 1999,
>Buffalo, New York
>
>Boy, Al Gore can speak. Go Albert 2000. Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan
>hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry
>"Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob
>"Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
>Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin'
>Adulterer" Chenoweth.
>
>So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
>with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
>
>And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
>What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
>baby!
>
>CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
>UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
>
>Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
>to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
>relations":
>
>"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
>when the person knowingly engages in or causes-
>
>(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
>of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
>person;
>
>(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
>genitals or anus of another person; or
>
>(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
>another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
>or through clothing."
>
>However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
>argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
>include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
>and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
>definitions (Parts II and III).
>
>So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
>as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
>purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
>and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
>
>Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
>the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. ?? 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
AFTech
Don't encourage the asshole by actually responding to his brainless
blathering!
--
All those who believe in psychokinesis, raise my hand.
Steven Wright
---|AFTech|--- Take out the garbage to e-mail
TeckAF...@aol.com
Cajun <1ca...@gte.net> wrote in message
<794qjl$bk6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>...
>Wait a second here.... You actually believe that Clinton did not lie
>under oath? Congratulations! You've earned the moron award! I <snip>
ca...@my-dejanews.com
What in heck have this to do with "Win95" and "LINUX".
PLS dont fill every newsgroup with bullshit.
REGARDS
CAY.
In article <794qjl$bk6$1...@news-1.news.gte.net>,
jimcarol...@hotmail.com
ada...@yahoo.com (None) wrote:
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling
Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer"
Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton, Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual
Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin' Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causesÑ
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. ¤¤ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case, and,
indeed, Judge Wright DISMISSED Paula's case.
But wait there's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
jimcarol...@hotmail.com
ca...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling
Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer"
Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton, Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual
Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin' Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causesÑ
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. ¤¤ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
jimcarol...@hotmail.com
1ca...@gte.net (Cajun) wrote:
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling
Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer"
Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton, Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual
Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin' Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causesÑ
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. ¤¤ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
jimcarol...@hotmail.com
david....@dynetics.com wrote:
> I DON'T HAVE A REAL COMPUTER!!!!
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling
Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer" Barr, Bob "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer"
Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton, Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual
Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Cheatin' Adulterer" Chenoweth.
So how's our hard-earned tax dollars at work in Washington? Are we there yet
with impeachment removal? Btw, Don't forget to FILE YOUR INCOME TAX RETURNS!!!
And how's our beloved President William Jefferson Clinton doing in the polls?
What's that? 76% approval rate? Where's Larry Flynt? Let's talk about sex,
baby!
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
UNLESS IT IS "RELEVANT" OR "MATERIAL" TO THE LEGAL PROCEEDING.
Paula Jones' lawyers had asked U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright
to allow them to use this overly broad 3-part definition of "sexual
relations":
"For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations'
when the person knowingly engages in or causesÑ
(I) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks
of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person;
(II) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the
genitals or anus of another person; or
(III) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of
another person's body. 'Contact' means intentional touching, either directly
or through clothing."
However, Clinton's lawyer, Robert S. Bennett, Esq., wisely objected and
argued that the proposed definition was way too broad because it could
include innocent conduct such as handshaking or hugging. Judge Wright agreed
and LIMITED the definition only to Part I, THROWING OUT the other 2 proposed
definitions (Parts II and III).
So when Clinton testified that he did not have "sexual relations" with Monica
as defined by Part I, he TECHNICALLY was telling the truth "[f]or the
purposes of th[e] deposition" insofar as he (the deponent) was the touch-ee
and not the touch-or; i.e., Monica gave him the blowjob, and not vice versa.
Furthermore, a lie is NOT "perjury" unless it is "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. ¤¤ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
BinaryBillTheSailor@sea++.com
<bcha...@ihatespam.micron.net> wrote:
>X-no-archive: yes
>
>Greetings --
>
> Aw, come on ! Threats, Binary Bill? We're better than that.
>Yes, I admit these posts are completely off-topic (not to mention
>unbelievably inane and politically naive) for the technical
>newsgroups. File complaints, as I have done, with the fools' ISP's
>and domains' postmasters. The various sysadmins & postmasters will
>get rid of these fools soon enough.
>
Aw c'mon yourself, Bruce. Your sig contains a more direct threat than
anything I wrote.
>
>HTH&GL,
>
>Bruce Chambers
>TANSTAAFL
>
>
>---------- NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE BULK
>E-MAILING
>THIS ADDRESS ----------
>Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any
>and all
>non-solicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a
>download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. Anyone who sends
>unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account will be charged a $500
>proofreading fee. Consider this official notification. Failure to
>abide
>by this will result in legal action.
>For a complete summary of this Legislation see
>
>http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D
>
><BinaryBillTheSailor@Sea++.com> wrote in message
>news:36b798d9....@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
>:On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 23:59:29 GMT, jimcarol...@hotmail.com wrote:
>:
>:>In article <36b72a95...@news.supernews.com>,
>:> ada...@yahoo.com (None) wrote:
>:>
>:>> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
>:>> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
>:>> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
>:>> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
>:>
>:
>:Look, stupid... I checked and your post does not contain "Windows,
>Win
>:95 or anything else that makes it "on topic" in alt.windows95 or
>:alt.linux. Don't do it again or the members of these groups may get
>:REALLY crabby about it. We collectively know a lot about computers
>and
>:you won't like the consequences. Neither will your ISP.
>:
>:Binary Bill
>
kenneth...@yahoo.com
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
It is time to elect a new world leader, and your vote counts. Here's the
scoop on the three leading candidates.
Candidate A: associates with ward heelers and consults with astrologists.
He's had two mistresses. He chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.
Candidate B: was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in
college and drinks a quart of brandy every evening.
Candidate C: is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and hasn't had any illicit affairs.
Which of these candidates is your choice??
[scroll down]
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt
Candidate B is Winston Churchill
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler
;-P ;-P ;-P
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case, and,
indeed, Judge Wright DISMISSED Paula's case.
But wait there's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
Incog Nito
kenneth...@yahoo.com wrote in article
<79b24j$hqk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. งง 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively
linda_...@hotmail.com
1ca...@gte.net (Cajun) wrote:
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
It is time to elect a new world leader, and your vote counts. Here's the
scoop on the three leading candidates.
Candidate A: associates with ward heelers and consults with astrologists.
He's had two mistresses. He chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.
Candidate B: was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in
college and drinks a quart of brandy every evening.
Candidate C: is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and hasn't had any illicit affairs.
Which of these candidates is your choice??
[scroll down]
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt
Candidate B is Winston Churchill
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler
;-P ;-P ;-P
Did you ever wonder why Cokie Roberts always has that silly grin? You see,
ever since Janet Reno indicted Sam Donaldson for receiving illegal government
subsidies for his ranch, Donaldson has had a stick up his ass. You'd be
grinning too from Cokie's perspective.
Screw those dumbass RepubliKKKlan hypocrites Newt "Gangsta Adulter while Wife
Dying of Cancer" Gingrich, Henry "Jekyll Adulterer" Hyde, Bob "Bumbling
Adulterer and 'Baby' Killer KKKlansman" Barr, Trent "KKKlansman Lyncher"
Lott, Bob "Lying Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag
linda...@ivillage.com
"Incog Nito" <liza...@hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <36BFF2...@hotmail.com>,
suzanna_j...@hotmail.com wrote:
> linda_...@hotmail.com wrote:
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Dear Friends:
How will we explain to our children that Congress cannot obey the very laws
it passes and so-called educators have major problems with basic English
reading comprehension, particularly the terms "relevant" and "material"? See,
e.g., "Why Jim an Carol Jo Kant <ken...@teleport.com> Reed or Rite"
http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=437350479.
Audiocassette Tape: STOLEN from the Pentagon My Makeover: $50,000.00 My
Salary @ Pentagon: $110,000.00 Kenneth W. Starr's Salary: $118,000.00 x 5
years and counting Kenneth W. Starr's Obsession: $150 Million and counting
Henry Jekyll Hyde et al.'s Salary: $250,000.00 RepubliKKKlans Much Ado About
Nothing and Making Fools of Themselves: Priceless
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case, and,
indeed, Judge Wright DISMISSED Paula's case.
But wait! There's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
"perjury," because he DID ADMIT to having "inappropriate contact" with Monica.
So where's the "perjury"?! Remember this when a non-lawyer (or worse, a
Republican lawyer / liar) farts about "perjury."
In the words of Homer Simpson: Doh!
Anyway, please contribute to my legal defense fund as my so-called
RepubliKKKlan hypocrite friends, Newt "Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer
Gangsta" Gingrich, Henry "Adulterer Jekyll" Hyde, Bob "Adulterer and Bumbling
'Baby' Killer KKKlansman" Barr, Trent "KKKlan Lyncher" Lott, Bob "Lying
Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
Ariana "No Sex with Homosexual Husband" Huffington, and Helen "Adulterer
Cheatin' " Chenoweth, are too busy wasting our hard-earned tax dollars.
Love, Linda
References
David Johnston and Don Van Natta Jr. "The Independent Counsel: Justice
Department to Examine Starr Request to Expand Whitewater Inquiry." _The New
York Times on the Web_. 1999 February 10.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/021099impeach-starr.html.
WASHINGTON - The Justice Department has decided to begin an inquiry to
determine whether Kenneth W. Starr's prosecutors misled Attorney General
Janet Reno about possible conflicts of interest when they obtained permission
to investigate the Lewinsky matter in January 1998, Government officials said
today.
Among other concerns, the inquiry will focus on whether the prosecutors should
have disclosed the contacts between Starr's office and the Paula Jones legal
team in the weeks leading up to Starr's decision to ask Ms. Reno to expand his
inquiry beyond the Whitewater matter, said the officials, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity.
In recent months, documentation has emerged that indicates there were
conversations between a prosecutor in Starr's office and a lawyer working
behind the scenes with the Jones legal team from November 1997 to January
1998.
But a series of newly disclosed notes taken at the initial meetings on Jan.
15 and Jan. 16, 1998, between Starr's prosecutors and Justice Department
officials, shows that the prosecutors flatly asserted that there had been no
contacts with the Jones team. For example, Eric H. Holder Jr., the Deputy
Attorney General, wrote in his three pages of notes of a Jan. 15, 1998,
meeting with Starr's prosecutors: "They've had no contact with plaintiff's
attys."
Handwritten notes by two other Justice Department officials, Monty Wilkinson
and Josh Hochberg, corroborate the statements attributed to Starr's
prosecutors.
Moreover, notes taken by another participant in the meeting, Steven Bates, a
prosecutor in Starr's office, indicate that Jackie M. Bennett, one of Starr's
deputies, told the Justice Department officials: "We've had no contact with
the plaintiffs' attorneys. We're concerned about appearances."
The notes have become crucial evidence in the Justice Department inquiry,
which will be conducted by the Office of Professional Responsibility, which
investigates prosecutorial misconduct. The lawyers' notes became public just
last month as part of the Senate record of documents related to the
impeachment trial of the President.
The truthfulness of Starr's prosecutors is one of several issues that the
department wants to examine, the Government officials said. Lawyers in the
ethics office also intend to investigate whether Starr abused his authority to
convene grand juries, or improperly pressed witnesses, like Ms. Lewinsky, and
disclosed secret grand jury information to the news media, the officials said.
Clinton's lawyers and supporters have long contended that there was collusion
between Starr's office and the conservative Jones lawyers, noting that Linda
R. Tripp found her way to the Office of Independent Counsel through a group
of private lawyers who performed legal work on the Jones case. Starr has
insisted that his office sought permission from Ms. Reno to expand his
jurisdiction when he learned of allegations that President Clinton's close
friend, Vernon E. Jordan Jr., was helping Monica S. Lewinsky find a job in
exchange for her silence as a possible witness in the Jones lawsuit.
Charles G. Bakaly 3d, a spokesman for Starr's office, would not comment on the
Justice Department's plans to start an investigation. But Bakaly said that the
notes showed that prosecutors supplied the Justice Department with a thorough
status report on the then-nascent inquiry.
"I don't know how else to put it," Bakaly said. "There was no misleading of
Justice. This was a very fluid evolving situation. Unlike most public
corruption cases, this one was ongoing felonies were still possibly being
committed."
This latest inquiry has exacerbated tensions that have existed between the
Justice Department and the Office of Independent Counsel almost since the
beginning of the Lewinsky scandal.
At one point last spring, Ms. Reno asked her senior aides to research whether
she had the authority to discipline Starr in some way that stopped short of
removing him, according to a former Justice Department official who spoke on
condition of anonymity.
Some aides told her that it would be a mistake, comparing it to the "Saturday
Night Massacre" when President Nixon ordered the firing of the Watergate
special prosecutor Archibald Cox in October 1973.
But, the official said, Ms. Reno shot back: "I'm not asking you to make a
political judgment. I'm asking you to make a legal judgment."
Deepening hostilities between the Justice Department and Starr's office
delayed the start of the new ethics inquiry. The ethics investigators
recently wrote to Starr outlining the scope and authority for the
investigation, the officials said. Starr's prosecutors are challenging the
inquiry, asserting that the Attorney General does not have the authority to
delve into highly sensitive grand jury material or investigative decisions
that led Ms. Reno to refer the case to Starr.
Ms. Reno's aides have said that investigative authority is implied by language
in the independent counsel statute, which gives the Attorney General the sole
responsibility to remove an independent prosecutor.
Over time, Justice Department officials, including Ms. Reno, have become
troubled by what they view as possible violations of Justice Department
guidelines. From issues like calling the Secret Service before the grand jury
to the crossfire over leaks to the news media, Starr's prosecutors and
Justice Department officials have feuded privately.
"As time went on, people became more and more frustrated with him," the
Justice Department official said of Starr. "He seemed less concerned with
Department of Justice policies."
The ethics lawyers are trying to determine whether prosecutors in Starr's
office had a vested interest in the outcome of the Jones case, an interest
that would have undercut their ability to impartially investigate allegations
related to the lawsuit. If that conflict existed, the officials said, it
would have been an important factor as Ms. Reno weighed whether to recommend
to a three-judge panel that Starr take on the Lewinsky matter.
At this point, the ethics unit of the Justice Department must determine
whether Starr and his prosecutors violated departmental rules and
prosecutorial guidelines. Their findings could lead to recommendations for
disciplinary action, like reprimands or suspension of employment.
The relationship between Ms. Reno and Starr began as a wary but cordial one
that a Government official compared to "Thatcher and Gorbachev."
At times, Ms. Reno has expressed exasperation over Starr's conduct, fuming
over letters sent by Starr's prosecutors accusing the Justice Department of
trying to undercut the inquiry.
Starr's prosecutors had also grown angry and suspicious about Ms. Reno's
aides, suggesting that the Justice Department was under the control of the
White House and had quietly tried to squelch Starr's effort, the officials
said.
Since October, several news organizations have reported how Starr's office
first learned about the Lewinsky matter. On Jan. 8, 1998 - four days before
Linda R. Tripp contacted Starr's office - Jerome M. Marcus, a Philadelphia
lawyer who did extensive work for the Jones legal team, informed Paul
Rosenzweig, a prosecutor in Starr's office, about the Lewinsky accusations.
The early tip was not disclosed in Starr's 445-page referral to Congress. Nor
was it disclosed to the Justice Department. And The New York Times reported
last month that there were several conversations between Marcus and
Rosenzweig from November 1997 to January 1998.
David E. Kendall, one of the President's personal lawyers, complained to Ms.
Reno in October that "very serious questions" were raised about those
contacts.
The allegations of collusion prompted lawyers at the Justice Department to
turn their attention to their own recollections, and their own handwritten
notes, of statements made by Starr's representatives on Jan. 15, 1998,
officials said today.
One former Justice Department lawyer said in an interview that Ms. Reno was
especially disappointed in the fact that the early phone call was not shared
with her senior aides in January 1998.
Last month, The New York Times reported that Marcus was the leader of a small
secret group of lawyers working behind the scenes on the Jones case. Marcus
drafted legal documents and was involved in many of the most important
strategic decisions in the Jones lawsuit, according to billing records in the
Jones case and interviews with other lawyers who worked with him.
Marcus recruited other conservative lawyers to assist with his efforts,
approaching among others, Paul Rosenzweig, who briefly considered doing work
for Ms. Jones in 1994, the billing records show, but decided not to.
In November 1997, Rosenzweig joined Starr's office, where he and Marcus had
several conversations about the Jones case, said a lawyer familiar with their
discussions.
Bakaly, the spokesman for Starr, has adamantly denied any suggestion of
collusion. When Starr testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Nov.
19 of last year, he was asked by the chief counsel for the minority, Abbe D.
Lowell, about the "substantial contacts" that Starr had had with Jones
lawyers.
In a series of questions, Lowell tried to suggest that Starr should have
revealed the contacts to the Justice Department in January 1998, and that
Richard W. Porter, a partner of Starr's at the law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, had
declined a request to represent Ms. Jones.
"I know Richard Porter; I've had communications with him from time to time,"
Starr testified.
linda...@ivillage.com
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Dear Friends:
How will we explain to our children that Congress cannot obey the very laws
it passes and so-called educators have major problems with basic English
reading comprehension, particularly the terms "relevant" and "material"? See,
e.g., "Why Jim an Carol Jo Kant <ken...@teleport.com> Reed or Rite"
http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=437350479.
Audiocassette Tape: STOLEN from the Pentagon My Makeover: $50,000.00 My
Salary @ Pentagon: $110,000.00 Kenneth W. Starr's Salary: $118,000.00 x 5
years and counting Kenneth W. Starr's Obsession: $150 Million and counting
Henry Jekyll Hyde et al.'s Salary: $250,000.00 RepubliKKKlans Much Ado About
Nothing and Making Fools of Themselves: Priceless
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
But wait! There's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
"perjury," because he DID ADMIT to having "inappropriate contact" with Monica.
So where's the "perjury"?! Remember this when a non-lawyer (or worse, a
Republican lawyer / liar) farts about "perjury."
In the words of Homer Simpson: Doh!
Anyway, please contribute to my legal defense fund as my so-called
RepubliKKKlan hypocrite friends, Newt "Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer
Gangsta" Gingrich, Henry "Adulterer Jekyll" Hyde, Bob "Adulterer and Bumbling
'Baby' Killer KKKlansman" Barr, Trent "KKKlan Lyncher" Lott, Bob "Lying
Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
Love, Linda
References
Barisic, Sonja. "Falwell: Antichrist May Be Alive." Yahoo! News/AP. 1999
Linda_...@postmaster.co.uk
> I'M A MOTHERFUCKER AND CHILD MOLESTER
> I LOVE TO SUCK HENRY HYDE'S LITTLE OLD COCK
> I LOVE TO SUCK OLD MEN AND LITTLE BOYS
> THIS IS RELEVANT + MATERIAL TO THIS NEWSGROUP !!!!
> PLEASE KEEP POSTING I'M A REPUBLICAN I DON'T
> UNDERSTAND SEND ME YOUR TAXPAYERS' $$$
> JERRY FALWELL THE MOTHERFUCKER MUST DIE!!!
Dear Friends:
How will we explain to our children that 50 RepubliKKKlan Senators cannot obey
the very laws they pass and that so-called educators have major problems with
basic English reading comprehension, particularly the terms "relevant" and
"material"? See, e.g., "Why Jim an Carol Jo Kennedy <ken...@teleport.com> Kant
Reed or Rite" http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=437350479.
Audiocassette Tape: STOLEN from the Pentagon
My Makeover: $50,000.00
My Salary @ Pentagon: $110,000.00
Kenneth W. Starr's Salary: $118,000.00 x 5 years and counting
Kenneth W. Starr's Obsession: $150 Million and counting
Henry Jekyll Hyde et al.'s Salary: $250,000.00 each
RepubliKKKlans Much Ado About Nothing and Making Fools of Themselves:
Priceless
CLINTON DID NOT LIE ABOUT SEX, AND EVEN IF HE DID, A LIE IS NOT "PERJURY"
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide:
"Whoever * * * having taken an oath * * * willfully and contrary to such oath
states or subscribes any MATERIAL matter which he does not believe to be true
* * * is guilty of perjury." [Emphasis supplied for retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1621.html.
"Whoever under oath * * * in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court
or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false MATERIAL
declaration * * * knowing the same to contain any false MATERIAL declaration,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned[.]" [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1623.html.
Rule 402 of the Federal Rules of Evidence further provides:
"Evidence which is NOT RELEVANT is NOT ADMISSIBLE." [Emphasis supplied for
retarded Republicans.]
http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/foliocgi.exe/fre/query=[jump!3A!27rule402!27].
Judge Wright had ruled that any CONSENSUAL sex with Monica was NOT "RELEVANT"
or "MATERIAL" to any alleged NON-CONSENSUAL sex with Paula. So even assuming
arguendo that Clinton did lie at the deposition about Monica and the cigar,
the lie was NOT at all "RELEVANT" or "MATERIAL" to Paula's case, and,
indeed, Judge Wright DISMISSED Paula's case.
But wait! There's more! The U.S. House of Representatives ALSO REJECTED the
impeachment charge of perjury before the Jones civil deposition.
Likewise, Clinton did NOT lie before the federal grand jury, i.e., commit
"perjury," because he DID ADMIT to having "inappropriate contact" with Monica.
So where's the "perjury"?! Remember this when a non-lawyer (or worse, a
Republican lawyer / liar) farts about "perjury."
In the words of Homer Simpson: Doh!
Anyway, please contribute to my legal defense fund as my so-called
RepubliKKKlan hypocrite friends, Newt "Adulter while Wife Dying of Cancer
Gangsta" Gingrich, Henry "Adulterer Jekyll" Hyde, Bob "Adulterer and Bumbling
'Baby' Killer KKKlansman" Barr, Trent "KKKlan Lyncher" Lott, Bob "Lying
Louisiana Serial Adulterer" Livingston, Dan "Scumbag Adulterer" Burton,
Love, Linda
References
Barisic, Sonja. "Falwell: Antichrist May Be Alive." Yahoo! News/AP. 1999
Rick Onanian
Linda_...@postmaster.co.uk wrote:
<same tired piece of crap snipped>
Is there any way to ban posts? Like, a way to make a news server that
will refuse and automatically send a delete command for a given message,
based on a substring of the name or a predefined comment?
I'd like to set up a news server that will automatically send a
cancel request to kill that message whenever it's received. Like
this stupid linda stripp crud. Anyone know if it's possible?
rick
Ian_S...@postmaster.co.uk
Rick Onanian <ri...@mail.artmold.com> wrote:
Dear Friends:
My Makeover: $50,000.00
the legal proceeding. 18 U.S.C. งง 1621(1) and 1623(a) respectively provide: