Posted on 04/09/2002 9:20:18 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
Miami local news have been reporting on the case of INS whistleblower Rick Ramirez.
Mr. Ramirez had a hearing Tuesday. April 9, where he denounced the actions of the Miami INS office, who under direct orders from then INS Commisioner Doris Meissner, destroyed and/or deleted all documents pertaining to the Elian Gonzalez case from their computers.
In a bomb shell announcement, Mr. Ramirez and his attorneys (Judicial Watch) have announced that at a press conference to be held Wednesday, April 10th. at 8:00 AM, they will produce proof that Juan MIguel Gonzalez was fully aware of Elisabet's trip to the US, that Juan Miguel wanted to leave Cuba as well, that the US government was fully aware that Juan Miguel Gonzalez was co-erced by Cuban agents, THAT HE ASKED FOR ASYLUM AT LEAST THREE TIMES WHILE HE WAS HERE, AND THAT EACH REQUEST WAS DENIED BY EX-AG, JANET RENO.
Why would Bill need to ask for asylum?
:-)
If the JW evidence is not as advertised, it will just be a minor footnote and quickly forgotten.
If the evidence is convincing and spin-proof, then it represents a big break in discovering mischief by the Clintons' DOJ in this affair.
Major props to our own China Clipper!
Luis Responded:
Are you a pro-executive order Republican?
Depends what you mean. I support Executive orders that clarify how the bureacracy is to impliment laws. I don't support the unConstiutional use of Executive orders in lieu of Laws.
Are you a pro-stomp on the constitution as well?
No. What does this have to do with being opposed to high rates of immigrations?
The government has a Constiutional right to define immigration rates and a responsibility to defend our borders.
In fact, I believe this could be punishable by law (har).....
If the evidence is convincing and spin-proof, then it represents a big break..."
Either it is "minor" for both sides or else it is a potential "big break" for both sides, but you can't have it both ways.
If the story gets hyped by the press and then turns out to be false, it will be like back when the press circulated rumors that Clinton "exploded" in his videotaped deposition. We all bought into that line, then the video came out and Clinton was calm in it.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...
GOOD GOD MAN!!!! Dont send her here!!!...JFK
The INS, in handling this case, defied Federal Courts, gave full access to a military base to Castro's henchmen, and denied the Senator in whose district the base is entrance. They shattered at kleast three, maybe four, amendments in the raid, and generally allowed a foreign dictator to call the shots in this matter.
Where do you get your ifo?
Godspeed, The Dilg
From your original post, I deduced the exact opposite.
That is, if that lying pr*ck or his evil witch wife were "for" it, I was "against" it right away, unless and until independent study showed some other course.
I can honestly say that in eight years of testing against the evil teensy bent one, he never disappointed me. It's a most accurate starting point on any political issue. Actually still is, since he has yet to go away.
As always, with Clinton, there is a caveat: you can't pay attention to what he says. America would be Eden, if we believed what that f***face said. You have to pay attention to what he did, and who got paid.
At a minimum, Reno should be facing obstruction of justice charges and if Clinton directed her actions, so should he. Jack Quinn may have some big problems, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.