And there you have it ..........
The jurisdiction for any case against anyone who worked in Washingotn in the Clinton administration would have to be tried in Washington D.C. The odds are 100 to 1 that the judge assigned to try Clinton would be a Clinton appointed judge. We have had a case where the presiding judge was accused of assigning all cases against Clinton and his people to Clinton friendly judges. The Clinton judges ruled that was not the case even though the regular assignment procedures were not followed and Clinton friendly judges were appointed to hear every one of the cases.
Ashcroft would have to get a D.J. grand Jury to indict Clinton. Starr did not get that done in D.C. but Ashcroft could likely get an indictment.
But the odds are fantastic that the judge would be in Clinton's hip pocket. A Clinton judge would likely throw the case out. Both Clintons would walk and have been vindicated in history by the decision of a federal judge. Woudn't the media have fun with that.
However there is an outside chance Ashcroft could get it before a jury. Such cases can be won even against a crooked judge, if you have a fair jury. If you look at the D.C. jury pool there is not a snowballs chance in hell that anyone could get a D.C. jury to convict him.
You know that finding a person innocent, can not be appealed. So the Clintons would be certified innocent by a court and jury. The media would demand that both Dubya and Ashcroft be impeached for prosecuting a man found completely innoncent by a judge and jury. It is likely that with the media's power both Dubya and Ashcroft would be impeached and convicted. That would make a Hillary presidency in 2004 a sure thing.
That has to be your goal in calling Ashcroft, Janet Ashcroft. You have to be a huge Bill, Hillary, and Janet fan.
One thing is certain you are doing all you can do to return them to power. I for one hope your crusade to return the Clinton gang to power fails.