You obviously are the most obtuse person on the internet. You made statements that those depositions were FACT; I pointed out to you that they are NOT EVIDENCE until they are presented in a court setting and PROVEN under cross examination. I give you Bill Clinton -- AGAIN -- as an example.
You are a liar.
There your are, parsing again ... hiding behind your definitions. And that NOT what I said. You said "You're NOT preposing that Bush and Ashcroft go to court on Larry Klayman's word alone, are you? and my response was "But it isn't Klayman's word ... its the sworn word of the people deposed." I didn't use the word FACT. I simply maintained that those depositions (by people like Tripp who you now CLAIM you believe) were grounds for Bush and Ashcroft to RE-INVESTIGATE the matter of Filegate. Instead, you insisted (and appear still to insist) that Klayman has to PROVE those depositions in court BEFORE the Feds can begin investigating ... which is patently ridiculous and an obvious "move-on" tactic to keep the Clinton-related crimes from ever being investigated at all. Howlin, you've been caught. You can't both believe every word of Tripp's testimony and still believe that Filegate (or the other matters) were properly investigated and about "nothing". Those are mutually exclusive.