Skip to comments.
Clintonista's Indictment Kept Secret for a Year
NewsMax.com ^
| 1/08/05
| Carl Limbacher
Posted on 01/08/2005 12:13:31 PM PST by kattracks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-256 next last
To: woofie
I used to listen to Judicial Watch on their syndicated Sat.show but it was dropped. Tom Fitton was just on FNC about an hour ago making this case.
But for me it is confusing a hell. I keep hearing disparaging comments on fr about Judicial Watch. Sometimes it's hard to separate the straight shooters from the rest.
41
posted on
01/08/2005 12:41:23 PM PST
by
rodguy911
(rodguy911:First let's get rid of the UN and then the ACLU, or vice versa..)
To: F16Fighter
Bush knows how to play poker. He's been holding a winning hand and now it's time to play it?
42
posted on
01/08/2005 12:41:25 PM PST
by
Arkie2
To: F16Fighter
Why has the President been treating the Clintons with courtesy and kid gloves (or even velvet gloves) after all the back-biting, criticism, and innuendo these two creeps have heaped upon him?The exact right question and MHO: There is no politcal upside for the President to go into the Clinonistas criminal operations. He's thrashing them quite soundly on the issues. Why complicate it with the pursuit of criminal activities that will be defended vigourously by themesleves, the media, and the entire democratic party?
He has an agenda and that stuff will not help him achieve it. I really think it's that simple.
43
posted on
01/08/2005 12:41:31 PM PST
by
tjg
To: Arkie2
It won't be mentioned on any shows until they are forced by a trial or something they cannot ignore. This they'll ignore.
To: Arkie2
I'm sure we'll get the talking points on how it's Bush's fault on tomorrows talk shows. No need to wait until tomorrow. If it's Bush bashing you're expecting, just read some of the comments on this thread.
To: drt1
OMG! What else is Bush hiding on behalf of the crinton crime family?
46
posted on
01/08/2005 12:43:34 PM PST
by
Samizdat
To: F16Fighter
Why has the President been treating the Clintons with courtesy and kid gloves (or even velvet gloves) after all the back-biting, criticism, and innuendo these two creeps have heaped upon him?The exact right question and MHO: There is no politcal upside for the President to go into the Clinonistas criminal operations. He's thrashing them quite soundly on the issues. Why complicate it with the pursuit of criminal activities that will be defended vigourously by themesleves, the media, and the entire democratic party?
He has an agenda and that stuff will not help him achieve it. I really think it's that simple.
47
posted on
01/08/2005 12:43:39 PM PST
by
tjg
To: MamaLucci
Hopefully, Sandy Burglar will be next........... Why is the Justice Department sitting on this?
Why didn't the FBI arrest him immediately?
And all on Bush's watch!!!!!
48
posted on
01/08/2005 12:43:44 PM PST
by
JohnG45
To: kattracks
Though Hillary Clinton's former finance chairman David Rosen was actually indicted in 2003, the Bush administration kept it secret till the indictment was unsealed late Friday,Wow - "Double secret probation" for a whole year ...
49
posted on
01/08/2005 12:43:53 PM PST
by
_Jim
( <--- Ann C. and Rush L. speak on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
To: sgtbono2002
"I seem to remember when George H. Bush ran against Clinton he had information on Bubba's drug use and info on the Brother himself and also Gennifer Flowers. he refused to let us know what an awful prick Clinton was, It got him defeated." Hear ya...(see my post #37 -- especially point #4)
To: F16Fighter
51
posted on
01/08/2005 12:45:11 PM PST
by
Czar
(StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
To: kattracks
as we all know, the clintons wear teflon underwear.
52
posted on
01/08/2005 12:45:31 PM PST
by
ken21
(if you didn't see it on tv, then it didn't happen! (/s))
To: kattracks
You're right but I'm waiting for some real professional spin, not just sniping from the subversive element here!
53
posted on
01/08/2005 12:45:52 PM PST
by
Arkie2
To: kattracks
Opps, my apologies for cluttering your thread with a double post.
54
posted on
01/08/2005 12:45:52 PM PST
by
tjg
To: woofie
55
posted on
01/08/2005 12:46:37 PM PST
by
timestax
To: kattracks
If it's Bush bashing you're expecting, just read some of the comments on this thread. I see there are some dense posters on this thread.
Good grief.
To: Arkie2
"Bush knows how to play poker. He's been holding a winning hand and now it's time to play it?"Would this come under the heading of the much bally-hooed "strategery"??
I doubt the Clintons will EVER be nuked by Dubya -- though he certainly could.
To: JohnG45
Perhaps Berger's been indicted already, too.
58
posted on
01/08/2005 12:48:28 PM PST
by
MamaLucci
(Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
To: timestax
Sorry, Im full of milk duds ,coke and popcorn
59
posted on
01/08/2005 12:48:49 PM PST
by
woofie
(Proudly posting inane comments since 1998)
To: tjg
"There is no politcal upside for the President to go into the Clinonistas criminal operations. He's thrashing them quite soundly on the issues. Why complicate it with the pursuit of criminal activities that will be defended vigourously by themesleves, the media, and the entire democratic party?"A. The Presidential candidacy of one Hitlery Clinton
B. Justice
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-256 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson