Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8960 total)
96 online now:
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,662 Year: 1,410/23,288 Month: 1,410/1,851 Week: 50/484 Day: 50/93 Hour: 6/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Clinton Bad Man
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 4 (335196)
07-25-2006 2:46 PM


A thread whereupon Randman (and anyone else who feels like it) can elaborate on statements like:

There was considerable evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the [Clinton] White House.

Thus far, his evidence (as laid out in post 30 of "Bush takes one more step toward outright fascism") seems to be that, in an as-yet unidentified case, Janet Reno denied requests from Congress to enforce subpoenas.

What was being subpoenaed? Well, that is as yet unknown. But, he tells us, it was on the grounds that the cases were in grand jury. What cases were in grand jury? That too is unknown.

He refers to "blatant bribe taking by the DNC and White House," which I think we can all agree is a serious offense. (And so far, the first actual criminal offense listed.) Who, specifically, was bribing whom, and for what? That is, once again, unknown. Apparently Janet Reno stonewalled investigations into this matter; the means by which she did this are as yet... unknown.

Doubtless, as soon as this topic is promoted, Randman will be along to fill in some of the crinklier edges in this already damning indictment.


"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminNWR, posted 07-26-2006 11:51 PM Dan Carroll has responded

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 4 (335606)
07-26-2006 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dan Carroll
07-25-2006 2:46 PM


I'm not too thrilled by this topic. I predict that it will generate lots of heat but very little light.

If you are sure you really want the discussion, I'll move it to the Forum Coffee House. But I am first giving you a chance to reconsider.


To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
  • Discussion of moderation procedures
  • Comments on promotions of Proposed New Topics
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Great Debate proposals

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Dan Carroll, posted 07-25-2006 2:46 PM Dan Carroll has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 3 by Dan Carroll, posted 07-27-2006 10:10 AM AdminNWR has responded

    Dan Carroll
    Inactive Member


    Message 3 of 4 (335683)
    07-27-2006 10:10 AM
    Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNWR
    07-26-2006 11:51 PM


    It was meant as a way to prevent the other thread from skipping off the tracks, as well as providing a venue for people who hate Clinton to provide some evidence.

    However, the poster who inspired it has said that he has no interest in either taking the subject to a new thread, or providing evidence for his claims. So it seems a bit redundant now. If it's okay with the mods, I'm happy to let it sit unpromoted, and if anyone else wants to fill his post, they can volunteer on the new-thread-promotion thread.


    "We had survived to turn on the History Channel
    And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
    You're what happens when two substances collide
    And by all accounts you really should have died."
    -Andrew Bird

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 2 by AdminNWR, posted 07-26-2006 11:51 PM AdminNWR has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 4 by AdminNWR, posted 07-27-2006 10:17 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

    AdminNWR
    Inactive Member


    Message 4 of 4 (335685)
    07-27-2006 10:17 AM
    Reply to: Message 3 by Dan Carroll
    07-27-2006 10:10 AM


    Okay. I'll close this for now. If you want it reopened, ask in the appropriate thread listed below


    To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
  • Discussion of moderation procedures
  • Comments on promotions of Proposed New Topics
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Great Debate proposals

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by Dan Carroll, posted 07-27-2006 10:10 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020