Christine, I didn't mean to appear to have copped your comparison to the O.J. trial. I have this annoying thing called work, which keeps dragging me away from the things that are really important, such as the Boink thread. Anyway, so I missed your OJ comparison.
I'm real foggy on the Starbucks clerk. I don't remember much about it. I wasn't drinking coffee there, it wasn't me, and I've never even heard of Starbucks!! -GG-
But if you could fill me in, I am interested.
Regarding Reno and Starr, and It is simply too bad that so few Americans can see that they are victims of a calculated spin.
It is. Did you see the movie "Terminator", the original one? Where he's explaining to "Sarah" how to view the robot Terminator (best I can remember): "it doesn't eat, it doesn't sleep, it doesn't have feelings, and IT WILL NEVER, EVER STOP!"
That's our justice system. That's how it was designed. It simply does a job. Some would have us believe that Justice has a "pahtisan" face, but the whole machinery is so dedicated to ferreting out the truth, that in the end either the truth becomes known, or the case ends in some kind of mistrial. Indeed, this investigation is only a grand jury probe, to determine an initial result. In this case, the Congress would then have to conduct the actual trial, if Congress felt they had such a duty.
I'm preaching to the choir in saying the above to you I know. And no, I haven't been able to follow the Jim Guy Tucker subplot, except that I thought I'd heard that he caved in and started naming names, or some such. Not to worry though. Clinton's never heard of anybody named Tucker anybody. -G-
DK |
