Your response is clueless as usual.
>>First, you have a handful of names for the same basic act
Only in what passes for your mind.
>>Every other divorce case
What comic books have you been reading?
>>Second, I believe that the Supreme court may eventually throw these out if it gets to that, because there are rules against prosecuting people for things that nobody else is ever prosecuted for - namely perjury in a dismissed civil case deposition, even if he didn't word his answers carefully enough for the law, and he probably did.
You are clueless. The Clinton administration has prosecuted many for the same.
>>Third, those are accusations at this point. You are not in authority, fortunately, so they are not crimes yet. They become crimes upon conviction, until then they are suspicions, they may be facts or acts, but they are not crimes.
A crime is a crime before prosecution as well as after.
>>Not that I would suspect a guy with a name from a comic book of understanding or caring about any of the fine points of due process. :-) Zoltan! Buck Rogers friend? I vaguely recall him from somewhere. Refresh my memory on that, eh Zoltan.
That's news to me. I suggest you check your no doubt extensive collection. And I also suggest that you get to work on your high school equivalency diploma. This may come as news to you, but old and stupid aren't accolades. |
