SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (17315)7/12/2002 3:13:50 PM
From: Bill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
If you read the SEC documents, it is clear they found NO evidence against Bush. None. Zilch. They closed the case. Because there was no merit in pursuing him. "Based on the facts." Based on the facts, he did nothing illegal. That's what is stated in the links I provided.

If that's not good enough for you, how should a total exoneration have been worded, in your opinion?



To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (17315)7/12/2002 3:40:36 PM
From: Bill  Respond to of 21057
 
Also, I suspect the Ramsey file might be couched with a few phases like, "Although there exist many unaccounted for discrepancies..." or "We doubt the credibility of testimony..." or "Although we believe evidence was destroyed..." or "Although we strongly suspect they killed her...".

There is NO condition or other statement of doubt about the conclusions the SEC drew wrt Bush.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News