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.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: unclewest who wrote (55293)7/20/2004 2:19:23 PM
From: Murrey Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793939
 
This has been around for a couple of days,

Picked the URL up at UFs Digital Photography thread. Be patient, it takes a while to load, even on broadband.

jibjab.com



To: unclewest who wrote (55293)7/20/2004 5:53:34 PM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 793939
 
That is not the case. He did not return it. What was returned was taken by the FBI via search warrant.

I used my Red Lobster experience to illustrate what I meant by "borrow" given that LB questioned it. I did not mean to suggest any parallel to the Berger business. I fully intended to return what I borrowed/stole at the time that I removed it from the premises and did so in a timely manner.

If you acknowledged taking it and told the authorities you discarded it would you be charged with borrowing or stealing.

I assume you intended that as a question. The answer is obvious I think. If you don't return it or replace it or compensate the owner for his loss, you've stolen it.



To: unclewest who wrote (55293)7/20/2004 5:58:17 PM
From: Ish  Respond to of 793939
 
<<That is not the case. He did not return it. What was returned was taken by the FBI via search warrant.>>

Just in my own thinking what he removed would have conflicted with either his or President Clinton's testimony. Why else would he have smuggled it out and not returned it?