Slick Willy and his bimbo at it again...

HendrixFan

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2001
4,646
0
71
Whats good for Reagan and Bush isnt good for Clinton? I dont understand.

"In a statement, first reported by ABC News, Clinton lawyer David Kendall said he was seeking reimbursement under the independent counsel statute and was following the precedent set by ex-presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, both Republicans."
 

PsychoAndy

Lifer
Dec 31, 2000
10,735
0
0
And who said justice was blind? Obviously not Wheezer, who lets his opinions and political leaning get in the way of making a rational decision about an ex-president wanting money due to a precedent with other ex-presidents getting reimbursed for legal fees from court. Maybe your name has a direct correlation to your age, which might also explain your opinion.
 

zippy

Diamond Member
Nov 10, 1999
9,998
1
0
Originally posted by: HendrixFan
Whats good for Reagan and Bush isnt good for Clinton? I dont understand.

"In a statement, first reported by ABC News, Clinton lawyer David Kendall said he was seeking reimbursement under the independent counsel statute and was following the precedent set by ex-presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, both Republicans."
Agreed, am I missing something?

Sure, it's more money, but still, the precedent was set by two Republicans, so what are you crying about?
 

HendrixFan

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2001
4,646
0
71
Yeah, you'd think he'd at least link to a partison article which doesnt mention that fact.
rolleye.gif
 

Balt

Lifer
Mar 12, 2000
12,673
482
126
What I don't understand is why the article repeatedly mentions how much Bill and Hillary Clinton earn for their speaking/book deals. That is totally irrelevant.

Pay their bills, it's an established precedent and I see no reason for an exception here. If they couldn't be convicted (or even charged) they were forced to pay legal fees for no purpose whatsoever.