SF>       If Clinton committed perjury than charge him.  Since 
SF>when does it cost $13,000,000 to decide if a crime was 
SF>committed?
SF>-> Or do you classify any questioning of your statements as
SF>-> "double-talk?"  While you are at it, explain what about Robert
SF>-> Plett's statements to you constitute double-talk.  Before
SF>-> posting, try looking the term up. 
SF>        My argument arose from me looking it up.  Get all 
SF>the facts together, then 
SF>respond............................. 
Oh this is sweet! YOU, of all people, are advocating that Tom get all
the facts and then respond?
What do you think Ken Starr is doing? Playing games? He's investigating.
Obtaining EVIDENCE that is admissible in a court of law. Once he does
that, THEN and ONLY then will he charge someone.
Obviously you are a firm believer in trial by innuendo. Next you'll tell
us you're a lawyer by profession.
What Tom said was WHICH statements from Robert Plett constituted "double
talk". Since you haven't told us which statements, in YOUR opinion,
constitute double talk, one can reasonably deduce that you can't find
any that are.
Looking up the word "double-talk" in the dictionary, although a major
feat of accomplishment for someone who is the product of OBE, doesn't
suffice. Knowing how to USE it and being able to describe which words or
statements constitute double talk, is what counts.
                       
And thanks for calling.
John Sampson
Rocky Mountain ILKS
___
 X OLXWin 1.00b X Back Up My Hard Drive? I Can't Find The Reverse Switch!
                                                                              
                           
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------