lein wrote:
> On Sep 19, 11:49 am, Bill Shatzer
comcast.net> wrote:
> >>Don Homuth wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:06:37 +0000 (UTC), gatt
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>lein wrote:
>>>>>>>Read Sarah Palin's Private Emails!
>>>>>>Nah -- such things are entirely uninteresting.
>>>>>>What's important in this matter is the ones that were supposedly
>>>>>>"private" that really should have been Public.
>>>>>>That's a no-no!
>>>>>Which ones are they?
>>>>Once the integrity of the e-mail account has been compromised, the
>>>>authenticity of any alleged data in the account is also suspect.
>>>>A person who maliciously hacks or phishes an e-mail account could use
>>>>existing header and address information and modify or fabricate content
>>>>and then post "screen shots" of the material on the internet.
>>>Hence the need for a thorough investigation of the matter -- one in
>>>which all of the concerned parties ought to be openly cooperating.
>>Oh, I'm rather confident that she's cooperating on the investigatin of
>>the hacking of her yahoo account.
>>Where's she's not cooperating is the investigation of the Alaskan
>>Troopergate affair.
>>You know, the one she initially "welcomed,", declared she had "nothing
>>to hide," and promised "full cooperation".
>>Apparently she's changed her mind on tha 'un.
>>
>>Wonder why?
> Could it be that the tenor of the investigation turned from fair to
> partisan?
>>Can you spell S-T-O-N-E-W-A-L-L?
> Can you spell W-I-T-C-H H-U-N-T?
As I think you recently mentioned, where there's smoke, there's often fire.
In this instance, there is a hell of a lot of smoke and an
investigatiion seems to be the only way to ascertain the extent of the
underlying blaze.
Still, the report has been promised by October 10, with or without her
cooperation. It will be interesting to see just how the McLumpy campaign
attempts to spin that.
> So why do you think Ken Starr was S-T-O-N-E-W-A-L-L-E-D when
> investigating Clinton?
Ah, so Clinton is now worthy of emulation by your girl?
Still, I would note the Clintons were interviewed by or testified before
Starr's folks at least five times during his investigation and they
never refused to testify when Starr requested their testimony.
Sarah is just flat out refusing to even talk to the investigator. And
has directed not only her staff but all state employees to do the same.
Smells like a cover up to me.
Peace and justice,
