kyburg | Snopes

A lesson in teasing out true, false and WTF.

And a very simple one, at that.

It takes time to sift through any amount of "evidence."

How long did it take to find out that neither Clinton had done anything "bookable" re: Whitewater? And that the only thing Clinton could be arguably tried for was lying about a blowjob? He lied to a Grand Jury about being unfaithful to his wife. Took how long to make that determination?

It took almost the entire two terms of Clinton in office. And cost a buncha money.

And that was after someone brought the case, which has not been the case with any of the Bush administration - yet. No, these things don't just happen. You have to pay someone.

aiobheil can speak to this - you have to pay them, and keep paying them.

"Free" country - uh, no. There has been the idea that everyone should have access to the legal process, but in the past that access was provided by various and sundry supported programs - including the whole "public defender" concept.

Try finding any kind of legal aid now.

I'm picking up bits and pieces of the Jackson case from time to time (no, I don't have a radio in the car, at my desk, or at work and I don't watch television news at home. Rarely. I read newspapers - when I get enough time. Which I haven't lately.) I am immediately struck by how the legal process is first trying to determine what evidence can be allowed. Not that there is any, but what. And gathered how.

I think we should look at everything, including how it was obtained - and decide that in the courts. Don't you?

I think my objection is the order in which they do that.

Random drive-by gripe. Your mileage may vary.