If Bush lied, will he be impeached ?

[sarettah]

from Findlaws:

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

As I remarked in an earlier column, this Administration may be due for a scandal. While Bush narrowly escaped being dragged into Enron, it was not, in any event, his doing. But the war in Iraq is all Bush's doing, and it is appropriate that he be held accountable.

To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose."

It's important to recall that when Richard Nixon resigned, he was about to be impeached by the House of Representatives for misusing the CIA and FBI. After Watergate, all presidents are on notice that manipulating or misusing any agency of the executive branch improperly is a serious abuse of presidential power.

Nixon claimed that his misuses of the federal agencies for his political purposes were in the interest of national security. The same kind of thinking might lead a President to manipulate and misuse national security agencies or their intelligence to create a phony reason to lead the nation into a politically desirable war. Let us hope that is not the case.

**********************************************

Bush's statements, in chronological order, were:

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

United Nations Address
September 12, 2002

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."

Radio Address
October 5, 2002

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."

"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
October 7, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003

[PornoDoggy]

I don't see an impeachable offense in the allegations that have been made so far.

Intelligence data requires analysis. Analysis is subjective. Attempts to compare spinning intelligence data to Nixon's wholesale abuse of the powers of the Executive Branch are the stuff of fantasy, no matter how much I wish it weren't so.

[JR]

i think that if there was a move to impeach Bush, that would be the final nail in the 04 Democratic coffin.

In politics, you cant attack a popular person without becoming unpopular.

[Mike AI]

It is funny watching Bush toy with the Democrats, they keep looking for ways to box him in, and slam him - yet he always turns it around.

Bush is very very smooth - and it just angers the liberals because they think he is a simpleton.

I think Bush is baiting the Dems into further destruction, they will think this is an issue to beat him up on, but I will bet they sooner or later, some Lt. in the Army is going to stumble into some undergound bunker which will be loaded with WMD....

Then after all the Dems were on the bandwagon, the cart will be turned over AGAIN by the President.

The Democrats have to remember their natural instict is ALWAYS wrong....

Bush has toppled 2 Middle Eastern countries that were hazards to the United States.... and this is in his first term!!! I think Bush has a LOT more in common with TR everyday!!

What will be do in his second term???



I

[JR]

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

is this a lie? how much of Sarin, VX and Mustard gas is STILL unnacounted for? quite a bit. it was known to exist or found by previous UN inspectors. its not a secret.

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003

its a fact right? the UN inspectors know what he had. they know what was unnacounted for.

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

its in the UN reports.

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."

Radio Address
October 5, 2002

seems pretty plausible since they found 1000's of chemical weapons suits in troop locations. it was all covered live by journalists.

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."

The Iraqi Regime DID possess and produce chemical and biological weapons. There has not been solid proof in the end of them pursuing Nuclear weapons... but i think its VERY reasonable to assume that they would be given their history, appetite for and use of chemical weapons.

"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

its a matter of UN record and fact. Not an opinion of one president.

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

They were shown on TV by Saddam himself right before the war.

"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

notice "the evidence INDICATES"

? dunno. according to what i heard in so many testimonies was that the technical specs on the aluminum pretty much negated the possibility of dual use.

Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
October 7, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

"our intelligence officials" estimate... i.e. "Bush" does not estimate. Therefore this cannot be proof of a lie by Bush unless it can be proven that "intelligence officials DO NOT estimate"

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003

its all in the UN Reports... weapons known to exist, programs known to exist... weapons and programs which could not be accounted for in the end.

They were KNOWN to exist. they were not proven NOT to exist.

[Winetalk.com]

Bush has no prayer to be re-elected...
he is NOT popular with Democrats
he is NOT popular with Holywood stars
he is NOT popular with terrorists
he is NOT popular among GFYers

he is ONLY popular with American People, and American People never know what's good for them
;-)))

[sextoyking]

Mike,

well one thing I know bush is going to do is start going after more online and offline porno / obsenity cases, that could affect alot of us.

I can't find the link where I read that story, but were not talking Illegal / CP stuff here, regular xxx action.

Also, I was watching cspan a couple of days ago, Ashcroft was testifying and a congressman asked him out right if he was going to go after online porn more and more, the congressman even said, I am not talking about CP, regular online porn.. Ashcroft said we are working on it, etc, etc.
--------------------------------------

What will be do in his second term???

[PornoDoggy]

Well, if it was just as simple as Bush's popularity - which can be here today, and gone tomorrow (ask Pop), then all the Democrats ought to stay home. Of course, there are a lot of other factors that can come into play between now and November 2004 that could affect that popularity.

How, btw, are you defining "Americans", Serge? GW barely won election last time. The "landslide" victory in the Congressional elections of 2002 was really only by a margin of 2%. Do Democrats no longer qualify as Americans?

And just so you know, I don't think AT THIS POINT the Democrats stand much of a chance in 2004. I don't like that very much, but that's how I feel.

Of course, I'm not terribly strong in my psychic abilities. I pretty much felt that way in 1991.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by sextoyking@Jun 9 2003, 12:58 PM
Mike,

well one thing I know bush is going to do is start going after more online and offline porno / obsenity cases, that could affect alot of us.

I can't find the link where I read that story, but were not talking Illegal / CP stuff here, regular xxx action.

Also, I was watching cspan a couple of days ago, Ashcroft was testifying and a congressman asked him out right if he was going to go after online porn more and more, the congressman even said, I am not talking about CP, regular online porn.. Ashcroft said we are working on it, etc, etc.
--------------------------------------

What will be do in his second term???

[Paraphrase]
No, that will never happen. Besides, the Democrats would do the same thing. BLAHBLAHBLAHBLAHBLAH.
[/Paraphrase]

The ostrich Republicans who don't like to own up to the dominance of the religious right in the party are going to tell you something like the above.

Unfortunately, they seem to be in denial of the fact that Bush owes his Presidency to people who consider the cover of most People magazines "pornograhic." The Bush Administration has both an idealogical axe to grind and a political debt to pay that an awful lot of people don't seem to want to admit to - or are just too damn dumb to realize it.

[sextoyking]

PD,

yeh I feel the same about 2004, we have a chance, but unless bush screws up real bad and we can push those points and People belive us, it's gonna be tough.

I do like Dean, smart guy, great speaker, etc but a little to Left to win. Kerry might be our best chance with Grahm as VP on the ticket.

Sure the dems will say the same about online porn in public too, but I think the right will go after it more, we shall see.

[Mike AI]

well one thing I know bush is going to do is start going after more online and offline porno / obsenity cases, that could affect alot of us.

You keep repeating this over and over and over for past 3 years. Have not seen anything concrete yet.

What adminstration went after MaxCash? Who went after other porn companies?? Think it was Democrats....

One day Todd you will wake up and realize ALL politicans are anti-porn.... get over it - find some new reasoning to support democrats.

[sextoyking]

Mike,

like that reason is why I support my party through thick and thin, Please you know me better then that. Wish I could find that link though. Maxcash and others didn't have much to do about adult content, the FTC was there because of complaints I imagine about billing practices, etc. But in the end Maxcash won.

I am not saying any party is Pro Porn, well except the Sykk party but repubs and the right side of the aisle are more prone to go after it.

[sarettah]

Actually if I remember right RB settled with the FTC.... Not an outright win...

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jun 9 2003, 02:00 PM

You keep repeating this over and over and over for past 3 years. Have not seen anything concrete yet.

What adminstration went after MaxCash? Who went after other porn companies?? Think it was Democrats....

One day Todd you will wake up and realize ALL politicans are anti-porn.... get over it - find some new reasoning to support democrats.

Mike ... nobody is arguing that there is a "pro" porn force in American politics today. Could be that the powers that be have been somewhat distracted by 9/11 and the subsequent war on terror - and besides, the political appeal of such moves would be much stronger sometime next spring or later.

Show me the Democratic candidates that got elected with anti-porn as a significant point of appeal to a key constiuency - a contituency they HAVE to keep in order to maintain the tenuous majority that they have.

[sextoyking]

Yes, you are correct I think, jeese can't remember the stories

[Mike AI]

Well I was a lot more afraid of Janet Reno, than I am of Ashcroft...

How many people did Reno kill in Waco?

Until there is major prosecution on a Federal level, for obscenity that goes after "normal" porn, I am not worried...

This whole sky is falling down sydrome, and using Ashcroft to demonize Bush is a joke....

Oh and Todd, prosecutions for obsenity usually fail, they just bankrupt the person being prosecuted.... that is exactly what FTC did to Maxcash. While they did not go bankrupt, they were never the same....

How they get you does not really matter - they got Capone on Tax Evasion.....

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jun 9 2003, 06:05 PM
Well I was a lot more afraid of Janet Reno, than I am of Ashcroft...

How many people did Reno kill in Waco?

Until there is major prosecution on a Federal level, for obscenity that goes after "normal" porn, I am not worried...

This whole sky is falling down sydrome, and using Ashcroft to demonize Bush is a joke....

Oh and Todd, prosecutions for obsenity usually fail, they just bankrupt the person being prosecuted.... that is exactly what FTC did to Maxcash. While they did not go bankrupt, they were never the same....

How they get you does not really matter - they got Capone on Tax Evasion.....

You have got to be kidding me, right? Janet Reno never worried me any - but then, I don't happen to have a secret cache of illegal weapons I'm trying to hide. Are you really as far right as the Wackos in Waco and their fellow travellers like the "patriot" Tim McVeigh?

You blame the Federal Government for the deaths at Waco? In the 60s and 70s many people on the left blamed the FBI for gun battles with the Black Panthers and the American Indian Movement - would you have agreed with them?

Do you blame the U.S Army for killing Iraqi soldiers?

The only thing I fault Janet Reno for is waiting around for weeks on end. That compound should have been stormed within 72 hours. The folks inside that compound made their choices. It's regretable that they made their choices for their children as well, but there is no blood on Reno's hands over Waco.

As far as poronography and the Republican Party goes, Mike - I hope you're right and I'm wrong. Ain't the way I read the cards, buddy - I've been following the AG's political carreer since you were hitting on the girl at the desk in front of you in Jr. High School, and I know who he panders to.

[Mike AI]

PD - The Branch Davidians were wackos, there is no doubt about that, but it is not against the law to be a wacko!

Also gun violations is not a reason to kill people. Koresh jogged everyday, the ATF could have swooped in to get him then.... however, they wanted to make a big splash, look cool for the TVs ( the ATF called the local TV stations on the intial raid), and came busting through the door.

Hell, when I had my FFL I was always worried that some gung-ho ATF crew would come through my door at night.... if I heard people breaking in and did not know who it was, I would come out firing as well.

It was a cluster fuck to begin with.... but nothing excuses the initial stupidity ofthe raid, and then the ending of the stand-off.

IT amazes me, liberals wanted to give Saddam forever to comply with the UN, infact gave him more then 12 years.... ( He was threat to the region, and possibly the world) yet when it comes to wackos in waco who had a few hundred GUNS, they stormed the place with tanks after a few weeks ( they were no threat to anyone outside the house)....

Never could understand that.....

Check yourself closely PD....

[Mike AI]

Oh yeah one more thing PD, Iraqi soldiers do not have the protection guerunteed them by the Constitution of the United States. ( neither does IRaqi civilians)

The people in Waco were Americans, who should have been protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Surely you liberals would agree with that.....

What crimes were the children who were killed at Waco guilty of?

[PornoDoggy]

Mike, I think it was tragic that the wackos in Waco dragged their own children into it. I find it mildly amusing - although somewhat disturbing - that normally "law and order" folks accuse the government of "murdering" those children simply because the clowns that put those kids in that situation pass some kind of rhetorical litmus test.

I don't agree with the morons on the left who blame the U.S government for civilians killed in wartime; I also don't agree with people who want to excuse criminal conduct, or criticize the government's action to enforce the laws, when the suspect/lawbreaker happens to spout the right rhetoric about the 2nd Ammendment.

I have a sneaking suspicion that you would be more than willing to bend over backwards to defend Ashcroft in this same situation - even though I think he WOULD go in in 48 hours or 72 hours, and not piss around with them. I also suspect that if it was an armed camp of PETA wackos who were asserting their 2nd Ammendment rights you would feel far less sympathy.

The "Constitutional Rights" arguement doesn't cut it with me - first of all, I'm not aware of a Constitutional Right to break the law. Additionally, I - like the U.S. Supreme Court and virtually all mainstream Americans, left and right - don't question the constitutionality of the laws the ATF was sent in to enforce.

Now - the question I have to ask myself is - would I defend Ashcroft in the same situation? I'd like to think I would - but I can't be absolutely sure about that.



Last edited by PornoDoggy at Jun 10 2003, 12:16 AM

[Mike AI]

Yeah please PD lets not be hypocritical.

The Branch Davidians broke the law, at least some of them did, and deserved to be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent.

The parents WERE responsible for their children, but it still should not have happend that way.... no need to go in like that, unless they were harming the children or something.

I am law and order, and think it should be applied fairly across the board. I am also big into civil liberties.... I know you find that hard to beleive but I am always going to tend to side against the gov't when it comes to dealing with Citizens....

I do not think Ashcroft would have done the same thing - So far to me Ashcroft has been enforcing the laws on the books, even those he does not personally agree with - that is what PROFESSIONAL law enforcement is about.

I think Ashcroft gets a bad rap, and is a convienent whipping boy for the left.... I have not seen one concrete thing he has done that I have issues with. Being Conservative means he IS law and order, and does what the laws say.... unlike liberals who like to twist and interpret the law.

The reality is, Ashcroft would not like me because I am a pornographer... I understand that, but I do not think he would drum up charges just to put me in jail.

I really think the genie is out of the bottle as far as porn, at least main stream fucking. Some ofthe extrme stuff with violence , beasty, kiddie, and other things are going to raise the flags and a lot of that has to be looked into.

But main stream plain old fucking between consentual adults is over with.... and Ashcroft and Bush or anyone else cannot do anything about it. I think Ashcroft and Bush are both realist, they know they cannot put the genie back in the bottle.... so they are not going to fight a battle they cannot win....

[Mike AI]

PD I thought you of all people would know your Constitutional Right better.....

They have a right to a fari, expediant trial by their peers. They are innocent until PROVEN guilty.... yadda yadda yadda... come on you know these things.

Liberals only like the Constitution when it benefits them..... at least ACLU tends to be even handed...

And my commetns on Ashcroft might be wishful thinking, time will tell.... I hope ( and I know you do too) that I am right!!

[PornoDoggy]

I have followed John Ashcroft's career for a long time. If you think he will be put off by the fact that he will get beat, you really don't know much about him.

As State Attorney General he took two or three Missouri laws re abortion all the way to the Supreme Court, knowing fully well he would lose at every step along the way. He did it to ensure his support by his political base, and for idealogical reasons.

I hope you are right about porn.

It's really hard to say whether Ashcroft would have done better than Reno did back in 94(?) - she did give the order and accepted responsibility, but the inability of her underlings to deal with the situation was institutional, not political.

I don't see a lot of sense in trying to make this a liberal vs conservative issue. The only way you can shoehorn constitutional rights into this issue is to drag in the 2nd Ammendment into it - and to do so would put you very far outside of anything resembling mainstream opinion. As far as the right to a fair trial or trial by their peers for the wackos from Waco - we never got that far. Are you questioning the right of the government to detain suspects? That's really what Waco was an attempt to do. A clusterfuck, to be sure- but they denied themselves their day in court by refusing to be apprehended.

[Torone]

Pd,
Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Cuban kid thing, the politically-based firing of 90+ federal prosecutors, attacks on 2 realistically profitable businesses (Microsoft and Maxcash) all combine to prove to me and apparently to the voters in Florida that Reno was a totally out-of-control fool who cared nothing for The Constitution.

I could suggest a new career for her...if there is a niche for 'ugly bitches'.

[PornoDoggy]

Morone, please explain to me in simple words that a public school graduate can understand the constitutional disregard shown by Janet Reno at Waco. I hope you have something better than lame-assed 2nd Ammendment arguements - because unfortunately for you the government of the United States, including the U.S. Supreme Court, rejects them categorically and has rejected them for years.

The only people I know that will make those arguements with a straight face are the same sort of people who think Timmy McVeigh is a martyr to the cause.

How many federal prosecutors do you think the new admnistration has brought in? Do you think that those changes are politically motivated, or is anything they do justified because they are rite-thinkin' merikins who say things that you agree with? Having worked for three former U.S. Prosecutors (2 Republicans and a Democrat), I can tell you that it's essentially a politcal office.

What I would really LOVE for you to explain is Janet Reno's unconstitutional actions over the incident at Ruby Ridge.

Please - if you want to defend the rights of white supremicist vermon like Randy Weaver and co., that's fine. I realize you've made a point of explaining ad naseum that you aren't a bigot, so I'll just assume you are a niave, foolish fellow traveller swayed by their use of rhetoric that warms the cockles of your heart. Some liberals with more heart than common sense used to fall for the Communists that way - it's a common phenomena among unsophistiated people.

BTW, Torone - please don't endanger yourself by revealing any information. If indicating how Janet Reno was secretly controlling the Justice Department even though Bill Clinton hadn't been elected by the time of Ruby Ridge and she hadn't technically been appointed yet will get THEM hunting you down to silence you, I will understand.

See partner, Evil Bill wasn't elected until 1992, and Janet wasn't appointed until 1993. The shootings at Ruby Ridge happened in August, 1992. And I still want to know why some Idaho cracker afraid of race mixing, or some so-called preacher with a fetish for weapons, rates any more respect or mercy from Federal Authorities than a drug cartel or a group of terrorists who happen to be Arab.

[Torone]

Ruby Ridge-They shot the wrong people.
Waco-They grandstanded the whole thing. They could have arrested Koresh easily outside the compound.
The Cuban thing was a direct violation of the same 14th amendment rights that the Liberals have used to justify pampering illegal aliens in other cases.

As for white supremacy, I actually abhor it; but it seems to be on your mind a lot...is there something we should know?

BTW, you still come off sounding like a Clinton-sucker (not like Monica, as in you believe that he never has and never could do any wrong).

Oh, and I apologize for stepping on your sweetheart's toes...I wasn't the one who stepped on her face. That was probably when she was a little whatever.

[PornoDoggy]

I didn't think you'd bother to address the fact that Janet Reno wasn't Attorney General when Ruby Ridge happened. The very same people who get their panties in an uproar over Ruby Ridge scream like banshees when someone from the left criticizes police actions in minority communities taken against drug dealers, for example.

You claim to abhor White Supremacy - but that was the schtick of the Weavers up there in Ruby Ridge. He was a gun runner for the wackos in that element.

I don't even care to speculate what you mean by "is there something we should know?"

All in all, it was an extremely poor response, even for you.

[Torone]

I don't feel your BS is worth more. That's why I have been avoiding posting...

[PornoDoggy]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight ...

[SykkBoy]

The Sykk Party feels:
Janet Reno fucked up Waco, they were religious whackos who deserved their right to idiotic beliefs in a pseudo god the same as Ashcroft and moronic porn people who want to "God bless" and pray for me

Ashcroft is a very dangerous religious bigot (who got beat in an election by A DEAD MAN) To me Ashcroft is only missing the silly mustache and the bent cross....some of the laws he is passing or attempting to pass are very damaging to our personal freedoms and liberties

Marijuana should be legalized, but the crimes committed while under the influence of it should be triple penalty crimes

Ruby Ridge? so a guy has extremist views...doesn't mean he should be killed

W's WMD "scandal"? who cares, my gas prices arefalling slowly...let's bomb some more desert dwelling brown people and get those prices down another 10-15 cents per gallon

The Olympic Park Bomber? he should be put up against a wall and Richard Jewel should be allowed to kick him in the nuts for 4 hours nonstop with steel toed combat boots. Where did they find this fucker? Bomb that fucking state...we bombed Iraq for supporting terrorism, let's bomb North Carolina...so we can show South Carolina we're serious about this religious wacko terrorism stuff

...and we should probably stop say "we should bomb..." unless "we" are wearing a military uniform or have worn one in the past. Armchair generals need to suit up or shut up. Show REAL support of our trops and signup trooper. Some congressman who gets his sons out of serving or has never been in the military nor had any children in the military should be flown in randomly to "hot zones" to view combat firsthand before deciding on sending someone else's sons into a place which may or may not have bad intentions. They should also be forced to live in a VA hospital for one month as a "resident" and see how attrocious the accomidations are.

member of both the right and the left should be holed up in a hotel together and forced into a group intervention....not sure which is worse, a letist who only holds the party line no matter what or a rightist who does the same thing and mocks the leftist about it....


..and the Libertarians need to get their shit together too because the inter-party bickering is tearing apart what little voice and support the party already has when it could be moving on and gaining a nationwide foothold the "big two" have and are abusing at every step..

so sayeth the Sykk Party!!!!



Last edited by SykkBoy at Jun 12 2003, 08:53 PM

[Torone]

Sykk,
I don't remember if he was killed or not; but his wife and son were.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by Torone@Jun 13 2003, 07:05 PM
Sykk,
I don't remember if he was killed or not; but his wife and son were.

He was not killed

"Following his release from jail, Randy Weaver flew back to Iowa with his children and filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the government for the killing of Samuel and Vicki Weaver. In an out-of-court settlement, Randy was given $100,000 and his daughters were granted $1 million apiece. "

http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outl...21.html?sect=18

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by sarettah+Jun 13 2003, 07:28 PM-->