RHF wrote:


-READ- Clintons Return White House Furniture
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121856&page=1
White House Furnishings Sent Back Following
following revelations of thief. Plus the Clintons
also paid $86K in restitutions to the US Treasury
for the many items taken from the White House.


That story says nothing about theft. It's about donations and gifts.
They returned the stuff, and they might get some of it back.

No trashing of the White House. No vandalism. No looting of Air
Force 1.

On Aug 1, 6:08*pm, dave wrote:
RHF wrote:

- - -READ- Clintons Return White House Furniture
- - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121856&page=1
- - White House Furnishings Sent Back Following
- - following revelations of thief. *Plus the Clintons
- - also paid $86K in restitutions to the US Treasury
- - for the many items taken from the White House.

- That story says nothing about theft.

Oh Really . . .

-*It's about donations and gifts.

The The White House -aka- US Federal Government
NOT to the Clintons -so- What was removed was
the Property of the USA Not the Clintons

Sure Do - I Say SURE DO Sound Like 'Theft' To Me.

- They returned the stuff,

-corrrection- The return some of 'the stuff'
-hint- That would be consider a admission of GUILT.

and they might get some of it back.

? Get It Back ? - ? Legally How ?
-hint- They Could Pay For It.

Dave so when you return something
that you 'took' that did not belong to
you : THAT IS NOT THEFT !

Oops I am having a Bill Clinton Moment
pondering the definition of "is" . . .

Dave so when you pay restitution for
something that you 'took' that did not
belong to you : THAT IS NOT THEFT !

Channeling Bill again : 'is', 'Is'. "IS" !

-*No trashing of the White House.

Dave so you say . . .

-*No vandalism.

Dave so you say . . .

-*No looting of Air Force 1.

Dave so you say . . .