From: pjb@ny.ubs.com
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:13:42 +0800
To: jimbell@pacifier.com
Subject: Re: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
Message-ID: <199608221840.OAA03501@sherry.ny.ubs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


jimmy carter proved that we anyone could be president, and it looks
like clinton is proving that we don't really need a president.

	-paul

> From cypherpunks-errors@toad.com Thu Aug 22 03:09:20 1996
> X-Sender: jimbell@mail.pacifier.com
> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset="us-ascii"> 
> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:36:23 -0800
> To: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
> From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
> Subject: Re: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
> Content-Length: 1492
> 
> At 02:47 PM 8/21/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote:
> >On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 Scottauge@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >> Rush Limbaugh reports:
> >> 
> >> That a husband and wife are being jailed for yelling to Clinton "You Suck".
> >> 
> >> The Secret Service states additional words (yet un-uttered to the rest of 
> us)
> >> were mentioned that they deemed threatening.
> >
> >
> >"I hope you die." 
> 
> Doesn't sound much like a "threat" to me.
> 
> > And the couple was arrestd for disorderly conduct by 
> >Chicago police. 
> 
> It sounds to me like the Chicops were just showing their "loyalty" by 
> sitting on somebody, not that they believed any real crime had been committed.
> 
> > Any possible federal charges for threatening a president 
> >in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 871 await a determination of the 
> >seriousness of the statement, in context with the wife's conduct, by 
> >prosecutors.  I predict no action.
> 
> But it isn't even a "threat", regardless of how "serious" it was.   The "I 
> hope you die"  part is, presumably, a statement of fact:  She did, indeed, 
> hope he dies.  But I don't see how hoping this can be considered a threat, 
> or even SAYING she's hoping this is, likewise.
> 
> 
> Makes me wonder whether visiting one of these appearances with a "Clinton 
> Doll" and a bunch of pins, and visibly inserting those pins into the doll 
> (while uttering various strange incantations), would constitute a "threat."
> 
> Frankly, I'd rather have a president who didn't feel the need to be 
> protected by thugs.
> 
> Jim Bell
> jimbell@pacifier.com
>