Word: documentation
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...were a charter to give Russian more participation in NATO proceedings, joint peacekeeping operations similar to those in Bosnia and promises that NATO would not deploy troops in substantial numbers in newly admitted states. But because none of the proposals addressed one of Russia's most coveted demands, a document legally binding the country to NATO, Primakov left unsatisfied. Emerging from the White House, he stated flatly that "Russia will not change its position on NATO" and continued his insistence that the U.S. make concessions. Speaking on Russian television, Boris Yeltsin echoed Primakov's hard line, suggesting that an expanded...
...manuscript has been on tour in New York, Milan and Rome since its purchase by the Microsoft chair two years ago. The document features sketches by the artist and his theories on evolution...
...much, laying bare some wounded pride. But the former deputy chief of staff says his cooperation with Representative Dan Burton's Government Reform and Oversight Committee is not retribution but common sense: he believes it would be easier--and cheaper--to comply with a request for documents than pay his lawyer to cope with a subpoena. That's a plausible explanation from a patrician tightwad who hates to spend money (he sends his old suits out to be rewoven rather than buy new ones). In any case, Ickes draws a line between his treatment by the President and everyone else...
...very hard to defend someone who is lying to you." On the other hand, defense lawyers cannot knowingly encourage their clients to lie on the stand without being liable to charges of suborning perjury. And if it is discovered that an attorney on either side leaked the document, that lawyer could be disbarred. Says former O.J. Simpson defense lawyer Carl Douglas: "There have been a series of leaks in this case, and I don't think they're coincidental...
...rather on what the justices think the meaning of Constitution should be (a question betraying a Scalian mind set)? I understood his answer to be, "There is no such thing as a 'textual' argument, or one that is self-evident from the text. Rather, the Constitution is an evolving document that must be understood in relation to changing circumstances...