« Previous | Main | Next »

October 06, 2012


In its first-ever complaint involving a politician’s underwear, the Ohio Elections Commission was asked today by Fetherolf to get to the bottom of the case of the prosecutor’s panties.

(Thanks to Ralph)


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Snickering-Among-the-Electorate is a small English village, not far from the larger hamlet of Fumbling-on-the-Goal-Line. I think it's somewhere in Wiltshire.

I think we would need to see said panties and the lawyer in question both with and without them on.

So dark colored panties upset the courtroom huh. (funny)

Wasn't The Mysterious Case Of The Prosecutor's Panties an episode on Perry Mason?

No briefs, no case.

If not it certainly should have been cindy.

I just know Johnnie Cochrane would have had an interesting take on this case.

Reminds of LBJ demanding his early state Senate campaign staff spread rumors that his opponent screwed barnyard animals, so that the opponent would have to publicly deny the charges. Obviously, this was back before politics got dirty.

Getting to the bottom of it should be a simple matter.

I see her clever plan to sit on the story is working.

Allegedly not wearing panties, and she said, “It’s embarrassing,”

Well, DUH!!!

Fill in appropriate "legal brief" joke.

'here come da judge'

No Omni, it's nearer to Mold-On-The-Stilton. You're thinking of Gammon-On-The-Rye.

hahaha.. panties the right of women lolz :D

The comments to this entry are closed.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise