Another Question for Conservatives. (This one is about Clinton)

[Blue Collar Joe]

OK. Prove Bill Clinton's obstruction of justice was less national security-related than, say, Bush authorizing the Valerie Plame leak. Go.

Proof of this, please.

 

[Kandahar]

Proof of this, please.

Proof of my request for evidence? Imperative sentences don't generally require proof...

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

Proof of my request for evidence? Imperative sentences don't generally require proof...

You made the comment that

OK. Prove Bill Clinton's obstruction of justice was less national security-related than, say, Bush authorizing the Valerie Plame leak. Go.

Where is the evidence that clearly proves that Bush was guilty of the Plame leak? We have already had the evidence of Clinton's obstruction, but you now make a claim that Bush also obstructed justice by disclosing a supposed covert agent of the CIA. If you are going to make these comments to counter what was previously stated, then prove your point is valid.

 

[Kandahar]

Where is the evidence that clearly proves that Bush was guilty of the Plame leak? We have already had the evidence of Clinton's obstruction,

Then why isn't Clinton in prison?

but you now make a claim that Bush also obstructed justice by disclosing a supposed covert agent of the CIA. If you are going to make these comments to counter what was previously stated, then prove your point is valid.

There is exactly as much evidence to support the accusation that Bill Clinton lied under oath, as there is to support the accusation that George Bush authorized the leak. Everyone knows that they're both true whether they'll admit to it or not, but given the fact that neither president is currently in prison, the evidence must not exist beyond all reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, one remains a stupid and petty charge while the other is very serious.

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

Then why isn't Clinton in prison?



There is exactly as much evidence to support the accusation that Bill Clinton lied under oath, as there is to support the accusation that George Bush authorized the leak. Everyone knows that they're both true whether they'll admit to it or not, but given the fact that neither president is currently in prison, the evidence must not exist beyond all reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, one remains a stupid and petty charge while the other is very serious.

Clinton was convicted of perjury. Your comment is pure supposition without any merit. You, and others, may believe he did that, but you have not proven anything, merely danced around the issue.
Until proof is provided, you are simply throwing a red herring out there to detract from others comments, and nothing more.
And perjury is a felony. The other? Currently, nothing but supposition without proof.

 

[mpg]

Then why isn't Clinton in prison?



There is exactly as much evidence to support the accusation that Bill Clinton lied under oath, as there is to support the accusation that George Bush authorized the leak. Everyone knows that they're both true whether they'll admit to it or not, but given the fact that neither president is currently in prison, the evidence must not exist beyond all reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, one remains a stupid and petty charge while the other is very serious.

You can't expect his own administration to prosecute him, and W made a political decision to move on.

There's DNA evidence that Clinton committed perjury. Wouldn't you say that that's beyond a reasonable doubt? His secretary testified that he committed witness tampering. Those are both forms of obstruction of justice. Are you saying that obstruction of justice is a "petty crime?" What evidence is there to support that W authorized the Plame leak? Even if there's proof, do you think that that's"very serious"?

As I've already said, Clinton supporters like to discuss that Bj because it deflects attention away from the other scandals.

 

[Navy Pride]

If that's what the federal judge found, then why isn't Clinton in prison today?



OK. Prove Bill Clinton's obstruction of justice was less national security-related than, say, Bush authorizing the Valerie Plame leak. Go.



No kidding. What's your point...that he should have been impeached because he was impeached?



There's no reason it can't be both.

1. His sentence was to have license to the bar in Arkansas suspended for 5 years.......

2. Prove Bush authorized the Plame leak............

3. He was impeached but not convicted by the senate........

 

[Hoot]

No doubt. And lots of men (as well as women) do that, for sure. They have the morals of alley cats too. It don't make 'em evil bad people who are useless and beyond redemption.....just makes them immoral. That's all.

I should be so lucky......:roll: I could get into a twenty year old little intern about right now, going under my desk and.....

<phone rings>

Hi honey. Not much, I'm just here at work thinking about you and the kids. Pick up a loaf of bread and some milk? Sure, anything for you angel. Love you too. Bye.

Now.....where was I? :mrgreen:

Great post Cpt! Thanks for making me laugh right out loud!!!!!

As far as Clinton, I believe his enemies launched a well financed attack. An attack subsidized by millions of dollars that undermined American democracy. I will admit that Clinton's reckless behavior didn't help matters any, but the facts that have emerged since his presidency, do show a right wing conspiracy...so much so that I was sickened by the republican party, and even swore to never vote republican again...their actions disgusted me. The republicans wanted power at any cost to our nation...there's the real truth.

These actions against the presidency were not patriotic, but were the lowest form of vile, despicable behavior I've ever seen in politics.

How about we spend 50-60 million dollars investigating Bush, with countless private investigators, and force the president to neglect the single most important job in the world, so he can make appearances in court and give sworn testimony?

That ok with everybody? I guarantee we'd find alot more then a bj.

 

[mpg]

Great post Cpt! Thanks for making me laugh right out loud!!!!!

As far as Clinton, I believe his enemies launched a well financed attack. An attack subsidized by millions of dollars that undermined American democracy. I will admit that Clinton's reckless behavior didn't help matters any, but the facts that have emerged since his presidency, do show a right wing conspiracy...so much so that I was sickened by the republican party, and even swore to never vote republican again...their actions disgusted me. The republicans wanted power at any cost to our nation...there's the real truth.

These actions against the presidency were not patriotic, but were the lowest form of vile, despicable behavior I've ever seen in politics.

How about we spend 50-60 million dollars investigating Bush, with countless private investigators, and force the president to neglect the single most important job in the world, so he can make appearances in court and give sworn testimony?

That ok with everybody? I guarantee we'd find alot more then a bj.

Is that a joke?

 

[Deegan]

As a taxpayer, I disliked Clinton, as a fellow poonhound, I loved him, as a married man, I was disgusted, but as an American, I felt his party was more responsible then he for the bad decisions made.

 

[Hoot]

Is that a joke?

I'm sure I don't know what you're referring to? If you mean the body of my post, no, I'm dead serious about everything I posted.

I didn't mean to imply we'd find sexual indiscretions by investigating Bush, merely that we'd find far more serous offenses.

 

[mpg]

I'm sure I don't know what you're referring to? If you mean the body of my post, no, I'm dead serious about everything I posted.

I didn't mean to imply we'd find sexual indiscretions by investigating Bush, merely that we'd find far more serous offenses.

Please inform us about these facts that emerged showing a right wing conspiracy.

 

[Iriemon]

Clinton was convicted of perjury.

He was? News to me.

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

He was? News to me.

My error, I meant to type charged. Instead I let personal dislike of the man get in the way. I withdraw convicted, as it should have said charged.

 

[Caine]

Navy Pride,

You know... like many others I always took your word for the "convicted of Perjury" statements you LOVE to make regarding Bill Clinton.......

But I finally decided to try to look some stuff up... and I came up with some info......

Famous persons accused of perjury

Famous individuals who have been accused of perjury include:

* Former U.S. President Bill Clinton, impeached by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury and obstruction of justice on December 19, 1998. The perjury charge was later rejected by the Senate, with 55 not-guilty votes and 45 guilty votes preventing a conviction. However later, on April 12, 1999, Clinton was cited by federal district judge Susan Webber Wright for contempt of court for giving statements that were "intentionally false" under oath in his January 28, 1998 deposition in the Paula Jones lawsuit. As a consequence of this, Clinton was fined $90,000 and the matter was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court and, ultimately, to the U.S. Supreme Court. Later, in January, 2001, Clinton agreed to surrender his law license and to give up his bar membership allowing him to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury
Also...
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/12/clinton.contempt/

So, he was not convicted of a Felony, but was found to be in contempt of court instead.

and, BTW, Perjury isn't a Felony in all cases, but in all cases IS considered to be AT LEAST a "high misdemeanor".

Do more research.

 

[Hoot]

Please inform us about these facts that emerged showing a right wing conspiracy.

I could post a novel's worth of material and facts and I doubt you'd be convinced.

If you're really curious, I suggest you read "The Hunting Of the President-The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary." It will open anyone's eyes into the back-stabing brand of politics employed by the republican party.

The campaign of hatred against Bill Clinton dates back to the early days of his involvement in Arkansas politics. Bill broke ranks with his own party and campaigned for the opposition because of the dixiecrat governor's involvement in the KKK...it all goes on from there.

It's Saturday...I have an outdoor band gig today...I don't have time to attempt to convince you of the reality of a reich wing conspiracy.

 

[Gardener]

I could post a novel's worth of material and facts and I doubt you'd be convinced.

If you're really curious, I suggest you read "The Hunting Of the President-The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary." It will open anyone's eyes into the back-stabing brand of politics employed by the republican party.

The campaign of hatred against Bill Clinton dates back to the early days of his involvement in Arkansas politics. Bill broke ranks with his own party and campaigned for the opposition because of the dixiecrat governor's involvement in the KKK...it all goes on from there.

It's Saturday...I have an outdoor band gig today...I don't have time to attempt to convince you of the reality of a reich wing conspiracy.

The question I usually ask is "How could it NOT involve a conspiracy, or if I wished to put it in terms avoiding the C word, at very least the confluence of like minded individuals intent upon destroying the man?" Sure, he was sleazy and sure he made a mistake when he lied rather than telling the muckrakers it was none of their effing business, but why is the president of the Unites States being put in the position of having to testify about the intimate details of his consensual sex life in the first place? What else BESIDES a conspiracy, oops, a confluence of like minded individuals, puts a man in that position? Does Bush have to testify about his sex life? I can hear it now "Now George, kindly tell us about your fraternity days? Did you really ask her to do that? Did she really do it? Oh, yes, more details, more, more! Yes, yes. And when she did it, can you desribe the sensations? They were? Yes, oh yes, more details, more more! And then you did what yo her? How? With what? really, and how did she sound when you did that? OH yes, I can just envision it now. Please don't stop describing, not now, not yet.....And it felt like what? oh yes, oh God yes, DON"T STOP YOUR DESCRIPTION!, I"M ALMOST....I'm......OH YESSSSSSSSS, Im........ Oh AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGG.


thank you Mr. President. That will be all.

 

[mpg]

I could post a novel's worth of material and facts and I doubt you'd be convinced.

If you're really curious, I suggest you read "The Hunting Of the President-The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary." It will open anyone's eyes into the back-stabing brand of politics employed by the republican party.

The campaign of hatred against Bill Clinton dates back to the early days of his involvement in Arkansas politics. Bill broke ranks with his own party and campaigned for the opposition because of the dixiecrat governor's involvement in the KKK...it all goes on from there.

It's Saturday...I have an outdoor band gig today...I don't have time to attempt to convince you of the reality of a reich wing conspiracy.

Let me guess. John Huang was really a Republican and Vince Foster is still alive.

 

[Navy Pride]

yeah, because we all know the litmus test to see how conservative you are is how many ways you support ****ing over the gays:roll:

Nice try but that is not the point...........Clinton is a liberal as is Hillary, they fool no one.......

 

[Navy Pride]

Navy Pride,

You know... like many others I always took your word for the "convicted of Perjury" statements you LOVE to make regarding Bill Clinton.......

But I finally decided to try to look some stuff up... and I came up with some info......


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury
Also...
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/12/clinton.contempt/

So, he was not convicted of a Felony, but was found to be in contempt of court instead.

and, BTW, Perjury isn't a Felony in all cases, but in all cases IS considered to be AT LEAST a "high misdemeanor".

Do more research.

Why did he lose his Law license?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Why did he lose his Law license?

Contempt of Court...look it up...

You know what? I'd rather have a President lie about getting a hummer than a President who lies to start a war and then doesn't give a rat's behind if the HUMMER that he gave is not even armored.

Here's a question for you fanatical Bushnicks? How come President Clinton was / is so much more popular than Bush ever was or ever will be? I don't recall seeing President Bush ordering Americans into Iraq to the tune of 20,000+ MAIMED Americans plus 2500+ DEAD AMERICANS? I do recall that Bush completely diverted a just military action (Afghanistan) towards and into a totally unjust and UNNECESSARY WAR in Iraq.

Saddam was not a threat to the USA. Al Qaueda was and is THE THREAT to the USA and nothing we're doing in Iraq will alter this except of course to create MORE TERRORISTS and ENEMIES worldwide.

Bush is a killer, Clinton is a whore. I'll choose the whore over the killer 100% of the time.

 

[Caine]

Why did he lose his Law license?

Did you read the quoted section in my post you responded to?
Obviously not, if you did you wouldn't be asking this... Let me repost this once again....

Source: my original post

on April 12, 1999, Clinton was cited by federal district judge Susan Webber Wright for contempt of court for giving statements that were "intentionally false" under oath in his January 28, 1998 deposition in the Paula Jones lawsuit. As a consequence of this, Clinton was fined $90,000 and the matter was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court and, ultimately, to the U.S. Supreme Court. Later, in January, 2001, Clinton agreed to surrender his law license and to give up his bar membership allowing him to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.......

This answers your question. In fact it had nothing to do with the Lewinsky stuff.
If you don't like my answer, do your own research.
Im certain you'll come up with something different though.

 

[erasamus snoggle]

Long before 'slick willie' klinton ever made it to the national stage, he was regarded as a buffoon by many folks I knew while attending college in Austin, TX. He's a liar, unable to tell the truth even when asked a simple question about smoking pot. Responses could have been: "...it gave me a headache ..." or "...I felt nothing..." or "... I didn't like the effects..." but no, that clown tried to tell people that "... didn't inhale...". One can only hope that his bitch doesn't progress beyond the junior Senator level.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Bill Clinton is a very intelligent man but he is a man of flawed moral character.......He disgraced the office of the presidency worse then any other president in history.........

He should have resigned like Nixon did.......

JFK was a much bigger whore than Clinton yet you never mention this, how come?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Long before 'slick willie' klinton ever made it to the national stage, he was regarded as a buffoon by many folks I knew while attending college in Austin, TX. He's a liar, unable to tell the truthOne can only hope that his bitch doesn't progress beyond the junior Senator level.

President Clinton is considered to be one of the smartest Presidents in our history by people on both sides of the aisle. Never heard that about Bush, have we?

Calling Sen. Clinton "his bitch" explains that you and President Clinton are not on an equal plane when it comes to intelligence and education.