Bill Clinton was Impeached

steverino said:
Clinton lied, and let Osama hide.
While Monica kneeled, Al-Qaeda wheeled and dealed.
Hillary screamed, and we may again, in '08, get reamed...
...by Clinton who lied.
Click to expand...
But this one is just silly (and given your Steve Allen reference , pathetic.) By the by, if you really believe that crap you wrote (as did someone else here) I suggest you look at exactly how the republicans played games and tied Clintons' hands during that time so he could not go after Osama/al Queerda. And think about why some (rather large number) of us hate Bush and his butt lickers rather than just disagree with them. There are reasons and they are rational ones.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Did I say that? No. He was impeached for trying to get out of it, which was dishonest and, far worse, impolite to the lady. If someone's nice enough to blow you, the least you can do is not go on camera and call her "that woman". It was intolerably rude. But not very many people died over it. Congress didn't even care enough to go beyond impeachment.

My point is that it's over with. If someone wants to make a big deal about honesty on the part of the president, well, shouldn't they be busy hounding Bush? He's still in office, at least. Why bother beating what is a thoroughly dead and decayed horse?
Click to expand...

I wasn't addressing you or any comment you have made. In fact, I've only read the title post until I came back to see the replies to my own thread.

It seems that on more than one occasion I've read flippant comments on this forum that misrepresented why he was impeached. I just consider it an ignorance vs information issue myself. Not many people have actually read the Starr report or know what charges Bill Clinton was impeached for.

When I see the flippant responses about the blowjob impeachment and such I usually shake my head and just pity the ignorant fools making those responses, this was my post about my frustration at the ignorance I see about it.

Mind you, the original poster is no doubt in my mind a right wing person who means to set out and shine light on this ignorance. However, I have the suspicion that political belief is much like religious belief and he is wasteing his time.
 
corplinx said:
It seems that on more than one occasion I've read flippant comments on this forum that misrepresented why he was impeached. I just consider it an ignorance vs information issue myself. Not many people have actually read the Starr report or know what charges Bill Clinton was impeached for.
Click to expand...

Speaking of things very few people have read, it's also worth noting that very few people have actually read the articles of impeachment. Trivia fact that almost everyone missed: There were four articles of impeachment. Two of them failed in the House of Representatives because they were incredibly, blatantly, ridiculous. Nevertheless, the GOP leadership put them forward. They were so out of touch with reality that they couldn't see how ridiculous they were.

Another trivia fact that illustrates the politics of the Clinton impeachment comes from looking at the votes that were called on the day of impeachment. Democrats wanted a censure resolution. The House leadership refused to allow a vote on it. Why?

One possibility is that the censure resolution was an extra-constitutional effort, unrelated to the actual criminal events which had allegedly occurred. These men of principle refused to let such a resolution be introduced, because the mere introduction of such legislation would be a mockery of the Constitution, and Newt Gingrich, Bill Archer, and Tom Delay were men of such high standards that they simply could not let such a travesty occur on their watch.

I, for one, think we can dismiss that possibility.

For one thing, even if they believed that, that would be a good reason to vote against a censure resolution, but it wouldn't be a good reason to block a vote on it. If it were really all that bad, it wouldn't pass, and they could move on. Why block the vote?

They blocked it for a simple reason. They knew it would pass.

They knew that most representatives wanted to be on record as condemning the President's behavior, but they didn't really believe he ought to be impeached for it. If the leadership allowed them any opportunity to express their displeasure on the record, the leadership knew that the articles of impeachment would be voted down. So, in a blatantly political move, they drew a line in the sand at impeachment, or nothing.
 
Bill Thompson said:
Let's call it like it is. He was not impeached because of the sex (or near-sex). He was impeached because he and Vernon Jordon had asked Monica to lie to Paula Jones' lawyers. That is crimal. That is obstruction of Justice in Paula Jones sexual harassment suit. Bill Clinton is a criminal.
Click to expand...

Seeing as how Clinton was never charged with a crime by any competent jurisdiction, how even sustaining the Articles of Impeachment would not have been a conviction of a crime, and how the Articles of Impeachment were not sustained in any case, there are no grounds for calling Bill Clinton a criminal. He has not been found guilty, let alone charged, of any crime.

Now, if you have any intellectual curiosity about the subject, you would read The Hunting of the President and learn just what a small group of Republicans did for no reason other than political distaste.
 
I think president bush could kill puppies for fun on national tv and someone would still say clinton was worse. its crazy to even bring it up at this point.
 
Bill? Have you slipped through a wormhole from 1996 or something? Are you wearing Eddie Bauer and awaiting the next Ace of Base single?
 
fuelair said:
But this one is just silly (and given your Steve Allen reference , pathetic.) By the by, if you really believe that crap you wrote (as did someone else here) I suggest you look at exactly how the republicans played games and tied Clintons' hands during that time so he could not go after Osama/al Queerda. And think about why some (rather large number) of us hate Bush and his butt lickers rather than just disagree with them. There are reasons and they are rational ones.
Click to expand...

I just thought I was being funny turning the meanings around. I don't know why you have to be so uncivil and impolite about it. I also don't really know anything about a Steve Allen whatever you call it. He was a talk show host with big glasses before Carson I think, and he had Kerouac on and took LSD. Not sure what else I know about him.
 
nails said:
I think president bush could kill puppies for fun on national tv and someone would still say clinton was worse. its crazy to even bring it up at this point.
Click to expand...

Ironically Nails it was Bill Clinton whose puppy was killed while under his care, but nor under his supervision.
 

Attachments

  • story2.buddy.jpg
    story2.buddy.jpg
    8.4 KB · Views: 182
Loss Leader said:
Seeing as how Clinton was never charged with a crime by any competent jurisdiction, how even sustaining the Articles of Impeachment would not have been a conviction of a crime, and how the Articles of Impeachment were not sustained in any case, there are no grounds for calling Bill Clinton a criminal. He has not been found guilty, let alone charged, of any crime.

Now, if you have any intellectual curiosity about the subject, you would read The Hunting of the President and learn just what a small group of Republicans did for no reason other than political distaste.
Click to expand...

Sexual Harassment is a crime. The fact that the Clintons had the means to perform some crafty legal maneuvering does not diminish the seriousness of the crime. Telling Monica Lewinsky to lie to Paula Jones' lawyers is also a crime. The fact that you can settle out of court, find legal loopholes, and avoid conviction does not magically change your status as a criminal. A criminal is one who commits crimes. A criminal is not always convicted.

I will put your suggested book on my list. But your logic sounds like wishful thinking to me.
 
Bill Thompson said:
Sexual Harassment is a crime.
Click to expand...

Was he convicted of sexual harassment?

Bill Thompson said:
The fact that the Clintons
Click to expand...

Don't you mean Bill Clinton?

Bill Thompson said:
had the means to perform some crafty legal maneuvering does not diminish the seriousness of the crime.
Click to expand...

You mean Bill Clinton had the law changed?

Bill Thompson said:
....snip...
The fact that you can settle out of court, find legal loopholes, and avoid conviction does not magically change your status as a criminal. A criminal is one who commits crimes. A criminal is not always convicted.

...snip...
Click to expand...

Do you not believe in the USA principle of innocent until proved guilty?
 
no, socks went on to have a homosexual affair with bill the cat.

(actually he was taken in by betty currie)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom