- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: True or false. GOP impeachment of Clinton
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:51 pm to ApexTiger
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:51 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
But again he committed perjury about being with Monica...
If you understand that the context of the questions about Monica were related to the impending sexual assault investigation stemming from Paula Jones’ deposition, you know the two are very correlated. Questions about Clinton’s behavior towards Lewinsky would help supplement Paula Jones’ account of the behavior directed towards her. All Clinton had to do was be honest about it. Everyone in America knew he was sleeping around.
0
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:53 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Did you have a point
Yes I did...that lying under oath about adultery isn't the same as lying under oath for murdering someone...
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:55 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
perpetual tic for tac
tit for tat?
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:55 pm to ApexTiger
You're witnessing a level of hate that heretofore ("modern era") has not been seen, nor been acted upon with such disregard....disregard for everything that makes any sense.
Sorta like a jilted ex-lover who is acting in an irrational way previously thought impossible.
Sorta like a jilted ex-lover who is acting in an irrational way previously thought impossible.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:56 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
Yes I did...that lying under oath about adultery isn't the same as lying under oath for murdering someone...
So then lying under oath should only be a crime in certain circumstances? Why should the President follow a different set of laws than any other American?
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:58 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
But again he committed perjury about being with Monica...
I'm not excusing the "crime"...but how many would lie in the same circumstances if you're POTUS? I would not...but I'm also not a cheater
He could have settled the lawsuit but he chose to commit perjury. (And that actually has the stink of Hillary all over it. Bill knew he could have bit his lip and apologized and survived the political hit. She's the one determined to destroy anyone in her path.)
But in hindsight, SCOTUS made a terrible decision in allowing the Jones case to go forward while he was in office. Their reasoning was based on the premise that it wouldn't be a major distraction. Ha ha.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 7:59 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
Yes I did...that lying under oath about adultery isn't the same as lying under oath for murdering someone...
Perjury is perjury, sorry. It doesn’t matter if it is about adultery, murder, or tiddlywinks. False testimony under oath is a felony, period.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:00 pm to shinerfan
quote:
But in hindsight, SCOTUS made a terrible decision in allowing the Jones case to go forward while he was in office.
I completely agree. The whole thing was politically motivated from the start and stunk. But once Clinton lied to a federal grand jury about something as trivial to a President’s duties as adultery, he deserved impeachment.
This post was edited on 1/29/20 at 8:03 pm
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:01 pm to ApexTiger
Yes, the Clinton impeachment set the precedent for the current shite show. The full on polarization of American politics is a de facto civil war. It may escalate to armed combat if one of the parties actually manages to overthrow a sitting president. It has gotten that rotten.
Oh, and it’s tit for tat, not tic for tac.
Oh, and it’s tit for tat, not tic for tac.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:01 pm to shinerfan
I believe he was also accused of obstruction of justice in that he was alleged to have coached his WH secretary to say or not say certain things in response to inquiries about the Monica situation. That's a bit more egregious in my mind.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:06 pm to troyt37
quote:
Perjury is perjury, sorry. It doesn’t matter if it is about adultery, murder, or tiddlywinks. False testimony under oath is a felony, period.
should both carry the same penalty or sentence?
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:07 pm to ApexTiger
quote:Democrsts won a majority in the house.
Why did Congress get to this point of total disfunction?
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:11 pm to ApexTiger
quote:Then you failed. They are the same. There is no exception in purjury law for lying about.... anything.
s I did...that lying under oath about adultery isn't the same as lying under oath for murdering someone...
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:12 pm to davyjones
quote:
I believe he was also accused of obstruction of justice in that he was alleged to have coached his WH secretary to say or not say certain things in response to inquiries about the Monica situation.
Yes, that and instructing Monica to lie under oath as well, while she was at the time a government employee, would assert that the President directly, explicitly, and expressly used the authority of his office to impede a federal investigation. That is textbook obstruction of justice.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:12 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
over his sexual sins in the oval office are why we have endless investigations and division?
No. Watergate is. And if not, Iran-Contra is.
Dersh is right - the changes to the law following Watergate weaponized impeachment, by making the independent/special counsel answerable to the House of Representatives.
Say whatever else you want about the Clinton impeachment - they identified clearly criminal conduct for which any other executive branch "supervisor" would be fired. Maybe impeachment was a bazooka to kill a mosquito in that case, but at least that one was arguable.
This one was purely due to policy differences/House Dems' intense dislike for the President.
Not a subtle difference IMHO.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:12 pm to ApexTiger
quote:They do.
should both carry the same penalty or sentence?
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:13 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
should both carry the same penalty or sentence?
Was anyone talking about throwing Billy Jeff in a Washington DC prison? No? Then they don’t, do they? He should have received the incredibly light sentence of losing his job.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:15 pm to ApexTiger
quote:Shoot Schiff between the eyes?
How do we move forward?
Works for me!!
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:21 pm to ApexTiger
quote:That's honestly pretty easy.
Why did Congress get to this point of total disfunction?
The left really believed the "demographics is destiny" rhetoric. Forget Trump. They didn't think they had the remotest chance in hell of losing in 2016 to ANYONE.
They were chomping at the bit to FINALLY get all their leftist wet dreams.
And Trump fricked it up.
We're talking about people who basically laughed at their opponents as they used the IRS against them. We're talking about a party who leaked Romney's tax returns and then, almost bragged about it while mocking their opponents.
What you need to recognize is that to Democrats, they ARE the government. That's why they can saw with a straight face something as absurd as "Trump went against uS foreign policy"...………..they literally think the GOVERNMENT and their cronies are superior to the President of the United States in his constitutional duties.
Posted on 1/29/20 at 8:21 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Dersh is right - the changes to the law following Watergate weaponized impeachment, by making the independent/special counsel answerable to the House of Representatives.
Say whatever else you want about the Clinton impeachment - they identified clearly criminal conduct for which any other executive branch "supervisor" would be fired. Maybe impeachment was a bazooka to kill a mosquito in that case, but at least that one was arguable.
This one was purely due to policy differences/House Dems' intense dislike for the President.
Not a subtle difference IMHO.
Agreed. I heard Derch talk about the law after Nixon.
When we compare what the democrats pulled off in broad daylight investigating trump for 22 months with the actions and deeds of what Nixon did because he didn't trust what the democrats were up to.
... it's just remarkable Nixon was forced to resign while the democrats get to keep rolling on with their destuction.
They literally fought the president of the United States on funding a border wall...
Isn't that against our national security interests?
"We can't afford a wall and it won't work"
Contrast that rhetoric with.
"Ukraine soldiers died while Trump held aid"
Incredible what Democrats say on TV
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News