Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The damn liberal media
Author Message
Schadenfreude Offline
Professional Tractor Puller
*

Posts: 9,684
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 256
I Root For: Bowling Green
Location: Colorado

CrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #21
 
Quote:
Quote:Yeah. He perjured himself about a blow job.

His agenda: He didn't want his wife to find out.

I disagree. His agenda was to avoid evidence that would have supported Paula Jones' accuasations. (You stand up for the little guy SF, remember Jones?)

What bearing did anything President Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky have on the Paula Jones case?

We know exactly what happened. Monica Lewinsky hit on President Clinton (by, as I recall, flashing her thong underwear at him). President Clinton decided he liked the opportunity that was presented to him.

The entire affair was consensual. There was not a whit of evidence otherwise. Nothing there had any bearing whatsoever on Paula Jones' accusations.

So, with that in mind, what was Clinton covering up?

A blow job. From his wife.

And this was a threat to our democracy?

Quote:If (and I'm willing to say 'if') Jones' accusations were true, then I think Clinton should have been impeached, kicked out of office, and serving time.

Why?

For one thing, the alleged events didn't happen while Clinton was president.

More importantly, Paula Jones sued Clinton in a civil court. No one in America service time based on the outcome of a civil lawsuit.

Quote:What appalled me is that the media turned this event into a circus about Lewinsky, instead of staying on course.

What appalls me is, despite the millions of dollars poured into investigating Paula Jones' accusations, the impeachment proceeds had nothing at all to do with those accusations.

Quote:
Quote:History will not treat Congress kindly for impeaching Bill Clinton.

We shall see.

Yes, we shall.
06-10-2004 09:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RandyMc Offline
Reverend
*

Posts: 10,612
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 410
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Tiger Town
Post: #22
 
Schadenfreude Wrote:
Quote:
Quote:Yeah. He perjured himself about a blow job.

His agenda: He didn't want his wife to find out.

I disagree. His agenda was to avoid evidence that would have supported Paula Jones' accuasations. (You stand up for the little guy SF, remember Jones?)

What bearing did anything President Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky have on the Paula Jones case?

We know exactly what happened. Monica Lewinsky hit on President Clinton (by, as I recall, flashing her thong underwear at him). President Clinton decided he liked the opportunity that was presented to him.

The entire affair was consensual. There was not a whit of evidence otherwise. Nothing there had any bearing whatsoever on Paula Jones' accusations.

So, with that in mind, what was Clinton covering up?

A blow job. From his wife.

And this was a threat to our democracy?

Quote:If (and I'm willing to say 'if') Jones' accusations were true, then I think Clinton should have been impeached, kicked out of office, and serving time.

Why?

For one thing, the alleged events didn't happen while Clinton was president.

More importantly, Paula Jones sued Clinton in a civil court. No one in America service time based on the outcome of a civil lawsuit.

Quote:What appalled me is that the media turned this event into a circus about Lewinsky, instead of staying on course.

What appalls me is, despite the millions of dollars poured into investigating Paula Jones' accusations, the impeachment proceeds had nothing at all to do with those accusations.

Quote:
Quote:History will not treat Congress kindly for impeaching Bill Clinton.

We shall see.

Yes, we shall.
The man lied and tried to get others to cover up in violation of criminal law. No different than Nixon. Nixon did not know about the Watergate break in prior to it taking place. He messed up in trying to cover it up.

If Clinton had not lied under oath and suborned perjury from others, no impeachment.

Read "Truth at Any Cost: Ken Starr and the Unmaking of Bill Clinton"by Susan Schmidt, Michael Weisskopf. These two Washington Post reporters are not conservative ideologues by any stretch. You will see an even handed account of the way an amoral man gets into the situation of which you try to defend.
06-10-2004 10:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #23
 
Was Kenneth Starr not commissioned by Clinton to investigate him? I really don't see what the liberals have to complain about. Clinton said investigate him and Starr did it. He asked and he received. I wasn't concerned with Monica. I was concerned with selling secrets to the Chinese.
06-10-2004 11:16 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.