PDA

View Full Version : Clinton Was Innocent, According to Right Wing



Gayle in MD
12-23-2007, 09:03 AM
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/impeachment/

<font color="red">According to right wing standards, Bill Clinton did not break any laws, as some here suggest, nor did he lie, since no one went to jail, and he was acquitted of all charges, including perjury and obstruction of justice charges, and was therefore, obviously, by right wing standards, innocent of all charges. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Just thought I'd clear up that right wing lie.

Acquittal n: A setting free from the charge of an offence, by verdict, sentence, or other legal process.

Since our congress set Clinton "Free from the charges" let's hope the somewhat dishonest and on-going accusers from the right, that Clinton lied, will follow suit.

</font color>

Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

LWW
12-23-2007, 09:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/impeachment/

<font color="red">According to right wing standards, Bill Clinton did not break any laws, as some here suggest, nor did he lie, since no one went to jail, and he was acquitted of all charges, including perjury and obstruction of justice charges, and was therefore, obviously, by right wing standards, innocent of all charges. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Just thought I'd clear up that right wing lie.

Acquittal n: A setting free from the charge of an offence, by verdict, sentence, or other legal process.

Since our congress set Clinton "Free from the charges" let's hope the somewhat dishonest and on-going accusers from the right, that Clinton lied, will follow suit.

</font color>

Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

<hr /></blockquote>
As we have all come to know and love you Gayle, you quote something that was based on a lie.

Although Clinton was able to illegally pull FBI files on every member of congress and then blackmail his survival by leaking a few to Larry Flynt, in the end he confessed to the prosecutor to avoid trial and paid a fine and paid $700K to settle the Paula Jones suit and was disbarred which is irrefutable proof that Billy Jeff was guilty right down the line.

Of course, however, you knew that already and we both know that you did. In addition we both know that you continue to run this stuff out because you prefer the lie to the truth.

Merry Christmas.

LWW

wolfdancer
12-23-2007, 03:55 PM
Gayle, after reading this article, I have formed my own "high" opinion re: Paula Jones.

And re: our former great President, William Jefferson Clinton,
it seems from this incident and the Lewinski incident that followed, that the man has an overactive sex drive. Those "offenses" pale in comparison with the "allegations" against the current President.
Bill might have dishonored himself, in the eyes of some; Bush has dishonored the nation in the eyes of the free world.
web page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Jones)

hondo
12-23-2007, 04:35 PM
Clinton said eaten ain't cheaten.
W said beaten ain't cheaten.
Hmmm.

Gayle in MD
12-26-2007, 04:14 PM
Very well said, friend. IMO, the Repubs who launched the witch hunt against Clinton, look pretty silly now. Since they were a bit confused about exactly what high crimes and misdemeanors actually are, Bush has given them a sterling example of them for future reference. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

BTW, did anyone ever ask Reagan why he took the solar panels off the White House roof? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif Just wondering.

Gayle in Md.

LWW
12-26-2007, 06:50 PM
How about asking why George W Bush...PLEASE-PLEASE-PLEASE-GAWD LET A MOONBAT CALL ME ON THIS...has an "OFF-GRID" self sustaining home yet the moonbats fawn all over Saint Albert of Green Acres for his ecological miracle of ONLY using 20 times the power as the average American home and none of it truly "GREEN".


http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/07.03.04.ConspicConsump-X.gif

LWW

bamadog
12-26-2007, 09:53 PM
You're dreamin' if you think any one of them will touch this subject. You have a better chance of getting them to admit that the Dem leadership knew of, and approved, waterboarding five years ago. Good luck.

moblsv
12-26-2007, 11:24 PM
When the Dem leadership falls short in their duties and moral obligations they get, and deserve, our wrath as well. Finding fault in others does not make the treason of the Right any more acceptable.

This isn't a Right vs. Left sporting event or Civil War... yet. If any on the Right were to actually be Conservatives again, and honor their obligations to the Constitution, I might actually vote for some of them again.


As a note on every one of the few posts of yours I bothered to read:
You can go ahead and ignore the facts and pretend that all of this disgust with the current manifestation of the Republican Party is all a bunch of illogical partisan bickering. I couldn't care less what you think. You have proven to me that you do not deserve my respect and are officially on my ignore list along with your leader LWW.

Please don't attempt to talk to me (i.e. troll) again.

wolfdancer
12-26-2007, 11:27 PM
I still believe it was a waste of $100 mil to investigate a private sexual affair...and then have the **** gall to turn around and cry witch hunt over the Gonzales scandal.
And I see you have your usual two detractors trying to mitigate your posts.
I had a dog once that I trained with a leash to follow me around. After awhile I didn't need the leash; he would even salivate when he thought I was leading him somewhere. I think some guy named Pavlov did a study on that.
You didn't even have to leash train them...
you don't suppose that when they see your posts....they drool???
I'm about out of here...it's total insanity dealing with these folks.
LWW makes some wild accusations and I ask him for proof. He says he has the proof but the left can't handle it.
Bama thinks if I reread his posts a second time, that's supposed to validate his accusations. There wasn't anything but more insults in them, the first time around though. (I think they have the same script writer)
And then Lamas thinks I should be called on the carpet for objecting to their trash talking /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
It's f*****G "Loony Tunes" here lately, and I need to take a break....so since you are back here now...if you can entertain these fine folks that AZB sent over for our "enlightenment" for awhile....I'll see you next year!!!

Gayle in MD
12-27-2007, 12:11 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I still believe it was a waste of $100 mil to investigate a private sexual affair...and then have the **** gall to turn around and cry witch hunt over the Gonzales scandal.
<hr /></blockquote>

Absolutely! Republicans have two sets of rules, one for themselves, and quite another for Democratics.

Let's take Eisenhower, for a moment. He was, IMO, a great President. A man of honesty, and integrity in his representation of our Presidency, and our country. He had a mistress, as is well known, and in those days the press, and politicians subscribed to the gentlemen's creed, and nothing was ever mentioned about it. Anyone who would have done so, would have been seen as worse than the person who had the mistress.

The right wing press, Hannity, O'Reilly, Limpballs, Coulter, along with Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, Barr, Delay, and other wide stance, toe tapping, bathroom dwellers in the Republican Party, changed all that. The decency code of privacy was dismantled by them, and now, nothing is sacred. It wasn't long before their own dirty laundry was exposed, O'Reilly harrassing his own young female producer, and she, with the recordings to prove it, Barr, paying for his wife's abortion, with his personal check, yet, after years of bashing those who support women's rights of choice in their private, personal matters. Gingrich, who had his own mistress, the current Mrs. Gingrich, (and who dumped his wife for the younger woman, as she lay in a hospital bed, recouperating from cancer surgery) the whole time he was bashing Clinton, and Limpballs, with his illegal drug activity, and addiction. I guess what goes around, comes around, huh?

MYOB, is the appropriate guiding principle as regards other people's marriages, personal choices, and sexual preferences and affairs, IMO. I'll never understand why people can't just stay out of things that are none of their business.

The neocons brought the term, "Dirty Politics" to a whole new level.

Gayle in Md.

Sid_Vicious
12-27-2007, 12:23 AM
Bill C. had the best economy the country's seen, and the right shut down the country for a stain on a dress, WHILE today they condone Bush being a complete obstructor of justice and being a complete idiot, all the while ALLOWING American soldiers to die for his own ego. Bill Clinton was perfect compared to Bush...sid

Gayle in MD
12-27-2007, 12:37 AM
Absolutely. Clinton was a great president. He's a brilliant man, and he did a fine job for the country. His greatest sin was beating Bush Sr., and for that, the Republicans wanted blood. Poor losers that they are, they ultimately cost Americans a fortune, and weakened his presidency, damaging the support Clinton needed in order to get bin Laden, and al Qaeda.

When one assesses our serious problems, from dependency on foreign oil, our loss of respect around the world, our cirtical problems with illegal aliens, and the increased volitility of the Middle East, they are all results of Republican policies, from Reagan, to Bush, and Bush. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

LWW
12-27-2007, 06:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bamadog:</font><hr> You're dreamin' if you think any one of them will touch this subject. You have a better chance of getting them to admit that the Dem leadership knew of, and approved, waterboarding five years ago. Good luck. <hr /></blockquote>
I knows thet Dawg ... but az rood az thay haz bin to uz I justs gotts to rubb day nozez in day own cowardice.

LWW

LWW
12-27-2007, 06:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> When the Dem leadership falls short in their duties and moral obligations they get, and deserve, our wrath as well. Finding fault in others does not make the treason of the Right any more acceptable.<hr /></blockquote>
Cite for me some examples then please please please.

How about Hillary being voted the most corrupt politician in America ... satill accepting ChiCom money even after her husband sole US missile tech to them, which apparently they then shipped to NK?

How an=bout John Conyers being voted in at #2 and his using public servants to babysit his kids, mow his grass, and numerous other personal scandals?

Did Feinstein at #4 bother you?
As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on military construction, Feinstein reviewed military construction government contracts, some of which were ultimately awarded to URS Corporation and Perini, companies then owned by Feinstein's husband, Richard Blum. While the Pentagon ultimately awards military contracts, there is a reason for the review process. The Senate's subcommittee on Military Construction's approval carries weight. Sen. Feinstein, therefore, likely had influence over the decision making process. Senator Feinstein also attempted to undermine ethics reform in 2007, arguing in favor of a perk that allows members of Congress to book multiple airline flights and then cancel them without financial penalty.

How about Harry Reid's numerous land scandals?

What about Pelosi and waterboarding?

If you can show me where ANY OF YOU complai\ned about ANY OF THAT please let me know.

Dawg, hold my buck, I'm betting they can't.

Next issue.

LWW

LWW
12-27-2007, 06:07 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> I still believe it was a waste of $100 mil to investigate a private sexual affair...<hr /></blockquote>
So would I. Of course, you know that's not the case but prefer the lie.

The investigation of why Gonzales legally fired the USAG's was political barf if there ever was.

Got a list of indictments that came out of that handy?

LWW

LWW
12-27-2007, 06:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Absolutely! Republicans have two sets of rules, one for themselves, and quite another for Democratics.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>
And finally we agree. The R's should have tried Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Rockefeller, and others for sedition while they held the majority.

A nation suffers from the cowardice of one over the criminality of the other.

LWW