9 years ago today: Clinton Impeached.

redstaterebel · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 128

On the anniversary, I thought I'd ask you distinguished members of the forum what you thought of
impeaching President Clinton?

Me: I was against impeachment - but disgusted by the actions of the president and thought he should have
seen the inside of a courtroom once he left office.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject:

Back during those times I was a full-fledged Clinton-supporter.

Anymore--I think I agree with you on this. He definitely should have seen a courtroom after he left.

redstaterebel · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 128

I agree.

Something had to be done - it was clearly perjury in the Jones suit - and President or not, you
don't get to do that. It could have waited though.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:38 pm Post subject:

It could have waited.

I also wonder if republicans were afraid of being demonized over attacking Clinton any further--or is that where the "liberal media" part that many people try to claim comes into place on this particular issue--any attempt to say anything resulted in media making it look like it was about Monica?

debateman · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 349 Location: New Mexico

If we are going to support legal action against Clinton after he left office, we should support legal action against Bush after he leaves office. Both have abused the public trust. Both have lied.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:16 pm Post subject:

redstaterebel · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 128

Distinctions:

President Clinton lied under oath in court - perjury. A criminal offense. As much as many on the left would like to claim that
he was impeached for getting oral sex from Lewinski - nowhere in the articles of impeachment does it state this. Not even close.
Perjury and obstruction of jusitice - eg: Scooter

He was NOT impeached for the "I did not have sex with that woman ...." a lie on TV - not in court and not under oath. Sure he lied, but
its not against the law to lie - UNLESS you are under oath.

President Bush - I know that the belief on the left is that Bush made up the WMD stories for some reason (steal oil, avenge his father, etc - whatever the reason).
If he did that - sure, I'd be onboard with impeachment and/or criminal proceedings. The problem is that there is 10 years of intelligence from the USA, the UN, England, France, Russia etc which all agreed that the WMD threat was real. Hussein himself had every opportunity to show the world that he was clean. Ever wonder why he didn't? Staring at 300,000 troops in Kuwait? The democrats in congress know better - hence the lack of investigation. I don't know why the intel was so wrong, for so long - or why Hussein chose to give up his country, rather than come clean. Acting on bad intelligence is not a war crime. The fundamental difference is what you think our motive is. Steal oil vs. rid the world of a believed grave threat. Its not imperialism - A year into this, we gave the country back to the Iraqis - like we did in afghanistan. We aren't colonizing Iraq We are not the Nazis marching into Poland for some sinister plot. The instinct is to believe three must be something sinister - a conspiracy (which the democrats have to be in on) - I just don't buy it. There is no motive. If bush knew there were no WMD, why send in David Kaye to look for them - and then allow him to come back and publically show the world that there weren't any? He wouldn't. We thought they were there. The intelligence was wrong - a huge failure on the part of the world's intellignce organizations - it does not change the honorable intentions. Think about this - the left would like to see the President of the United States strung up in defense of a murdering dictator's right to threaten the region, the world, and murder thousands of this own people. WTF?

I'm so SICK of the bush lied crap - we have troops on the ground trying to secure that country so WE CAN GIVE IT BACK and GO HOME. To make it a better place - for Iraqis and for the rest of the world. If we are sticking with the Bush lied conspiracy theory - then its high time to answer some serious questions:

#1. Why are the democrats not investigating - why are they in on it? String them up too?
#2. Why send in David Kaye?
#3. Why not plant WMD?
#4. Why wouldn't hussein come clean? thought we were joking?
#5. May we also string up the former President for bombing them on bad intell?
#6. How/Why did Bush get Britain to go along with his lie? What do they gain?
#7. Spain? Australia? How did he get france to state WMD were there?

For the Bush lied theory to hold - answer those questions and then consider the WORLDWIDE conspiracy that had to have taken place. Heads of state - hostile heads of state - all in on it. Former Presidents and Vice Presidents, The UN - all in on it.

And that concludes my morning Rant. Have a great day.

debateman · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 349 Location: New Mexico