NationStates Jolt Archive

Hillary and Bill have zero room to bitch.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- White House spokesman Tony Snow fired back at former President Bill Clinton after Clinton charged that the Bush administration believes the law is a "minor obstacle" in the "Scooter" Libby case.

"I don't know what Arkansan is for chutzpah, but this is a gigantic case of it," Snow told reporters in an off-camera briefing Wednesday.

Webster's New World dictionary defines chutzpah as "shameless audacity; imprudence; brass."

President Bush on Monday spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from federal prison, commuting his 30-month sentence for perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to federal agents investigating the 2003 exposure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson.

Bush left a $250,000 fine and two-year probation intact, but he left the door open to a pardon, which would clear Libby's record.

"You've got to understand, this is consistent with (Bush administration) philosophy," Clinton said during an interview on Des Moines news-talk station WHO.

Bush administration officials, he said, "believe that they should be able to do what they want to do, and that the law is a minor obstacle." Video Watch Bill Clinton sound off on Bush's decision »

In an op-ed piece in USA Today on Wednesday, Snow defended Bush's action, charging that Clinton was "in a mad rush to push through pardons with dizzying haste -- 141 grants on Clinton's final day in office, part of 211 in the final nine weeks."

Clinton's flurry of last-minute pardons issued as he left office in 2001 -- particularly his absolution of fugitive financier Marc Rich -- sparked largely partisan outrage. Critics alleged that the pardon of Rich was linked to contributions raised for Clinton's presidential library by Rich's ex-wife.

Libby's defenders have pointed to Democratic support for Clinton during that period to accuse critics of Bush's commutation order of hypocrisy.

Asked by a reporter if he was asserting that "two wrongs make a right," Snow said: "Do we feel we've done wrong? Do we feel we cut corners? The answer is no."

Snow also said the White House feels it is on safe legal ground in contending that Libby will serve two years of probation, despite questions now being raised by Judge Reggie Walton, who issued an order Tuesday suggesting Libby cannot serve any probation since he never served any prison time before the commutation.

"Strictly construed, the statute authorizing the imposition of supervised release indicates that such release should occur only after the defendant has already served a term of imprisonment," Walton wrote.

After first suggesting he wasn't sure, Snow said White House counsel Fred Fielding had "absolutely" checked on this question before the president signed off on the commutation.
advertisement

"The White House did not make a misstep," he said. Despite the certainty expressed by Snow, he did add that there's some "gray area in the law."

Asked about the plan of House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Michigan, to probe the Libby commutation, Snow snapped that the congressman should "knock himself out," but also probe the slew of pardons granted at the end of the Clinton administration.

I have to ask Carnivorous' question then post my reply.

If Bill Clinton jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?

They might, just so the survivors can bitch about how many Republicans Clinton killed or injured.

I haven't gone through the list, but I wonder how many of Clinton's pardons were given to members of his own administration who were party to treason.

Just curious. :p

ALL politicians are crooked regardless of which party they represent..its just plain sad that of all the dems to make a roar over it... its the Clinton's...they both just continuously put their feet in their mouth's..exactly why there wont be a Clinton in white house in 08...

In an op-ed piece in USA Today on Wednesday, Snow defended Bush's action, charging that Clinton was "in a mad rush to push through pardons with dizzying haste -- 141 grants on Clinton's final day in office, part of 211 in the final nine weeks."

As if "he did it, so I can too!" was a defense.

ALL politicians are crooked regardless of which party they represent..its just plain sad that of all the dems to make a roar over it... its the Clinton's...they both just continuously put their feet in their mouth's..exactly why there wont be a Clinton in white house in 08...

I just got a mental image of Bill & Hillary putting their feet into each other's mouths! :eek: :D

I haven't gone through the list, but I wonder how many of Clinton's pardons were given to members of his own administration who were party to treason.

Just curious. :p

Which definition of treason would we be going by? Webster's dictionary definition or Ann Coulter's?

I haven't gone through the list, but I wonder how many of Clinton's pardons were given to members of his own administration who were party to treason.

Just curious. :p

MSNBC already checked this for you, while debunking other claims made about the Libby commutation. The answer, apparently, is none.

Not one of the pardons granted by Clinton was given to a member of his own staff who had been convicted of breaking the law while doing Clinton's or Gore's bidding. Also, I do not believe any of Clinton's pardons were granted before the convicted person had actually started serving his sentence, nor while the appeals process was still going on.

Granted, many of Clinton's last minute flurry of pardons were bad ones, imo, especially the Mark Rich pardon, but Mark Rich was not working for Clinton at the time he was pardoned, nor at the time he committed his crime, the "allegations" against the Clinton's notwithstanding.

I saw the MSNBC report about this last week. Here is a link. It's not direct. Scroll down to the bottom to find a link to a video called "Truthsquadding the Libby decision." I think this is the same one, but if not, I apologize (didn't stop to watch it again; I wish they'd just post transcripts of these things). I tried to link direct, but for some reason it didn't work, though it worked when I clicked it on the MSNBC page.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19588942/from/RS.4/

Which definition of treason would we be going by? Webster's dictionary definition or Ann Coulter's?

If we go by Ann Coulter's I think most of us on NS better hide from the stormtroopers who are coming for us. :p

I just got a mental image of Bill & Hillary putting their feet into each other's mouths! :eek: :D

Foot fetishist.

who cares what clinton thinks anyway. i loved him as a president, but now that hes out, does anyone listen to him anymore?

who cares what clinton thinks anyway. i loved him as a president, but now that hes out, does anyone listen to him anymore?

Ever since he was elected President, Bill Clinton always has been and always will be the Busheviks' favorite bogeyman scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in the country and why Dear Leader isn't an incompetent fratboy who bankrupted three companies and now is trying for the United States.

Ever since he was elected President, Bill Clinton always has been and always will be the Busheviks' favorite bogeyman scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in the country and why Dear Leader isn't an incompetent fratboy who bankrupted three companies and now is trying for the United States.

Never let a cheerleader lead anything. It always gets fucked.


That joke is in its infant stages. It'll mature when I take it on the road.

Never let a cheerleader lead anything. It always gets fucked.


That joke is in its infant stages. It'll mature when I take it on the road.

I dunno, pretty appropriate as it is.

:D

Ever since he was elected President, Bill Clinton always has been and always will be the Busheviks' favorite bogeyman scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in the country and why Dear Leader isn't an incompetent fratboy who bankrupted three companies and now is trying for the United States.

and the same ploy will be used by the fanatical supporters of the next president...

"it's not [obama/hillary/whomever's] fault, it's all on the Shrub's shoulders. :rolleyes:

and the same ploy will be used by the fanatical supporters of the next president...

"it's not [obama/hillary/whomever's] fault, it's all on the Shrub's shoulders. :rolleyes:

Well, you gotta let that slide if the issue is about this stupid war.

Well, you gotta let that slide if the issue is about this stupid war.
not really. after all, each of these candidates has "a better plan" for the war, and should the situation not improve on their watch... you'll see them all opening that first envelope. ;)

not really. after all, each of these candidates has "a better plan" for the war, and should the situation not improve on their watch... you'll see them all opening that first envelope. ;)

Even if the President never voted for the war in the first place like Obama?

You really think that him saying that Bush fucked up on the war is not fair?

edit: or maybe ' not fair' isn't the right way to put it. Rather, do yous ee it as the same thing as sayign well Clinton did it...

Only if Obama started the war perhaps but dealing with the last presidents mess doesn't compare in my mind.

I just got a mental image of Bill & Hillary putting their feet into each other's mouths! :eek: :D

Im glad someone took it humorously...:D

not really. after all, each of these candidates has "a better plan" for the war, and should the situation not improve on their watch... you'll see them all opening that first envelope. ;)

It depends on what you see as an improvement.

Even if the President never voted for the war in the first place like Obama? yep.

You really think that him saying that Bush fucked up on the war is not fair?

edit: or maybe ' not fair' isn't the right way to put it. Rather, do you see it as the same thing as saying well Clinton did it...
Didn't say if it was fair or not, just that it will be said by the fanatical supporters of the new President.

Yes, even if that new President happens to be a Republican. ;)

Only if Obama started the war perhaps but dealing with the last presidents mess doesn't compare in my mind. it won't matter. If people will only see that the situation hasn't improved they will still blame the current administration. And may the PTB help him/her if s/he 'whines' on camera how the situation isn't his/her fault.

Public opinion is a fickle thing. ;)

It depends on what you see as an improvement. true, and it's not just 'me' but the majority of people.

What I find very funny is that Libby was Rich's lawyer. What a small world...

Never let a cheerleader lead anything. It always gets fucked.


That joke is in its infant stages. It'll mature when I take it on the road.

I resent that comment.

What I find very funny is that Libby was Rich's lawyer. What a small world...

That's rather interesting.
.....
....*snrg*
.........:D
*dies of laughter*

As if "he did it, so I can too!" was a defense.

Too bad they didn't try that in Nuremberg eh? The Americans might have pardoned the whole lot.

I just got a mental image of Bill & Hillary putting their feet into each other's mouths! :eek: :D

I saw video footage of a woman taking the Goatse treatment with a foot once.
Then came the clapping.
:eek:

Never let a cheerleader lead anything. It always gets fucked.


That joke is in its infant stages. It'll mature when I take it on the road.
Ooh! Ooh! HAND PUPPETS!

If we go by Ann Coulter's I think most of us on NS better hide from the stormtroopers who are coming for us. :p

95% of the United States Citizens would be hung, if we go by hers. Of course, actually treasonous criminals would be in the clear, but meh.

Ooh! Ooh! HAND PUPPETS!

...

at least the hand will be going through in the proper... direction... :D

What I find very funny is that Libby was Rich's lawyer. What a small world...

One of those happy little coincidences. :)

One of those happy little coincidences. :)

>.>


<.<


or... is it...

O.O'

I have to ask Carnivorous' question then post my reply.

If Bill Clinton jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?

They might, just so the survivors can bitch about how many Republicans Clinton killed or injured.

Bill Clinton, President of the United States in 1999 grants clemency to 16 members of a Puerto Rican terrorist group who had perpetrated 130 bombings, including one that killed four people at a New York City tavern.

Bill Clinton was a perverted idiot:upyours:

Bill Clinton, President of the United States in 1999 grants clemency to 16 members of a Puerto Rican terrorist group who had perpetrated 130 bombings, including one that killed four people at a New York City tavern.
And there goes Remote Observer flying off the bridge...
*next day*
Hannity: And yesterday there was the tragic killing of a good, intelligent Republican by Bill Clinton after Clinton goaded him into jumping off a bridge by doing the same himself. This is a travesty that Clinton goes around killing off all of these good Republican people. What do you think Anne?
Coulter: This just goes to show that liberals hate America and Bill Clinton is a treasonous terrorist.
Hannity: Thanks Anne.

Bill Clinton was a perverted idiot:upyours:

Wow. Thanks for contributing less than nothing.

It seems awfully quick-triggered to commute a sentence that hadn't even begun to be served yet [please do not try to parse that last sentence, your head will explode].

If none of Clinton's pardonees were in fact convicted of anything relating to Clinton when they pardoned, then Tony Snow hasn't got a leg to stand on...a position not wholly unfamiliar to him.

Wow. Thanks for contributing less than nothing.

It seems awfully quick-triggered to commute a sentence that hadn't even begun to be served yet [please do not try to parse that last sentence, your head will explode].

If none of Clinton's pardonees were in fact convicted of anything relating to Clinton when they pardoned, then Tony Snow hasn't got a leg to stand on...a position not wholly unfamiliar to him.

no problem, I love contributing :D

MSNBC already checked this for you, while debunking other claims made about the Libby commutation. The answer, apparently, is none.

Not one of the pardons granted by Clinton was given to a member of his own staff who had been convicted of breaking the law while doing Clinton's or Gore's bidding. Also, I do not believe any of Clinton's pardons were granted before the convicted person had actually started serving his sentence, nor while the appeals process was still going on.

Granted, many of Clinton's last minute flurry of pardons were bad ones, imo, especially the Mark Rich pardon, but Mark Rich was not working for Clinton at the time he was pardoned, nor at the time he committed his crime, the "allegations" against the Clinton's notwithstanding.

I saw the MSNBC report about this last week. Here is a link. It's not direct. Scroll down to the bottom to find a link to a video called "Truthsquadding the Libby decision." I think this is the same one, but if not, I apologize (didn't stop to watch it again; I wish they'd just post transcripts of these things). I tried to link direct, but for some reason it didn't work, though it worked when I clicked it on the MSNBC page.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19588942/from/RS.4/

Thank you, Muravyets and MSNBC. :)

Thank you, Muravyets and MSNBC. :)
Thank you, Bill Clinton, for pardoning murderers...

Oh, and thanks for the reciprocal donation and pardon of Marc Rich.

Thank you, Bill Clinton, for pardoning murderers...

Oh, and thanks for the reciprocal donation and pardon of Marc Rich.

Ah, the strangled cries of the recently fact-slapped.

Thank you, Bill Clinton, for pardoning murderers...

Oh, and thanks for the reciprocal donation and pardon of Marc Rich.

*munches on a taco*

*burp* Pardon me. :)

Ah, the strangled cries of the recently fact-slapped.

Let's see... Bill was convicted of perjury... over a sex scandal. Libby was convicted of perjury... over something he had no idea Richard Armitage did (and, to be short, was not a crime since she wasn't an operative at the time of the outing - otherwise, Armitage would have been charged with a crime).

So, Bill gets away with no punishment... Seems fair to me that Libby gets a 250,000 fine.

If I were Libby, I would sue Armitage in civil court.

Let's see... Bill was convicted of perjury... over a sex scandal. Libby was convicted of perjury... over something he had no idea Richard Armitage did (and, to be short, was not a crime since she wasn't an operative at the time of the outing - otherwise, Armitage would have been charged with a crime).

So, Bill gets away with no punishment... Seems fair to me that Libby gets a 250,000 fine.

If I were Libby, I would sue Armitage in civil court.
Oh God, he is on a bungee cord attached to the bridge.

Oh God, he is on a bungee cord attached to the bridge.

You still believe this "outing" was orchestrated by the White House, when it's clearly something Armitage did on his own?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Time for your medication - your paranoia is up...

Let's see... Bill was convicted of perjury... over a sex scandal. Libby was convicted of perjury... over something he had no idea Richard Armitage did (and, to be short, was not a crime since she wasn't an operative at the time of the outing - otherwise, Armitage would have been charged with a crime).

So, Bill gets away with no punishment... Seems fair to me that Libby gets a 250,000 fine.

If I were Libby, I would sue Armitage in civil court.

ANd here we see a glimpse into an alternate reality. This alternate reality differs from actual reality on several key points. First and foremost, apparently in this alternate reality, Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury. While in actual reality, Bill Clinton was not even charged with a crime(since he would have to be removed from office before he could be).

Second, apparently in this reality, Scooter Libby had no idea that when he perjured himself and obstructed justice it didn't help. So since he broke the law for no good reason, it shouldn't count. ;)

But I have yet to find an alternate reality where all water is mud. :(

ANd here we see a glimpse into an alternate reality. This alternate reality differs from actual reality on several key points. First and foremost, apparently in this alternate reality, Bill Clinton was convicted of perjury. While in actual reality, Bill Clinton was not even charged with a crime(since he would have to be removed from office before he could be).

Second, apparently in this reality, Scooter Libby had no idea that when he perjured himself and obstructed justice it didn't help. So since he broke the law for no good reason, it shouldn't count. ;)

But I have yet to find an alternate reality where all water is mud. :(

Since there wasn't a crime to begin with, he shouldn't have been charged to begin with.

Perjury is only important when there's a crime being covered up.

Armitage did the "crime" which turned out to be perfectly legal, given Plame's non-operative status.

So, why, if there's no crime, is there an investigation? Mmm?

Same for the US attorney investigation - it's not illegal to fire the US attorneys for ANY reason - even a political one (which is common).

So why the hearings? Well, here in this town, the only charge that ever sticks is perjury - sooner or later, someone's testimony may not match up with someone else - then you can claim "oh! a crime!"

But there isn't a crime... so why is there an investigation?

Pure mudslinging politics...

Hope you're happy with that sort of thing, instead of having your Congress actually do something that they promised to do...

I have to ask Carnivorous' question then post my reply.

If Bill Clinton jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?

They might, just so the survivors can bitch about how many Republicans Clinton killed or injured.
That was my question, champ.

You still believe this "outing" was orchestrated by the White House, when it's clearly something Armitage did on his own?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Time for your medication - your paranoia is up...
Don't you have a KKK meeting to go to? Maybe a mosque to go spray swastikas on with your skinhead or neo nazi buddies?

That was my question, champ.
I knew it was a C name.

Bill Clinton, President of the United States in 1999 grants clemency to 16 members of a Puerto Rican terrorist group who had perpetrated 130 bombings, including one that killed four people at a New York City tavern.

Doesn't answer it.

Doesn't almost every president pardon a whole bunch of people right before they leave office? And Bush has a year left, and if I remember right, he's already pardoned almost as many people as Clinton.

And, as for Clinton pardoning murderers, let's see who Bush has pardoned:

Donald Lee Pendergrass (1964 armed bank robbery)
Joseph William Warner (1995 arson on an Indian reservation)

There are others, of course. But what I found interesting is a lot of the people he's pardoned are drug dealers, mostly those who dealt marijuana or cocaine. And moonshiners, that's also a big group he's pardoned. And in the middle of his precious War on Drugs too. Wonder why that is.

Don't you have a KKK meeting to go to? Maybe a mosque to go spray swastikas on with your skinhead or neo nazi buddies?

More falsehoods, eh?

Still can't prove that Bush or Cheney orchestrated the outing, eh?

Still can't unprove that Armitage, by his own admission, "outed" Plame?

Still can't prove that outing Plame was illegal, eh? Since it was perfectly legal, given her non-operative status...

Keep clutching at straws.

BTW, I couldn't join the KKK if I wanted to, because I'm not white...

More falsehoods, eh?

Still can't prove that Bush or Cheney orchestrated the outing, eh?

Still can't unprove that Armitage, by his own admission, "outed" Plame?

Still can't prove that outing Plame was illegal, eh? Since it was perfectly legal, given her non-operative status...

Keep clutching at straws.
Clutching at straws? Give me a break. The Republicans, and every other rightwinger, are all clasping at a single straw and it says "Bill Clinton" on it.
I should be a political cartoonist, you people make it "All too easy."

BTW, I couldn't join the KKK if I wanted to, because I'm not white...Sure you arn't. If you don't know what race you are, you are white.

Sure you arn't. If you don't know what race you are, you are white.

So, if your skin is brown, but you don't know where you're from, you're white? I'll have to remember that.

So, if your skin is brown, but you don't know where you're from, you're white? I'll have to remember that.
There are only so many ethnicities with brown skin.

Sure you arn't. If you don't know what race you are, you are white.

Funny, Koreans don't look white, and aren't accepted as whites.

But don't let that detail bore you...

Hope you're happy with that sort of thing, instead of having your Congress actually do something that they promised to do...

I've gotten used to it over the last twelve years. :)

Oh, and if there was no crime, then why did Scooter feel a need to lie under oath in order to obstruct the investigation?

Funny, Koreans don't look white, and aren't accepted as whites.

But don't let that detail bore you...
So Asian people don't know they are Asian? Interesting.

Bill Clinton, President of the United States in 1999 grants clemency to 16 members of a Puerto Rican terrorist group who had perpetrated 130 bombings, including one that killed four people at a New York City tavern.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9909/08/faln.clemency.01/

And of course you jump to hyperbole as always in defense of Dear Leader.

None of the 16 at the heart of the clemency offer was convicted in any of the bombings. They were convicted on a variety of charges, ranging from bomb-making and conspiracy to armed robbery, and given sentences ranging from 35 to 90 years. The activists already have served between 14 to 19 years in prison.

They were never convicted of the actual bombings. And unlike Scooter, they served actual jail time.

Two Puerto Rican nationalists have one more day to decide whether to accept a conditional clemency offer from President Clinton which was accepted by 12 other members of the group FALN on Tuesday.

Two imprisoned FALN members have rejected the offer of clemency.

"We think this is an unprecedented, historic moment," attorney Jan Susler said, "that the president of the United States could recognize that men and women who have dedicated their lives to the freedom of their country deserve to be free ... to participate in the political, legal process to shape the future of their country."

The dozen prisoners -- 11 of whom are eligible for immediate release -- signed papers renouncing violence to achieve political goals and agreed as a condition of parole to sever ties with FALN.

The 12th prisoner who signed the papers will not be eligible for release until he serves five more years at a federal prison in Florida, Susler said.

The White House issued a statement saying: "The president expects all those who accept the conditional clemency grant to abide fully by its terms, including refraining from the use or advocacy of the use of violence for any purpose and obeying all the statutory conditions of parole."

The prohibition on associating with one another is a common condition of parole, and authorities said if these prisoners violate their parole, the charges will be reinstated against them.

Unlike Scooter's commutation and possible future pardon, the FALN clemencies were conditional. They had to renounce terrorism as a condition of the clemency, with the clemencies going away like a wet dream if they broke the terms agreed upon. And since there hasn't been any big news about any of them being reconvicted on activities associated with FALN in over 8 years then obviously that meant they kept to their end of the deal.

-----

No wonder you chose the name Deep Kimchi at one time. You'd have to be buried in the earth pickling to come up with all these brilliant leaps of conclusion without checking all the facts.

:D

Funny, Koreans don't look white, and aren't accepted as whites.

But don't let that detail bore you...

But North Koreans sure love to worship a Dear Leader unconditionally.

Still waiting for RO/DK to refute Zarakon's earlier post about the criminals and drug dealer's Bush has already pardoned.

Anyone got a copy of War and Peace?

EDIT: Also, that crack RO/DK made about congress doing its job instead of going after Libby? I'm sure you said the same thing while Kenneth Starr was spending $40M to find out who blew who. Didn't you?

Still waiting for RO/DK to refute Zarakon's earlier post about the criminals and drug dealer's Bush has already pardoned.

Anyone got a copy of War and Peace?

EDIT: Also, that crack RO/DK made about congress doing its job instead of going after Libby? I'm sure you said the same thing while Kenneth Starr was spending $40M to find out who blew who. Didn't you?

Bushevik Comrade Kimchi doing a Cut and Run? There's a shocker.

Bushevik Comrade Kimchi doing a Cut and Run? There's a shocker.

He'll just grumble something about his 'real life' and then post four or five more threads plagerized from The Drudge Report or NewsMax or someone's blog...

He'll just grumble something about his 'real life' and then post four or five more threads plagerized from The Drudge Report or NewsMax or someone's blog...

That would make him a Cut&Paste and Runner.

As if "he did it, so I can too!" was a defense.

Especially considering how the Republicans swept into power back in the day promising to be the party of "morality," unlike those awful, "crooked Democrats." It's all fine and good to point at past Democratic wrong-doing and shrill "j'accuse," but your legitimacy goes out the window when you don't hold the Republicans up to the same standard. You don't occupy the moral high ground by playing tit-for-tat and saying "they did it X number of times, so we get to do it X number of times," you occupy the high ground by saying "they did it, but we categorically refuse to do it ourselves."

Hillary and Bill have zero room to bitch.

Bullshit, and Mr. Tony is full of it as well. It doesn't matter if Clinton pardoned 10,000, 100,000, or a million inmates. The problem is not the act of pardoning or commuting, it is not whether it is legal for the executive to do, it is whether in this context it was justified. Just crying "Clinton did X many therefore it is OK" is meaningless. It does not include the context for Clinton's, the reason.

Fact is there was no valid reason or justification in the case of Libby. Clinton could have pardoned 10 million prisoners, but as long as they were justified in the context they were pardoned, then it is not the same.

More falsehoods, eh?
Still can't prove that Bush or Cheney orchestrated the outing, eh?
Of course we can't - because Libby deliberately lied to the investigators to protect whoever it was that orchestrated the outing. That's why he was found guilty of perjury and sentenced to jail.
Is that so difficult to understand?
Still can't prove that outing Plame was illegal, eh? Since it was perfectly legal, given her non-operative status...
Funny. Judge Walton came to a completely different - i.e. opposite - conclusion. He mentioned in his ruling that she was covered under the IIPA. Guess you know more about the law than Judge Walton, eh?
Keep clutching at straws.
You're the only one here doing such a thing. You've got enough to build a whole house now. No doubt you're praying to Allah that the Big Bad Wolf of Reality doesn't come knocking.

Since there wasn't a crime to begin with, he shouldn't have been charged to begin with.

Perjury is only important when there's a crime being covered up.
By your definition, then why was Bill Clinton charged with perjury?
How is it a crime to deny getting a BJ?

He'll just grumble something about his 'real life' and then post four or five more threads plagerized from The Drudge Report or NewsMax or someone's blog...
I'd wager that now RO has gone offline, suddenly a rash of brand new nations will spring up spouting exactly the same arguments RO was shovelling.
coincidently, of course.

By your definition, then why was Bill Clinton charged with perjury?
How is it a crime to deny getting a BJ?

In the minds of Busheviks like Kimchi, the Whitewater real estate deal was made with the intent of getting Bill a blowjob.

i wouldn't say zero room, there ARE questions of motivation among other things, but i wouldn't call them completely innocent either. after all, neither innocence, honesty or even sincerity in reading the oath of office, seem to be qualifications for the job, for any party. i would say though, when it comes to serving the real intrests of john q public, the repulicrats have an order of magnitude worse of a track record then the demikins.

and i don't believe the clintons, or anyone else for that matter, have ever manipulated an american election to the degree the current regeme, as a matter of public record, is known to have.

and that's just one example of its tyrannical malpheasance.

=^^=
.../\...

i wouldn't say zero room, there ARE questions of motivation among other things, but i wouldn't call them completely innocent either. after all, neither innocence, honesty or even sincerity in reading the oath of office, seem to be qualifications for the job, for any party. i would say though, when it comes to serving the real intrests of john q public, the repulicrats have an order of magnitude worse of a track record then the demikins.

and i don't believe the clintons, or anyone else for that matter, have ever manipulated an american election to the degree the current regeme, as a matter of public record, is known to have.

and that's just one example of its tyrannical malpheasance.

=^^=
.../\...

Nobody rational is going to claim the Clintons are saints- contrary to what Busheviks like Kimchi and New Mitanni howl about. But whatever their dirty deeds might have certainly did not come close to inflicting the same damage that Beloved Dear Leader's incompetent reign has done.

Clinton didn't drag the United States into a long, drawn out civil war in a foreign country that only served to kill off our troops, give experience points to future terrorists, and suck down the nation's budget surplus towards nepotism, corruption and incompetence.

And Clinton certainly didn't step on our own country's intelligence service by exposing a covert operative and destroying a decades old cover company just to spite a political opponent.