I did not have sexual relations with that women

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Here they are: http://www.startingpage.com/sounds/clintondenial.wav


And just for laughs:
http://members.aol.com/h0tp00lman/wavs.htm

10019.jpg


:lmao:
 
the "crime" was perjury, nothing to do with a sex crime.

and we can argue that questioning someone about their sex life is tantamount to a perjury trap.

did he perjur himself? yes.

was it worth it? are we better for this? was this money well spent? did the investigation cheapen the country and coarsen the culture?
 
Could you imagine if W was under an oath
and had to answer questions by himself for 5 minutes.

yet alone 3-4? how many hours?
 
what makes him a sex offender? last time i checked it wasn't clinton molesting the alter boys.
 
Irvine511 said:
the "crime" was perjury, nothing to do with a sex crime.

and we can argue that questioning someone about their sex life is tantamount to a perjury trap.

did he perjur himself? yes.

was it worth it? are we better for this? was this money well spent? did the investigation cheapen the country and coarsen the culture?


Sorry, you're wrong. I don't want to get into a big arguement about this, but a lot of people then and now seem to forget exactly why Clinton was being investigated. The perjury about Monica Lewinsky was in direct connection to the case with an alleged rape and sexual harrasement of Paula Jones by Bill Clinton. Investigators were looking for patterns of Clinton abusing his power for sexual purposes.
I've never really understood why liberals--so called progressive thinkers-- say that perjuring oneself to cover up sexual harrasement and patterns of abuse in a rape case isn't a bad thing when it comes to Clinton. What kind of precident does that set?
 
1. Paula Jones never said it was rape.


2. and most importantly. What was the "Scope of the White Water investagation" ?
 
ahh the anti-sex right wing. by the way, the paula jones charges were never proven, were they? she voted for bush.
 
deep said:
1. Paula Jones never said it was rape.


2. and most importantly. What was the "Scope of the White Water investagation" ?

1. Sorry, it was a different woman who accused Clinton of rape-- Juanita Broaddrick--but this was still part of the Paula Jones case.

2. When more crimes were suspected, the Whitewater investigators recieved an expansion of the original scope of the investigation. Would it have made you feel better to set up a separate special prosecutor? By the way, the administration(attorney general) had to approve the expansion.
 
When more crimes were suspected, the Whitewater investigators recieved an expansion of the original scope of the investigation.

it was partisan, a right-wing fishing exposition


Would it have made you feel better to set up a separate special prosecutor?




it did not warrant a special prosecuteor
 
earthshell said:
ahh the anti-sex right wing. by the way, the paula jones charges were never proven, were they? she voted for bush.

Why don't you think of something intelligent to say? Because I feel that perjuring oneself in a sexual harrasement and possible rape case is wrong I'm anti-sex right wing? Fucked up dude.

Why did Clinton pay off Paula Jones for $850,000 if he was a completely innocent man as he claimed? Of course the charges are hard to prove when he was perjuring himself during the investigation!
 
deep said:


it did not warrant a special prosecuteor

Claims from 7 different women claiming sexual harrasement and or rape isn't enough to warrent a special investigator??

You said this was all partisan..do ya think maybe you're a little partisan in this matter also? Would you be saying the same things if there was a "democratic witchhunt" for the same things against Bush? Did you like F-9/11 by the way???

Anyway, I said in my original post I wasn't going to get into a big arguement because I knew this is way it would go.
 
You said this was all partisan..do ya think maybe you're a little partisan in this matter also?

i am and have always been a registered Republican (30 years, now.)

Would you be saying the same things if there was a "democratic witchhunt" for the same things against Bush?

the partisanship is what held most of the 911 report until after the election and let W testify NOT under oath with Cheney beside him,
How can you NOT be embarrassed?

Did you like F-9/11 by the way???

I did not watch much of it, so no I did not like it.

Anyway, I said in my original post I wasn't going to get into a big arguement because I knew this is way it would go.

No reason to argue, we can discuss and correct each other when we get information wrong.
 
Where is everyone's sense of humor? Does anyone here actually take that sign seriously? It's along the same line as all the jokes about Clinton on SNL, Leno, Conan, etc. Lighten up a little, folks
 
Back
Top Bottom