5stringJeff
Senior Member
theHawk said::rotflmao:
LOL only a liberal could think something like that up.
You should write her back-
EQUALITY FOR WOMEN AT ANY EXPENCE BUT KEEP OUR WOMEN IN THE KITCHEN!
:rotflmao:
You totally nailed it!!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
theHawk said::rotflmao:
LOL only a liberal could think something like that up.
You should write her back-
EQUALITY FOR WOMEN AT ANY EXPENCE BUT KEEP OUR WOMEN IN THE KITCHEN!
jillian said:Which means he was tried by the House, in front of the Senate (the jury) and not found guilty.
To be removed from office, he would have had to be found guilty of high crimes or misdemenors by the Senate. He wasn't.
dmp said:Side note: Do you, personally feel Clinton committed the crime of perjury when he said he didn't "have sexual relations with that woman - Miss Lewinksy"?
jillian said:Was he under oath when he was on camera? You have to be sworn to commit the crime of perjury.
Do I think he answered dishonestly? Of course. But of greater moment, was that the question had no business being asked in the first place. What he should have done was told them to piss off and that it was none of their business.
dmp said:Yes - he was under oath when he denied having 'sexual relations' with Monica. What he said on camera - the text I quoted was something he said off-the-cuff.
Your editorial aside, you DO believe he committed perjury - regardless, eh?
When the case went to the Senate, the Senate voted to acquit on a vote of 50 to 50; 66 votes were needed to find the President guilty. Cuz they didn't wanna see Al Gore as President. Pretty much an impeachment though, in my book. Just no Consequences. Cept for the humiliation and disbarring I guess. He got off way to easy. (No pun intended)jillian said:Actually, that's not accurate. An impeachment is a trial where the president is charged with treason, bribery or other high crime or misdemenor. The articles of impeachment are tantamount to an indictment; the impeachment a trial.
As you may recall, the House voted articles of impeachment with respect to Clinton, but the Senate didn't buy it.
jillian said:I answered your question. No one ever asked Daddy Bush, FDR, Eisenhower or Kennedy about their affairs.
Wasn't anyone's business but his wife's.
dmp said:So you believe a sitting president committed perjury. You feel if Clinton THOUGHT the question was out of line, he should have indicated - yet instead of a protest he answered to the effect that he did NOT have a seuxal relationship with Monica.
It's refreshing - to see a Liberal admitting to faults of their own.
Mr. P said:When the case went to the Senate, the Senate voted to acquit on a vote of 50 to 50; 66 votes were needed to find the President guilty. Cuz they didn't wanna see Al Gore as President. Pretty much an impeachment though, in my book. Just no Consequences. Cept for the humiliation and disbarring I guess. He got off way to easy. (No pun intended)
jillian said:I didn't say I thought he committed perjury.
jillian said:Do I think he answered dishonestly? Of course.
jillian said:See...I thought the whole thing was loathsome... Henry Hyde up there talking about Monica when he was having his own affair. Newt filed divorce papers against his wife while she was in a hospital bed after a mastectomy...while he was cheating on her. He then divorced the woman he cheated on his wife with.
It was such a prurient exercise by such hypocritcal people. So, I'm wondering what ramifications did Hyde and Gingrich and Daddy Bush have?
dmp said:So he answered questions dishonestly. That's not Perjury? That's simply 'dishonestly answering questions he was legally bound to honestly answer?
There's a difference in your mind?
Errr, they weren't The ones that committed perjury.jillian said:See...I thought the whole thing was loathsome... Henry Hyde up there talking about Monica when he was having his own affair. Newt filed divorce papers against his wife while she was in a hospital bed after a mastectomy...while he was cheating on her. He then divorced the woman he cheated on his wife with.
It was such a prurient exercise by such hypocritcal people. So, I'm wondering what ramifications did Hyde and Gingrich and Daddy Bush have?
Mr. P said:Errr, they weren't The ones that committed perjury.
If there was you think they would have lied TOO?jillian said:That's cause there was no democratic House of Representatives to put them under oath and ask them about it.
jillian said:And yes, I already explained the difference. Perjury and lie are not interchangeable terms.
jillian said:...I'm pretty good with words, hon, so I'd really appreciate your not trying to restate what I say so that it means nothing like what I said like you just did in your "reality filter" post. Fair enough?
dmp said:I'm going to re-state what you say for the clarification required. You say things which don't make sense. I try to make what YOU say make sense in a logical way. That's my gift to you, love.
Correct! Perjury is the result of a lie.jillian said:...
And yes, I already explained the difference. Perjury and lie are not interchangeable terms.
....
A crime that occurs when an individual willfully makes a false statement during a judicial proceeding, after he or she has taken an oath to speak the truth.