FBI Expands Probe of Hillary Clinton Emails, Explores Criminal Code

[Freewill]

Sadly, nothing is going to happen, it is the world we live in. Let's just hope it is over soon so it isn't too big of bump for Mrs. Clinton when they say they found nothing, or more correctly, nothing they will charge her with.

Then all the left wing will sing as one the praises of the dried up old brain damaged candidate.

The world we live in is one where most fair-minded people don't think we dump on someone who had dedicated decades of her life to public service because of a minor technical violation of a rule that hasn't really kept up with the technology.

We know what Mrs. Clinton is dedicated to.

 

[Freewill]

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

So he got an adminsitrative slap on the wrist and he made a payment because it was cheaper than continuing to litigate against a liar? This is the best argument you have?

Kind of sad, really.

Bottom line, the 5 year suspension meant nothing to a lawyer that never practiced law.

The settlement was all Clinton and i am sure she got what she wanted.

 

[JoeB131]

Bottom line, the 5 year suspension meant nothing to a lawyer that never practiced law.

The settlement was all Clinton and i am sure she got what she wanted.

Actually, the settlements were paid by Clinton's insurance company and Paula Jones didn't get jack shit. She was posing naked for Penthouse and doing boxing with Tonya Harding to raise money because she was so broke. The lawyers got most of the money. her husband also left her and their kids. Really classy folks on the right.

 

[billyerock1991]

Not giving a crap about honesty does seem to be the new norm. That is one reason I call Clinton the worse president ever.

No, you see, here's the thing. Most people realize people make mistakes. They cheat on their marriages, they don't want to admit to things that are kind of embarrassing. The point was that Ken Starr spent 70 million dollars, accused Clinton of everything under the sun,

Tell me true, buddy. If you gave someone 70 million dollars to turn over every aspect of YOUR life, are they going to not find anything you are ashamed of?

The thing was, look at the people who were going after Clinton. Henry Hyde - fat sack of shit who used to be my Congressman - was outed by Salon for an affair he had back in the 1960's with a married women. Newt was cheating on Wife #2 with the woman who would become Wife #3. Livingston lasted a whole of a week as Speaker before we found out he was cheating on his wife, too. And then you have Denny Hastert, who fucked a teenage boy in the ass and spent 3 million in hush money covering it up.

People give Clinton a pass because of the GROSS hypocrisy of your side on this issue.

Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed the denial of a woman's civil rights. Denied by of all people a lawyer, or was until he lost his license for lying. Lawyers are sworn to tell the truth all the time, believe it or not. But lying under oath that a whole new ball game.

No, people gave him a pass because they just don't give a damn about the rule of law and honesty. Isn't that obvious even to you?

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

 

[billyerock1991]

So you think that the FBI is investigating Hillary and questioning her partners-in-crime just for shits and giggles???

Damn, I'm starting to see how you earned that Section 8!!!

I think the FBI is going through the motions. Just like they went through the motions with Lois Lerner and then determined there was nothing criminal done.

Again, if they had something, we'd have heard about it by now.

You DO know that investigations are kept under wraps until the FBI completes them, right???

Hell, if they are investigating YOU, would you expect daily updates in the NYT, where you and your cronies can get your lies together???

Sadly, nothing is going to happen, it is the world we live in. Let's just hope it is over soon so it isn't too big of bump for Mrs. Clinton when they say they found nothing, or more correctly, nothing they will charge her with.

Then all the left wing will sing as one the praises of the dried up old brain damaged candidate.

when I read your crap about nothing being done here and how unfair it is thats what it is crap ... where was your anger when Mit Romney erased all of his emails and removed every hard drive in every office he hadm while he was governor ... then he ran for president still refusing to give back all of his emails and hard drives ... to date they've never been returned ... so wheres your anger now skippy ???

 

[Freewill]

So you think that the FBI is investigating Hillary and questioning her partners-in-crime just for shits and giggles???

Damn, I'm starting to see how you earned that Section 8!!!

I think the FBI is going through the motions. Just like they went through the motions with Lois Lerner and then determined there was nothing criminal done.

Again, if they had something, we'd have heard about it by now.

You DO know that investigations are kept under wraps until the FBI completes them, right???

Hell, if they are investigating YOU, would you expect daily updates in the NYT, where you and your cronies can get your lies together???

Sadly, nothing is going to happen, it is the world we live in. Let's just hope it is over soon so it isn't too big of bump for Mrs. Clinton when they say they found nothing, or more correctly, nothing they will charge her with.

Then all the left wing will sing as one the praises of the dried up old brain damaged candidate.

when I read your crap about nothing being done here and how unfair it is thats what it is crap ... where was your anger when Mit Romney erased all of his emails and removed every hard drive in every office he hadm while he was governor ... then he ran for president still refusing to give back all of his emails and hard drives ... to date they've never been returned ... so wheres your anger now skippy ???

I don't remember Romney working for the State Department. I am not sure how many classified documents Romney actually sent or received. Do you have information that he had his own server and the FBI investigated him? If you do I would really like the link to it. Never the less I wasn't a big Romney fan, he just wasn't Obama.

 

[Freewill]

Not giving a crap about honesty does seem to be the new norm. That is one reason I call Clinton the worse president ever.

No, you see, here's the thing. Most people realize people make mistakes. They cheat on their marriages, they don't want to admit to things that are kind of embarrassing. The point was that Ken Starr spent 70 million dollars, accused Clinton of everything under the sun,

Tell me true, buddy. If you gave someone 70 million dollars to turn over every aspect of YOUR life, are they going to not find anything you are ashamed of?

The thing was, look at the people who were going after Clinton. Henry Hyde - fat sack of shit who used to be my Congressman - was outed by Salon for an affair he had back in the 1960's with a married women. Newt was cheating on Wife #2 with the woman who would become Wife #3. Livingston lasted a whole of a week as Speaker before we found out he was cheating on his wife, too. And then you have Denny Hastert, who fucked a teenage boy in the ass and spent 3 million in hush money covering it up.

People give Clinton a pass because of the GROSS hypocrisy of your side on this issue.

Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed the denial of a woman's civil rights. Denied by of all people a lawyer, or was until he lost his license for lying. Lawyers are sworn to tell the truth all the time, believe it or not. But lying under oath that a whole new ball game.

No, people gave him a pass because they just don't give a damn about the rule of law and honesty. Isn't that obvious even to you?

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

 

[billyerock1991]

So you think that the FBI is investigating Hillary and questioning her partners-in-crime just for shits and giggles???

Damn, I'm starting to see how you earned that Section 8!!!

I think the FBI is going through the motions. Just like they went through the motions with Lois Lerner and then determined there was nothing criminal done.

Again, if they had something, we'd have heard about it by now.

You DO know that investigations are kept under wraps until the FBI completes them, right???

Hell, if they are investigating YOU, would you expect daily updates in the NYT, where you and your cronies can get your lies together???

Sadly, nothing is going to happen, it is the world we live in. Let's just hope it is over soon so it isn't too big of bump for Mrs. Clinton when they say they found nothing, or more correctly, nothing they will charge her with.

Then all the left wing will sing as one the praises of the dried up old brain damaged candidate.

when I read your crap about nothing being done here and how unfair it is thats what it is crap ... where was your anger when Mit Romney erased all of his emails and removed every hard drive in every office he hadm while he was governor ... then he ran for president still refusing to give back all of his emails and hard drives ... to date they've never been returned ... so wheres your anger now skippy ???

I don't remember Romney working for the State Department. I am not sure how many classified documents Romney actually sent or received. Do you have information that he had his own server and the FBI investigated him? If you do I would really like the link to it. Never the less I wasn't a big Romney fan, he just wasn't Obama.

we are talking about law the law said you as a government employee can't take government document including emails .... he took them ....it has noting to do with classified or not ... you don't know what a governor receives from the government ... you can't say some times they get classified information for their state becasue you don't know what they get ....

to date nothing Hillary had on her private server has turned to be classified at all ... everything from the right has had nothing to do with her violating any law ... everything they have listed, so far, is the right hoping they have something ... they don't ... the hatred from the right against liberals/dems and hillary says it all ... you don't have a leg to stand on but wish you did

 

[Rustic]

Since when is the F.B.I. Hillary haters?

1st you want cops not to arrest people the way I gather.. And now you don't want the FBI to do their jobs?

This country is getting insane.

Guy, the FBI's job should be busting terrorists and drug dealers, not doing the political dirty work of the EITHER political party.

If you guys think what Hillary did was SOOOOOO horrible, make that the basis of your campaign. The voters will tell you to go fuck yourselves, just like they did when you tried to find fake scandal after fake scandal with her husband.

Well, she is an loopy kunt...

 

[billyerock1991]

No, you see, here's the thing. Most people realize people make mistakes. They cheat on their marriages, they don't want to admit to things that are kind of embarrassing. The point was that Ken Starr spent 70 million dollars, accused Clinton of everything under the sun,

Tell me true, buddy. If you gave someone 70 million dollars to turn over every aspect of YOUR life, are they going to not find anything you are ashamed of?

The thing was, look at the people who were going after Clinton. Henry Hyde - fat sack of shit who used to be my Congressman - was outed by Salon for an affair he had back in the 1960's with a married women. Newt was cheating on Wife #2 with the woman who would become Wife #3. Livingston lasted a whole of a week as Speaker before we found out he was cheating on his wife, too. And then you have Denny Hastert, who fucked a teenage boy in the ass and spent 3 million in hush money covering it up.

People give Clinton a pass because of the GROSS hypocrisy of your side on this issue.

Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed the denial of a woman's civil rights. Denied by of all people a lawyer, or was until he lost his license for lying. Lawyers are sworn to tell the truth all the time, believe it or not. But lying under oath that a whole new ball game.

No, people gave him a pass because they just don't give a damn about the rule of law and honesty. Isn't that obvious even to you?

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

NO he did not .. you can't show one bit of proof that he lied under oath ... I challenge you to show where he lied under oath ... you won't fine it ...so stop your lying ...

 

[Freewill]

Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed the denial of a woman's civil rights. Denied by of all people a lawyer, or was until he lost his license for lying. Lawyers are sworn to tell the truth all the time, believe it or not. But lying under oath that a whole new ball game.

No, people gave him a pass because they just don't give a damn about the rule of law and honesty. Isn't that obvious even to you?

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

NO he did not .. you can't show one bit of proof that he lied under oath ... I challenge you to show where he lied under oath ... you won't fine it ...so stop your lying ...

Actually, since he ended up paying a big fine, I think that the punishment he received was probably enough. But the fact is the bar was lowered.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/multimedia/timeline/9809/starr.report/grounds/g1.htm

(6) One stated in relevant part:

Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every [federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were] . . . President of the United States.(7)


The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." Judge Wright ordered the President to answer the interrogatory, and on December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, President Clinton answered "None."(8)

At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the President, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President specific questions about possible sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky. The attorneys used various terms in their questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not specially defined by Ms. Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations" was defined:

For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes . . . contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. . . . "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.(9)


President Clinton answered a series of questions about Ms. Lewinsky, including:

Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?


WJC: No.


Q: If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?


WJC: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.


Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?

Mr. Bennett:(10)


I object because I don't know that he can remember --


Judge Wright:


Well, it's real short. He can -- I will permit the question and you may show the witness definition number one.


WJC: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her.(11)

 

[American_Jihad]

HILLARY CLINTON:CLASSIFIED EMAILSONLY WRONG BECAUSE I GOT CAUGHT
January 27, 2016
Daniel Greenfield

Does that count as honestly dishonest or dishonestly honest?

When the poll numbers on trust turned against her, Hillary Clinton finally broke down and apologized for the email scandal, claiming that it was a mistake. Now she clarified why it was a mistake. It was a mistakebecause she got caught.

...

Fact Check: The facts have changed. Hillary Clinton claimed that there were no classified emails. We now know that not only was not true, but that there were highly classified materials on her email server including some that could potentially have compromised human intelligence sources.

But the bottom line is the typically Clintonesque lack of remorse. Hillary Clinton doesn't think she did anything wrong. She said it was a mistake because the whole thing is inconvenient. Or as she put it, " “It was a mistake, because who wants to put people through all of this? I don’t want to go through it." And that amounts to an admission that if she could do it again and get away with it, she would.

Quite an admission for someone running for the highest office in the land.

Hillary Clinton: Classified Emails Only Wrong Because I Got Caught

 

[tyroneweaver]

I expect Hillary will be arrested any day now - along with Lois Lerner.

Are navy personnel considered soldiers?

 

[Freewill]

Her claim will be that she never sent one classified email she only received them which she has no control over.

 

[Geaux4it]

Her claim will be that she never sent one classified email she only received them which she has no control over.

She'll have to get Bill to define what the definition of 'is' is.....

-Geaux

 

[billyerock1991]

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

NO he did not .. you can't show one bit of proof that he lied under oath ... I challenge you to show where he lied under oath ... you won't fine it ...so stop your lying ...

Actually, since he ended up paying a big fine, I think that the punishment he received was probably enough. But the fact is the bar was lowered.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/multimedia/timeline/9809/starr.report/grounds/g1.htm

(6) One stated in relevant part:

Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every [federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were] . . . President of the United States.(7)


The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." Judge Wright ordered the President to answer the interrogatory, and on December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, President Clinton answered "None."(8)

At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the President, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President specific questions about possible sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky. The attorneys used various terms in their questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not specially defined by Ms. Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations" was defined:

For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes . . . contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. . . . "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.(9)


President Clinton answered a series of questions about Ms. Lewinsky, including:

Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?


WJC: No.


Q: If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?


WJC: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.


Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?

Mr. Bennett:(10)


I object because I don't know that he can remember --


Judge Wright:


Well, it's real short. He can -- I will permit the question and you may show the witness definition number one.


WJC: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her.(11)

stop quoting laws that were never made

 

[billyerock1991]

I hope the Hildebeast has LOTS OF SHIT on the obomanation, or it will be Hillary for PRISON 2016!

Washington Free Beacon ^ | 11/12/15 | Morgan Chalfant
The FBI has expanded its probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails and launched an independent classification review, according to intelligence sources.Agents are now looking at whether several statements violated a section of U.S. criminal code.Fox News reported: Agents are looking at U.S. Code 18, Section 1001, which pertains to “materially false” statements given either in writing, orally, or through a third party. Violations also include pressuring a third party to conspire in a cover-up. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison. This phase represents an expansion of the FBI probe, which is also exploring potential violations of an Espionage Act provision relating...

so far the emails you are taking about here, they are investigating if they were ever stamped classified ... so far they haven't been able to show that they were classified documents at the time sent ... good luck with you pathetic attempt... can you say president Hildebeast ???? sure you will have to

 

[billyerock1991]

That tells me that they can't make their prima fascia case...

You Hillary Haters really need to stop getting your hopes up.

Unless you have an e-mail titled "Our really super-duper Secret stuff" sent to KimJongUm@DPRK.COM, you guys aren't going to get a grand jury to indict someone who half hte country wants to be the next president.

if funny how these fools quote this so-called law that they say she will get convicted over ... the problem they have is it never got into any foreign government hands ... they are quick to quote a law but they aren't bright enough to understand what the law says...

 

[billyerock1991]

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

NO he did not .. you can't show one bit of proof that he lied under oath ... I challenge you to show where he lied under oath ... you won't fine it ...so stop your lying ...

Actually, since he ended up paying a big fine, I think that the punishment he received was probably enough. But the fact is the bar was lowered.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/multimedia/timeline/9809/starr.report/grounds/g1.htm

(6) One stated in relevant part:

Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every [federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were] . . . President of the United States.(7)


The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." Judge Wright ordered the President to answer the interrogatory, and on December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, President Clinton answered "None."(8)

At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the President, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President specific questions about possible sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky. The attorneys used various terms in their questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not specially defined by Ms. Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations" was defined:

For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes . . . contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. . . . "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.(9)


President Clinton answered a series of questions about Ms. Lewinsky, including:

Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?


WJC: No.


Q: If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?


WJC: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.


Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?

Mr. Bennett:(10)


I object because I don't know that he can remember --


Judge Wright:


Well, it's real short. He can -- I will permit the question and you may show the witness definition number one.


WJC: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her.(11)

here is the title of your document..... you do realize that this isn't a ;legal document that you are showing don't you
There is Substantial and Credible Information that


President Clinton Committed Acts that

May Constitute Grounds for an Impeachment

the funny part is it says right in the article that you used, it says "May constitute" ... it doesn't say it "constitute" , it says "may" ... I've seen this before it is a fake document ... go look up anything it has quoted as law,
you won't find it nice try ...

 

[billyerock1991]

No, you see, here's the thing. Most people realize people make mistakes. They cheat on their marriages, they don't want to admit to things that are kind of embarrassing. The point was that Ken Starr spent 70 million dollars, accused Clinton of everything under the sun,

Tell me true, buddy. If you gave someone 70 million dollars to turn over every aspect of YOUR life, are they going to not find anything you are ashamed of?

The thing was, look at the people who were going after Clinton. Henry Hyde - fat sack of shit who used to be my Congressman - was outed by Salon for an affair he had back in the 1960's with a married women. Newt was cheating on Wife #2 with the woman who would become Wife #3. Livingston lasted a whole of a week as Speaker before we found out he was cheating on his wife, too. And then you have Denny Hastert, who fucked a teenage boy in the ass and spent 3 million in hush money covering it up.

People give Clinton a pass because of the GROSS hypocrisy of your side on this issue.

Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed the denial of a woman's civil rights. Denied by of all people a lawyer, or was until he lost his license for lying. Lawyers are sworn to tell the truth all the time, believe it or not. But lying under oath that a whole new ball game.

No, people gave him a pass because they just don't give a damn about the rule of law and honesty. Isn't that obvious even to you?

heres where you have a problem with he lied under oath and thats why he was convicted because he lied ... the problem you have is you have done any research .... he was never convicted of lying under oath by any court ... I challenge you to find where he was in any court document ... he was convicted of giving misleading testimony and my friend thats not lying under oath thats giving misleading testimony when are you moron going to pull your heads out of your ass ...

Do you have a reading problem? Do you? Where did I say he was conflicted? I said the opposite. The sleazy democrats in congress didn't give a damn about his lying he almost skated. Except he did pay a huge out of court settlement and did lose his law license for five years, BECAUSE HE LIED UNDER OATH. Waving his finger in our collective faces and lying was bad enough but not impeachable, lying under oath, that is a problem.

it appears it is you with a reading problem ... I said CONVICTED NOT CONFLiCTED ... he was never CONVICTED of LYING UNDER OATH ...
back then, We all heard him say I never had sexual relations with that woman while wagging his finger ... the term sexual relations isn't oral sex ... its define back then as sexual intercourse ... so when Clinton was wagging that finger, saying he never had sexual relations with that woman, he was telling you the truth ... he wasn't lying to you ... it also appears that you have a reading problem and a comprehension problem ...this was a misleading testimony to many, because they didn't grasp the Idea that sexual intercourse and oral sex weren't sexual relations ...yes it was misleading , also when he said the same thing under oat it too was misleading ... in court misleading testimony isn't lying... look it up ... the judge allowed him to setttled with the court with misdemeanor by him giving misleading statements, as you said they took his license away for giving misleading testimoney in court and gave him 5 year probation from practicing law ... look it up !!!! there isn't any where in his plee agreement saying anything about lying under oath ... that was my point to many of your types make this false accusation he lied under oath... again I was replying to your false understanding where you stated "Bottom line, Clinton lied under oath and the left wing poo pooed"

Quit playing games. Capone was never charged with anything other then tax evasion. Was he not guilty of running a corrupt organization?

Are you denying that Clinton lied under oath? You certainly can not be unless you are posting as a turnip.

Do you speed over the posted speed limit? Does your not getting convicted of speeding mean you didn't speed?

Clinton sanctimoniously shook his finger in your face an lied his ass off to YOU. Then he did it again in court. He was guilty it was clear, the congress just didn't have the moral compass to do the right thing.

don't ya love the rant of a fool that hasn't a clue that they are saying freewill is a prime subject for ranting thats for sure and this is wagging my finger at you