The hard facts driving impeachment fall apart

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Both Impeachments were a complete travesty. Pelosi and the Democrats have turned the Constitution into silly putty and mold into whatever form suits their purpose.

Uh, you guys impeached Bill Clinton over a blow job.

Colluding with foreign government and inciting riots that get people killed are a lot more serious.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

He was impeached over the January 6 speech doesn't incite people to attack the Capital at all. No he was never charged with "colluding" with the Russians, heck even Mueller stated he didn't in section one of his report.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Not for sex.
He was being sued for sexual harassment.

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance, it was a gross mistake on his part because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Paula Jones was a state employee.
Clinton was her boss.
He dropped his pants and asked to be serviced.
That is clear case of on the job sexual harassment.

 

[Sunsettommy]

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance,

His lying was because he sexually harassed Paula Jones, she sued him and he lied under oath.
Nothing bogus about it.

it was a gross mistake on his part

Lying under oath usually is a mistake.

because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Yeah, his delaying tactics were almost 100% successful.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Yes he lied (inside of the bogus Starr investigation frame), yes he slept around, but the unfair Starr investigation made a mockery of justice since the sexual misbehavior with Lewinsky was never impeachable offense, and the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt, it was thrown out in 1998

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation, the bullshit he had to endure for several years.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President

Yup. And his perjury and obstruction of justice occurred during his time as President.

and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Who said his affair was an impeachable offense? Link?

the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt

He paid $850,000 to settle it.

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation

Awwwww.....poor guy. Never did nuffin'.

In all the mess you have ZERO guilty verdicts against Clinton to write about, that is why your arguments ultimately fails.

The lawsuit was thrown out (Ooops Clinton was still innocent) but she had made clear she was going to continue her legal pursuits against him, thus the 850,000 settlement to stop her from future legal harassments.

The Starr report you never read included the Jones allegations as part of the investigation, the Lewinsky affair was never an impeachable offense (notice you don't dispute it) at any time. Clintons mistake was to lie and obstruct during the investigation over sexual events that were never impeachable from day one. It boggles my mind why he felt the need to lie when Starr had no case against him on sexual dalliance with Monica at all.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start, which is why it ultimately failed.

Will end this with an admission from Starr himself:

LINK

"Partial retraction
In January 2020, while testifying as a defense lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial, Starr himself would retract some of the allegations he made in the report.[1] Slate journalist Jeremy Stahl pointed out that as he was urging the Senate not to remove Trump as president, Starr contradicted various arguments he used in 1998 to justify Clinton's impeachment.[1] In defending Trump, Starr also claimed he was wrong to have called for impeachment against Clinton for abuse of executive privilege and efforts to obstruct Congress and also stated that the House Judiciary Committee was right in 1998 to have rejected one of the planks for impeachment he had advocated for.[1] He also invoked a 1999 Hofstra Law Review article by Yale law professor Akhil Amar, who argued that the Clinton impeachment proved just how impeachment and removal causes "grave disruption" to a national election."

bolding mine

 

[Sunsettommy]

Both Impeachments were a complete travesty. Pelosi and the Democrats have turned the Constitution into silly putty and mold into whatever form suits their purpose.

Uh, you guys impeached Bill Clinton over a blow job.

Colluding with foreign government and inciting riots that get people killed are a lot more serious.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

He was impeached over the January 6 speech doesn't incite people to attack the Capital at all. No he was never charged with "colluding" with the Russians, heck even Mueller stated he didn't in section one of his report.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Not for sex.
He was being sued for sexual harassment.

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance, it was a gross mistake on his part because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Paula Jones was a state employee.
Clinton was her boss.
He dropped his pants and asked to be serviced.
That is clear case of on the job sexual harassment.

The Jones lawsuit was thrown out in 1998.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance,

His lying was because he sexually harassed Paula Jones, she sued him and he lied under oath.
Nothing bogus about it.

it was a gross mistake on his part

Lying under oath usually is a mistake.

because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Yeah, his delaying tactics were almost 100% successful.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Yes he lied (inside of the bogus Starr investigation frame), yes he slept around, but the unfair Starr investigation made a mockery of justice since the sexual misbehavior with Lewinsky was never impeachable offense, and the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt, it was thrown out in 1998

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation, the bullshit he had to endure for several years.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President

Yup. And his perjury and obstruction of justice occurred during his time as President.

and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Who said his affair was an impeachable offense? Link?

the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt

He paid $850,000 to settle it.

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation

Awwwww.....poor guy. Never did nuffin'.

In all the mess you have ZERO guilty verdicts against Clinton to write about, that is why your arguments ultimately fails.

The lawsuit was thrown out (Ooops Clinton was still innocent) but she had made clear she was going to continue her legal pursuits against him, thus the 850,000 settlement to stop her from future legal harassments.

The Starr report you never read included the Jones allegations as part of the investigation, the Lewinsky affair was never an impeachable offense (notice you don't dispute it) at any time. Clintons mistake was to lie and obstruct during the investigation over sexual events that were never impeachable from day one. It boggles my mind why he felt the need to lie when Starr had no case against him on sexual dalliance with Monica at all.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start, which is why it ultimately failed.

Will end this with an admission from Starr himself:

LINK

"Partial retraction
In January 2020, while testifying as a defense lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial, Starr himself would retract some of the allegations he made in the report.[1] Slate journalist Jeremy Stahl pointed out that as he was urging the Senate not to remove Trump as president, Starr contradicted various arguments he used in 1998 to justify Clinton's impeachment.[1] In defending Trump, Starr also claimed he was wrong to have called for impeachment against Clinton for abuse of executive privilege and efforts to obstruct Congress and also stated that the House Judiciary Committee was right in 1998 to have rejected one of the planks for impeachment he had advocated for.[1] He also invoked a 1999 Hofstra Law Review article by Yale law professor Akhil Amar, who argued that the Clinton impeachment proved just how impeachment and removal causes "grave disruption" to a national election."

bolding mine

In all the mess you have ZERO guilty verdicts against Clinton to write about, that is why your arguments ultimately fails.

As I said, "Yeah, his delaying tactics were almost 100% successful"

The lawsuit was thrown out

And then she appealed and the Supreme Court allowed it to continue.

The Starr report you never read included the Jones allegations as part of the investigation,

Lots of Bill's sleazy activities were included.

the Lewinsky affair was never an impeachable offense (notice you don't dispute it) at any time.

I never claimed it was. Ever.

Clintons mistake was to lie and obstruct during the investigation

Yes, perjury and obstruction of justice are mistakes and impeachable offenses.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start,

Yup. Politics can get political.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Both Impeachments were a complete travesty. Pelosi and the Democrats have turned the Constitution into silly putty and mold into whatever form suits their purpose.

Uh, you guys impeached Bill Clinton over a blow job.

Colluding with foreign government and inciting riots that get people killed are a lot more serious.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

He was impeached over the January 6 speech doesn't incite people to attack the Capital at all. No he was never charged with "colluding" with the Russians, heck even Mueller stated he didn't in section one of his report.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Not for sex.
He was being sued for sexual harassment.

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance, it was a gross mistake on his part because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Paula Jones was a state employee.
Clinton was her boss.
He dropped his pants and asked to be serviced.
That is clear case of on the job sexual harassment.

The Jones lawsuit was thrown out in 1998.

She appealed, she received $850,000 to drop the appeal.

 

[surada]

nothing to do with Trump.

Tommy, none of this would have happened if it weren't for T****. It was ALL about T****, and he could have prevented or stopped it, if he wasn't a barking mad loon.

All five of Trump's lawyers have quit.

Trump to Defend Self After Receiving Law Degree from Trump University

In his first official statement as the lead attorney of his defense team, Trump vowed not to quit the team “like those other losers.”

www.newyorker.com

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

American Thinker

January 30, 2021
The hard facts driving impeachment fall apart
By Monica Showalter

Excerpt:

President Trump, who was impeached, no less, in the waning days of his presidency for supposedly starting a riot at the Capitol, is starting to look less and less culpable for what his enemies claimed.

A pipe bomb planted by rioters intended to distract police forces ahead of the Jan. 6 rally Trump spoke at turns out to have been planted on Jan. 5, according to the FBI.

According to The Hill:

The FBI released a new wanted poster on Friday revealing that two pipe bombs that were placed near the Democratic and Republican party headquarters and discovered during the Capitol riots on Jan. 6 were planted there the night before.

According to the newly released information, the bombs were placed between 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. on Jan. 5.


LINK

=======

Whooops, there goes the silly incitement argument.

Rushing to judgement was a bad idea from the start.....

Been sayin....See ya at the trial.LOLOL

This was an obvious hoax....................LOLOL

i guess he'll represent himself. This will be the 2nd most watched world event since the moon................................LOLOLOL

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

nothing to do with Trump.

Tommy, none of this would have happened if it weren't for T****. It was ALL about T****, and he could have prevented or stopped it, if he wasn't a barking mad loon.

All five of Trump's lawyers have quit.

Trump to Defend Self After Receiving Law Degree from Trump University

In his first official statement as the lead attorney of his defense team, Trump vowed not to quit the team “like those other losers.”

www.newyorker.com

Going to be great too. He'll slit their guts open...lol

 

[Leo123]

This is really lame. Trump had been inciting them for 7 or 8 weeks.

If calling for a peaceful protest is inciting anyone, then the whole democrat leadership needs to be brought up on charges for doing much more than that. Remember? Biden was going to physically beat up Trump, Watters told people to harass Trump followers, Pelosi called him unfit, said he lies and much more.

 

[Leo123]

Yes. it was planned.. Trump was exciting these crackpots since early November.

Utter bullshit, prove it.

 

[surada]

Yes. it was planned.. Trump was exciting these crackpots since early November.

Utter bullshit, prove it.

I have seen a list of the evidence.. If I find it again, I'll post it for you.. Otherwise, wait and see.

 

[Chuz Life]

His lying was due to the bogus investigation over his sexual dalliance,

His lying was because he sexually harassed Paula Jones, she sued him and he lied under oath.
Nothing bogus about it.

it was a gross mistake on his part

Lying under oath usually is a mistake.

because Starr had nothing else to impeach him on.

Yeah, his delaying tactics were almost 100% successful.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Yes he lied (inside of the bogus Starr investigation frame), yes he slept around, but the unfair Starr investigation made a mockery of justice since the sexual misbehavior with Lewinsky was never impeachable offense, and the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt, it was thrown out in 1998

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation, the bullshit he had to endure for several years.

In 1994, Paula Jones filed a lawsuit accusing Clinton of sexual harassment when he was governor of Arkansas, that isn't an impeachable offense since it didn't occur during his time as President

Yup. And his perjury and obstruction of justice occurred during his time as President.

and her lawsuit was later thrown out in 1998, and the dumb Lewinsky affair was never a impeachable offense from the start.

Who said his affair was an impeachable offense? Link?

the Jones lawsuit was about his Governors days was never settled to prove Clintons guilt

He paid $850,000 to settle it.

Clinton was clearly a victim of Partisan Politics, a victim of a fishing Starr investigation

Awwwww.....poor guy. Never did nuffin'.

In all the mess you have ZERO guilty verdicts against Clinton to write about, that is why your arguments ultimately fails.

The lawsuit was thrown out (Ooops Clinton was still innocent) but she had made clear she was going to continue her legal pursuits against him, thus the 850,000 settlement to stop her from future legal harassments.

The Starr report you never read included the Jones allegations as part of the investigation, the Lewinsky affair was never an impeachable offense (notice you don't dispute it) at any time. Clintons mistake was to lie and obstruct during the investigation over sexual events that were never impeachable from day one. It boggles my mind why he felt the need to lie when Starr had no case against him on sexual dalliance with Monica at all.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start, which is why it ultimately failed.

Will end this with an admission from Starr himself:

LINK

"Partial retraction
In January 2020, while testifying as a defense lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial, Starr himself would retract some of the allegations he made in the report.[1] Slate journalist Jeremy Stahl pointed out that as he was urging the Senate not to remove Trump as president, Starr contradicted various arguments he used in 1998 to justify Clinton's impeachment.[1] In defending Trump, Starr also claimed he was wrong to have called for impeachment against Clinton for abuse of executive privilege and efforts to obstruct Congress and also stated that the House Judiciary Committee was right in 1998 to have rejected one of the planks for impeachment he had advocated for.[1] He also invoked a 1999 Hofstra Law Review article by Yale law professor Akhil Amar, who argued that the Clinton impeachment proved just how impeachment and removal causes "grave disruption" to a national election."

bolding mine

STARR Was wrong, alright.

But, not at the point he later claimed.

The impeachment was legit. Starr's spineless lack of confidence and second guessing, not withstanding.

Klinton was himself a lawyer.

As a lawyer, he fully understood the seriousness of perjury.

You should read what the worlds earliest lawmakers had to say about perjury, sometime.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Both Impeachments were a complete travesty. Pelosi and the Democrats have turned the Constitution into silly putty and mold into whatever form suits their purpose.

Uh, you guys impeached Bill Clinton over a blow job.

Colluding with foreign government and inciting riots that get people killed are a lot more serious.

I agree the Clinton never should have been impeached over a stupid blue dress and some dumb sexual dalliance, not even close to high crimes and misdemeanors threshold.

He was impeached over the January 6 speech doesn't incite people to attack the Capital at all. No he was never charged with "colluding" with the Russians, heck even Mueller stated he didn't in section one of his report.

I see you bought into the libtard narrative. Clinton was impeached for PERJURY!

 

[JoeB131]

clinton wasnt impeached for a blowjob,, and you thinking so dismiss's you from any further rational discussions,,

Then why was there so much discussion at the time about whether or not a blow job is considered sex or not and all this talk about stained dresses?

 

[progressive hunter]

clinton wasnt impeached for a blowjob,, and you thinking so dismiss's you from any further rational discussions,,

Then why was there so much discussion at the time about whether or not a blow job is considered sex or not and all this talk about stained dresses?

the impeachment was not for a blowjob,,,

 

[JoeB131]

STARR Was wrong, alright.

But, not at the point he later claimed.

The impeachment was legit. Starr's spineless lack of confidence and second guessing, not withstanding.

Actually, Starr never should have been investigating that to start with. He was appointed to investigate the Whitewater Land deal. Period. Full fucking stop.

Again, if lying about a blow job is impeachable, then so is instigating a riot or trying to shake down a foreign government.

Klinton was himself a lawyer.

As a lawyer, he fully understood the seriousness of perjury.

You should read what the worlds earliest lawmakers had to say about perjury, sometime.

Actually, you should live in the real world. Just like in the real world, where women get abortions no matter what the law is, in the real world, people shade the truth when they are on the witness stand.

The "lie" in question here is whether or not he considered a blow job to be sex. A lot of men don't. Frankly, a lot of men consider oral gratification to be the new third base.

I should also point out that when Kenny was President of Baylor University, he actively covered up rampant rapes of co-eds by athletes.... Just more wonderful right wing hypocrisy.

 

[JoeB131]

The lawsuit was thrown out

And then she appealed and the Supreme Court allowed it to continue.

No, that wasn't the case at all. SCOTUS ruled on a case called Burlington v. Ellerth, which held that a woman COULD sue for sexual harassment EVEN IF there was no professional retaliation against her. This didn't apply to Jones v. Clinton because Clinton was not really her direct supervisor.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start,

Yup. Politics can get political.

Then you really shouldn't have a problem with going after Trump now that he's out of office. If lying about a blow job is impeachable, inciting a riot is impeachable.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

STARR Was wrong, alright.

But, not at the point he later claimed.

The impeachment was legit. Starr's spineless lack of confidence and second guessing, not withstanding.

Actually, Starr never should have been investigating that to start with. He was appointed to investigate the Whitewater Land deal. Period. Full fucking stop.

Again, if lying about a blow job is impeachable, then so is instigating a riot or trying to shake down a foreign government.

Klinton was himself a lawyer.

As a lawyer, he fully understood the seriousness of perjury.

You should read what the worlds earliest lawmakers had to say about perjury, sometime.

Actually, you should live in the real world. Just like in the real world, where women get abortions no matter what the law is, in the real world, people shade the truth when they are on the witness stand.

The "lie" in question here is whether or not he considered a blow job to be sex. A lot of men don't. Frankly, a lot of men consider oral gratification to be the new third base.

I should also point out that when Kenny was President of Baylor University, he actively covered up rampant rapes of co-eds by athletes.... Just more wonderful right wing hypocrisy.

Actually, Starr never should have been investigating that to start with. He was appointed to investigate the Whitewater Land deal. Period. Full fucking stop.

Independent Counsels are cool, eh?

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, Starr never should have been investigating that to start with. He was appointed to investigate the Whitewater Land deal. Period. Full fucking stop.

Independent Counsels are cool, eh?

Actually, no.

The problem with IC"s in general is that they are going to damn well find someone guilty of something.

We saw that with Lawrence Walsh, who couldn't get Reagan or Bush on anything related to Iran-Contra (because they hadn't actually broken any laws), but he went after Cap Weinberger for perjury because he said he hadn't kept a diary, but he did submit meeting notes to the national archive. And Cap was the guy in the room who had the good sense to say selling weapons to the Iranians was probably a terrible idea.

We saw that with Patrick Fitzgerald, who didn't go after the anti-war Circle Jerk of Armitage-Novak-Wilson for outing Wilson's wife... But he went after Scooter Libby for not remembering a conversation with Tim Russert the same way Tim remembered it.

And yes, we saw that with Ken Starr, who was supposed to be investigating a land deal and ended up investigating Clinton's sex life.

Now that said, I do think we need a reformed IC statue, but one where they are ONLY focused on the thing they are supposed to be investigating... not process crimes or side issues.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The lawsuit was thrown out

And then she appealed and the Supreme Court allowed it to continue.

No, that wasn't the case at all. SCOTUS ruled on a case called Burlington v. Ellerth, which held that a woman COULD sue for sexual harassment EVEN IF there was no professional retaliation against her. This didn't apply to Jones v. Clinton because Clinton was not really her direct supervisor.

It was a Politically driven investigation from the start,

Yup. Politics can get political.

Then you really shouldn't have a problem with going after Trump now that he's out of office. If lying about a blow job is impeachable, inciting a riot is impeachable.

No, that wasn't the case at all.

The judge, Susan Webber Wright dismissed, Jones appealed. It went to the Supreme Court and they ruled 9-0 to allow the suit to continue.

If lying about a blow job is impeachable

Yes, lying under oath and obstruction of justice when you're being sued for sexual harrassent is impeachable.

inciting a riot is impeachable.

To paraphrase Sol Wachtler, you can impeach a ham sandwich.