🚀 go-pugleaf

"Duffer" <ef.no.spam.duffer@home.com> wrote in message
news:CKls5.101080$oj6.2157862@news1.rdc1.tx.home.com...
>
> "Jafo" <jafo@_cheetah.net> wrote in message
> news:v3o0rsg0r2mqdkgg728dojf204v3dtee3f@4ax.com...
> > As viewed from alt.california, Duffer wrote:
> >
> > >I am by NO means a Clinton supporter (eg, he doesn't know where to
> > >draw the previously mentioned line). I just don't think that what he
> > >did was an impeachable offense. Did it tarnish the office? Yes, but
> > >many other presidents have done so, too. I don't think what happened
> > >was appropriate, but it wasn't an issue for impeachment. The
> > >accompanying disgrace was an appropriate 'punishment'. If members of
> > >Congress were booted for infidelity, how long would the roll call
> > >be? Shorter than it is now.
> >
> > "For infidelity"?
> >
> > Thank you, Duffer; you've just proven that you didn't know - and
> > still don't know - what was going on.  It wasn't about infidelity,
> > it was about lying while under oath.  Try that yourself, if you're
> > ever in court, and see it gets *you*.
>
> Whatever.

That's how you feel about perjury which, by the way, is often a felony?
"Whatever"??  What other felonies do you feel so blas� about?

> Do you really think it would ever have come up if people weren't in an
uproar about the
> 'infidelity' issue.

I can only hope so.

I don't care who he gets a blowjob from.  He could get it from you for all I
care.  No crime in that.  It is, however, a crime to lie under oath.  It's
called perjury.  If he wants to lie to his wife, that's his business.  If he
wants to lie to his friends, that's his business.  If he wants to lie to the
entitre country, that's my business as a citizen but not illegal and my
recourse in through the voting booth. If he lies under oath, that's a crime.
If he seeks to deny someone, say a Paula Jones for instance, her entitled
day in court, that obstruction of justice, also a crime.

> One lead to the other. So I guess unfaithfulness should be a
> punishable crime in your book?

I don't care who consentually screws who or how they do it.  The lying isn't
the issue except that he lied UNDER OATH!  What part of that "under oath"
part escapes so many people so easily?  It never was about a blow job.  It
never was about infidelity.  And for those who, for some bizarre reason,
insist that it was, I suggest they get their head out of the sand and
remember what taking an oath is about.  Or is their word (their oath) so
easily dismissed as well?

The real dishonesty is from those who insist the impeachment was abnout sex.
It never was.  But sex sure was a convenient way for the ostrich brigade to
avoid seeing what it really was about in that the economy is/was healthy.

> I still don't agree that what he did was right. And it started long before
his presidency.
> It lead to a whole other series of events that showed his true character.
I grant you that
> I don't like what has been going on in the White House since he got there,
but isn't
> possible to damage him on his official incapacities instead of his
personal ones? Those
> tactics are what have so many disgusted with the state of politics and
politicians. Would
> you ever consider a political career? Most people wouldn't, and don't.

Even his friends consider him a slimeball now.  But being a slimeball was
never an impeachable offense, nor was it ever part of those circumstances
considered illegal.  Having a lack of character is neither illegal nor
immpeachable.  Indeed, one might argue that having a lack of character makes
for being a good (if there is such a thing) lawyer or a good politician
(even miore rare).

I wouldn't consider a political career, either.  Even a Pervert can be
selective about those with whom he associates.  And I sure as hell wouldn't
subject myself to a background check!