GOP likely to urge Obama officials not to shred documents

Status
Not open for further replies.
TXgolfer said:
Just another corrupt scumbag like Rangel and Waters..... :shrug: Nothing to do with race.
Click to expand...

You know, it's funny. The moment you call them corrupt for what they are they pull the race card time and time again thinking it has to do with skin color. By the way, did you hear about the Jefferson case in Lousianna on hiding $90,000 dollars in a freezer? Rep. William “Cold Cash” Jefferson who got thirteen years in prison for what the judge in the case called “the most extensive and pervasive pattern of corruption in the history of Congress.” William Jefferson sentenced to 13 years in prison | NOLA.com
 
TXgolfer said:
A government official lying under oath to a judge is grounds for divorce????
Click to expand...


If he committed a crime, sure.

But since he had and affair with someone who's not his wife, that would be grounds for divorce if Hilary didn't agree with him having an affair and they are not swingers.

I think impeachment is out of proportion for something that is a personal matter between Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton. I was hoping you would be able to understand that and that I wouldn't need to spell it out.

Oh, impeaching the President over an affair seems to be unnecessarily cruel and unjust and more than a little over the top. Didn't the Constitution have something to say about cruel and unjust punishment?

Impeachment should be reserved for serious abuse of power like breaking into hotels. It's not something to be abused and to be used to get rid of someone who belongs to the "wrong" party and then ignored when it becomes inconvenient for your party's purposes.
 
If I'm not mistaken, the articles of impeachment is done when the president is convicted of high crimes like treason, and bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Not all misdemeanors are worth of jail time nor should all misdemeanors committed by the President be worth of an impeachment.
 
deafskeptic said:
If he committed a crime, sure.

But since he had and affair with someone who's not his wife, that would be grounds for divorce if Hilary didn't agree with him having an affair and they are not swingers.

I think impeachment is out of proportion for something that is a personal matter between Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton. I was hoping you would be able to understand that and that I wouldn't need to spell it out.

Oh, impeaching the President over an affair seems to be unnecessarily cruel and unjust and more than a little over the top. Didn't the Constitution have something to say about cruel and unjust punishment?

Impeachment should be reserved for serious abuse of power like breaking into hotels. It's not something to be abused and to be used to get rid of someone who belongs to the "wrong" party and then ignored when it becomes inconvenient for your party's purposes.
Click to expand...

over $6 million in just 6 months. that's how much Ken Starr's office spent just to wrap up the case against Clinton. nice huh? ..... and Republicans spent about $60 million on this investigation and yet... only about $15 million on investigation into 9/11 terrorist attack. :roll:

"He [Republican Bob Livingston] made Clinton look like Mary Poppins" -Larry Flynt
 
TXgolfer said:
Just another corrupt scumbag like Rangel and Waters..... :shrug: Nothing to do with race.
Click to expand...

Avoiding the real question. The original article posted in this thread is about the GOP "urging" Obama not to shred documents. Obama has nothing to do with Rangel or Waters. So why do you bring up other democrats? Trying the ol' guilt by association routine? Doesn't work.


kokonut said:
Why are you asking me that question? I didn't post a link about Eddie Bernice Johnson. TXgolfer did. Go ask him that question.
Click to expand...

Translation: Now that I realize what the real question is and that I have no good answer for it, I'm just going to quietly back away and hope nobody noticed the part where I jumped in with my misinformed opinion.

You two are too predictable. It is so tiring to debate with people who use logical fallacies so implicitly in their argumentation that they don't even know it. It's just become natural for you to deflect and spin; you can't do anything else.
 
deafskeptic said:
If I'm not mistaken, the articles of impeachment is done when the president is convicted of high crimes like treason, and bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Not all misdemeanors are worth of jail time nor should all misdemeanors committed by the President be worth of an impeachment.
Click to expand...

That is correct. Jeez.
 
TheWriteAlex said:
It's just become natural for you to deflect and spin; you can't do anything else.
Click to expand...
It is to inform, critique, educate. :P
I learned the way it works a few weeks ago. Now I play along. Try it. Wurx fur mee. :giggle:
 
TheWriteAlex said:
Avoiding the real question. The original article posted in this thread is about the GOP "urging" Obama not to shred documents. Obama has nothing to do with Rangel or Waters. So why do you bring up other democrats? Trying the ol' guilt by association routine? Doesn't work.

??Um, Waters and Rangel were in Congress long before Obama came along. Nothing to do with Obama here. Again, GOP asked officials in the WH not shred or delete relevant documents. I didn't see any avoiding the real question from TXgolfer. Just a fact that Maxine and Rangel are being investigated.


Translation: Now that I realize what the real question is and that I have no good answer for it, I'm just going to quietly back away and hope nobody noticed the part where I jumped in with my misinformed opinion.

You two are too predictable. It is so tiring to debate with people who use logical fallacies so implicitly in their argumentation that they don't even know it. It's just become natural for you to deflect and spin; you can't do anything else.
Click to expand...

Exactly what logical fallacies did we use? Rather a curious response from you.
 
deafskeptic said:
If he committed a crime, sure.

But since he had and affair with someone who's not his wife, that would be grounds for divorce if Hilary didn't agree with him having an affair and they are not swingers.

I think impeachment is out of proportion for something that is a personal matter between Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton. I was hoping you would be able to understand that and that I wouldn't need to spell it out.

Oh, impeaching the President over an affair seems to be unnecessarily cruel and unjust and more than a little over the top. Didn't the Constitution have something to say about cruel and unjust punishment?

Impeachment should be reserved for serious abuse of power like breaking into hotels. It's not something to be abused and to be used to get rid of someone who belongs to the "wrong" party and then ignored when it becomes inconvenient for your party's purposes.
Click to expand...

Lying under oath is a crime.....
 
TheWriteAlex said:
Avoiding the real question. The original article posted in this thread is about the GOP "urging" Obama not to shred documents. Obama has nothing to do with Rangel or Waters. So why do you bring up other democrats? Trying the ol' guilt by association routine? Doesn't work.
Click to expand...


Actually it has nothing to do with obama (yet) Since your "scumbag" post (18) came after the Rangel and Waters post (17) I thought you were calling Republicans scumbags for going after them.....hence my question.
 
deafskeptic said:
So it is. Given the context, i'd consider it a misdemeanor.
Click to expand...

The law is pretty clear

Sec. 1621. Perjury generally

-STATUTE-
Whoever -
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer,
or person, in any case in which a law of the United States
authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify,
declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony,
declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is
true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes
any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement
under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title
28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material
matter which he does not believe to be true;

is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly
provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the
statement or subscription is made within or without the United
States.
Click to expand...

18USC1621

But even misdemeanors are impeachable offenses
 
TXgolfer said:
18USC1621

But even misdemeanors are impeachable offenses
Click to expand...

If it's serious enough. The question here is this the proper punishishment given the context? I don't think most people would be honest about affairs when they're under the oath -especially if their wife is watching.

Had Clinton been convicted of sex harrasement, I would have been for the impeachment.
 
Some time ago Congress passed a bill blocking any impeachment of Bush for his role in the war. I am sure Obama is covered.
 
Beowulf said:
Some time ago Congress passed a bill blocking any impeachment of Bush for his role in the war. I am sure Obama is covered.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. They'll want repeal it when a liberal is President and they seem determined enough to find anyway to get rid of Obama.
 
Beowulf said:
Some time ago Congress passed a bill blocking any impeachment of Bush for his role in the war. I am sure Obama is covered.
Click to expand...

Kucinich tried to include the Articles of Impeachment against Bush. It never progressed to a full House vote. There was no bill bocking this articles of impeachment bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top