Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Gingrich, Livingston & Hastert Impeached Clinton for What? [View all]quadrature
(2,049 posts)63. he wasn't forced to answer the q.... that is what bothers me....nt
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I didn't pretend shit. I never said they weren't delighted to have grounds to impeach him.
merrily
May 2015
#4
Investigating him and impeaching him are two different things. BTW, they did not even investigate
merrily
May 2015
#49
Jebus. Google. The Court that heard the Paula Jones case held him in contempt for
merrily
May 2015
#11
No, the Jones case was settled because Clinton paid a chunk of cash out of court.
merrily
May 2015
#15
Did you read it? ALL of it? The article mentions reinstatement of the trial, saying
merrily
Jun 2015
#58
STOP Focusing on the impeachment. Two courts of law held him guilty of lying under oath.
merrily
May 2015
#14
Never once denied I said perjury at first. Desperate much? Still ignoring lying under oath, I see.
merrily
May 2015
#50
Again, it met all the elements of perjury. I cannot read anyone's mind to tell you why
merrily
Jun 2015
#52
Sure, Starr just didn't prosecute Clinton for perjury because he wasn't in the mood...or something
Major Nikon
Jun 2015
#53
Both the Paula Jones Court and the Arkansas Supreme Court found all 3 of those things.
merrily
May 2015
#31
No matter what it was, knowing they'd been after him, he sat in front of TV cameras and in
merrily
May 2015
#21
The court found that he had lied to the court while under oath. There is no question of that.
merrily
May 2015
#24
OMG, you're back about five posts ago. I haven't used the word perjury since then.
merrily
May 2015
#26
Um, no you got answers and links. Your trumped up story was the only fart and splutter in the
merrily
May 2015
#29
All three elements you described above were met. So held both the Paula Jones court
merrily
May 2015
#33
So your argument is that Starr didn't prosecute Clinton for perjury because he exercised discretion
Major Nikon
May 2015
#35
Sure he was completely guilty of perjury, but curiously was never so much as indicted
Major Nikon
May 2015
#38
To justify the never ending perpetually expanding expensive witch hunt they had against him
Johonny
May 2015
#34
Clintons approval ratings during the impeachment were higher than St. Ronnie's ever were
Major Nikon
May 2015
#41