An incident took place in 1996 as the votes in the presidential election were coming in. Bill Clinton was on his way to defeating Bob Dole. Respected commentator David Brinkley made an unflattering remark about Clinton, not knowing his microphone was still on. He staed that with Clinton reelected, “Now we (America) will be subjected to another four years of God d@mn nonsense.”
While I personally agreed with those sentiments, and while I would argue the Seinfeld (Clinton) Presidency really was a nonsensical era of nothingness, the remarks themselves were beneath the normally dignified Mr. Brinkley. Unwilling to make a phony, namby-pamby non-apology apology (quite Clintonian actually), he was contrite and sincere. He stated that we as people, “Don’t always have to be right…but we do have to be fair.”
Mr. Brinkley apologized to Mr. Clinton, and to his credit, Mr. Clinton was gracious enough to do an interview with him after the election.
I think of that quote often because I value my integrity. Now that I have a blog, I zealously guard my brand. I never want to be the Jayson Blair Times, accused of shoddy work, low standards, and a lack of ethics. The only thing I have in this world is my name, and it matters to me.
Therefore, my obligations to my readers are…1) To admit my biases. I am a conservative republican. I am absolutely biased. 2) To try and be right as often as possible. 3) To be fair to people, and admit when I am wrong. Mistakes will happen, but they must be acknowledged, and not with a page 37 retraction in fine print.
So now I have a question for the world. Is Bill Clinton a convicted felon. I have stated that he is. It is my understanding that as part of his plea agreement, he was fined $90,000 by Judge Susan Webber Wright, and surrendered his law license. It was my understanding that this was a felony plea. I am aware that most people associate felonies with violent crimes, and while he was accused of rape at one point, he has never pleaded guilty to a violent crime. However, there are non-violent felonies, and my understanding was that his plea was a felony plea.
I need to know the truth. There are millions of reasons to hammer Bill and Hill, but I do not wish to be part of the conspiracy crowd. I have seen it directed at George W. Bush, and it sickens me.
If I am wrong, I will loudly retract my statement calling him a convicted felon, and never use that as a talking point again.
I need the help of everybody out there. Show me the evidence.
You must cite your sources, and let me view the link. Also, do not send me opinion columns. I want cold hard facts from respected legal analysts. Also, I do not want to receive anything from the Jayson Blair Times. I will not read it out of principle because they have no credibility. Other liberal or conservative sources are fine.
Again, it is vital that this question be answered. With my Jewish Holy Day of Yom Kippur Approaching, I do not want to have possibly spoken Loshon Hara (gossip) about an innocent man. If I am right, I will obviously beat my chest loudly and let the world know how incredibly close to prefect I am, which I may or may not apologize for on Yom Kippur.
The bottom line is I have stated that Bill Clinton is a convicted felon. Others disagree with me. The blogosphere should do its job and get me the cold hard facts.
I have often accused the Clintons of revisionist history. I do not wish to be guilty of the same transgression.
My column is not a courtroom. He is guilty until proven innocent. Again, I am biased, and I believe I am right.
Well, legal beagles of America? What say ye?
eric
As you know, eric, this one had me scratching my head as well. Since the senate aquitted Cliton’s impeachment articles, there’s nothing there. so leaves only Judge Webber Wright’s decision regarding the Paula Jones case. Here’s from CNN…
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/12/clinton.contempt/
“District Judge Susan Webber Wright found President Bill Clinton in civil contempt of court Monday for his “willful failure” to obey her repeated orders to testify truthfully in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit.”
A civil contempt holding is not a felony, though this was certainly a fair and interesting question. Many people have made the error of calling Clinton a felon, but to be a felon one must be convicted of a felonious crime, which he was not. Bill Bennet made this slanderous mistake, though ironically his own brother represented Clinton at the time! In any case, it was a civil, not criminal, matter and was eventually settled out of court.
I hope this clears it up. It did for me, anyways! I hope this also shows just how petty, unfortunate, unnecessary, and damaging to the presidency and balance of powers that the Lewinski scandal and impeachment was.
JMJ
By the way, Eric, you’re a good man for bringing this up. Sometimes we make mistakes. Good people deal with that honestly. I’ve tried to live up to that myself. I see that you are here. Kudos!
JMJ
I wish he was convicted, he should of been convicted, but the US Attorney wimped out. The part in quotations from my comment on the prior posting comes directly from the US Attorney’s statement. Also, this is a link to a great piece that summarizes much of the entire Clinton mess quite nicely – http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/clinton/icreport/intro030602icrpt1.pdf .
I am amazed to have found this site , however, I wonder why he was never convicted with those crimes he commited .
http://prorev.com/wwindex.htm
Timothy J. Budding-into-other-peoples-houses, Why do you wish he was convicted of something and for what should he have been convicted?
Don”t you ever think to yourself, “Gee, ya’ know, Clinton wasn’t all that bad after all.” I’m no big Clinton fan, but Christ, when do we finally put all this vitriol to rest? Even Nixon is considered a pretty good president by most educated people’s standards today. Johnson, Truman, and Ike, are all rather favored today. Toward the end of their presidencies and for a while thereafter, they were pilloried. Not so anymore. Who knows? Maybe even Bush II can redeem himself in history. Clinton, by any reasonable standard, should at least be thought a descent pilot of the boat of state. When the friggin’ heck are you guys gonna put all this to rest? Let’s face it, this Clinton-lunacy is a joke. A sad, worthless, incorrect, unproductive joke.
JMJ
The worse that Bill looks, the worse Hillary will look for staying with him. As a result the right can legitimatly question her motives and decision making.
I would see that as just one motive.
The other reason Bill falls prey to constant ridicule is because the left never lets up on Bush while not acknowledging the hypocrisy in doing so.
Jersey, I actually DON’T ever think that Clinton wasn’t that bad after all.
I think he was potentially WORSE, and that a lot of people have covered up for him and helped him hurt women.
As a woman (and Independent voter, not a Conservative), I look at how this man has treated women, how he has objectified them, degraded them, humilated them, and then potentially threatended them into silence. His wife has ‘forgiven’ this behaviour over the years.
If he were ‘everyman’, women would avoid him like the plague. But since he’s a ‘celebrity’ he gets a rap on the knuckles and women continue to fawn all over him.
Does this need to play out in the political arena? Probably not. But when the media treat him like ‘St Bill’ and coronate his wife on a daily basis, I do think people need to be reminded that they’re not who they’re painted as in the mostly liberal media.
Bill Clinton didn’t help drive the debt up three trillion dollars, Bill Clinton did not maintain constant deficits, Bill Clinton did not send us off to a failed unilateral war,, Bill Clinton did not authorize torture, circumvent FISA, and eavesdrop on American citizens. Bill Clinton did not burn bridges with our allies and during his term American, and Clinton himself, were as popular as ever both here and abroad. Bill Clinton earned everything he had, rather than have his daddy make his way for him. Bill Clinton spoke correct English and did not scapegoat others who do not. Bill Clinton did not say that his God instructed him to do things, nor did he wear his religion on his sleave. Bill Clinton worked with the Republicans to accomplish things from welfare reform to bringing an end to the Yugoslavian civil wars to balancing the budget for the first time in over a generation. Bill Clinton worked with congress to pass the Family and Medical Leave act. Bill Clinton remains mostly popular, though strangely and inanely polarized by a minority of hard-core right-wingers, to this day.
Bush has little on which to rest his laurels, Micky. People don’t like the Bush administration for real reasons. People dislike the Clinton administration because cognative dissonance disallows them the ability to see his adminstration for what it was: Fairly sucessful.
JMJ
I have to agree with Jersey McJones. It speaks volumes that someone WANTS Clinton convicted of a felony, whether he actually committed one or not.
No, Bill Clinton is not a felon.
I hope this helps you to sort through your facts more closely, if you are going to take your information from the Clinton slime machine. The facts you beg for are out there, and the fact that he is NOT a felon couldn’t be clearer, if you just take the time to check your own opinions against the facts.
Special Prosecutor Ken Starr brought his charges of multiple felonies to a Federal Grand Jury and the Jury refused to indict Clinton on any of Starr’s charges. Therefore, Ken Starr took his charges to the GOP Congress, who impeached him but did not have the votes to go any farther.
(And Clinton’s poll numbers zoomed up, and have never fallen since.)
The contempt of court charge (not even close to a felony – more like a serious parking ticket) had nothing to do with Starr’s charges or Monica Lewinsky. Moninca Lewinsky agreed that she and Clinton had never had sex, and her testimony was backed up by the secret Linda Tripp tapes.
The contempt of court charges had to do to do with Paula Jones, and were issued after the impeachment fiasco, when Paula Jones accepted Clinton’s settlement.
The court was angry that Clinton offered to settle with her after saying that he would not settle with her. The fine and revoking of his law license had nothing to do with Ken Starr’s felony charges.
Scooter Libby was actually charged, indicted and CONVICTED on the very felony charges that you accuse Clinton of.
How do you feel about Scooter Libby?
Your answer will probably indicate whether you are fair-minded or not.
Hillary stayed with Bill, and she never ever looked the suffering wife. Power beckoned all the time, and didn’t she personally manage some of the damage control then. The Clinton issue will be closed only when Hillary retires, or when the PRC smacks the US real bad, which they will try to do, which certain powermongers helped them to prepare for.
The Chinese connections alone, to my non-expert eyes, is enough reason to make clear that near-felony can be just as bad as felony, for the USA is at stake, with it the safety of quite a number other nations. A tip-of-the-iceberg perspective, as most Clinton actions never got scrutinized. You can ruin a nation in 4 years, in 8 for sure.
Jersey McJones,
Clinton balanced the budget by raping the DoD budget and skimming off of the SS fund. That is a proven fact. I was on active-duty throughout the Clinton years and we had little or nothing to train with. That we pulled off Afghanistan and Iraq is a testimony to the US Military.
Clinton also wholly ignored the rise of global terrorism and a terrorist operation the size of 9/11 takes YEARS to plan and implement. From killing Americans at Waco to passing on OBL to selling nuke secrets, that spoiled baby-boomer did more to hurt American than Alger Hiss.
PS: Jersey McJones,
I have reams of data, all validated, on the Clintons at:
http://noliberalspin.townhall.com/Default.aspx
Clinton sat on his ass and watched the monster we are dealing with today grow to a point that cost us three thousand plus lives. Now Bush has to handle and clean up after that 900 lb gorilla that Clinton was too feeble to deal with. 911 was in the works on Billy Boys watch. He missed it, plain and simple. And got very defensive when Wallace asked him about it { ” I did everything I could”} and then attacked Wallace.
I will give Bill credit whwere it is due. But I wonder how many of us would trade Bills accomplishments to have back all the people who have died in the last 7 years as a result of his unwillingness to confront what was already a serious problem.
Bill was on record long before anyone stating that Saddam had WMDs. And at that time he did, And then there was those weak left jabs at Al Queda.
This is probably why Sandy Berger had to high tail it down to the archives and stuff his underwear
Okay guys, this is exactly what I was talking about in action. Mention Bill Clinton and the rightwing starts rabidly frothing at the mouth. First of all, he’s gone now. He’s no longer the president. His legacy is marginal at best.
No, Gunny, you may have reams of data, but you don’t have facts, and data as Ben Wattenberg says, is just the plural of anecdote. ;) All kidding aside, Clinton conspiracy theorists are wasting their time, and just making themselves look loony. Really, try to find something valid and relevent with which to concern yourself. Yes, Hillary may be back on the scene, and therefore by default her husband, but I seriously doubt she can win a national election. There are too many people like you out there who would mobilize to defaet her. So this whole Clinton thing is moot. Pointless and moot.
And Waco? Please. The government may have mishandled Waco, but only the people in that compound can be blamed for the final outcome. Why is it conservatives only favor “personal responsibility” when it suits them? I, for one, am darn glad we have a government that disallows illegally armed, religious fanatic, fatalist, apoplectic, armageddonists. The Waco people were better than Al Qaeda.
You said, “Clinton balanced the budget by raping the DoD budget and skimming off of the SS fund.”
The congress has the power of the purse, Gunny, and for 6 of Clinton’s 8 years it was Republican. In my opinion, they should have gutted it a lot more, removed our troops from the vast majority of the 140 nations in which they’re stationed, and get America back to our founders ideals as opposed to a mirror of the fall of the Roman Empire. And every president and congress since Carter has looted SS. So, don’t morally equivicate. No one is saying that’s a good thing.
Micky, What monster? Terrorists? Oh please. Anyone who really thinks terrorists are a genuine existential threat to America is a paranoid dellusional. We will have spent 2 1/2 trillion dollars on the misadventure in Iraq and we’ve already lost more people fighting this insipid “war on terror” then we lost on 9/11, let alone the maimed, psychologically damaged, and the broken families. And again, you shouldn’t morally equivicate with a man you apparently destest.
Yes, Bereger may have taken some docs that exposed Clinton’s failures to prevent 9/11, but there is no proof of tat. Just more silly conspiracy theories. Moot. Pointless, silly, paranoid, moot.
JMJ
Oops… I meant, “The Waco people were NO better than Al Qaeda.”
JMJ
O.K. , I have to call you on this one
” Anyone who really thinks terrorists are a genuine existential threat to America is a paranoid dellusional. ”
If you seriously mean this, it just means that you are without doubt one of the most delusional lost minds I have ever come across.
This is an extreme but true example of the looney , looney, looney left.
Hell, I’m not even going bother with you after that remark, see ya !
Jersey,
Acually, I KNOW people in Waco who were there. First, the ATF was informed by people in Waco that Koersh came into town on business on a certain day. Without fail. Second, the AT was up for a budget review. This too is fact. They needed something spectacular to up their budget. Three, Lon Horiuchi, the sniper who killed an innocent woman and an infant at Ruby Ridge was never disciplined under the Reno admin. The Clinton admin simply did not care as it was right-wing religious folks. Remember the phrase: “Freedom of religious expression?”
Nice dodge of my invitation to review the Clinton info on my blog. I also have good stuff on Land Deal Reid, Illegal Alien employer Red Nanny P-Lousy but I know you liberals hate facts.
As far as Sticky Socks Berger goes, get a grip. He was busted and some of the documents found UNDER a construction trailer.
Spin on.
Funny how we will never be able to find out what Berger took.
Process of logic leads me to think it was something really bad, really bad.
So bad that he had to get it out there even if it meant recklous and blatent actions.
micky2,
No doubt. The proof is in the pudding in any event. Bubba and his crew of Carter retreads screwed the pooch.
In fact, Les Aspin, a Carter retread, told the Commaning General in Somalia, who asked for tanks, that he would not get them. Aspni didn’t want a big “footprint”. It was Pakistanis TANKS that rescued the Army Rangers in Mogadishu. And what happned? Bubba cut and ran thus encouraging OBL. SO typical of libturds to run when the going gets tough.
Mr. MsJones – To answer, here is why I think he should of been convicted:
“1) President Clinton’s admission of providing false testimony that was knowingly misleading, evasive, and prejudicial to the administration of justice before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.”
” …admission of providing false testimony”. He lied under oath. It’s called perjury. I “wish” he was convicted because I believe that would of been the right thing to happen. “Wish” is probably a bad choice of wording there, though.
Also, if you review the comments to the post previous to this one, you might note that it looks like I may have been the one to question the statement that Clinton was a convicted felon, ironically coming to his defense.
I give a great measure of kudos the author of this blog, as you did also, for opening up this discussion. It helps confirms that the time I take to read it each day is not wasted.
JEEZ – I can’t type worth a cud – the MsJones is a typo, sorry.
I’m sorry you feel that way, Micky. But I’m an American, and no bucnh of Muslem-crazed hasashsins is going to scare me. I watched the towers fall. I know how dangerous terrorism can be. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. I also know that the attack was preventable. And that worse things have happened. If you want to live in fear, then fine. I do not. America is a great, strong nation. Terrorism may be a trajic pain in our collective ass, but it is not a threat to our nation.
Gunny, the Branch Davidians were a dangerous, terrorist, child-abuding, brain washing, apocyleptic cult. There are limits to all freedoms, including religion. Amassing illegal arms, polygamy, and child abuse cross the line. While I completely concur that the government botched the arrests, the blame for the outcome rests soley with those in that compound. Had they surrendered peacably all this would have been long forgotten by now. But no, those sleazy, murderous, child abusing, scum of the Earth chose to die and kill their own children with them. If there’s a hell, David and the rest of the adults in that wicked cult will burn there forever.
Gunny, Somalia was Bush I’s mess. It’s a shame we ever went in there, and it’s a shame what happened to some of our kids over there. But I’m glad we got out. That country is one libertarian utopia of mess that we should be damn glad to have no part of.
Timothy, Clinton lied at a deposition in answer to an irrelevent question that should never have been asked and would not have been permitted to have been asked at trial. A petty, stupid, vindictive, idiotic, irrelevent question from a sleazy lawyer representing a sleazy client egged on by the sleazy GOP. The entire affair makes conservatives look like prepubescent punks. Really, put it away. Move on. Get back to the old days, when people like Barry Goldwater and William F Buckley were the brains of conservatism. The Limbaugh/Hannity brand of conservative block-head psuedo-intellectualism is killing your ideology. When are you guys gonna realize that?
JMJ
Interestingly enough, Eric, you have been provided the evidence that Bill Clinton is NOT a convicted felon several times now, and you have blocked that information from appearing the two times I sent it to this blog. If you really intend to make a retraction, then what are you waiting for?
GunnyG, you are full of bull.
I served under Clinton as well. We had training for terrorism that was stopped when Bush came into office. For that very reason, I left the military in Feb 2001 and refused to serve under Bush.
Clinton had one attack on the WTC just after he came into office ( six deaths) and we weren’t attacked on US soil again. We got rid of an evil dictator, with the support of the international community, and we didn’t have over 3000 deaths to do it.
I don’t think Clinton was the best C-i-C, having served under GHW Bush as well (terrific C-i-C!) but I definitely think Bush is the Worst C-i-C ever.
Jan,
I was talking about training and deployments, terrorism training is a ONE DAY class ONCE a year. It’s done in the Base Theater on a powerpoint. Not exactly a high dollar training session.
First of all, I did EVERY major deployment from Okinawa from 1996-2001. Second, I did 90% of the minor deployments on island or local trips. We usually had to crossdeck our gear with LITTLE TIME for maintenance. We were chronically short of spare parts. I know, I did the classified SORTS report and was the Unit historian for that period. Next, we were NEVER above 80% manning and I had a total of FIVE key billets from 1996-1999 including a stint as a Platoon Commander as a SSgt (which is usually a LT’s billet) for six months. My day started at 0500 and ended about 1930. So please, don’t tell me I’m wrong, I FLIPPING LIVED IT! I originally enlisted in August 1979 so I got to enjoy that enormous asshole Carter as well.
Also, I NEVER make a statement without backing it up. I draw your attention to the State Dept’s OWN terrorist website. Please note the amount of attacks against Americans from 1993-2000. Bubba was criminally negligent as was Sandy “Sticky Socks” Berger. Americans were being killed by A-Q and Bubba and his co-president Hillary IGNORED IT!
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm
Jersey,
Actually, if you knew WTF you were takling about, you’d know that Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides. This can be researched as the Marines were there under Bush 41 with no problems. You see, I had friends there in country handing out food and water. Once Klintoon started going after Addid, he pissed off the natives. Then Aspin denied armor support to keep it low-keyed. Then 18 Army Rangers paid with their lives.
Next, the Branch Davidians have never been proved to be such. In fact, Koresh was wanted on MINOR weapons charges. The FBI and the ATF attacked the building right off, the report absolutely admits that.
FACT: Within a minute of the raid starting, a Davidian, Wayne Martin, called 911 pleading for them to stop shooting. The resident asked for a ceasefire, and audiotapes clearly caught him saying “Here they come again!” and “That’s them shooting, that’s not us!”
The local sheriff then attempted to contact the ATF force, but initially could not get through as the ATF communications officer had turned his radio off. Eventually the sheriff got through and negotiated a ceasefire.[3]
FACT: Between 1993 and 1999, FBI spokesmen denied (even under oath) the use of any sort of pyrotechnic devices during the assault; non-pyrotechnic Flite-Rite CS gas grenades had been found in the rubble immediately following the fire. In 1999, FBI spokesmen were forced to admit that they had used the grenades, however they claimed that these devices, which dispense CS gas through an internal burning process. (I’ve thrown CS grenades in exercises and they have started grass fires)
The FBI claims the gernades were not fired into the building itself. According to FBI claims, the fires started approximately three hours after the grenades had been fired.[9] When the FBI’s documents were turned over to Congress for an investigation in 1994, the page listing the use of the pyrotechnic devices was missing. Gee, go figure.
Of course the Feds said that the Davidians started the blaze but the whole thing could have been avoided had the feds waited to nab Koresh in Waco.
The bottom line is that NO ONE was punished for Ruby Ridge or Waco. And WHO can forget Reno’s Gestapo in action.
http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/gonzalez_elian_sm.jpg
Gunny,
“..Somalia did not start coming apart until Clinton started taking sides.”
Now, I don’t know much about you, or what you know about modern history (I was a history major who worked for many years in international trade, albeit at the grunt level) but just so you know Somalia was a stinking hell hole long before GHWB, let alone Clinton. I actually give GHWB some credit for trying to intervene, but his efforts were certainly no more or less intensive than Clinton’s. “Blackhawk Down” could well have happened under Bush I or Clinton. Read about it.
As for the Branch Davidians, we can parse the “facts” however you like. It’s easy to do that with dead people and ashed buildings. In my opinion, these were sick, twisted religious fanatics who got what they deserved – and probably wanted. I just feel bad for the children. For that I first blame the Davidians themselves, and then the government for not realizing what sort of sick, twisted people these were. It was mishandled, obviously, but whether it should have been dealt with in the first place should not be in question. Koresh was a dangerous domestic terrorist.
JMJ
Okay, I’ll try this one more time. And again, I’ll tell you where I am coming from. I am a legal beagle. I graduated from law school and was admitted to the bar in 1980. I have been a Republican and am now a Democrat. I voted for Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan twice, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton twice. If Al Gore chooses to run in 2008 I’ll vote for him again. I’m a tree hugging environmentalist and an ordained minister with standing in two major Protestant denominations. And I used to live in San Francisco and in Berkeley.
The information I have is that (1) Bill Clinton was acquitted by the U.S. Senate on the impeachment articles, (2) on July 29, 1999 he was ordered to pay $90,686 for civil contempt of court in the Paula Jones case with the judge referring the matter to the Arkansas State Bar for possible disciplinary proceedings, and (3) on January 19, 2001, in response to those possible proceedings he agreed to a five-year suspension of his law license in Arkansas and pay a $25,000 fine. As a specific condition of his agreeing to the suspension and fine, no criminal charges were to be filed or pursued against him. Civil contempt of court is not a felony — in fact it is not even a crime. Thus, he is not a convicted felon and has never even been charged with a felony so the whole issue about whether he is getting special treatment by being allowed to vote is a non-issue.
Here are some of the sources I looked at. Eric, you will increase your own credibility if you recognize that while the NY Times may have its faults, rejecting it out of hand in all circumstances is really kind of silly.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/19/clinton.lewinsky/
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760626.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D9103EF93BA35757C0A9679C8B63&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FJ%2FJones%2C%20Paula%20Corbin
There’s no question that Bill Clinton has his moral shortcomings. All of us do. But he is most definitely NOT a convicted felon.
I also agree with those who say it’s time to move on from the fanatical obsession some people have with Clinton. Too many people on the other side of the fence suffer from the same obsession with Richard Nixon. Part of the problem for both Clinton and Nixon is that, while both had their moral shortcomings, they were both quite effective politicians and that frustrated their opponents to no end. And, just as Richard Nixon sought and largely succeeded in redemption to become not a politician but a statesman, I suspect Clinton will do the same. I can’t say the same for our current president, however.
I agree with #14. You put it on the line. Bill Clinton was in trouble, because he raised his right hand and lied under oath. Old george and dick did not have the balls to raise their right hands. They refused, but they did go before congress, sitting together, but were to cowardly to swear under oath. Just like they did not have the balls to serve in the military, but call ones that did cowards. I have realized that the people that support this war and the lies that bush told to get us there, are the ones in this country not serving, never have. It just came out in nixon’s papers about dick applying for a job with him, and the DUIs that were listed in his application. Plus being drunk out there when he shot that old friend. If I shoot someone and liquor is involved, I would be arrested ande found quilty of a felony. I also agree with #28 comments. I think Nixon and Clinton have been great world diplomats and that is what we need here. Lord knows bush is hated throughout the world.To hide behind religion is the worst thing this ad. is doing. LORDY To think that he told the world that God told him to bomb Iraq. People need to look at the records of the whole bush family. FDR had to pass a law to stop themy from aiding Hitler. Its called “DO not help the Enemy. I look at all runing for Pres., on both sides and I could live with any of them. But who can clean up this mess. I can’t see republicians voting for G. from up in NY as he has committed adultry, how many times.
I haven’t read all the posts in this thread because, frankly, too many of them get offtopic and get engaged in flamethrowing. However, to your original point “Is Bill Clinton a Convicted Felon?” I believe you to be disingenuous at best and certainly deceiving: you ask the question and then demand proof for the negative: “If I am wrong, I will loudly retract my statement calling him a convicted felon, and never use that as a talking point again.” If he is not a convicted felon there of course would be no evidence to prove that point, indeed, it is your obligation as the accuser to show proof that he IS a convicted felon, court documents, legal statements, etc; for surely if he was convicted of a felony such a record would certainly exist. I demand either the proof or the loud retraction, without either I will consider you dishonest and possibly a fraud.
George W Bush did not lie about Iraq, and did not “hide behind religion” to justify the wise action of retaliating againt Saddam and taking the largest terrorist force in the world out of the equation…… and more than 500 WMD were found after the invasion.
No Bush “aided Hitler”. It was ruotine for businesses to deal with Germany prior to WW2. It was nothing unusual.
Clinton committed felonies. The only reason he was not convicted is that Democrats put “party unity” above justice. The head of the Democrat Party said that no Democrat senator who voted to convict Clinton would get any re-election money.
Womanizing is not a felony. Lying in court is. Clinton turned a civil court matter into a felony charge by lying.
And don’t forget that Clinton also used the FBI to spy on his political; enemies. The recent articles on spying on Democrat candidates in both Bush administrations are strangely silent on Clinton’s similar activities. Don’t tell me the press is not biased.
Despite what the judge said, and what the papers said, Clinton was found guilty of criminal contempt. A civil contempt is refusing to do something like pay child support, sign a deed, tell the other party where a asset is, etc. One is punished until one conforms there actions. It is coercive not punitive.
What Bill did was an insult to the court like telling the judge he is an ass or worse committing perjury (which is what he did). It was punishment for improper conduct unbefitting a party or a lawyer. That is criminal cintempt. No one contested it because if it were criminal contempt Paula Jones would not/ could not have received the “fine”. Bill did not contest the ruling because he did not want to be found to be a criminal. Nevertheless, he has been found to have committe a felony but was not convicted of
a felony because he was not indicted/charged as it were.
Bill’s legacy is not only the redefinition of the word “is” it is also the redefinition of the word “criminal contempt”.