English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

job more than having to defend against the years-long campaign to destroy his Presidency?

Please keep in mind that among the accusations of dirty business deals, rape, and murder, the ONLY thing he was ever found was guilty of was perjury about a sexual incident that never would have come up if not for the otherwise dead-end investigation...

2007-11-19 03:08:25 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Notice all things everyone is assuming, like that I'm defending Clinton's behavior...I never said that!

NOBODY HAS ANSWERED THE QUESTION

2007-11-19 03:47:21 · update #1

Oh, and "Babe"...are you really that stupid you can't see that the entire basis for my question is that the investigation itself wasn't about sex?

2007-11-19 04:08:14 · update #2

11 answers

And Al Capone was brought down on a tax evasion conviction... So what? That was the least of the things Capone did.

If you are going to be a slime-ball and create enemies, you better have your bases covered...

It is simply arrogant and sloppy to think that you won't be investigated by your political opposition. It is selfish and a dereliction of your duty to jeopardize your ability to execute your responsibilities in such a foolish manner.

2007-11-19 03:39:32 · answer #1 · answered by floatingbloatedcorpse 4 · 0 0

Bill Clinton a very clever man who was able to choreograph all the shady undertakings done in such a way as to not incriminate himself, was finally caught lying about his illicit affair.
Yes, it was distracting to the work he was supposed to be doing. He even talked to former president Ford and asked him what he should do. Ford advised him on his sex addiction by first telling the truth and next to get counseling. Clinton refused.
He was dishonest to the American people, and to himself.
There were many decisions made by Clinton, that were not to the benefit of the USA.

.

2007-11-19 03:21:35 · answer #2 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 3 0

what's at situation right this is the warfare. on a similar time as united statesa. has its troops in harms way, we ought to consistently no longer be attacking their Commander-in-chief by potential of calling him names, claiming he's stupid or making wild accusations of criminal interest. Doing so harms our troops ethical and encourages the enemy. moreover, it is achieveable to be in opposition to the goals of the President's administration without own assaults or phony investigations. The term for the occasion no longer in potential has consistently been the "unswerving opposition". There are good the thank you to oppose and undesirable the thank you to oppose. bill Clinton dedicated a criminal offense as President. He lied decrease than oath and suborned the perjury of Monica Lewinsky. For this he exchange into impeached. The Senate did no longer think of those costs rose to the point the place he could have been removed from place of work. there's a huge distinction between criticizing the President and bashing the President. i exchange into severe of bill Clinton for many things yet i did no longer bash him. i'm severe of Hillary for many things yet i do no longer bash her. the subsequent time a Democrat turns into president, he/she would be in a position to be my president merely as much as a Republican. you could wager i'm going to be an outspoken member of the unswerving opposition while want be yet i'm going to additionally help the President while his/her movements are appropriate. One can't be so skinny skinned that each and each grievance is seen as bashing nor could any American have interaction in bashing the President. like it or no longer, the President is President by way of fact he gained the election. it is an exceptionally complicated interest and the President merits our help and the excellent factor approximately any doubt. regardless of the shown fact that, now that it is election time, one expects the gloves will come off. After the election, we ought to get returned to being united statesa., One united states of america decrease than God, Indivisible. .

2016-11-12 02:18:39 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

So you're admitting that defending himself against the years-long campaign to destroy his Presidency distracted him from his job?

And you're also admitting that the only thing that the Republicans had on him was his perjury in the Lewinsky affair?

So therefore his affair, which led to the perjury charges, distracted him for years while he was Presidency?

Thanks for agreeing with us.

2007-11-19 03:36:18 · answer #4 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 1 0

Look she checked into the oval office some 50 something times.
How many times did the CIA director check in to see the President?

2007-11-19 03:13:02 · answer #5 · answered by csn0331 3 · 5 1

Bill Clinton could lie UNDER OATH about such a small personal matter as getting a BJ, what would he NOT lie about?????

"white Water"? "Illegal Chinese COntribution"??? North Korea?? Iraq WMD?

2007-11-19 03:15:42 · answer #6 · answered by Boomer 4 · 4 0

who cares he just got caught for what countless of president have being doing for years.remember george washington and thomas jefferson,2 of the greatest president this country had, they had like 20 kids apiece from affairs with their slaves.

nobody ever criticize monica for what she did,it was just as much as her fault as clintons obviously she only came forward for money and book deals.she acted like she had an emotional problem because of the affair,u have emotionally problems when you've been raped not when you willingly consent to oral sex.but we treated here like a victim of a crime for some reason.

if u want to see what or what not clinton do to take action against terrorist i suggest u talk to richard clarke or at least read his new book.he was the cheif of counter terrorism advisor under clinton.he also served under reagan ,bush sr,and bush jr,untill he was fire or either resigned under bush jr.he mad it clear that clinton mad an valid effort to fight terrorism

2007-11-19 03:25:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

If you don't understand why it is a disgrace for a sitting president to lie under oath you just don't and won't get it.

2007-11-19 03:14:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

Why are democrats so stupid to think this was about a sexual encounter?

2007-11-19 03:11:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

Maybe they do but that would be partisan bias. It was a storm in a teacup but became a witch-hunt far out of proportion that it merited.

2007-11-19 03:16:35 · answer #10 · answered by Paranormal I 3 · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers