DaVinci

Seems like a stand up guy. I will watch his voting record over the next few years to see what I think about him as a President. I do think that he would stand a better chance as a VP canidate due to what Quade said.

If the IRS then still fines him he IS still guilty.

Difference is you refuse to admit the guy that cheated on his taxes is a criminal. Saying, "Its just taxes, not a big deal. But that other guy killed someone." All the time not providing proof of the guilt.

He was still fined for it. So you saying he was fined illegally? See if you plead out to get the charges dropped, it still means you did it. Hell, he ADMITTED IT! It does not matter that he was found not guilty, he SAID HE DID IT! Got proof? If not it is just a claim. Big difference, Clinton admitted to lying under oath. Not almost lying, or not being glad that he didn't lie enough to be really lying.

Oh look, character attacks from you!!! Where is my surprised look!

Breaking news - nacimund still can't understand the difference between facts and opinions.

I would call that a major fuckup. If he did the misleading, I would call it criminal.

No. One is a fact, the other conjecture. We have what you consider to be a nothing offense. But we know it happened. Vs. an offense that is large, but may not be true. So you will let the known fact slide, but wish to crucify based on only allegations.

Ya know what part of your dance I forgot? I really can't believe I did... The attacks!!!!! Sheesh, How could I have missed mentioning your little jabs? Can't back your stance, so you distract and attack and insult. Infact if the good folks reading this thread look back between us they will see you started this whole "dance" thing. Edit: Your first post was about Bush. "That's in keeping with a large majority of the Bush apologists on dropzone who seem to still be campaigning against Clinton." Your second an attack: "You mean the way you stopped bashing Billy when he was found not guilty? " Your third actually ALMOST related to the thread..Or the direction you took the thread. The next a flat out attack "DaVinci wants it both ways. He wants to imagine his guy would be found not guilty and criticize the hypothetical continuing criticism by the liberals. But in the exact same post, he ACTUALLY does precisely what he complains the other side WOULD do. I have little reliable information about Bill Clinton's hypocrisy but we see here a perfect compact example of DaVinci's. " Then the dance comment and then more attacks. I know how you play, I have read it many times. Attack things when you can't defend. Distract and divert a thread to your own meanings.

One was proven, the other is not. And thats kinda my point. I welcome the impeachment. I really hope you get it and can't wait to see the results. All I ever want is the truth no matter from which side of the party line it is on.

As opposed to your dance? Bitch, gripe, complain....Wait for it...Provide no proof, make accusations, and repeat.

All I am doing is stating a fact. I am sorry if that is inconvenient for your beliefs. Of course you may not have an issue with a guy lying under oath.

How would a censure work? Just a vote, or would there be a "trial"? A censure could just be a political tactic if there is not a "trial".

Then you are willing to admit to a double standard. Then it should be easy to provide the proof in a court then? So far no one has been able to provide proof. And if nothing comes from it, will you then drop it?

Not even close, I just want people like you to be able to back what they say, or quit saying it. Again I am FOR the impeachment. Like I said I just hope if nothing is found that people like you will only quote facts, not continue to try and state accusations as fact. But you are free to continue to think otherwise.

You keep just ignoring that he pleaded out one day before he left office. "In April 1999, about two months after being acquitted by the Senate, Clinton was cited by Federal District Judge Susan Webber Wright for civil contempt of court for his "willful failure" to obey her repeated orders to testify truthfully in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. For this citation, Clinton was assessed a $90,000 fine, and the matter was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court to see if disciplinary action would be appropriate.[10] Regarding Clinton's January 17, 1998, deposition where he was placed under oath, the judge wrote: "Simply put, the president's deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false . . . ." [11] In January 2001, on the day before leaving office, Clinton agreed to a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license as part of an agreement with the independent counsel to end the investigation. Based on this suspension, Clinton was also automatically suspended from the United States Supreme Court bar, from which he chose to resign. [12]" All I have ever said was he lied under oath. Which is true. No, but you are making claims with no proof. I ahve proof of my claims. Then why are you always doing it? All I have done is state fact, you state conjecture. Like I said, you could say Bush got a DUI. I would not disagree nor defend it. But you keep making accusations with nothing to back it up then defend Clinton when he was in fact been proven to have lied.

Then why did he get fined 90,000 and get disbared if he did nothing wrong?

One really big difference. We have proof Clinton had an affair. We have proof he lied under oath. You have nothing, but make the claim anyway. Then you defend Clintons actions by saying they are not as bad as Bush's...However, you STILL can't prove any wrong doing by Bush. So you are convicting Bush without evidence. And defending Clinton against evidence. Like I said before, I WELCOME an investigation, even an impeachment trial. And again I state that if he is found guilty, I will join with you to seek punishment. I also hope that if found not guilty you will drop your accusations that were found false.

Sorry, I assumed you would understand that "they can do as they please" was in reference to taking whatever they want in payment provided it was legal. None of your list of arguments involves currency as an issue. So care to try again?

Close but not right. I hope that if Bush is found not guilty of the crime of lying to lead us to war then you will quit saying he did. I still claim Billy lied under oath since he DID lie under oath and admitted to it. If Bush goes to trial about Iraq and gets accuited, you could still claim he had a DUI since he actually did.

Why thank you! You should see my Salsa!

Not of what I acussed him of. But you never pay enough attention. I don't care he got a BJ, I care he lied under oath. Which is a crime which he did plead out of and was disbared. Again, not even close. I want you guys to shut up about what you can't prove. I can prove Billy lied under oath, which IS a crime. Some is included in this post above. It is not my fault you make judgements without any evidence.

Wow, the one issue you and I change sides on....Someone mark this second down in time. I would agree if it were the GOV. I think all GOV business should be done in English and dollars...But a private business can do as they please.

Simple, my point is that both wars were popular at the start. The major media focus is on Iraq. We get reports every HOUR or less. So the poulartity is falling. The same would happen in any war with the same level of coverage. EVEN Afganistan. And the real issue is someone who grabbed a headline and thought it could be tied into making Bush look bad. That person (and the others that jumped on the bandwaggon) didn't bother to pay attention to the details of the system they were praising, and cussing at the President for not having. However, a little tiny bit or research showed that the system has plenty of drawback in a MOUT environment. Enough that the system is a bad choice.

I welcome it. If he is found guilty he should be punished. So far no one has been able to provide proof of anything. Maybe this would provide that proof. I also hope that if found guilty he actually gets punished unlike Billy. However, I hope that if found not guilty then you guys would stop the bashing. I however doubt it.