Lucky...

Members
  • Content

    10,453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by Lucky...

  1. dude.... I read him saying he was wrong about that. calm down. take a step back from your caps lock. Ok course he's wrong, I just wanted to see him admit that WITHOUT ANY BS RATIONALIZATIONS. This is not a question of whether Clinton lied, whether the senators gave him a break, this is a singular question of whether Belgian has the character to admit he wasn't aware of how the impeachment process works; obviously he didn't but has now been educated. It's both fun and typically boring to watch one neo-con come to the rescue of another, so let's take a break from that and see if Belgian can answer the question himself.
  2. Hahahahaaha, the preudo acft sheetmetal mech can't answer. To break from our forum neo-con, I will answer: Yes they are and under Clinton they did pursue the perjury (the sexual harrassment was never pursued, something Belgian will figure out as soon as he graduated high school) and came up empty as far as a conviction went. To give to the, "Give Belgian a political education" fund, I will help you with all 4 charges brought before the House: Upon the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228-206 vote)[14] and obstruction of justice (by a 221-212 vote)[15]. Two other articles of impeachment failed — a second count of perjury in the Jones case (by a 205-229 vote)[16] and one accusing Clinton of abuse of power (by a 148-285 vote)[17]. Four Republicans opposed all four articles, while five Democrats voted for three of them and 1 Democrat for all four. Upon passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton became the first elected U.S. president and the second U.S. president to be impeached, following Andrew Johnson in 1868. (In 1974, Richard Nixon resigned the Presidency before the House impeachment vote.) 2 passed, meaning they were political indictments, there was no sexual harrassment pursued nor indicted. Now, we'll all see you look sillier and for the 4th or 5th time dodge my question: WERE YOU FLAT WRONG, WITHOUT EXCUSES, WHEN YOU WROTE THAT AN IMPEACHMENT IS A CONVICTION?
  3. 27 and 32 of them respectively? Post some, hell, then post 27 and 32 and we'll see if that saved his ass or it's your fuzzy math. Ken Star and Newt couldn't get their witchunt to yield even a simple majority and you claim there were 27 and 32 who switched votes.....but let me guess..... it's your guess. Again, fun to be in your mind Oh, and this: Belgian: He WAS found guilty (it is called IMPEACHMENT) by the House of Representatives but was not punished by the Senate. Lucky: An impeachment is a political indictment, it makes possible the trial process; it's only a way to bring it to trial, not a conviction. It's tantamount to a probable cause hearing. Belgian: Yes, you are correct. But that does not alter the fact that the majority of the Sanate believed he was guilty but voted 'not guilty' because the Constitution only allows for the removal of the impeached and they felt his crimes were not of a serious enough nature to remove him from office. Lucky: Are you like the Fonz; can you not admit you're wrong? Belgian: Can't admit i was wrong? You didn't read my response eto Bill, did you? I thought not. So then you admit you are wrong about THE IMPEACHMENT FROM THE HOUSE BEING A FINDING OF GUILT? I read teh rest of your excuse about the senate, a very unsubstantiated assertion considering it would take 27 andd 32 senators to flip votes, but the issue was about the impeachment from teh House, not the voting from the trial body, the senate, Mr Strawman. It'll be typical to watch you squirm out of this very simple question: are you flat wrong about the impeachment being a conviction? Tell me, how does it feel to have no clue about the Clinton Impeachment? He wasn't impeached om the 2 sucessful counts of sexual harrassment, he was impeached for perjury and obstruction. By the end of this thread you'll then have an understanding. I had an advantage, I was taking poli-sci in the midst of the witchunt. Well, I was trying to understand that which is why I asked you about LIBBY'S CRIMINAL CONVICTION, but you id as usual and ran from that one. Well, sure, I didn't realize Scooter was your idol, but hey, an neo-con will do. Oh, that's right, it was Harding; the first Reagan. Keep pretending to understand high school politics, clearly you don't. BTW, you didn't respond to the other post I wrote, I expect you won't - keep runnin.
  4. What? Still no comment on that criminally guilty guy who didged prison? Yea, you and your neo-con senators too: http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2007/07/gop-senators-who-voted-for-clinton.html But that guy who got the BJ and lied is worth hanging . See, the country had enough of the family values neo-cons like you and all these senators. Oh, show us a list of all the presidents you have voted for. Oh, it's personal.
  5. But Bush a lying moron is only 835,000 hits. http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS341US341&q=Bush+is+a+lieing+moron#hl=en&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS341US341&&sa=X&ei=Yi13TNeoF4P6sAOC3tSgDQ&ved=0CBYQvwUoAQ&q=Bush+is+a+lying+moron&spell=1&fp=ad526d12389e3c08
  6. He WAS found guilty (it is called IMPEACHMENT) by the House of Representatives but was not punished by the Senate. So, yes you are correct an impeachment is a political indictment, but he was found guilty by the House . Are you like the Fonz; can you not admit you're wrong? You said the House found him guilty and that the Senate decided not to punish him. The truth is that the House found the charges sufficient to bring to trial, he was acquitted at trial. And hell, they needed 2/3 and couldn't even crap out a simple majority on either charge. Even if the maggots had solidarity they couldn't have made 67, so quit and quit looking more and more silly. And the Senate refused to punish him? Who said they chaged their vote to avoid punishment? Not that it matters, as they couldn't make 67 anyway. Perhaps the truth is that all Dems and some R's thought Newt and his misguided agenda were so pathetic that they wouldn't fascillitate it. And then family values Newt of course fucked around on his wife but that's OK to Belgian, as he didn't lie about it. It must be fun to be in your mind. But Clinton was found not guilty in a political court, so you are contradicting yourself, unless you count your dellusion that 27 and 32 senators changed their vote from guilty to not guilty. Are you claiming Dems changed their votes too? I love to read your love for the system until you dislike the outcome, then it's flawed. BTW, how do you feel about Libby, a person very close to the pres, for obstruction and perjury convicted in a CRIMINAL COURT WITH MUCH HIGHER CRIMINAL STANDARDS, then commuted after a 30 month sentence? Oh yea, we won;t talk about that one. Or we could cite Stenibrenner's felony pardoning. Of course we would have to indict your neo-con heroes, so that won't happen.
  7. Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues Shocker: a Christian Libertarian is all about downgrading Obama; what next? GWB was a great president? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Rasmussen Shocker: Lucky can't refute the results, so he goes after the source; what next? Yes, the credibility of the poll; Rass is notoriously rating Obama lower than other polls. I'm not calling Rass a NAzi maggot, Reagan-loving pile of Christian Wall Street Journal dogshit, I'm merely pointing out that the rag is notorious for downgrading Obama; there is a difference that I'm sure is indistinguishable to you.
  8. And I replied before I read this. Amazing how people call others, "goat fuck stupid" when they can't grasp simple concepts like that of political impeachment.
  9. And don't forget your own personal savior, Bill Clinton, who committed sexual harrassment while Governor and President, lied about it to a grand jury ( a felony), and a bunch of goat-fuck-stupid people said it was ok. Yea, basicaly the entire world thought it was pathetic to persecute the guy for that. I guess you're saying the you selectively agree with the process. If a guy you want gets convicted, it's a good system; if a guy you want covicted get acquitted, it's a non-functionin g system. Amazing how he left and holds > a 50% approval, whereas your favorite president is probably < 30% and never was impeached. See, silly neo-cons focus on silly issues; the rest of us focus on substantive issues like the economy, social need, etc. Many European countries thought it was pathetic of RW garbage to persecute him for that, then the head tool to the impeachment, Newt Gingrich, was discovered fucking around on his wife. Oh, is that how sad your political understanding is? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment Impeachment is a formal process in which an official is accused of unlawful activity and the outcome of which, depending on country can lead to the removal of that official from office or other punishment. They even place the operative word in italics. It is an accusation, not a finding of guilt. Now, what was that you were saying about, "only the goat-fuck-stupids did." An impeachment is a political indictment, it makes possible the trial process; it's only a way to bring it to trial, not a conviction. It's tantamount to a probable cause hearing. Oh, anyone maggotted and who wants to deprive poor and MC people of benefits and make the even more rich. If you had the courage, you would tell me. I don't blame you, I wouldn't like that title either, but denial is a bad thing.
  10. Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues Shocker: a Christian Libertarian is all about downgrading Obama; what next? GWB was a great president? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Rasmussen
  11. you could search for rhaig is goat fuck stupid and come up with many hits also. The presence of something on the internet doesn't make it true. The more prevalent presence of something on the internet doesn't make it more true or less false. It only indicates how many people are posting about it. True, but all that aside, the garbage groups she posted are corrupt.
  12. And don't forget your own personal savior, Bill Clinton, who committed sexual harrassment while Governor and President, lied about it to a grand jury ( a felony), and a bunch of goat-fuck-stupid people said it was ok. Yea, basicaly the entire world thought it was pathetic to persecute the guy for that. I guess you're saying the you selectively agree with the process. If a guy you want gets convicted, it's a good system; if a guy you want covicted get acquitted, it's a non-functionin g system. Amazing how he left and holds > a 50% approval, whereas your favorite president is probably < 30% and never was impeached. See, silly neo-cons focus on silly issues; the rest of us focus on substantive issues like the economy, social need, etc.
  13. quoting numbers from search results is hardly damning. Some of what's listed inside some of the results would make for interesting discussion. It's a shame you didn't dig a little deeper. However I could post google results for "amazon is goat fuck stupid" but that doesn't mean it's true. Or we could search Alexander Haig and come up with many hits.
  14. Back in the day we had the oil scandal tied to Harding and he went down as nearly the worst pres of all time, now we have Cheney tied to Halliburton and we expect it.
  15. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Back at ya - tax cuts have ruined this country, do I need to post all the data while you fail to show me a major fed tax cut that has done us good? Oh, well you want tax cuts, every time we have a major one the spread gets greater; it' simple deduction.
  16. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Hmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater.
  17. More of your neo-com fantasies. More arguments why your philosophy is so wonderful. As well, anothr argument that the FF and their museum rag is worthless by today's standards. No, but the top executive is or will be. They still have to address the Defense of Marriage Act drawn up by the (not-so) moral right and signed by Clinton 96, this establishes a marriage betwween a man and woman only. So gay marriage is a state concept, abolition is already federal and needs to be overturned. Absolutely, states make staute; SCOTUS makes law.
  18. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. Yep, like the 14th, enacted at least in part to tell southern states that the 13th and Emancipation Proclamation wasn't/weren't just a fed document(s). If we want to have the "same" country across the board, we need to limit variances between the states. Of course your beloved elitists can't expolit the poor as well when you have that pesky fed gov ensuring they don't. And you have the elitist 5% exploit the poor; who's the sociopath and who's the egalitarian? Right, we should let the elite decide who doesn't get HC, welfare, etc.
  19. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. Communist/Socialist; all the same if you don't know the difference. English as a second language? When you have nothing of importance to say, go after their typo's and spelling.....Pretty Juvinile aproach! I addressed your lack of understanding the diff between Communism and Soialism. Typos are mechanical errors, this: bay sitted is supposed to be babysat? I'm the last to knock spelling/grammar, but it was too funny to pass up
  20. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some.
  21. Thats what started this thread. Go back and read the entire first post. OK, dude. I was trying to answer your question in a reasonable way, but I guess that didn't work. So here's a new answer. Sure, state militias have the right to wage war. Why don't you start one up and lead the charge over the border into Juarez? Let me know how it goes. Educated, informed people like you will have no luck appealing to those who make knee-jerk reactions to issues; people who don't read or research. I come here in part to learn, I was unaware of the info you posted, it cleared up the issue and yet others just want to build the argument from the top-down, starting with how they want it to turn out and trying to build a case that caters to that vs learn the fundamentals and build the case bottom-up. This same poster thought it was Obama's fault for a Texas fed judge striking down stem cell funding; the judge was of course appointed by Reagan. Somehow that's Obama's fault to this poster. Don't argue with those who refuse to listen to reality.
  22. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. Communist/Socialist; all the same if you don't know the difference. English as a second language?
  23. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS.
  24. And you would denounce China as a POS nation . Must be nice to selectively mve around your opinions.