RightinNYC

It's true. Although I would have to argue that his history of allegations of sexual harassment is something that was in fact worthy of investigation.

__________________
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Pacridge

But that's not what they were investigating. They were investigating whether he had sexual relations in the oval office with Ms. Lewinsky. Nobody made the claim that she was harassed. She certainly didn't.

Squawker

The investigation was in relation to the Paula Jones harassment case.

__________________
http://users.igl.net/jdsquawker/squawkereagle.gifhttp://users.igl.net/jdsquawker/squawkername.gif

Political Word W/RSS Feed

Stinger

The denial of the left never ceases to amaze me. It was about the perjury and obstruction of justice. That's what Linda Tripp brought to the media and justice department. Lewinsky was asking her to join in a conspricy to obstruct justice, a conspricy headed up by a sitting President. Gee just like Watergate.

Hmmmm, it is the left that is always saying that until someone is convicted of a crime we must declare them innocent. So what crime was Nixon convicted of? What crime was he charged with at the time?

Clinton actually committed crimes right on camera, admitted to them and was held in contempt of court. Linda Tripp exposed his conspricy to commit those crimes so why is she not a hero too?


And Clinton WAS impeached and held in contempt of court and plea bargained a felony, so what is your point?

How on earth could it have beena coup if the result would have been Al Gore becoming president and appointed his own Vice-President and more than likely being reelected to two more terms? Esplain that one Lucy.

So what?

Debateable and totally discounted by those around him but I find it curious that you think attacking him personally makes your case. How silly.

Which has nothing to do with this discussion, I take it you find your case weak and must try to make up for it with this nonsense.

Nope it was pretty cut and dried. He committed crimes before a federal court.

The trial in the Senate and the decission to not remove him was, but the charges were completely valid.

I agree but so what?


I guess more so than who ever broke into the Republican Headquarters 4 times that very same year.

[/quote]Nixon was the worst President in modern American history, by light years. Bush is his caddy.....[/quote]

Oh you won't find many presidential historians who agree with you on that one, but they will rank Clinton as one of the most failed.

Pacridge

Fair enough then how come they were checking DNA on a dress she never wore? Monica never claimed she was abused. She asked to be left alone over and over.

Stinger

But lying about it in a federal courtroom is. And trying to get other people to also lie under oath is. Although I DO believe his sexual behavior in the White House was grounds to have him removed from office that was not what the Lewinsky matter was about. It was about Clinton being sued in court by another former employee who he tried to get sexual favors from, while on duty. It was about his breaking the law by lying about his other sexual activities with subordinate employees, information the plaintiff had a right to under the law. Then it was about his going in front of a federal grand jury and further lying and obstructing justice.

And the Democrats thought all that was OK.

Which is why a lot of people went to jail. The difference is the Republicans and conservatives do not protect Nixon while the the Democrats and the left still try to protect Clinton. If Clinton were a Republican or a conservative he would have been repudiated and sent out to pasture a long time ago, as it is he still sulley's the left.


And Felt was convicted of doing the same, so doesn't that make him just as "immoral"?

Stinger

No because he was accused of sexuall assualting and sexually harassing a state employee. I you are claiming he had an "affair" with Jones I'd like to see your evidence. And yes what he did to Jones was illegal. Jone's problem was the statute of limitations had run out and she had to sue in civil court.

Stinger

They were investigating whether he lied about it in a federal court where he was REQUIRE BY LAW to give truthful answers. A law, the Molinari Act, which HE SIGNED to much acclimation by the feminist groups as increasing protection for women in the workplace.


But having sexual relations with subordinate workers and rewarding those workers with special favors is creating a sexually hostile workplace and other workers can sue you for sexual harassment and having sexual relations with other subordinate workers is subject to inquiry under the federal rules of evidence if you are sued in court for such actions.

Now don't you support the proposition that if a woman is sexually harassed by her boss, and she takes him to court and she knows he has asked other subordinate workers to perform sexual acts on him and they have received rewards for doing so and those that don't get nowhere and she has not because she refused that she should be able to bring those facts into court to help prove her case?

Stinger

Was she a subordinate employee whom Clinton asked to perform sexual favors during the course of her employement? Did she recieve gifts and special treatement from him after she had perfromed sexual acts on him? Were she and Clinton trying to get Tripp to commit perjury and obstruction of justice?

yes to all of the above.

Arthur Fonzarelli

Anyone of us having an affair/sexual relations/sexual harassment with a subordinate would be fired from our jobs. I have heard the argument..."not if you or I were the 'boss' or 'owner' of the business. What's wrong with that is Clinton was not the boss..."we the people" are. AND, he doesn't own the country.