Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

  1. #1
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:08 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    21,968

    While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Should we open criminal investigations into the Clinton/Gore administration's foreign campaign contributions from China, especially to see if they resulted in favorable policy?

    I mean, after all, if laws were broken -- and these are serious allegations -- they should be held accountable, correct?

    It's not facetious. It's a serious question.

    If you say "no," please explain why.
    Last edited by Harshaw; 04-30-09 at 10:57 AM.
    2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
    2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
    2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.

  2. #2
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:08 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    21,968

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Dangit. Will a mod please add a yes/no poll?
    2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
    2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
    2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.

  3. #3
    Pathetic Douchebag
    Cilogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    10-10-14 @ 03:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,587

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Should we open criminal investigations into the Clinton/Gore administration's foreign campaign contributions from China, especially to see if they resulted in favorable policy?

    I mean, after all, if laws were broken -- and these are serious allegations -- they should be held accountable, correct?

    It's not facetious. It's a serious question.

    If you say "no," please explain why.
    I don't know much about that China contribution information, but if it's true, is that really illegal?

    I would say that its almost irrelevant now, and I have come accept the fact that candidates might or might not get outside contributions.

    What the Bush admin allegedly did is way more serious and worth being given a full on trial.

    So I would say no, was that contribution issue even confirmed?


  4. #4
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Should we open criminal investigations into the Clinton/Gore administration's foreign campaign contributions from China, especially to see if they resulted in favorable policy?

    If you say "no," please explain why.
    Well, of course not.
    Only Republicans should be accountable for breaking the law.
    Democrats? Well, thats OK, because its for a good reason.

  5. #5
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:08 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    21,968

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Cilogy View Post
    I don't know much about that China contribution information, but if it's true, is that really illegal?

    I would say that its almost irrelevant now, and I have come accept the fact that candidates might or might not get outside contributions.

    What the Bush admin allegedly did is way more serious and worth being given a full on trial.

    So I would say no, was that contribution issue even confirmed?
    Accepting foreign campaign contributions is illegal. What's worse is that Clinton pushed for and got Most Favored Nation status for China after that election, which could constitute a quid pro quo, and bump it up to the level of bribery.

    So, it's possible that the President of the United States was, by bribery, under the thrall of a foreign power.

    Yeah, I'd say that's as LEAST as serious as waterboarding some terrorists.

    Was it "confirmed"? You need an actual serious investigation first. But it sure didn't look good.
    2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
    2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
    2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.

  6. #6
    Guru
    Binary_Digit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Last Seen
    08-24-16 @ 01:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,413

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Every crime that government officials commit or are suspected of committing should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I can't even begin to understand why party affiliation should have anything to do with it. Well, I do know why, but it borders on treason.

    But in that specific incident, there was a Justice Dept. investigation which resulted in 22 criminal convictions. There were also House and Senate investigations that pretty much went nowhere. Apparently they were unable to find evidence that Clinton himself was involved and/or committed any crime.

  7. #7
    Pathetic Douchebag
    Cilogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    10-10-14 @ 03:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,587

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Accepting foreign campaign contributions is illegal. What's worse is that Clinton pushed for and got Most Favored Nation status for China after that election, which could constitute a quid pro quo, and bump it up to the level of bribery.

    So, it's possible that the President of the United States was, by bribery, under the thrall of a foreign power.

    Yeah, I'd say that's as LEAST as serious as waterboarding some terrorists.

    Was it "confirmed"? You need an actual serious investigation first. But it sure didn't look good.
    Ok well if that's the case, and I now know more about it than before, then I change my answer to yes. Like someone said above me, every government crime or scandal should be investigated.


  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Cilogy View Post
    What the Bush admin allegedly did is way more serious and worth being given a full on trial.
    Hmmmm....Bush, for the sake of national security, implemented an enhanced interrogation routine that was deemed legal by his staff of legal advisors.

    Clinton took campaign cash from China in exchange for military secrets.

    Oh, clearly what GWB did was sooo much worse.

  9. #9
    Guru
    Binary_Digit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Last Seen
    08-24-16 @ 01:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,413

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Hmmmm....Bush, for the sake of national security, implemented an enhanced interrogation routine that was deemed legal by his staff of legal advisors.
    What if a President's staff of legal advisors deem that rape is legal? Is everything they say automatically correct just because they are lawyers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Clinton took campaign cash from China in exchange for military secrets.
    Three investigations could not conclude that, so I don't understand how you can be so certain.

  10. #10
    Pathetic Douchebag
    Cilogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    10-10-14 @ 03:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,587

    Re: While we're prosecuting the previous administration

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Hmmmm....Bush, for the sake of national security, implemented an enhanced interrogation routine that was deemed legal by his staff of legal advisors.

    Clinton took campaign cash from China in exchange for military secrets.

    Oh, clearly what GWB did was sooo much worse.
    Good someone agrees with me.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •