• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Monica Lewinsky Breaks her Silence

This was my original point, but all the conservatives seem to want to talk about was him perjuring himself.. They either can't read or don't want to accept that a 19 year old has free will.

And she wasn't 19 - she was a 22 year old college graduate. And she already had years long affair with a married man under her belt before Clinton.

We are sexual beings. Sometimes we make stupid mistakes because of it. Monica and Bill made gross errors in judgment. And Bill lied under oath about it. Hillary had nothing to do with it.
 
And she wasn't 19 - she was a 22 year old college graduate. And she already had years long affair with a married man under her belt before Clinton.

We are sexual beings. Sometimes we make stupid mistakes because of it. Monica and Bill made gross errors in judgment. And Bill lied under oath about it. Hillary had nothing to do with it.

She certainly did. She was the one who coined the term "vast right wing conspiracy" in defense of Slick Willy, a phrase which continues to inspire left wing conspiracy theorists today.
 
She certainly did. She was the one who coined the term "vast right wing conspiracy" in defense of Slick Willy, a phrase which continues to inspire left wing conspiracy theorists today.

Ummmm.....you do not think there is a consipiracy where they are concerned???:lamo
 
Ummmm.....you do not think there is a consipiracy where they are concerned???:lamo

This was also my point about Republicans exploiting the situation for political gain. If anyone in their right mind thinks that Republicans only motive here was to see some sort of justice served then they are ****in nuts. Lets not forget who was the ringleader in trying to bring down Clinton.. Mr. Gingrich, who himself was involved in a few love affairs. Republican hypocrisy combined with opportunism cannot be denied.
 
This was also my point about Republicans exploiting the situation for political gain. If anyone in their right mind thinks that Republicans only motive here was to see some sort of justice served then they are ****in nuts. Lets not forget who was the ringleader in trying to bring down Clinton.. Mr. Gingrich, who himself was involved in a few love affairs. Republican hypocrisy combined with opportunism cannot be denied.

It was funny, Hillary was made fun of saying stuff about right wing conspiracies -- seriously, I will bet over two decades later the DP boards still have folks bringing up Vince Foster or Whitewater. I heard a Rep. talking head dredging that stuff up (again) just the other day. We are talking twenty plus year old material.

One jackass was even bringing up brain injury and Hillary. Seriously, no, there is no vast right wing conspiracy against Clinton.;)
 
If Hillary becomes a candidate, all the past probably will be dredged up, as will any potential health issues. And health issues are important. Why was she wearing those special glasses? If she no longer is, isn't this also significant?
 
This was also my point about Republicans exploiting the situation for political gain. If anyone in their right mind thinks that Republicans only motive here was to see some sort of justice served then they are ****in nuts. Lets not forget who was the ringleader in trying to bring down Clinton.. Mr. Gingrich, who himself was involved in a few love affairs. Republican hypocrisy combined with opportunism cannot be denied.

Gingrich didn't go after Clinton for his "love affair". He went after Clinton for perjury. Remind me again when Gingrich was accused of or convicted of perjury. If he was, he's a hypocrite. If he wasn't, you're barking up the wrong tree, or you simply have no clue what Clinton did wrong.
 
If Hillary becomes a candidate, all the past probably will be dredged up, as will any potential health issues. And health issues are important. Why was she wearing those special glasses? If she no longer is, isn't this also significant?

Her health issues are completely valid concerns when it comes to her being a candidate for President (in fact, that is one of the main reasons I would not vote for her). However, bringing up an affair that her husband had over 15 years ago is much more akin to mudslinging (and considering the reaction we are seeing, not exactly effective mudslinging). It really shows nothing about her character itself in a valid way, without making some major assumptions about her character to begin with, which would show bias one way or another.
 
This was also my point about Republicans exploiting the situation for political gain. If anyone in their right mind thinks that Republicans only motive here was to see some sort of justice served then they are ****in nuts. Lets not forget who was the ringleader in trying to bring down Clinton.. Mr. Gingrich, who himself was involved in a few love affairs. Republican hypocrisy combined with opportunism cannot be denied.

don't forget henry hyde, the person responsible for bringing the impeachment charges against bill clinton
his extramarital affair was exposed by the husband of the woman he was screwing at the time
those family value republicans you know
 
Her health issues are completely valid concerns when it comes to her being a candidate for President (in fact, that is one of the main reasons I would not vote for her). However, bringing up an affair that her husband had over 15 years ago is much more akin to mudslinging (and considering the reaction we are seeing, not exactly effective mudslinging). It really shows nothing about her character itself in a valid way, without making some major assumptions about her character to begin with, which would show bias one way or another.

Do you think there is a massive difference between investigating a persons physical ability to do the job as saying "see the glasses , must be brain damaged"?
 
Do you think there is a massive difference between investigating a persons physical ability to do the job as saying "see the glasses , must be brain damaged"?

Oh, definitely. It's basically the difference between legitimate concerns over her health (fainting or dizzy spells, signs of longterm exhaustion, or hospitalizations for things that aren't basically accidents or regular illnesses) and inferences that simple things mean more than there is any proof for.
 
It was funny, Hillary was made fun of saying stuff about right wing conspiracies -- seriously, I will bet over two decades later the DP boards still have folks bringing up Vince Foster or Whitewater. I heard a Rep. talking head dredging that stuff up (again) just the other day. We are talking twenty plus year old material.

One jackass was even bringing up brain injury and Hillary. Seriously, no, there is no vast right wing conspiracy against Clinton.;)


Were any of these claims untrue, or do some of them point to a character problem. The Left didn't want Barrack Obama's past investigated for a variety of reasons and now they are wanting the same thing with Hillary Clinton, it seems.

How do you arrive at the best candidate for the presidency if you refuse to investigate their history?
 
don't forget henry hyde, the person responsible for bringing the impeachment charges against bill clinton
his extramarital affair was exposed by the husband of the woman he was screwing at the time
those family value republicans you know

Did any of these people, like Bill Clinton, commit perjury in front of a Grand Jury?
 
Do you think there is a massive difference between investigating a persons physical ability to do the job as saying "see the glasses , must be brain damaged"?

Yes, there is. And Rove said one thing while the NY Post said the other.
 
Do you think there is a massive difference between investigating a persons physical ability to do the job as saying "see the glasses , must be brain damaged"?

Who made the claim, "see the glasses , must be brain damaged"?
 
Did any of these people, like Bill Clinton, commit perjury in front of a Grand Jury?

was referring to the hypocrisy of those on the right, such as henry hyde, who drafted the articles of impeachment, who simultaneously castigated clinton's affair while having one of their own ... all while proclaiming they - and their party - stood for 'family values'

now, notice that the investigation of clinton began with whitewater. but nothing criminal was found there. it was only when the republicans caught wind of the lewinsky blow jobs that they questioned the president about his sexual activities - and he wrongly lied about it. he lied about receiving a blow job. later, dicknbush lied about the presence of WMDs to justify a war with iraq, resulting in the deaths of 4,489 Americans. so much for your party of family values
 
So tired of the stale "Bush lied" thing. And this thread is about Clinton and his perjury, not about Dubya.
 
now, notice that the investigation of clinton began with whitewater. but nothing criminal was found there. it was only when the republicans caught wind of the lewinsky blow jobs that they questioned the president about his sexual activities - and he wrongly lied about it. he lied about receiving a blow job. later, dicknbush lied about the presence of WMDs to justify a war with iraq, resulting in the deaths of 4,489 Americans. so much for your party of family values

You're wrong. A few Whitewater partners went to prison over the investigation, pretty much everyone from the Rose Law firm except Hillary. And Al Qaeda's actions are what lead to the deaths of 4,489 Americans.
 
From Wiki:

Ultimately the Clintons were never charged, but 15 other persons were convicted of more than 40 crimes, including Bill Clinton's successor as Governor, who was removed from office.[40]

Jim Guy Tucker: Governor of Arkansas at the time, removed from office (fraud, 3 counts)
John Haley: attorney for Jim Guy Tucker (tax evasion)
William J. Marks, Sr.: Jim Guy Tucker business partner (conspiracy)
Stephen Smith: former Governor Clinton aide (conspiracy to misapply funds). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Webster Hubbell: Clinton political supporter; Rose Law Firm partner (embezzlement, fraud)
Jim McDougal: banker, Clinton political supporter: (18 felonies, varied)
Susan McDougal: Clinton political supporter (multiple fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
David Hale: banker, self-proclaimed Clinton political supporter: (conspiracy, fraud)
Neal Ainley: Perry County Bank president (embezzled bank funds for Clinton campaign)
Chris Wade: Whitewater real estate broker (multiple loan fraud). Bill Clinton pardoned.
Larry Kuca: Madison real estate agent (multiple loan fraud)
Robert W. Palmer: Madison appraiser (conspiracy). Bill Clinton pardoned.
John Latham: Madison Bank CEO (bank fraud)
Eugene Fitzhugh: Whitewater defendant (multiple bribery)
Charles Matthews: Whitewater defendant (bribery)

Whitewater controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
was referring to the hypocrisy of those on the right, such as henry hyde, who drafted the articles of impeachment, who simultaneously castigated clinton's affair while having one of their own ... all while proclaiming they - and their party - stood for 'family values'

now, notice that the investigation of clinton began with whitewater. but nothing criminal was found there. it was only when the republicans caught wind of the lewinsky blow jobs that they questioned the president about his sexual activities - and he wrongly lied about it. he lied about receiving a blow job. later, dicknbush lied about the presence of WMDs to justify a war with iraq, resulting in the deaths of 4,489 Americans. so much for your party of family values

George Bush was never charged with perjury and the idea that he 'lied' is ridiculous. Your post only highlights how poorly informed so many leftists are.
 
George Bush was never charged with perjury and the idea that he 'lied' is ridiculous. Your post only highlights how poorly informed so many leftists are.
we know dicknbush lied because they would have not needed to shut up the spouse of a covert CIA agent by disclosing her employer, had the spouse not had his opinion piece published, which article described the lies told by the dicknbush regime to force our country into an unnecessary war

but your side is willing to overlook a lie which resulted in the deaths of 4,489 Americans while prosecuting a lie told about being the recipient of a voluntarily given blow job
 
we know dicknbush lied because they would have not needed to shut up the spouse of a covert CIA agent by disclosing her employer, had the spouse not had his opinion piece published, which article described the lies told by the dicknbush regime to force our country into an unnecessary war

but your side is willing to overlook a lie which resulted in the deaths of 4,489 Americans while prosecuting a lie told about being the recipient of a voluntarily given blow job

So, be proven wrong and then just double down on the lies, good tactic there. Our country wasn't "forced into war", we went there willingly and with congressional approval.
 
we know dicknbush lied because they would have not needed to shut up the spouse of a covert CIA agent by disclosing her employer, had the spouse not had his opinion piece published, which article described the lies told by the dicknbush regime to force our country into an unnecessary war

but your side is willing to overlook a lie which resulted in the deaths of 4,489 Americans while prosecuting a lie told about being the recipient of a voluntarily given blow job

Your incoherent post suggests you can't use proper English much less define historical happenings.
 
So, be proven wrong and then just double down on the lies, good tactic there. Our country wasn't "forced into war", we went there willingly and with congressional approval.

I think this is an attempt to distract attention from the thread topic.
 
Back
Top Bottom