Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton to Obama: Don't blink on debt ceiling showdown
CNN ^ | July 3, 2011 | Pamela Sellers

Posted on 07/03/2011 3:34:17 AM PDT by bobk333

"This is the political equivalent of the government shutdown when I was president," Clinton said. "The White House could blink. I hope not."

Clinton made his argument in front of a large crowd at the left-leaning Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado Saturday. Should the United States default on its payments, the country's credit ratings will decline, Clinton said, and interest rates could rise.

Growing anti-government forces like the Tea Party are truly affecting healthy government reform, Clinton said. "It's astonishingly good politics," he admitted, "but poor economic policy."

(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: clinton; clintondebtceiling; debtceiling; debtlimit; government; governmentshutdown; obama; shutdown; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last
I hope Boehner and the Republicans don't blink.

Spending on handouts to special interests and cronies is good politics, but astonishingly poor economic policy.

1 posted on 07/03/2011 3:34:27 AM PDT by bobk333
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bobk333

You damn right us tea partiers are affecting ‘reform’. We are not for the ‘fundamental transformation’ of this country.


2 posted on 07/03/2011 3:39:18 AM PDT by Free America52 (The White guys are getting pissed off. We beat Hitler Hirohito and Krushchev. Obama will be easy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

The government shut down twice under Clinton. Same story, different day...


3 posted on 07/03/2011 3:39:35 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free America52

The Clintons paved the way smoothly for Obama.


4 posted on 07/03/2011 3:46:08 AM PDT by Twinkie (For whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Romans 10:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Twinkie

Who cares what this pervert has to say anymore.


5 posted on 07/03/2011 3:56:06 AM PDT by DooDahhhh (ma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Free America52
Growing anti-government forces like the Tea Party are truly affecting healthy government reform, Clinton said.

I was going to jump on Clinton for using the term “anti-Government” after reflection I'll agree with that but contest the “affecting healthy government reform”. Coming from his ilk that's a joke.

6 posted on 07/03/2011 4:02:38 AM PDT by Recon Dad (Herman Cain is the man in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bobk333
WOW!!! What wisdom. I so miss Bill and Hillary being in the White House.
(Do I need the sarcasm tag here?)
7 posted on 07/03/2011 4:03:06 AM PDT by no dems (When I learn that a person, regardless of who they are, is a Democrat, I lose respect for them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobk333
I hope the Republicans are prepared this time. The arrows of blame are aimed directly at them.

They should cite all Obama's czars, his trips and vacations, Michelle's expensive junkets, on and on blame Obama and his cronies.

How about parties at the White House, expensive meals, cars, SUVs, unnecessary trips on Air Force 1, on and on?

Somebody should put together a big list of expenses to blame on Obama and the Repubs should memorize the list and repeat the points every time they are on the air.

It doesn't matter if the numbers add up - all that counts is the blaming of Obama.

8 posted on 07/03/2011 4:28:08 AM PDT by eCSMaster (We will fight for America and it starts here in Madison, WI. It starts here. It starts now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

My guess is that the Republicans will blink, Boehner will cry, and if necessary, Zero will declare a national emergency and simply assume control.

The problem we have is one that that only an election or impeachment can fix.


9 posted on 07/03/2011 4:30:20 AM PDT by Phillipian (Post Tenebras Lux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

Interest rates SHOULD rise for a number of reasons. I believe that lack of return on savings is one of the things holding the economy back. Also, maybe if loan rates rose, banks would [really] start lending again. Who wants to make a loan which effectively has no return?


10 posted on 07/03/2011 4:31:45 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phillipian

Impeachment starts in the senate so that option is off the table...


11 posted on 07/03/2011 4:46:10 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
C'mon, Eric. Do a little research before you post stuff like that.
12 posted on 07/03/2011 4:55:08 AM PDT by Timmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Impeachment starts in the senate so that option is off the table...

Incorrect. Impeachment starts in the Supreme Court, and is decided by the vote of the Cabinet in the Executive branch. In the event of a tie, the Speaker of the House casts the deciding vote.

13 posted on 07/03/2011 5:00:32 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Until Obama, has there ever been, in history, a Traitorous Ruler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Apologies to all.
What was I thinking of ?


14 posted on 07/03/2011 5:09:45 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

No need to apologize to him...he’s wrong also...impeachment starts in the house of representatives...as best I remember...when Clinton was impeached!


15 posted on 07/03/2011 5:11:44 AM PDT by RVN Airplane Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

0bama’s call to increase taxes on “The Rich” and corporations sounds good to many, after all, “The Rich” have more money than they can use.
I ask these people what “The Rich” do with their money. Most just shrug. I tell them that their surplus isn’t stuffed in a mattress or coffee can. They invest it. Money that is invested creates jobs, jobs create tax revenues.
Even though our government leaders refer to spending tax money as “investing” very little of it actually gives us a return on the dollar. Very little actually creates long lasting jobs.
When it comes to an increase in interest rates I wouldn’t mind. I don’t borrow money. I’d like to see my savings account rate rise from .25%


16 posted on 07/03/2011 5:16:40 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RVN Airplane Driver

Yes, Clinton was impeached by the House, The Senate rinos would not remove the scum bag from office.


17 posted on 07/03/2011 5:23:59 AM PDT by reefdiver ("Let His day's be few And another takes His office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RVN Airplane Driver

Still recovering from our son’s wedding in Leavenworth, Washington.
The old man had too much wine...


18 posted on 07/03/2011 5:31:10 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

First of all, there would be no default. OTHER spending might be cut, but government securities obligations would be given a high priority.

This would actually enhance the attractiveness of investment in U.S. securities, because it would demonstrate that we are serious about maintaining a sound economy.

Don’t just stand your ground, Boehner. Attack, attack, attack!


19 posted on 07/03/2011 5:33:20 AM PDT by Walrus (Throw your thief out in 2012; get yourself a Mike Kelly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Oh, by the way, I wonder how many corporate jets were used by the attendees to get to and from this “Aspen Ideas Festival”? (snicker)


20 posted on 07/03/2011 5:36:31 AM PDT by Walrus (Throw your thief out in 2012; get yourself a Mike Kelly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

So far, polls show that a majority is with the GOP on this issue. They don’t want the debt ceiling raised. They want government cut and they want steps taken to pay down the debt.

But the parade of sob stories hasn’t begun yet and the tide of public opinion can change.

I hope and trust that the GOP has a counter strategy when the sob stories appear. I think they do.

The best counter is to point to the debt we’re saddling our children and grandchildren with, but in this “me first and only” generation of the FSA, that appeal may fall on deaf ears.


21 posted on 07/03/2011 5:41:10 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

There is only one party in DC now and they BOTH stand for the same immoral and unethical corruption... and the saddest part is this is not a statement made out of anger at republican inaction... it is the truth.

LLS


22 posted on 07/03/2011 5:46:04 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DooDahhhh

RAPIST and pervert.

LLS


23 posted on 07/03/2011 5:47:01 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

The situation is different this time and Clinton knows it is different this time. Obama has a political tin ear, whereas Clinton, for all his Clintonesq crap, has a way of not only sensing the tune, but then turning around and calling it. This time he is calling it for Obama. This time, if the Government ‘shuts down’ Obama will take the fall.


24 posted on 07/03/2011 5:48:10 AM PDT by AD from SpringBay (We deserve the government we allow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eCSMaster
The republican leadership will do nothing... they will not act... they will not confront... they will not defend. As trent lott said when challenged as to why he was not defending republican positions and countering democrat propaganda... and why as defacto leader he was not defending the party... he said... “THAT IS NOT MY JOB”. Well... that is exactly why we will see no defense or offense... that and the fact that the current leadership supports obama and his agenda behind the scenes. All that you and I will get is rhetoric with nothing backing it up... fiat words.

LLS

25 posted on 07/03/2011 5:53:33 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Who will loan money when the government has legislated that many of those loans do not have to be repaid?

LLS


26 posted on 07/03/2011 5:54:58 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Impeachment starts in the House and the Senate holds a trial... The House indicts... the Senate tries.

LLS


27 posted on 07/03/2011 5:56:05 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bobk333
I hope Boehner and the Republicans don't blink.

What did the Easter Bunny bring you this year?

28 posted on 07/03/2011 5:56:27 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reefdiver
TRENT LOTT would not remove clinton from office... and that is what stopped his expulsion... and they had the dirt on old trent... and they still do. He is guilty of many things... look up his Brother-in-Law dickie scruggs... trent and dickie arejustthisclose.

LLS

29 posted on 07/03/2011 5:58:26 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reefdiver
The Senate rinos would not remove the scum bag from office

There were 55 Republicans in the US Senate, and 45 Democrats. Removal from office would have required 67 "guilty" votes.

The fact that five Republicans voted against conviction on all 3 charges was of no importance in the grand scheme of things.

Removal from office would have required between 12 and 17 Democrats, and that was never a possibility.

I would say that the Clinton impeachment was probably (politically) a mistake.

30 posted on 07/03/2011 6:03:41 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
TRENT LOTT would not remove clinton from office... and that is what stopped his expulsion

How did Trent Lott prevent the necessary 12-17 Democrats from voting to convict?

Clinton was NEVER, NEVER, NEVER going to be removed from office by a 55-45 Senate, with or without RINOs and with or without Trent Lott.

31 posted on 07/03/2011 6:07:46 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Got it !


32 posted on 07/03/2011 6:12:25 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Who will loan money when the government has legislated that many of those loans do not have to be repaid?


Not sure it will happen exactly that way as lending would stop altogether. What is more likely is hyperinflation was the Government prints more $$ to “create” prosperity. The effect will be almost the same—existing debt will lose much of its original value.


33 posted on 07/03/2011 6:22:04 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Who will loan money when the government has legislated that many of those loans do not have to be repaid?


Not sure it will happen exactly that way as lending would stop altogether. What is more likely is hyperinflation was the Government prints more $$ to “create” prosperity. The effect will be almost the same—existing debt will lose much of its original value.


34 posted on 07/03/2011 6:22:04 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bobk333
America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution

Differences between Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas are of degree, not kind.

35 posted on 07/03/2011 6:25:18 AM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
I would say that the Clinton impeachment was probably (politically) a mistake.

Agreed. Waste of time and political capital.

36 posted on 07/03/2011 6:26:10 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (And, therefore, isn't Jim (Robinson) the original Blog Father? - FReeper Aevery_Freeman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

Daddy Blues


37 posted on 07/03/2011 6:57:39 AM PDT by FrankR (A people that values its privileges above its principles will soon lose both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
trent lott told Henry Hyde not to “bring that trash into MY Senate Chamber"... I remember Henry and his aide walking across that grass knoll that led to the Senate... trent would not meet with them. You may be 100% correct in your assumption that they votes were not there... as we all know rats will group together to protect one another... a trait completely missing in the spineless gop... but to say that trent lott did not block the actions that would have led to a vote are wrong. Our two points are not mutually exclusive.

LLS

38 posted on 07/03/2011 7:02:01 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

I knew that you knew that! :-)

LLS


39 posted on 07/03/2011 7:06:26 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

True... good points.

LLS


40 posted on 07/03/2011 7:07:59 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bobk333

Clinton remembers - and assumes Obama wants - all that spare downtime his shut-downs gave him.


41 posted on 07/03/2011 7:09:55 AM PDT by hocndoc (http://www.LifeEthics.org (I've got a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.) (RIAing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AD from SpringBay
This time he is calling it for Obama.

This has overtones of Clinton serving his third term. Who is resident anyway.

42 posted on 07/03/2011 7:58:28 AM PDT by chainsaw (I'd hate to be a democrat running against Sarah Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Heck, even the last somewhat honest dem senator, DP Moynihan, was too senile at that point to vote to convict.
43 posted on 07/03/2011 8:02:28 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RVN Airplane Driver; Eric in the Ozarks
No need to apologize to him...he’s wrong also...impeachment starts in the house of representatives...as best I remember...when Clinton was impeached!

NONSENSE! In the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, it states: "When a President Shall Be Impeached, The Supreme Court shall Issue a Warrant For Their Arrest, and Upon Arrest, The President Shall Stand For Trial Before The Full Cabinet of the Executive Branch."

Now, I admit the Cabinet has changed a bit since this country was founded in 1861, however, at present, the Cabinet is Department of State, Department of the Treasury, Department of Defence, Department of Justice, and Department of Food, Vitamins and Exercise.

I don't know what Cracker Jax box you got your high school diploma out of! Sheesh!

44 posted on 07/03/2011 3:31:07 PM PDT by Lazamataz (Until Obama, has there ever been, in history, a Traitorous Ruler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Impeachment starts in the House and the Senate holds a trial... The House indicts... the Senate tries.

See my post above, please. So many uneducated people.

45 posted on 07/03/2011 3:32:17 PM PDT by Lazamataz (Until Obama, has there ever been, in history, a Traitorous Ruler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

The “Cracker jax” remark ignores how Clinton was confronted with impeachment.


46 posted on 07/03/2011 3:44:48 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Happy 4th my friend...that was good!


47 posted on 07/03/2011 3:47:20 PM PDT by RVN Airplane Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/clinton.htm

Making matters worse for Clinton, the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee announced it would consider a resolution calling for a formal impeachment inquiry, the first step in the long process toward possible removal of Clinton from office. The super-charged partisan political atmosphere in Washington, combined with lingering anger over the President’s deceit, and the allegations contained in the Starr report, all lent the necessary momentum. Thus the process moved forward and Clinton became only the third U.S. President to be seriously faced with the threat of impeachment. On October 8, the House of Representatives voted 258-176 to authorize an open-ended impeachment inquiry, with 31 Democrats joining the Republicans in voting for the investigation. The House Judiciary Committee, consisting of 21 Republicans and 16 Democrats, then began televised hearings.

Witnesses appearing before the committee included Ken Starr himself, who accused Clinton of repeatedly engaging in conduct under oath that was deliberately deceptive in order to hide his affair with Lewinsky. The Democrats, in defense of Clinton, produced an array of scholars asserting that the charges against Clinton did not rise to the level of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” mentioned, but not specifically defined, in the U.S. Constitution as grounds for impeachment, and therefore did not warrant removal of the President from office. The President’s own lawyers described Clinton’s conduct as “morally reprehensible” but not impeachable.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde also sent 81 written questions to the President asking Clinton to “admit or deny” various statements of fact contained in the Starr report. On November 27, the President responded in writing to the questions and forcefully denied having lied under oath. The President’s responses to the 81 questions would later be used as the basis of an article of impeachment. (81 Questions/Responses)

Republicans on the Judiciary Committee drafted a total of four articles of impeachment based on 60,000 pages of evidence provided by Ken Starr. The evidence included sworn testimony, grand jury transcripts, depositions, statements, affidavits, along with video and audio tapes, all concerning Clinton’s attempts to conceal his extramarital affair with Lewinsky during the Paula Jones lawsuit and subsequent criminal investigation by Starr’s office.

On Friday, December 11, the Judiciary Committee voted mainly along party lines to approve the first three articles of impeachment, accusing Clinton of committing perjury before Starr’s grand jury and in the Jones case, and with obstruction of justice in the Jones case. Only one Republican on the committee sided with Democrats by casting a no vote on Article 2 charging Clinton with perjury in the Jones case.

On Saturday, the fourth article was approved, accusing Clinton of making false statements in his answers to the 81 written questions. The four articles were then forwarded to the full House of Representatives for consideration. Republicans controlled the House with 228 members compared to 206 Democrats and one Independent who normally sided with the Democrats.

With polls indicating that Clinton’s job approval rating was holding steady at 60 percent amid a booming economy, and with most Americans disapproving of impeachment, Democrats now began a major push for an alternative to impeachment. They hoped for a congressional censure of the President that would reprimand him but leave him in office. However, their efforts got nowhere amid the fiercely partisan impeachment atmosphere in Congress.

Adding to the polarization, old rumors and allegations of marital infidelities came out of the woodwork against leading Republicans, including Speaker-designate Bob Livingston, who stunned his conservative colleagues when he admitted several marital indiscretions.

The House of Representatives had been scheduled to convene on Thursday, December 17, to begin considering the four articles of impeachment. However, on Wednesday, President Clinton ordered a series of military air strikes against Iraq, following the failure of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to comply with U.N. weapons inspectors. Clinton’s timing drew an immediate chorus of criticism from Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott who stated: “I cannot support this military action in the Persian Gulf at this time. Both the timing and the policy are subject to question.”

The President defended his timing when asked by a White House reporter if the attack was an attempt to avoid the impeachment vote in Congress. “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing.”

Democrats wanted to postpone the impeachment proceedings until after the conclusion of the joint U.S.-British military operation, claiming it would be improper to debate removing America’s Commander in Chief while U.S. pilots were “in harm’s way.” Republicans, however, allowed only a 24-hour delay, noting that impeachment proceedings had been held against President Richard Nixon while U.S. troops were still in Vietnam.

Thus, on Friday, December 18, 1998, the full House of Representatives gathered for the first time in 130 years to consider the impeachment of a President. Thirteen hours of fiery partisan oratory followed in which over 200 members of Congress arose to speak their minds, quoting everyone from Abraham Lincoln to Martin Luther King Jr.

On Saturday, toward the end of deliberations, Speaker-designate Bob Livingston made a blockbuster surprise announcement on the House floor, saying he would quit Congress as a result of his now-admitted extramarital affairs, and also called on President Clinton to resign. “I must set the example that I hope President Clinton will follow,” Livingston declared.

Meanwhile, televised news reports indicated the U.S. was in the midst of bombing Iraq again.

House Democrats also staged a brief walkout to protest the Republican refusal to allow consideration of a censure resolution as an alternative to impeachment.

Amid this extraordinary atmosphere, the House of Representatives voted on the four articles of impeachment, needing only a simple majority (218 votes) for approval of each article.

Articles of Impeachment:

RESOLVED that William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT EXHIBITED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE NAME OF ITSELF AND OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AGAINST WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT OF ITS IMPEACHMENT AGAINST HIM FOR HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.


48 posted on 07/03/2011 9:39:40 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

My thesis is that the Clinton Impeachment failed because it was done wrong. If they had started at the Supreme Court, like the Constitution says, he’d be GONE.


49 posted on 07/03/2011 9:48:02 PM PDT by Lazamataz (Until Obama, has there ever been, in history, a Traitorous Ruler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

Your post is why you will never be appointed the Director of the Department of Food, Vitamins and Exercise.


50 posted on 07/03/2011 9:51:51 PM PDT by Lazamataz (Until Obama, has there ever been, in history, a Traitorous Ruler?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson