Barack Obama Forgets That Bill Clinton Got Away With Perjury

The Federalist ^ | May 9, 2020 | David Marcus

[gattaca]

Barack Obama says there is no precedent for anyone getting away with perjury. He forgot about his buddy Bill Clinton.

As we get closer and closer to November’s election, a ghost of presidential past is beginning to haunt the political discourse. Barack Obama is back. Beginning last month on Twitter, he started attacking president Trump directly. Now audio of a phone conversation has been “leaked” in which Obama has more to say about what he views as Trump’s failures. In the remarks, one thing stood out: his remarkable take on the exoneration of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

Here’s what the 44th president had to say on the matter:

The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn, and the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic — not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk.

Let’s focus in on this idea that nobody has ever gotten off scot-free after being charged with perjury. The year was 1999, “Armageddon” was the highest grossing film in America, the New York Yankees were World Series champions, and President William Jefferson Clinton was impeached for committing — wait for it — perjury.

Let’s back up for second because, in fact, Flynn was never actually accused of perjury. He was not under oath when he was questioned by the FBI and, according to the Justice Department, told no material lies. Clinton, on the other hand, blatantly lied under oath to a grand jury about the exact allegation of sexual misconduct he was facing.

Not only did Clinton face no criminal charges for his blatant act of perjury, he wasn’t even convicted by the Senate. One might even say he “got off scot-free.” Of course, it’s fairly unlikely that Obama actually forgot that Clinton lied under oath; rather he is applying the requisite double standard for actions committed by Republicans and Democrats.

We are all familiar with this by now. If a claim of sexual assault is made against Brett Kavanaugh, he is unfit for the Supreme Court. If a claim of sexual assault is made against Joe Biden, then #BelieveBiden. Likewise, Clinton didn’t really commit perjury, he just told a little white lie about a consensual sex act with an intern, but Flynn should be rotting in jail.

Barack Obama is making it crystal clear that he does not intend to abide by the tradition of former presidents staying above the political fray. That’s fine, but let’s hope the next time he decides to pontificate, he does so in a way that is accurate and that makes the slightest bit of sense.

[Mouton]

But but but he was a dem and everyone knows they lie about sex. Besides he was a many times accused harasser and all women should know that and avoided “contact” or become complicit.

[Vaquero]

Put a little ice on it. It will go away.

[joma89]

No he did not. He simply knows that leftist democrats only use the law to punish their enemies.

JoMa

[Travis McGee]

The Flynn memos and transcripts being released was just step one. Barr is working a plan. All shall be revealed.

Every illegal or unauthorized NSA search they conducted (for unmasking, etc), left digital fingerprints.

[Imagine your life being examined under these microscopes, for legal action, leverage, or blackmail. Or how about Chief Justice Roberts, for example?]

Now Obama's got a very big problem, because all of his illegal orders and the actions of his henchmen are going to come out.

The Obama clique couldn't resist using these powerful surveillance tools against their enemies, and now the entire sordid affair will be laid bare, chapter by chapter.

[griswold3]

Flynn was not charged with perjury. (He was not under oath) Obama is trying to create a false narrative. Obama is lying

[Travis McGee]

Why is Obama Panicking Now? – The Importance of Understanding Political Surveillance In The Era of President Obama…
Posted on May 9, 2020 by sundance
Why is former President Obama calling forth all his defensive resources now? Why did former national security advisor Susan Rice write her cya letter? Why have republicans in congress not been willing to investigate the true origins of political surveillance? What is the reason for so much anger, desperation and opposition from a variety of interests?

With the release of recent transcripts and the declassification of material from within the IG report, the Carter Page FISA and Flynn documents showing FBI activity, there is a common misconception about why the intelligence apparatus began investigating the Trump campaign in the first place. Why was Donald Trump considered a threat?

In this outline we hope to provide some fully cited deep source material that will explain the origin; and specifically why those inside the Intelligence Community began targeting Trump and using Confidential Human Sources against campaign officials.

[rest of the deep dive at the link]
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/05/09/why-is-obama-panicking-now-the-importance-of-understanding-political-surveillance-in-the-era-of-president-obama/

[Savage Beast]

So what? The so-called “journalists” of the Propaganda Machine will cover it all up.

[Brilliant]

So did Clapper.

[Sir Napsalot]

Obama forgets .... Fogets, my foot!!!

Obama is up to his old tricks -

Timely leak of his “private” conversation, “deep concerns”, more lies to obfuscate what truly happened, etc. etc.

And Enemedia were TOO HAPPY to follow suit and continue to carry water for him.

[Mouton]

Absolutely. I had no idea the extent of this menace used in the wrong hands. Little mention of the illegal use by ohola and his bunch since the news broke years ago. No doubt this was illegal political surveillance. This is worse than watergate by a factor of trillions. Get them all on record now in a grand jury so we can update the statute of limitations through perjury for those who refuse to admit what they did. Even if someone must be given immunity to force their answers.

[Blood of Tyrants]

He didn’t quite get away with it. He had to pay a fine and he lost his law license.

[Thank You Rush]

obozo sounded drunk in that clip...more than the usual hemming and hawing... Let’s hope it’s because he is scared to death. I don’t care if he’s drunk but I would prefer that he’s fearful of the truth coming out...

[Travis McGee]

Imagine how many MSM talking heads, senators and congressmen could be under deep state blackmail control?

“Be a big shame if your wife and kids found out about your mistress, I mean, your ‘intern,’ Senator.... we just need you to back off on the XYZ bill. That’s all.”

[marktwain]

The whole premise is absurd.

As usual, the sentence assumes the person is guilty and perjury occurred.

It obviously happens that people are accused of perjury and are found not guilty.

It obviously happens that innocent people are falsely accused.

[GoldenPup]

Barack Obama Forgets That Bill Clinton Got Away With Perjury.

O’dorko has gotten away with much more, and far worse...so far.

[oldtech]

Hoping that somehow this all works out so that Obama & his bunch will all come to justice. I know that’s wishful thinking, but it’s long overdue.

[Vendome]

“...there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free...”

1. He was not convicted so, I’d say there is probably a good chance many people have been charged and got off scott free

2. He lost everything, including his reputation.

Where can he at least get that back?

3. It is rare the defense of an accused is so doggedly determined they receive the Brady evidence which have exonerated a client in the 1st place, making this nonsense unnecessary.

Your corrupt administration Dred’s a Scott free escape of unjust shackles?

Irony...

[mosesdapoet]

Obama gave Pearson Publishing $350 million to create Commoncore text and Pearson gave Obama a $65 million dollar book deal in return. Investment Watch ^ | 12/8/19 |The Obamas’ $60m book deal has broken all records. From James Patterson to JK Rowling and Pope John Paul II, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3805839/posts

[CommerceComet]

He didn’t quite get away with it. He had to pay a fine and he lost his law license.

Apparently, the Arkansas Bar Association takes perjury a bit more seriously than the U. S. Senate does. However, giving up his law license when his career is essentially over and he's got his Presidential pension and is raking in big speaking fees from his wife's pay to play scheme is like turning in your office keys when you retire. Other than losing some face (not that any Clinton has ever had any shame), it was a totally painless penalty.