Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (449389)	1/21/2009 2:21:21 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575374

It matters not what the lie was about in Clinton's case...but he was impeached for misleading a federal judge, submitting phonied up affidavits in a court proceeding, lying under oath in a judicial proceeding, etc....In Clinton's case his actions were wilful and knowing. He intended to mislead. BJ Billy intended only to cover his own sorry lying scumbag butt. He intended to place himself above the law in violation of his oath of office, the Constitution and his oath as a lawyer. Bush did not lie about the Iraq war. He did not intend to mislead in that respect and made his decision fully supported by Congress on the best available intel and information at the time. No amount of second guessing or hindsight changes that fact. There ain't no comparison beween the two scenarios and that's why neither the impeachment clause nor the Constitution is implicated nor harmed by Bush's action.