SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Conservatives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SirWalterRalegh who wrote (21680)12/9/2013 5:40:46 PM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 124703
 
Clinton was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice in a federal court relating to conduct before he became President. He was impeached for those charges after a very lengthy and expensive independent counsel investigation. He wasn't convicted in Congress on the articles of impeachment, and wasn't likely to be convicted and removed from office in the Senate.

Since I know of no criminal statute that Obama violated in his Presidential candidacy, much as we like to believe, the chances of any repeat performance of Clinton are nil. And who the hell would want to go through that again? It tore the country apart, to no useful end.

The guy is in office for only three more years. Forget it.



To: SirWalterRalegh who wrote (21680)12/9/2013 5:43:27 PM
From: longnshort3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Geoff Altman
locogringo
SirWalterRalegh

  Respond to of 124703
 
"Buraq and Moochelle have already given of their law licenses.
I wonder why."

clinton didn't want to give his up because he had to work for it, even though he wouldn't need it.

the other morons didn't need their Law licenses plus they never had to work for it, because of affirmative action they were basically given them, so the license had no meaning to them, so when they got into a little trouble and all they had to do was give up the license they went that route because it meant nothing to them



To: SirWalterRalegh who wrote (21680)12/9/2013 6:51:03 PM
From: golfer72  Respond to of 124703
 
Political prosecution of sitting presidents is in the constitution