Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

merrily

(45,251 posts)
12. Didn't say that, but thanks for the gratuitous snark.
Mon Aug 11, 2014, 05:45 PM
Aug 2014

I was simply responding directly to your comment about Presidential dalliances not being unusual.

Dalliances by Presidents, neither unusual nor criminal.

Perjury about dalliances by a President (and an attorney), both unusual and criminal.

Was it worthy of impeachment, though? The rule of law is supposedly important in our society and perjury is a direct attack the rule of law. So, was impeachment as frivolous as you try to make it seem? Moot point. He was both impeached and acquitted years ago. He even succeeded in getting his bar membership reinstated, though most lawyers who had perjured themselves and needed that membership to earn a living would be SOL.

I'll leave it to you to decide if the House should have ignored a President's perjuring himself, on national TV, no less. Me? I don't care. As my bold italics suggest, I don't believe the rule of law is the cornerstone of out our society, anyway. But we do pay it some heavy duty lip service.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Huckabee Clarifies He 'Ne...»Reply #12