General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

52. Again, it met all the elements of perjury. I cannot read anyone's mind to tell you why

Sun May 31, 2015, 11:30 PM

May 2015

no criminal prosecution occurred. For one thing, he was a sitting President. For another, the material I can and did show you indicates he and his attorney were making deals. For another, he was going to be impeached. Scores of possible reasons why no criminal prosecution occurred, but it's not me saying he met all the elements. It is the court.

What errors did you admit, even after you got links proving your claims wrong? And why are you still ignoring lying under oath? I referred to changing my claim from perjury to lying under oath almost four hours ago. This is the first time you've come anywhere near acknowledging he lied under oath.

You lot are funny. Only person has provided links for any claims at all--the same one your lot has been accusing of being wrong, clueless and/or deceptive. Yet, I've got the liinks that back me up. What laughable bs.

Nitey nite.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Gingrich, Livingston & Hastert Impeached Clinton for What? [View all] laserhaas May 2015 OP

He was impeached for perjury and lost his Arkansas license to practice law merrily May 2015 #1

Pretending the goal was not to "get em" is not in keeping with facts either. laserhaas May 2015 #2

I didn't pretend shit. I never said they weren't delighted to have grounds to impeach him. merrily May 2015 #4

You are technically correct... Whiskeytide May 2015 #46

Investigating him and impeaching him are two different things. BTW, they did not even investigate merrily May 2015 #49

Sure it was totally correct Major Nikon Jun 2015 #55

He's not technically correct Major Nikon Jun 2015 #54

It was the years of witch hunts that soured many of us madokie May 2015 #3

All the more reason not to have given them grounds. nt merrily May 2015 #5

Hastert just got busted on lying, too. treestar May 2015 #6

You betcha. Hypocrisy here, hypocrisy there. E-I-E-I-O. merrily May 2015 #7

Perjury IS lying under oath horseshoecrab May 2015 #8

No shit, but ordinary lying is not a crime. Perjury is. merrily May 2015 #9

Pres. Clinton = Never Convicted horseshoecrab May 2015 #10

Jebus. Google. The Court that heard the Paula Jones case held him in contempt for merrily May 2015 #11

here's a clue! horseshoecrab May 2015 #12

No, the Jones case was settled because Clinton paid a chunk of cash out of court. merrily May 2015 #15

You have no idea what you're talking about horseshoecrab May 2015 #17

Again, google and read for comprehension. merrily May 2015 #44

the Jones case was dismissed because horseshoecrab May 2015 #18

Absolutely wrong jberryhill May 2015 #42

Clinton pays $850,000. merrily May 2015 #45

Did you read it? jberryhill Jun 2015 #57

Did you read it? ALL of it? The article mentions reinstatement of the trial, saying merrily Jun 2015 #58

You have no idea what you're talking about Major Nikon Jun 2015 #61

articles of impeachment are charges. THEY ARE NOT PROOF OF GUILT horseshoecrab May 2015 #13

STOP Focusing on the impeachment. Two courts of law held him guilty of lying under oath. merrily May 2015 #14

I could have sworn you said "perjury" Major Nikon May 2015 #47

Never once denied I said perjury at first. Desperate much? Still ignoring lying under oath, I see. merrily May 2015 #50

Neither did you ever admit it wasn't perjury Major Nikon May 2015 #51

Again, it met all the elements of perjury. I cannot read anyone's mind to tell you why merrily May 2015 #52

Sure, Starr just didn't prosecute Clinton for perjury because he wasn't in the mood...or something Major Nikon Jun 2015 #53

Perjury is more than lying under oath Major Nikon May 2015 #20

Thanks for this as well Major Nikon horseshoecrab May 2015 #23

Both the Paula Jones Court and the Arkansas Supreme Court found all 3 of those things. merrily May 2015 #31

They did not Major Nikon May 2015 #40

Stop lying jberryhill May 2015 #43

Yes, it was a witch hunt loyalsister May 2015 #16

No matter what it was, knowing they'd been after him, he sat in front of TV cameras and in merrily May 2015 #21

Wrong Major Nikon May 2015 #19

Thank you Major Nikon! n/t horseshoecrab May 2015 #22

You can thank him for coming to your aid, but he's wrong. merrily May 2015 #27

Perhaps Major Nikon May 2015 #32

Actually I answered it many times over. And disproved your claims merrily May 2015 #37

You answered it once and it was completely hilarious Major Nikon May 2015 #39

The court found that he had lied to the court while under oath. There is no question of that. merrily May 2015 #24

So if it were perjury, why wasn't he ever criminally prosecuted for it? Major Nikon May 2015 #25

OMG, you're back about five posts ago. I haven't used the word perjury since then. merrily May 2015 #26

Your refusal to answer the question speaks volumes, BTW Major Nikon May 2015 #28

Um, no you got answers and links. Your trumped up story was the only fart and splutter in the merrily May 2015 #29

Ah yes, a clever repackaging of the tired old, "I'm rubber, you're glue" Major Nikon May 2015 #30

All three elements you described above were met. So held both the Paula Jones court merrily May 2015 #33

So your argument is that Starr didn't prosecute Clinton for perjury because he exercised discretion Major Nikon May 2015 #35

Again, read for comprehension. You got all the info any reasonable person merrily May 2015 #36

Sure he was completely guilty of perjury, but curiously was never so much as indicted Major Nikon May 2015 #38

To justify the never ending perpetually expanding expensive witch hunt they had against him Johonny May 2015 #34

Clintons approval ratings during the impeachment were higher than St. Ronnie's ever were Major Nikon May 2015 #41

Republicans impeached Clinton for personal financial gain. KentuckyWoman May 2015 #48

Amen.... laserhaas Jun 2015 #56

lying under oath, which is perjury. ...nt quadrature Jun 2015 #59

All perjury is lying under oath Major Nikon Jun 2015 #60

he wasn't forced to answer the q.... that is what bothers me....nt quadrature Jun 2015 #63

He actually was forced to answer them to a Grand Jury Major Nikon Jun 2015 #64

not at all . there was no waterboard or gun pointed at him ...nt quadrature Jun 2015 #65

Sure, if you discount the threat of going to jail for criminal contempt Major Nikon Jun 2015 #66

not at all. he(BC) would have fought it out ... quadrature Jun 2015 #67

Don't forget to lump Henry Hyde in with the hypocrites n/t deutsey Jun 2015 #62