Freepers running with scissors

All day yesterday, "Well Clinton lied too"...jeezus are these people ignorant or what?

Yeah a family sex issue is equivalent to National Security. Sure it is.
Holy shit why doesn't the msm call these stupid bastards on their stupid statements?

And I would add to that, "if Clinton jumped off a bridge does that mean you will too?"

has to be fair and balanced. They never stop to think that sometimes it just is not fair or blanced...it is what it is.

I always laugh, and remind him how pathetic and irrelevant that sounds.

But his "strategery" -- as with other kool-aid drinkers -- is to just keep repeating it over and over as if it was ever going to make any difference. And because he cannot face the truth of how BushCo has bamboozled and stolen from him and other Americans.

We know Bush & Kronies are traitors to the USA, and now they are going to start being brought to justice.

Freep-think has become OUTMODED AND IRRELEVANT.

where she showed up looking stupid. Road to fame and all I guess.

I have always been disappointed that Bill let a big mouth RW operative take his trousers. Very poor judgment to be sure.

Of course no one got KILLED in the line of that action. Unlike George W. Bush who has been the killing instrument for 10's of thousands.

It isn't about lying. It's about dieing.
Big difference.

Clinton's head on a platter?

Finally, a Democratic caller and a Democratic pollster called them on it and pointed out that Clinton has been out of office for 5 years and that his troubles had nothing to do with national security. Those RWers just love to hate the Clenis.

Bush could lead us to nuclear armageddon and the surviving freepers would still be going on and on about how bad Clinton was.

choked to death on their own toenails, or something.

:dunce:

Oooh I am going to use that one. hehehehe

under oath!" (about sex.)

I guess lying under oath about matters of national security isn't a "real crime," though.

Hey Freepers -- a little cognitive dissonance with that hypocrisy?

When the whole thing happened, legal scholars said that you never indict someone for perjury about their own sexual activities--it just ain't done. Basically, you can't indict someone for denying their own involvement in an activity.

For example, if you believe someone robs a bank and they are on the witness stand and you ask them, did you rob the bank and they said 'No' you don't then indict them for perjury once they are convicted of the bank robbery.

Also, if you have someone under oath and you ask them, Did you have sex with Person A (bad example) , and you say NO (emphatically because it was Person A) but later they find out you did have sex with Person A( clearly you should have pled insanity) they will not generally indict you for perjury. If they ask you, Did you know or associate with Person A and you say know and later they find out you did know and associate with that person--indictment for perjury. Bingo!