Is Newt right?

[NOVA]

again... our system of jurisprudence states that accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty... Clinton was impeached (indicted) but never found guilty by the court (senate) that heard his case. He was presumed innocent going in and he was found not guilty going out. DOn't like it? Fucking move somewhere where the guilty are presumed guilty.

His impeachment isn't even relevant to the issue.....the impeachment was a legal proceeding....get over it....we're all familiar with what the outcome was.
Its like arguing about OJ's vertict of 'not guilty' with the real question of his 'innocence'....

The courtroom doors are closed......you're no longer presemed innocent after you confess in the eyes of the people.

The question is what did Clinton DO......what he ADMITTED DOING....what he is GUILTY of doing, not what a partisan jury of his supporters decided in the Senate....

the impeachment outcome is irrelevant....

and no one that is rational can deny the obvious facts.....

 

[maineman]

His impeachment isn't even relevant to the issue.....the impeachment was a legal proceeding....get over it....we're all familiar with what the outcome was.
Its like arguing about OJ's vertict of 'not guilty' with the real question of his 'innocence'....

The courtroom doors are closed......you're no longer presemed innocent after you confess in the eyes of the people.

The question is what did Clinton DO......what he ADMITTED DOING....what he is GUILTY of doing, not what a partisan jury of his supporters decided in the Senate....

the impeachment outcome is irrelevant....

and no one that is rational can deny the obvious facts.....

so trials are irrelevant once Nova has decreed what the verdict ought to have been?

got it.

 

[NOVA]

so trials are irrelevant once Nova has decreed what the verdict ought to have been?

got it.

Yes, now you've got it.....trials are irrelevant to this discussion.....

The question is what did Clinton DO......what he ADMITTED DOING....what he is GUILTY of doing.....by his own admission.

 

[maineman]

Yes, now you've got it.....trials are irrelevant to this discussion.....

The question is what did Clinton DO......what he ADMITTED DOING....what he is GUILTY of doing.....by his own admission.

now...if only Dubya would admit to lying to us, then you and I could have closure.

 

[Robo]

And you're sure that's what happened and couldn't possibly be anything else?

YES!!!

 

[The Dude]

Yes, now you've got it.....trials are irrelevant to this discussion.....

The question is what did Clinton DO......what he ADMITTED DOING....what he is GUILTY of doing.....by his own admission.

Poor people fixate on a blow job 20 years ago, simple minds

 

[Robo]

Poor people fixate on a blow job 20 years ago, simple minds

You are a blowjob Adolph!

 

[USFREEDOM911]

YES!!!

Then explain to me how someone STARTS a war, when there was no declaration of peace, from when it first started?

 

[Robo]

Then explain to me how someone STARTS a war, when there was no declaration of peace, from when it first started?

"PEACE" does not require a declaration it only requires the absents of warring activities Goober.

 

[The Dude]

You are a blowjob Adolph!

You need one, Gaylord

 

[Robo]

You need one, Gaylord

Not right now Liberace.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

"PEACE" does not require a declaration it only requires the absents of warring activities Goober.

Then I guess Saddam should have lived up to the CEASE FIRE and ceased his warring activities; but that still doesn't make it President G. W. Bush's WAR.

A ceasefire (or truce) is a temporary stoppage of a war in which each side agrees with the other to suspend aggressive actions. Ceasefires may be declared as part of a formal treaty, but they have also been called as part of an informal understanding between opposing forces. An armistice is a formal agreement to end fighting.

cease-fire or cease·fire (ssfr)
n.
1. An order to stop firing.
2. Suspension of active hostilities; a truce.

truce [truːs]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an agreement to stop fighting, esp temporarily
2. temporary cessation of something unpleasant

Now, I'm sure you have a completely different set of explanations; but while you are entitled to your own opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts.

 

[NOVA]

You need one, Gaylord

Lookin for a date with him there, Mudfish ?.....Try Poet. You two would hit off .

 

[NOVA]

now...if only Dubya would admit to lying to us, then you and I could have closure.

You'd still be kneeling under Clinton's desk if the facts weren't totally against you.

Bush was wrong... plenty of times about plenty of things, but was solid in his beliefs

 

[NOVA]

Then I guess Saddam should have lived up to the CEASE FIRE and ceased his warring activities; but that still doesn't make it President G. W. Bush's WAR.

A ceasefire (or truce) is a temporary stoppage of a war in which each side agrees with the other to suspend aggressive actions. Ceasefires may be declared as part of a formal treaty, but they have also been called as part of an informal understanding between opposing forces. An armistice is a formal agreement to end fighting.

cease-fire or cease·fire (ssfr)
n.
1. An order to stop firing.
2. Suspension of active hostilities; a truce.

truce [truːs]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an agreement to stop fighting, esp temporarily
2. temporary cessation of something unpleasant

Now, I'm sure you have a completely different set of explanations; but while you are entitled to your own opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts.

Clinton was right back to attacking, with air strikes and missiles, Saddam's defenses right after he was elected....

 

[The Dude]

Lookin for a date with him there, Mudfish ?.....Try Poet. You two would hit off .

I'm sure you were close to guys in the navy
Village bravo

 

[maineman]

You'd still be kneeling under Clinton's desk if the facts weren't totally against you.

Bush was wrong... plenty of times about plenty of things, but was solid in his beliefs

and if he had said "THEERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND..." you still wouldn't be fighting a losing battle trying to say that he hadn't lied to us.

 

[Robo]

Then I guess Saddam should have lived up to the CEASE FIRE and ceased his warring activities; but that still doesn't make it President G. W. Bush's WAR.

What made it Dubya’s unconstitutional war was the fact that Dubya had no constitutional authority to start the war nor did his father before him.

“…..the Congress shall have the power to declare war…..” (Article One Section Eight, United States Constitution)

A ceasefire (or truce) is a temporary stoppage of a war in which each side agrees with the other to suspend aggressive actions. Ceasefires may be declared as part of a formal treaty, but they have also been called as part of an informal understanding between opposing forces. An armistice is a formal agreement to end fighting.

cease-fire or cease•fire (ssfr)
n.
1. An order to stop firing.
2. Suspension of active hostilities; a truce.

truce [truːs]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an agreement to stop fighting, esp temporarily
2. temporary cessation of something unpleasant

Now, I'm sure you have a completely different set of explanations; but while you are entitled to your own opinion, you're not entitled to your own facts.

What the fuck does any of that shit have to do with the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO DECLARE WAR???

For your information Goober a cease fire/ truce is only required by warring nations after the fact of the fucking war. No cease fire/truce or declaration of peace was required before they went into the fucking war. Those Goober are the FACTS. Now if you have any more straws to clutch for, have at em!!!

 

[USFREEDOM911]

What made it Dubya’s unconstitutional war was the fact that Dubya had no constitutional authority to start the war nor did his father before him.

“…..the Congress shall have the power to declare war…..” (Article One Section Eight, United States Constitution)



What the fuck does any of that shit have to do with the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO DECLARE WAR???

For your information Goober a cease fire/ truce is only required by warring nations after the fact of the fucking war. No cease fire/truce or declaration of peace was required before they went into the fucking war. Those Goober are the FACTS. Now if you have any more straws to clutch for, have at em!!!

So you admit that G W Bush started no war; but instead the cease fire was ended.
Ending a cease fire is not STARTING a war, it is the continuation of one that had already begun.
I guess Saddam should have adhered to the sanctions that had been put into place.

Almost forgot.
The only one "clutching at straws", appears to be you; who has decided that you not only have the right to your own opinion, but also has the right to construct his own facts.

 

[NOVA]

What made it Dubya’s unconstitutional war was the fact that Dubya had no constitutional authority to start the war nor did his father before him.

“…..the Congress shall have the power to declare war…..” (Article One Section Eight, United States Constitution)



What the fuck does any of that shit have to do with the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO DECLARE WAR???

For your information Goober a cease fire/ truce is only required by warring nations after the fact of the fucking war. No cease fire/truce or declaration of peace was required before they went into the fucking war. Those Goober are the FACTS. Now if you have any more straws to clutch for, have at em!!!

Bush never declared war on anyone.....wtf are you ranting about ?