[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Clinton's fake apologies (fwd)
Forwarded message:
> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 08:49:56 -0700
> From: [email protected] (Jim Gillogly)
> Subject: Re: Clinton's fake apologies
> In any case, despite these legalisms, I'm not convinced that perjury in
> any case should be considered treason or high crimes and misdemeanors.
> The Founding Fathers could have been more specific about what was
> impeachable, and they chose not to be, leaving it intentionally ambiguous.
What part of:
High crimes and misdemeanors don't you understand?
Oh, and it isn't 'high misdemeanors'...
I figure it's the fact that 'principles' are involved that is confusing
everybody, no room to move like there is with relativism. Bottem line, he
held a public office, while in that office he should commit *NO* crime or
else he should loose that office. There was no abmiguity there in the minds
of the founding fathers and there shouldn't be in yours either. If this
confuses you then take it as an indication that you have a axiomatic
contradiction in your world view and need to rethink things in a serious
way.
As Jefferson said, if you hold a public office your public property.
Nail the son of a bitch to the wall, he did the crime let him do the time.
It's a pitty he doesn't have this sort of empathy for all those people he's
put in jail for consensual crimes during his tenure. The man has a base
double standard, let him pay for it.
____________________________________________________________________
The seeker is a finder.
Ancient Persian Proverb
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ [email protected]
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------