Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below Testosterone boy
New member
The dude has a tenuous grip on the facts.
Irony of Rush Limbaugh's comments today
- Thread starter kingsbury
- Start date
Ironmako Two
New member
to which dude are you referring?
Ironmako Two said:
You. Clearly.
Whenever a president gets up to address a joint session for a state of the union or ANY other purpose, he is under oath.
That makes George W. guilty of perjury about a half dozen times.
Impeach his ass. Please.
The real difference is that Wicked Willy's lies amounted to a hill of beans, and Dubya's lies amount to a hill of aluminum boxes with our boys inside awaiting burial.
A
Ashamed
Guest
America sure is a scary mary
Testosterone boy
New member
I as diplomatically saying that he lies a great deal. Lies are subject to interpretation however.Ironmako Two said:
Ironmako Two
New member
PERJURY - When a person, having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the U.S. authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true; 18 USC
In order for a person to be found guilty of perjury the government must prove: the person testified under oath before [e.g., the grand jury]; at least one particular statement was false; and the person knew at the time the testimony was false.
The testimony of one witness is not enough to support a finding that the testimony was false. There must be additional evidence, either the testimony of another person or other evidence, which tends to support the testimony of falsity. The other evidence, standing alone, need not convince that the testimony was false, but all the evidence on the subject must do so.
Testosterone Boy:
There is no other way to interpret what Clinton's statement "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" to a Grand Jury
Chefwide:
Your statement and comparison to Bush is completely off topic,(not to mention erroneous) perhaps you forgot what the topic of the thread was.
I was addressing comments by Limbaugh and Clinton because both were cited in the original post.
But since you brought it up the oath that Bush took attested to things like "defend the constitution of the United States against ALL ENEMIES, foreign and domestic" I could give a rats ass about anyone's pathetic apologistic, pacifism. Such european weaknesses should stay in europe where they have historically originated. (No offense to sane Europeans) Disagree? pick up a history book...
In order for a person to be found guilty of perjury the government must prove: the person testified under oath before [e.g., the grand jury]; at least one particular statement was false; and the person knew at the time the testimony was false.
The testimony of one witness is not enough to support a finding that the testimony was false. There must be additional evidence, either the testimony of another person or other evidence, which tends to support the testimony of falsity. The other evidence, standing alone, need not convince that the testimony was false, but all the evidence on the subject must do so.
Testosterone Boy:
There is no other way to interpret what Clinton's statement "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" to a Grand Jury
Chefwide:
Your statement and comparison to Bush is completely off topic,(not to mention erroneous) perhaps you forgot what the topic of the thread was.
I was addressing comments by Limbaugh and Clinton because both were cited in the original post.
But since you brought it up the oath that Bush took attested to things like "defend the constitution of the United States against ALL ENEMIES, foreign and domestic" I could give a rats ass about anyone's pathetic apologistic, pacifism. Such european weaknesses should stay in europe where they have historically originated. (No offense to sane Europeans) Disagree? pick up a history book...
atlantabiolab
New member
Testosterone boy said:
Then if you accept this, you believe that there is no truth, so there is no point in anything.
atlantabiolab
New member
kingsbury said:I personally don't listen to this "man", but heard that he said the charges against him were part of some politically motivated conspiracy. Wasn't this same guy who made his whole career off the politically motivated investigations (won't use the word conspiracy) against former president Bill Clinton?
I don't know really what my point is here...but I just thought it was amusing reading the story about him calling it a politically motivated conspiracy, while remembering how he mocked Hillary for her statement on the Today show about "A Vast Right Wing Conspiracy".
Personally I think Rush's crimes are, well, they're crimes....and what clinton did was just immoral. Don't know what my point is there either, I'm tired and its late....grrrrr
Rush Limbaugh's only crime is irrationality. He is the wielder of his own destruction. He, and many Republicans, hold to an irrational and dictatorial idea that drug use is immoral, in and of itself, and because of this they accept the despotic War on Drugs. Because he holds this view, he has stated, and most likely believed that drug users, no matter what the context, should be penalized by the state. Because he has made such statements, he has no moral grounds on which to defend his actions to argue against punishment.
He should be punished just as any other common drug user who has had the misfortune of being caught. Not because he did any action that was immoral or unethical, but because he advocated action against others.
actually
The type of perjury which clinton supposedly committed has never been prosecuted in the United States prior to and after his case. In the case in which he stated that he didn't have sex with lewinsky, he was pleading not guilty to sexual harrassment of Paula Jones. He said that in his testimony that he did not commit the act nor did he have sex with ms. lewinsky (the part of the testimony pertaining to lewinsky was later thrown out because it was impertinent to the case). So, in effect, if you're going to go after clinton for this "perjury" you're going to have to go after anyone else who has lied about private matters to protect their case....something which has never been done. Also, you're going to have to take him to trial for something (adultery) for which their is no criminal charge. The fact that he lied about adultery is incredibly important...........
So lets take into account whats a greater threat to our nation and our national security....Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex with monica lewinsky or the Republicans completely disrupting the business of the federal government for months on end, not to mention wasting millions of dollars in a case which eventually went NOWHERE. The whole lewinsky thing was an embarrassment and a farce....much like the career of rush limbaugh....a zealot, a biggot and an all around pig who lies and distorts the truth on a daily basis.
The type of perjury which clinton supposedly committed has never been prosecuted in the United States prior to and after his case. In the case in which he stated that he didn't have sex with lewinsky, he was pleading not guilty to sexual harrassment of Paula Jones. He said that in his testimony that he did not commit the act nor did he have sex with ms. lewinsky (the part of the testimony pertaining to lewinsky was later thrown out because it was impertinent to the case). So, in effect, if you're going to go after clinton for this "perjury" you're going to have to go after anyone else who has lied about private matters to protect their case....something which has never been done. Also, you're going to have to take him to trial for something (adultery) for which their is no criminal charge. The fact that he lied about adultery is incredibly important...........
So lets take into account whats a greater threat to our nation and our national security....Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex with monica lewinsky or the Republicans completely disrupting the business of the federal government for months on end, not to mention wasting millions of dollars in a case which eventually went NOWHERE. The whole lewinsky thing was an embarrassment and a farce....much like the career of rush limbaugh....a zealot, a biggot and an all around pig who lies and distorts the truth on a daily basis.
Similar threads
