Happy Clinton Impeachment Day 2014!!! Impeachment is Forever

“...we can do it again...” Oh I HOPE SO Kristinn!!

But the REAL Trick is: DON’T LET IT HAPPEN IN THE 1ST PLACE!!!

God Bless.

D.A.

I still have my copy of that Washington Times...

“President Bill Clinton was impeached”, REALLY?

To me being impeached means he should have also been REMOVED. Instead of removing him, the demodummies had a great lawn party to celebrate his “victory”.

What the hell? Impeachment means NOTHING IMO.

We were there. Mrs jimfree was wearing a Monica style beret, but I don’t remember a rope line.

THANK YOU! Jim Free!!

For being there! I & everyone knows what it takes just to show up, just to Sacrifice to show up, for rallies like this & other Rallies!

WE don’t get;

——Mass-Produced Signs Handed to us as we dis-embark from Free, round-trip, TAX PAYER Paid Buses, with our Giggling high school friends & Teachers!

——Free Lunch tickets or Monies from Mom & Dad!

——Indoctrinated and Emotionally-Charged in our Class rooms by Liberal Teachers or Unions!!

WE all; Save, Take un-paid days off from WORK! Travel on out own Monies! and get Eggs Thrown and Threats screamed in our faces by un-employed Communist & Socialist Clubs!

And those who were at these rallies— WE- like I picture took- aren’t PAID $20 dollars each from Homeless DC clinics to ride a bus to march & carry signs (for issues we know nothing about!) either!

God Bless you and your families and friends.

2016 isn’t far away—Plan Now!!

D.A.
“...Democrats ALWAYS Vote Straight-Ticket!?.. Republicans and Conservatives wise up- WE put Obama AND his elk in Office...”

It does NOTHING without conviction

bttt

It was all a sham, Kristinn. The GOP was never serious about impeachment - it was all Kabuki theather.

The day that George Stephanopolous threatened the media and the GOP on national TV, telling them to back off or the Clintons would dump all the FBI files on every media celebrity and every member of Congress, and they all caved, ended any hope of true justice.

And today, we have She Who Must Not Be Named poised once again for a run on Her former power, and Chelsea is being groomed in dynastic succession.

These people will never leave.

For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.

WAR IN KOSOVO

During Bill Clinton’s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo – which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion – we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a “humanitarian war.” In March 1999 – the same month that the bombing started – Clinton’s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevic’s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevic’s “War Crimes” trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 “bodies and body parts.” During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.

BILL CLINTON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

In fact, as CNN’s Brooke Jackson has reported: “Three days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.” See (See http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/31/jackson.recession.primer.otsc/).

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: “The longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP — the country’s total output of goods and services — shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.” See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3676690/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/gdp-figures-revised-downward/.

This, from a November 1998 Wall Street Journal article by Walter Berns discussing the NYT ad taken out by 400 reputed 'noted historians' effectively telling us all lying about a BJ and then lying to cover it up is not an impeachable offense.

Familiar charges, these, but this time they come not from the White House or its Hollywood friends, but from more than 400 professional historians, many of them well-known, some of them distinguished and none of them (we are to believe) partisan. "We do not condone President Clinton's behavior or his subsequent attempts to deceive," they say, but "the current charges against him depart from what the Framers {of the Constitution} saw as grounds for impeachment."

Except for one reference to a commonplace uttered by James Madison, we have only their word on this, but their word ought to carry weight, coming as it does from professors at all the Ivy League universities (save only Dartmouth), along with Stanford, Chicago, Virginia, Duke, Berkeley, Williams, Amherst and many lesser institutions.

I wanted everyone to remember or know that Dr. Doris Kearns Goodwin (a popular shill used often on MSM to provide 'unbiased' academic historical and Constitutional comment) was a signatory to this ad.

Never forget her and those 399 others. They are the enablers of the likes of Clinton (and Obama).

Yea...thanx for embarrassing our nation and defiling our sacred house. Slick, you’ll always be warmly referred to as the 3rd worst president in American history.

You lost first to negro’ pendejo en la casa blanco.

"We did it once, we can do it again."

Until there are no more Demonicrats and RINOs elected, impeachment needs to be a regular habit, like flushing the toilet when needed.

They protected William the Impeached.

They’ll vote their vaginas in lock-step for She Who Must Not Be Named.

Amen! God bless you, kristinn, for all you have done over the years.

In memory of the late, great Dr. Raoul”” “Bill Clinton! Drop the cigar, step away from the intern, and come out....with your pants up!”

16 years since we found of that Bill Clinton had raped more women than Cosby!

photo TheBillsCFatScribe_zps87b608d5.jpg

Reminiscing about the good ol' days

We can indeed do it again, Mr. Taylor. All we need to do is stiffen the backbones of the Freepers who are more interested in perpetuating Republican Party influence than they are in preserving Constitutional principles and the rule of law.

Yes, they protected him. At the sacrifice of their supposedly unbiased academic opinion.

We as conservatives should never let these people Doris K. Goodwin get away with it.

Never trust a three-named woman.