How a New York Senator Can Rag on the Clintons without Risk of Death

American Thinker.com ^ | November 20, 2017 | Michael Nollett

[Kaslin]

On November 16, 2017, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) kicked off her run for the 2020 presidency by intoning that Bill Clinton should have resigned (in disgrace?) in 1998 over the Monica Lewinsky affair.

Talk sure is cheap, isn't it? That's because the Democrats had in their power to dump Clinton in 1999 and kick him right out of office – and took a pass on it. They could even have accomplished this with a minority of their Senate membership. And not only would it have been easy, but it would even have redounded to their benefit, by guaranteeing their continued rule for at least six more years and probably ten. They would have only benefited from doing so. And how!

The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States states that "no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once." This means that if Vice President Albert Sidney "Al" Gore had succeeded to the Presidency in 1999, he would have been enabled to serve out the time remaining in Clinton's term – and then two full terms of his own. Gore would have been on a fast track to become the longest serving president in American history, save only Franklin Roosevelt himself.

[Kaslin]

Clinton RAPED a woman

Correction: Clinton didn't just rape one woman, he raped several (like four)

Someone posted the name of them yesterday on an other thread that I had posted

[Robert DeLong]

No, because the remainder of Clinton’s term would have been less than 2 years. So Al could potentially have been elected 2 times.

[adorno]

No, because the remainder of Clinton’s term would have been less than 2 years. So Al could potentially have been elected 2 times.

Thst's true, but, the first sentence of the article says this:

Bill Clinton should have resigned (in disgrace?) in 1998 over the Monica Lewinsky affair.

...which would have made it more than 2 years left in his last term.

You are right about it being leas than 2 years and a person being able to run for two terms. If the resignation had occurred in 1999 (and after January), Gore could have been in office for close to 10 years, IF he had won.

[Robert DeLong]

You are correct, had he resigned on his own in 1998 then Gore could only serve one more term. However, he was stating that in 1999 the Democrats had their chance of getting rid of him & then Gore would have served the remainder of Bill's term & be eligible for 2 more full terms.

I'll agree that he confused the issue by mentioning Clinton resigning in 1998 to begin with.

Furthermore, he erred by stating that the Democrats would have retained control of the Presidency for an additional 8 to 10 years.

That's because they had control for the duration of Clinton's term regardless who served that term out.

Thus the Democrats would have only gained 4 more years, if he had resigned and Gore won election to serve the limit he could legally serve after taking over for Bill Clinton. Or 8 more years had he been removed from office & Gore served 2 additional terms in addition to completing the term that started with Bill Clinton as President.

[G Larry]

Our respective observations are not mutually exclusive.

Both could be true.

[mazda77]

Damn, that was funny while listening to George Carlin!

But to be sirius, you got my point. Any one making definable recriminations based off nothing but conjecture sure makes for a messy plate.

[mazda77]

But then I forgot to add this . . . .

http://truepundit.com/mueller-requests-documents-and-emails-on-holder-lynch-obama-from-justice-department/

remember that old saying about thing are not as they seem?

[doug from upland]

[spacewarp]

Actually, if they booted him, it would have been past the 2 year mark, so it would have ended up with Gore having less than 2 years, so he would have run, and had the incumbent advantage, and the close election would probably have turned towards Gore. The next election, he would have done so much damage, he would probably have had armed guards at the polling places ensuring they voted Gore.