Sen. Thompson's closed-door impeachment statement (Feb 12, 1999)

CNN ^ | February 12, 1999 | Fred Thompson

[Kurt Evans]

“It’s also intended to be a misleading statement people by omitting the important fact that Fred did vote for a conviction on the other count.”

I wasn’t talking about other votes. I was talking about the perjury vote. There’s nothing misleading about it.

“Fred’s vote did not affect the final outcome, and it’s not an issue today.”

If Clinton had been convicted of perjury, he would have been removed from office. Senator Thompson’s “not guilty” vote affected the final outcome every bit as much as the “not guilty” votes cast by Democrats. And it is an issue today because it raises questions about Senator Thompson’s character.

[Kurt Evans]

“Is this some kind of run-up to another wacky Ron Paul pitch?”

Not at all.

[NavVet]

So, Thompson only voted to “convict and remove from office” on one count instead of two. Gee and I thought he was a conservative. (Is this the best you have in attacking Thompson’s Conservative credintials and if so, who is the more conservative candidate you would have us vote for?)

Next you’ll be telling me he donated large sums of money to NARL like Rudy, has made impassioned speaches defending Roe v. Wade like Romney and Rudy, Shut down the Catholic Adoption agency because it wouldn’t allow homosexual couples to adopt like Romney, Used deceptive accounting to hide an affair like Rudy, praised Amnesty for illegals and advocated for tution breaks for illegals like the Huckster or advocated for tax increases like the Huckster.

[NavVet]

Raises a question about his character? Are you serious. Good God, if we’re going to say that any disagreement on any point, no matter how technical is a reflection on a man’s character, I think we’ve hit rock bottom. However, if you want to go there, you could write a book on such Character flaws on the part of Huckabee, Romney, and Rudy. Like Rush said yesterday, none of them are conservative and that’s the biggest character flaw of all.

[UCFRoadWarrior]

My bad not realizing this was from a Huckabee supporter

[restornu]

it is not as troubling as Romney allowing wealth redistribution through forced purchasing of health insurance (MittCare).

Explain your understanding of wealth redistribution in an opportunity for an individual to chose to purchance free market affordable insurance or not to chose?

Please don't confused revisions added after Mitt left office.

[newzjunkey]

There’s nothing misleading about it.

Hair-splitting much? He did not see sufficient evidence to support a perjury conviction but did on obstruction. To be fair and not biased you must include both votes else you are simply spewing propaganda through insinuation by omission.

Though we don't always succeed, we aim to be better than that around here.

What are the "questions" of "character" you suggest are being raised? Again, you made insinuations. Shame on you.

Since removal from office required a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Senate to convict on at least one article of impeachment, the final outcome was entirely in Democrat hands. Thompson's vote alone not to convict on just one of those two articles did not effect whether Clinton ultimately stayed or was removed.

Thompson's character should not be called into question simply because he did not see sufficiently clear evidence of perjury while still recognizing the pattern of obstruction and voting for removal on that basis.

You don't even have the character to admit you're attempting a hit-and-run on Thompson are unwilling to admit you support another candidate.

[LibLieSlayer]

Fred voted to convict on the one charge that could be proved. Anyone saying otherwise is a LIAR! Fred asked questions... his answer came when he voted to remove ‘toon from office on one of two charges... all it takes is one to convict.

LLS

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

What I would like to know is which Senators sent their aides to look at the mounds of information that led to the house indictment of BJ Clinton?

[LibLieSlayer]

Bullsh!t... it only takes ONE charge to convict... he voted with principle... her statement... like yours... is a deception at best.

LLS

[#1CTYankee]

Talk about old news, why would you post an article that is eight years old?

Never mind, not too difficult to figure out.

[aj7360]

I’m not a liberal.

Then just what ARE you and which candidate ARE you supporting?

I'm afraid that you are not better than the fake "undecided" voters (i.e. Edwards, Hillary and Obama supporters) who planted those questions in the debate the other night.

This is ancient history and isn't going to accomplish anything around these parts... except to prove that Fred is starting to scare even more people.

Yes, "Fred Fear" is a terrible thing... and we all can feel your terror.

Try not be so obvious.

[LilAngel]

Thanks for this thread. It gives me a glimpse into Fred’s character that I wouldn’t otherwise have.

I completely disagree with his vote on the perjury charge, but now that I see his reasoning behind it, it’s clear to me that his decision came from the best quality of character one can hope to find in any person, much less a politician. He did what he believed was right, despite pressure to do what was popular. I still think he was wrong, but he displayed a strength of character that I hope to find in our next president.

[ontap]

Has nothing to do with his character the fact that he voted yes on one and no on the other is a credit to his character in that he carefully weighed the evidence and voted his conscience.

[catfish1957]

Sounds like a CNN hit piece to try to alienate Fred from conservatives. CNN has no sense of shame.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Here is a very interesting and shocking poll:

http://www.whoradio.com/pages/2008elimination/index.html?feed=119197&article=2855869

[cva66snipe]

Fred the man who took down Tennessee's {my states} Felon governor acted like a first year law student in the later part of so called chairing his own committee hearings. No vote for Fred from me. When the hearings first began and Fred said "Let the chips fall where they may" I thought Fred is gonna take him down. When Fred a few weeks later said "Don't name names" and from then on looked as if he could care less I knew he had sold us out.

Fred was a good senator his first term. Fred was a good lawyer in Tennessee helping to bring down "Pardon me Ray" Blanton. When he got elected his second term Fred become just another two bit RINO DC insider. Stick with acting or the court rooms Fred. You are not POTUS material the MSM portrays you to be.

[cva66snipe]

Has nothing to do with his character the fact that he voted yes on one and no on the other is a credit to his character in that he carefully weighed the evidence and voted his conscience.

It has everything to do with it. Remember when the witness stated he could have {bribe} anyone in that room or too that effect? Let the chips fall where they may Fred said "Don't name no names". Character my foot. I rank him with Ted Stevens another so called beloved of RINO's who also made a statement about Clinton's guilt then voted NOT GUILTY!

[LilAngel]

There is no copy/paste function on my cell phone. I could open up my address bar and type the url in, one character at time, on my alpha-numeric keypad, if I first write it down somewhere. But I don’t have a pen and paper handy. If it was a link, I could click on it. My cell phone has a slower than dial-up connection, so I hope that’s not a big page.

[aj7360]

AND it shows that Fred isn’t a spineless, flip-flopping, pandering wimp that will now say “oh.. I was wrong... I didn’t mean to do that...” etc... instead of saying anything to get votes... like Romney, Guiliani, Huckabee, Clinton, Edwards.... etc... will do.

There are NO candidates out there who have made perfect decisions their entire lives pleasing everyone. They don’t exist.