[Just mythoughts]

What saved Clinton was the constitutional provision that you need two thirds of the Senate to vote for conviction in order to convict. He was never close to that. Spectre’s disingenuous vote meant Clinton didn’t get a majority for conviction, but the difference between not getting a 50% majority for conviction and not getting a 2/3rds majority is moot. Spectre converted to Republican to run for office because it made it easier, and converted to Democrat later. I didn’t care for him, but Pennsylvania voters elected him many times.

It really is hard to convict someone if the 'Senate' court refused to present the evidence, notwithstanding the Constitutional provisions. Why is Newt held to a higher standard than disingenuous play actor Spectre? The visceral hate for this guy is rather curious because it sure is not only about adultery.

[donmeaker]

I don’t hate Newt. In fact, I rather like him. I don’t see him as presidential, I find the notion that he is an outsider as laughable.

I see Romney as having an edge based on having been a governor. Hey, is the governor’s job of Georgia open? Perhaps there is time for Newt to buff up his management resume?

[donmeaker]

I think the higher standard is because of the higher office. Newt is running for President. Spectre is dead.

Why are you whipping a dead dog?