Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
One of the grounds could be that the articles do not state an impeachable offense. I think Clinton made that argument, but the senate didn't vote on that.

Clinton actually did commit a crime. (I am firmly of the opinion that he did it to keep discussion of his sale of missile technology to China and nuclear technology to North Korea out of the news cycle; he was successful at keeping most of the American public in the dark.)

But the articles of shampeachment fail to identify a single crime. They are clear grandstanding by a Congress that is attempting to overthrow the government every member has sworn to uphold.

The silver lining here is that while the Congress was busy coaching non-witnesses and throwing hissy fits over the fact that they do not understand a President who does not share their hunger for power and ill-gotten wealth, the Senate has been busy confirming judge after judge without a single demagogic peep from the left.

4 posted on 12/19/2019 4:19:00 AM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom
-- I am firmly of the opinion that he did it to keep discussion of his sale of missile technology to China and nuclear technology to North Korea out of the news cycle --

Congress approved of those transaction, under the principle that "silence is approval." The puppets in Congress do the bidding of the money and war men, and the powers that be aim to level the standard of living globally, as well as reduce the world population by 80-90%. Those are a tough sell if done in the open.

6 posted on 12/19/2019 4:22:49 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom; All

When the God fearing founders of this nation came up with the Republican vs democratic form of governmental representation. They considered that groups we call political partys once elected to a given political office. Could place their groups control and interest above the common good and benefit of the nation once elected to a legislative, executive or judicial office. Rather than work together for the common interest.

They truly believed that upon election. requiring taking the oath of office which swears loyalty to abide and support the constitution would take precedence and avert any fractious direction super ceding any political position taken by the group that the office holder associated with before entering .It took the democrat convention of 2012 when they attempted to remove any reference to God, “Our Creator,” to clearly demonstrate that belief no longer applied and when one took that oath it meant nothing.


9 posted on 12/19/2019 4:40:03 AM PST by mosesdapoet (mosesdapoet aka L,J,Keslin posting here for the record hoping somebody might read and pass around)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson