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

To: Hidy
I just have a long memory. It's not my fault this documentation points that way. And.. they could be isolated incidences. But it does make a person think.
22 posted on 10/17/2001 8:58:18 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur Wildfire! March
As others have pointed out, that silly tinfoil-hat "crime" list and that full-of-filthy-lies "film" put out by fat-fingered pharisee Falwell and other professional Clinton-haters amounts to doodley-squat. There's no 'there,' there.

Factually speaking, there is absolutely zero 'documentation' to back up ANY acusation in the "Clinton Chronicles." In fact, that hate-video is so full of nasty lies that if Falwell doesn't some day apologize for his part in producing it, he is very likely going to go to hell when his time comes. The Lord is VERY prejudiced against people who bear false witness against others. He even made a specific commandment against it. To God, lying about someone is the same as killing them. And Falwell's film (which he has dishonestly disavowed) is full of lies -- including some told by Falwell himself (such as when he pretends to be interviewing an "insider" whose life is being threatened. There was no insider. Falwell was interviewing the guy who made the stupid movie and letting on that it was someone whose identity he was protecting to save him from Clinton's mythical murder machine -- which of course is yet another another invention of that paranoid crowd of Clinton-haters.)

There is not a SINGLE accusation of malfeasance on Clinton's part in his entire public life that can be proved, although many people have spent many millions TRYING to prove same and failed. All the GOP ever got on him was lying about a few BJs, and they had to move heaven and earth to trap him into saying even that.

If Dubya and his daddy (who have both been accused of much bigger misdeeds than Clinton was ever accused of -- although the press refuses to tell you that) were investigated with one-twentieth of the ardor that Clinton was, it's likely they'd both wind up in jail.

The reason Clinton didn't go to jail is because he was investigated and found innocent. The reason the Bushes won't go to jail is because nobody (especially nobody in the CIA-controlled media) would dare to look into their affairs like Starr looked into Clinton's.

See what I just did? I did the same thing you guys do: I accused without proof, purely on the basis of dislike. But as I'm sure you realize now that the shoe is on your foot, although I can claim Bush is a philanderer and murderer all I want, that isn't factual "documentation" any more than phoney Falwell's flim-flam film is.

37 posted on 10/17/2001 9:46:30 AM PDT by Hidy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | 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