Posted on 05/29/2003 3:27:31 AM PDT by Mia T
Clinton Wants Change in Presidential Term Limits
Reuters Wednesday, May 28, 2003; 8:03 PM
BOSTON (Reuters) - Former President Bill Clinton said on Wednesday Congress should change the rule that barred him from seeking a third term in the White House, but stopped short of saying he wants to return as commander-in-chief.
Speaking at the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum here, Clinton questioned certain aspects of the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prevents a person from being elected president more than twice.
Shays Reveals Details of Clinton's 'Horrific' Broaddrick Rape
Arkansas nursing home operator Juanita Broaddrick told impeachmentinvestigators she was raped not once but twice by Bill Clinton during a brutal attack in a Little Rock hotel room 22 years ago, Connecticut Congressman Christopher Shays revealed Wednesday.
Shays was one of forty moderate congressional Republicans to visit the Ford Building evidence room during the House impeachment probe, where Broaddrick's accusation and documentation of other alleged Clinton crimes were made available for review.
Five days after Clinton was impeached by the House, Shays told the New York Times that the evidence was, "very alarming and very unsettling,"involving, "conduct by the president that is alleged to be pretty horrific."
In his comments to the Times Shays made no mention of the second attack on Broaddrick.
But when asked about the Ford Building evidence on Wednesday by WELI New Haven talk-radio host Tom Scott, Shays replied, "I believed that he had done it. I believed her that she had been raped 20 years ago. And it was vicious rapes, it was twice at the same event."
When Scott asked Shays if he believes the president is a rapist, the congressman replied, "I would like not to say it that way. But the bottom line is that I believe that he did rape Broaddrick."
Shays comments to Scott were first reported by National Review Online late Wednesday.
The reactions of other House members who viewed the evidence at the time suggested that Clinton's assault on Broaddrick was more disturbing than what has been reported in the press since.
Just days after the impeachment vote Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon told the Arizona Republic that what he saw in the Ford Building left him "nauseated." Delaware Rep. Mike Castle was reduced to tears, according to CNBC's Chris Matthews.
The shocking presidential rape evidence briefly moved Shays into the pro-impeachment column, he told the Times after the vote. But a personal meeting with Clinton, Shays said, changed his mind.
Not a single U.S. Senator viewed the Ford Building evidence before voting to acquit Clinton on two articles of impeachment.
In 1999, Georgia Congressman Bob Barr told NewsMax.com that the Ford Building materials would remain sealed unless the American people demanded their release.
Washington Post ^
it's more important that
we get the
FORD BUILDING RAPE EVIDENCE RELEASED
& that we change
the statute of limitations
--retroactively--
on RAPE
Q ERTY3BUMP!
1- It IS possible to prove by induction (and to confirm using FBI profiling of the POWER ASSERTIVE serial rapist) that the degenerate is a sexual predator and rapist.
2- There IS evidence that clinton raped Broaddrick. There ARE multiple witnesses to whom Broaddrick contemporaneously and independently and consistently told the story of her rape by clinton. There IS a witness to Broaddrick's injuries, shock and torn clothes, who saw all this evidence within minutes of the alleged rape.
3- Virtually ALL rapes have no witnesses to the act, itself. It is virtually ALWAYS a he-said/she-said situation. Credibility of the "he" and the "she" is the key criterion. Clinton is a documented congenital liar and sexual predator. Broaddrick is "squeaky clean" according to NBC. Which one of these two any unbiased jury and/or sane, thinking person would believe is a no-brainer.
4- This is not about "punishing" clinton. It's not about depriving clinton of life or liberty or money. It's about firing clinton. Thus, the standard is different. It is lower.
5- The suggestion that because the alleged rape occurred 21 years ago, it is unprovable, is standard issue clinton claptrap. Crimes of greater age are routinely solved.
6- That the statute of limitations has run is another red herring. The issue here is clinton's fitness to serve, not whether he can be tried for the rape.
Notwithstanding this, there are recent, associated crimes that can resurrect the rape.
NOTE: Heinous crimes (like murder) have no statute of limitations.
Moreover, the argument can fairly be made that the statute of limitations should be extended in this case because clinton and his Arkansas machine intimidated Broaddrick into inaction for those 21 years.
The following, found not in NBC's 23 sanitized minutes but rather on the cutting room floor, applies: Immediately after the rape Broaddrick says she was fearful clinton would send one of his goons up to that hotel room "to dispose of the body."
Broaddrick feared for her life and her well-being, given clinton's reputation for brutality and his very public maltreatment of his numerous other wounded prey; and she feared for her livelihood, given the state regulation of her nursing home(s).
|
Hamilton (or Madison) discussed the importance of wisdom and virtue in Federalist 57. "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."
(Contrast this with clinton, who recklessly, reflexively and feloniously subordinates the common good to his personal appetites.)
|
the logic of pathologic self-interest
by Mia T
There was a third chance to get rid of the clintons. In '98, when there was still time to stop bin Laden...
The failure to remove the clintons in '98 was a monumental error and is directly traceable to the logic of pathologic self-interest.
Recall in particular:
THE LIEBERMAN PARADIGM
Senator Joseph Lieberman's bifurcated Monicagate speech in 1998 on the floor of the Senate was almost universally misperceived as an act of honesty and courage.
In reality, it was neither.
Lieberman's argument that sorry day was rightly headed toward clinton's certain ouster when it suddenly made a swift, hairpin 180, as if clinton hacks took over the wheel. . .which they probably did.
What was Joe promised? A place on the 2000 ticket?
To be fair, it was not the Lieberman speech but rather a New York Times apologia that institutionalized this shameless scheme to protect a thoroughly corrupt and repugnant--and--as everyone except The New York Times now acknowledges-- dangerous -- Democrat regime.
The Lieberman Paradigm made its debut in The Times' utterly loony 1996 endorsement of clinton. The Times actually argued -- NOTE: this is NOT satire on my part (nor is it satire, as far as I can discern, on the part of The Times) -- that although bill clinton was a "corrupt," "dysfunctional personality [with} delusions" -- The Times' own words -- we need not -- we must not -- remove bill clinton; we need only remove.the character lobe of bill clinton's brain.
Not an aberration, the Shays Syndrome was quickly adopted by the entire Senate as its impeachment show trial deus ex machina of choice.
Shays, you may recall, examined the evidence in the Ford Building, concluded that clinton did, indeed, rape Broaddrick -- "VICIOUSLY!" AND "TWICE!" he declared at the time-- and was planning to vote to impeach; he changed his mind, however, after a tete a tete with the rapist.
Any cognitive dissonance Shays may have experienced rendering that verdict was no doubt assuaged by the political plum clinton had given Mrs. (Betsi) Shays...
Each of the 50 senators, on the other hand, cured the cognitive dissonance problem pre-emptively by making certain not to examine the damning Ford Building evidence in the first place. |
THE CLINTONS ARE SERIAL RAPISTS.
THE EVIDENCE EXISTS.
WE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, MUST DEMAND THE RELEASE OF THE FORD BUILDING EVIDENCE.
I WOULD SUGGEST ATTACKING THIS FROM BOTH THE POLITICAL AND LEGAL FRONTS.
HOW ABOUT IT, FREEPERS? |
|
*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio
|
Poison Pen Proves Autotoxic:
|
|
America still waits for the evidence in the US Senate office building to be released.
I think he may end up regretting such foolish dreams as "we the people" would surely re-elect President Bush for life over the despicable sex-crazed socialist perjuring self-centered liar, Bill Clinton if the opportunity presents itself.
There is something really wrong with Bill's hyper sense of importance that we just can't go on without his interference in to our lives even though we have ample reason to be leery of his own dysfunctional state of existence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.