Did I call you that now banned term on this thread? I don't believe so. For those who don't know, my understanding is that the term has been banned because someone(s) found it personally insulting and hit the abuse button ... even though it was absolutely descriptive of the philosophy they subscribe to with regards to the crimes committed by the democRATS the last 9 years. PC comes to FreeRepublic, I guess.
Your feeble attempts at slamming all of us with your annoying keyboard diarreah only makes people sick of you, and your petty, tin-foil theories.
Gee. Should I take this as a personal insult? And you say I'm annoying? What SPECIFIC part of my commentary on this thread do you find annoying? It is hard to debate someone whose response is so vague. And you call what I say "tin-foil". Am I to assume then that you are going to be the first to say outright that no crimes were committed by the democRATS the last 9 years? Or are you the claiming the Bush administration has or is investigating those crimes? If so, please provide your supporting data.
Like it or not, and what everyone on the face of this earth other than you knows (and that includes Klayman), is that it's never going to happen.
What's not going to happen? You mean Bush isn't going to FAITHFULLY EXECUTE the laws as the Constitution says he is supposed to do? Surely a Bush supporter isn't suggesting that Bush and his administration would KNOWINGLY and DELIBERATELY disregard the Constitution and let serious crimes go uninvestigated and unprosecuted ... just for their own POLITICAL gain.
The political fallout of spending the greatest part of any president's term in attempting to prosecute his predecesor would be too costly, and would in the end, simply be viewed as a witch hunt.
Geeeeee. I guess you were suggesting that. But why are you focusing only on CLINTON? Why do those of you who want Bush to ignore crimes as serious as election tampering, conspiracy to blackmail Republicans and Congress, selling US secrets and access to restricted technology for campaign contributions, bribery (as in selling vetos), murder and mass murder to go uninvestigated and unpunished focus solely on Clinton? What about the MANY others in the democRAT party who also helped commit those serious crimes? Are we just to forget that many of them are still in government, the media and the democRAT party doing mischief and committing more crimes? Why focus on Clinton? Those others would have to be investigated and tried long before we ever got around to indicting a Clinton, if that were possible at all.
I think you know this, and I think that your job is to maintain Clinton in the spotlight.
But I'm not the one keeping Clinton in the spotlight. You are. You people ALWAYS mention him, and ONLY him, when the issue of crimes committed by democRATS is raised. Why is that? Are you blind to the dozens if not hundreds of other democRAT criminals? And if you are so concerned about keeping Clinton out of the spotlight, why did so many of you applauded when Bush asked him to officially represent this country in a foreign land (not far from where he got those millions of illegal dollars which were the subject of the Riady plea bargain)? As a result, all we saw on the nightly news was Clinton's face and voice ... regaining, perhaps, some of the "stature" he had lost.
There's nothing that would please Clinton more than to be able to be on national TV, day in and day out, pontificating about his innocence
Oh I don't imagine he'd be pleased to see dozens of his closest friends and supporters facing juries and being shown to have committed serious crimes. I don't imagine he'd be pleased to see one or two of them turn states evidence and implicate him, as might well happen. And is this really a valid excuse for ignoring credible allegations of crimes like murder?
(no one will ever pin anything on him, we had our chance and we let him slip away),
Only your opinion. But certainly true if nothing is every investigated. Or are you claiming that the matters I'm concerned about were properly investigated? Come on Luis Gonzalez, answer that question.
Waste another four years on Bill? You go ahead son, and good luck to you. Me? I want to forget that we had a president from 1993 to 2001.
and congratulate Bush for violating his oath and the Constitution. Right.
Every word of it, including "the", "if", and "of".