Chris Wallace says 'well-connected' Republican told him there's a 20 percent chance GOP will vote for impeachment

NuffSaid · 2019-10-21T17:05:26.386Z

DougBH:

DOLOOP:

DougBH:

No.
…

Oh.

You must be pretty young, then. That whole Clinton thing must not have happened in your lifetime.

Your only looking at part of my statement. Clinton was guilty of perjury, a felony.

He was.

Do you remember why he was initially investigated?

NuffSaid · 2019-10-21T17:06:00.321Z

DOLOOP:

NuffSaid:

DOLOOP:

DougBH:

No.
…

Oh.

You must be pretty young, then. That whole Clinton thing must not have happened in your lifetime.

Nah, they just conveniently forget about it.

The profound victimhood is a long-running feature, it seems.

Look at their idol, Trump. He portrays victimhood in the greatest sense.

DOLOOP · 2019-10-21T17:06:23.882Z

NuffSaid:

DougBH:

DOLOOP:

DougBH:

No.
…

Oh.

You must be pretty young, then. That whole Clinton thing must not have happened in your lifetime.

Your only looking at part of my statement. Clinton was guilty of perjury, a felony.

He was.

Do you remember why he was initially investigated?

Some sort of land deal. From long before he was President, when, I’ve been made aware, are no longer fodder for consideration into the character of a President.

NuffSaid · 2019-10-21T17:07:19.880Z

DOLOOP:

NuffSaid:

DougBH:

DOLOOP:

DougBH:

No.
…

Oh.

You must be pretty young, then. That whole Clinton thing must not have happened in your lifetime.

Your only looking at part of my statement. Clinton was guilty of perjury, a felony.

He was.

Do you remember why he was initially investigated?

Some sort of land deal. From long before he was President, when, I’ve been made aware, are no longer fodder for consideration into the character of a President.

Shhh

No fair, you gave away the answer.

WorldWatcher · 2019-10-21T17:07:26.656Z

DougBH:

DOLOOP:

DougBH:

No.
…

Oh.

You must be pretty young, then. That whole Clinton thing must not have happened in your lifetime.

Your only looking at part of my statement. Clinton was guilty of perjury, a felony.

Clinton acquitted by the Senate, he was not convicted.

There was no criminal case in which to be convicted of a felony.

Even the Paula Jones case was dismissed by the court.
.
.
.
.^^^^

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:11:42.344Z

Clearly perjury nonetheless. At least he lost his law license over it, though I’m sure he was never going to use it anyway.
What’s funny is how the self described feminists groups went from committing perjury in a sexual harassment case being about the worst crime ever to being “its only about sex”.

NebraskaFootball · 2019-10-21T17:12:57.696Z

And Trump clearly obstructed justice multiple times. But you don’t care about that, do you.

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:13:41.231Z

NebraskaFootball:

And Trump clearly obstructed justice multiple times. But you don’t care about that, do you.

I don’t agree that he did. In fact, the DOJ has determined that he did not.

WorldWatcher · 2019-10-21T17:15:05.381Z

DougBH:

At least he lost his law license over it, though I’m sure he was never going to use it anyway.

He didn’t loose his law license, he suspended it for 5-years and could have gotten it reactivated around 2005 if he wanted.

.
.
.
.^^^^

sikofit · 2019-10-21T17:15:21.587Z

DougBH:

Clearly perjury nonetheless

So what you’re saying is that Democrats are justified in using set precedent to pursue this in the same manner?

NebraskaFootball · 2019-10-21T17:15:55.662Z

DougBH:

NebraskaFootball:

And Trump clearly obstructed justice multiple times. But you don’t care about that, do you.

I don’t agree that he did. In fact, the DOJ has determined that he did not.

Okay. Like I said, we know you don’t care. The facts don’t lie. Trump has committed multiple felonies, both before and after the election. Period. This is beyond debate, and I have no interest in debating reality.

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:17:33.194Z

You are certainly justified in accusing Trump of obstruction of justice even though he has not been convicted…in fact you are continually doing so. The only difference is you are wrong.

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:18:24.521Z

I bet you win a lot of debates that way.

sikofit · 2019-10-21T17:18:42.255Z

DougBH:

You are certainly justified in accusing Trump of obstruction of justice even though he has not been convicted…

What was Clinton convicted of again?

sikofit · 2019-10-21T17:19:25.973Z

DougBH:

The only difference is you are wrong

Heavily biased, unsubstantiated opinion noted

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:19:56.948Z

sikofit:

DougBH:

You are certainly justified in accusing Trump of obstruction of justice even though he has not been convicted…

What was Clinton convicted of again?

He was not charged, as you know. He was guilty of perjury and lost, temporarily it seems, his law license.

DougBH · 2019-10-21T17:20:36.575Z

Likewise, I am sure. Except I have a decision by the DOJ in my favor.

sikofit · 2019-10-21T17:20:37.107Z

DougBH:

I bet you win a lot of debates that way.

And you certainly try to. You just always come up short

sikofit · 2019-10-21T17:21:19.552Z

DougBH:

He was guilty of perjury

Please cite this ruling of guilt

WorldWatcher · 2019-10-21T17:21:49.986Z

DougBH:

Clinton was guilty of perjury, a felony.

DougBH:

You are certainly justified in accusing Trump of obstruction of justice even though he has not been convicted…in fact you are continually doing so. The only difference is you are wrong.

Interesting, you say Clinton was guilty of a felony even even though he has not been convicted.

But somehow is wrong to claim that Trump has obstructed justice and hide behind “well he has been convicted”.

Hmm - care to explain the logical consistency here?
.
.
.
.^^^^