Bill and Hillary

How to say, "I live a fact free existence."


Did you happen to remember the reasons drumpf was impeached? Don't remember it having to do with exposing crooks. lol Originally Posted by TechPapi

Well since you live a fact free existence then maybe you should go look it up and get the facts. If Trump was truly guilty of anything notorious they would have done more than just impeach him. The whole thing was a charade.

And Trump was impeached........twice !


Bill is a crook.
Hillary is a bigger crook.
Trump is the biggest crook.
Al Capone....at least he admitted he was a crook. Originally Posted by VitaMan

Impeachment is an indictment only and it is purely political without any rules for fair play or constitutional protections. Only an idiot would compare that to an actual criminal conviction like the kind that Bill Clinton got on his record. Just like Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton is a convicted felon.

Well since you live a fact free existence then maybe you should go look it up and get the facts. If Trump was truly guilty of anything notorious they would have done more than just impeach him. The whole thing was a charade. Originally Posted by Levianon17

"charade"? kinda

More like dems abuse of Power! Just because they could!

Well since you live a fact free existence then maybe you should go look it up and get the facts. If Trump was truly guilty of anything notorious they would have done more than just impeach him. The whole thing was a charade. Originally Posted by Levianon17

Since you don't seem familiar with those proceedings I found you a couple of links on that liberal rag wikipedia.


First impeachment of Donald Trump

Second impeachment of Donald Trump


So the impeachment of Clinton...that was righteous?

"charade"? kinda

More like dems abuse of Power! Just because they could! Originally Posted by winn dixie

You low-info guys crack me up with your certainty of bullshit.

Impeachment is an indictment only ..... Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

... the only person who could possibly be "impressed" with either an indictment or an "impeachment" is someone who is ignorant of those two processes. And more importantly they aren't old enough mentally to recall the old saying about prosecutors, ham sandwiches, and indictments.

OJ Simpson was INDICTED for killing his former wife and her boy-toy, but he is INNOCENT of murdering them. People who actually know are aware of the legal concept of a "PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE."

For their edification:

The presumption of innocence is a legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty.

The same is correct with respect to "impeachment" proceedings. I suspect that Judge Roberts knows the difference and I imagine that his legal knowledge explains why he didn't bother to appear and preside over any proceeding in the Senate with respect to the 2nd attempt to convict Trump to have him removed from office.

It has to do with our Constitution and the amendments regarding "Due Process" and it should be concern of ALL U.S. OCCUPANTS that the long existing rules remain intact for all occupants of the U.S. to assure they ALL HAVE DUE PROCESS protected if anyone attempts to destroy their lives and families by punishing them for not agreeing politically with one side or the other when one side or the other is "in power"!

The old saying is appropriate: The shoe is on the other foot soon enough!

"Soon" may well be later this year and more importantly beginning in January of next year. I have no doubt like the Little Nazis partying in Florida without protecting others and in violation of the oppressive measures they want to visit on others .. they will be screaming at the tops of their feminine yelps if they don't get ALL THEIR DUE PROCESS.

... the only person who could possibly be "impressed" with either an indictment or an "impeachment" is someone who is ignorant of those two processes. And more importantly they aren't old enough mentally to recall the old saying about prosecutors, ham sandwiches, and indictments.

OJ Simpson was INDICTED for killing his former wife and her boy-toy, but he is INNOCENT of murdering them. People who actually know are aware of the legal concept of a "PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE."

For their edification:



The same is correct with respect to "impeachment" proceedings. I suspect that Judge Roberts knows the difference and I imagine that his legal knowledge explains why he didn't bother to appear and preside over any proceeding in the Senate with respect to the 2nd attempt to convict Trump to have him removed from office.

It has to do with our Constitution and the amendments regarding "Due Process" and it should be concern of ALL U.S. OCCUPANTS that the long existing rules remain intact for all occupants of the U.S. to assure they ALL HAVE DUE PROCESS protected if anyone attempts to destroy their lives and families by punishing them for not agreeing politically with one side or the other when one side or the other is "in power"!

The old saying is appropriate: The shoe is on the other foot soon enough!

"Soon" may well be later this year and more importantly beginning in January of next year. I have no doubt like the Little Nazis partying in Florida without protecting others and in violation of the oppressive measures they want to visit on others .. they will be screaming at the tops of their feminine yelps if they don't get ALL THEIR DUE PROCESS. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Just wanted to say, it's your clever, strategic use of ALL CAPS that really sells your bullshit! Without it, no one would listen. Keep it up!

Since you don't seem familiar with those proceedings I found you a couple of links on that liberal rag wikipedia.


First impeachment of Donald Trump

Second impeachment of Donald Trump


So the impeachment of Clinton...that was righteous? Originally Posted by TechPapi

You weren't familiar that's why you had to look it up. Nothing ever really resulted from either he was acquitted on both. The second so called impeachment Trump was already walking out the door which was a chicken shit move on the part of the Democrats. Clinton should have been convicted of Rape when he was Governor along with his screwed up brother Roger Clinton. So don't give me any bullshit about Trump.

You weren't familiar that's why you had to look it up. Nothing ever really resulted from either he was acquitted on both. The second so called impeachment Trump was already walking out the door which was a chicken shit move on the part of the Democrats. Clinton should have been convicted of Rape when he was Governor along with his screwed up brother Roger Clinton. So don't give me any bullshit about Trump. Originally Posted by Levianon17

You do remember that Clinton was acquitted as well? But that doesn't count, right? Also, sure sounds like drumpf should have been convicted of sexual assault more than a few times.

I get why you're pushing this bullshit though. It's like the picture:

Staff Edit - Image Violation - Image Removed - Biomed1

Impeachment is an indictment only and it is purely political without any rules for fair play or constitutional protections. Only an idiot would compare that to an actual criminal conviction like the kind that Bill Clinton got on his record. Just like Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton is a convicted felon. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Can you check that out and report back ?
Here is what comes up on my computer using Google to search.


"On February 12, the Senate voted on whether to remove Bill Clinton from office. The president was acquitted on both articles of impeachment."

Can you check that out and report back ?
Here is what comes up on my computer using Google to search.


"On February 12, the Senate voted on whether to remove Bill Clinton from office. The president was acquitted on both articles of impeachment." Originally Posted by VitaMan

Don't you know? It's all part of the deep state conspiracy. They've hidden the fact that Clinton was convicted! lol

Can you check that out and report back ?
Here is what comes up on my computer using Google to search.


"On February 12, the Senate voted on whether to remove Bill Clinton from office. The president was acquitted on both articles of impeachment." Originally Posted by VitaMan

So your google searches do work. Only for approved links eh'?

Care to explain what it is you are trying to say ?

You do remember that Clinton was acquitted as well? But that doesn't count, right? Also, sure sounds like drumpf should have been convicted of sexual assault more than a few times.

I get why you're pushing this bullshit though. It's like the picture:

Staff Edit - Image Violation - Image Removed - Biomed1 Originally Posted by TechPapi

It actually does count because it actually happened and it's behavior unbecoming of a head of state. It's pretty obvious you don't know much about Bill Clinton and his antics. You should read about the Mena Airport and Barry Seal transporting contraband to and from South America Bill Clinton knew all about that but he lied and said he didn't.

It actually does count because it actually happened and it's behavior unbecoming of a head of state. It's pretty obvious you don't know much about Bill Clinton and his antics. You should read about the Mena Airport and Barry Seal transporting contraband to and from South America Bill Clinton knew all about that but he lied and said he didn't. Originally Posted by Levianon17

I find your outrage at Clinton's behavior as "head of state" amusing, given that you don't appear to have the self-awareness to compare that statement with the outrages of that retarded shitbird drumpf.


Let's review. Your guy:

• Said windmills cause cancer
• Used a Sharpie to change the path of a hurricane
• Autographed bibles
• Saluted a North Korean general
• Said there were airplanes in the Revolutionary War
• Wanted to nuke hurricanes and
• Suggested that bleach could cure COVID

Such a fucking statesman! Particularly if you like your statesmen to be an international embarrassment. I think in light of all of that, you aren't qualified to judge anyone's fitness. For anything.