Clinton had sex and he lied about it to cover up his affair. Sure he lied, but if nobody had asked about the trysts then he would not have had to lie.
Actually, that is not what Clinton was being impeached for. It was for using his office for subverting justice in the Paula Jones affair. The truth behind the affair was significant enough that it cost Clinton $850,000 and his law license.. details that the mainstream media seems to completely miss. The mainstream media seems to always get caught up in the sex and scandal (because it sells copy?) and ignores the facts..[/quote]
Ucodegen: Certain folks on this board, like Brian and Pat, don’t like facts. Facts are inconvenient, as is the truth. Its far easier to either go ad hominem or ignore those things that don’t fit your worldview.
Hiding behind this “Us versus Them” meme is especially easy, in that it allows for everything to devolve into an easily understood and, more importantly, easily swallowed condensation of events. Who cares if its true?
I pointed out to Brian earlier that Hillary Clinton’s fulminations about the “vast right-wing conspiracy” all pre-dated her finding out that Monica was indeed gargling Bill’s meat doodle. That story then became the accepted truth amongst the true believers on the Left, not the fact that Bill suborned perjury, lied under oath and basically pissed on the office of the President.
As Brian says, “Hey, if we hadn’t asked, none of this would have happened” (is that part of Bill’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy?). When you reach that level of mendacity, the argument is over, as is the game.
