Clinton impeachment
 

There has been talk that if Hillary was to get in office that the GOP would start impeachment proceedings on her first day in office because of the laws that she broke with the email usage. OK all well and good, but if that would be reason enough, and it may be then why cant that disqualify now to keep her from running and save the country millions of dollars.

If in fact there is any such thought I would like to hear the logic that results in waiting until after elected VS taking appropriate action NOW!

I think it was a congress man from Alabama

Are you sure it wasn't a former president from Arkansas?...:1rotfl:

Logic? We are Tea Bag members and we don't need no stinkin' logic!

As if Mrs Clinton hasn't already made the Cons look like the incompetent fools they are.

They sure are glutons for punishment.

That would take the prize for stupidity. What they would be saying is they don't trust the FBI. Everyone that doesn't agree with them is in the bag for the Democratic party. Ryan, when he becomes speaker, is going to have to deal with these people. Good luck.

That's a stupid remark. It's HER "incompetence" that is being investigated. Talk about incompetence, how about those Dems sitting on the committee that did nothing but kiss her as...? They asked no question related to the investigation.

And the spelling is "gluttons." Automatic spell check is a wonderful thing. It's too bad that it doesn't correct my grammar.

If anyone would know anything about Tea Ba...ing, it would be you. That's a liberal thing, not a conservative thing.

If she is elected, then YES she should be impeached. Of course, it will mean that Obama's FBI is corrupt, which shouldn't be any surprise, if you consider that the Attorney General is corrupt, the Director of the IRS is/was corrupt, etc. It is obvious that Hillary did in fact violate Federal Law as revealed by her emails and the SF312 that she was required to sign. Any first year law student would be able to get a conviction.

It would 2/3 vote of the House to impeach her. Do you think that about 60 Democrats would vote to impeach her?

This is a sorry conversation for all. The only things that both parties ever agreed upon and came together was going to war 9-11. This is the only event in our history that both parties were UNITED....going to war....

All it takes for 60 Dems to vote for it, is enough money. Everyone knows that the corrupt Dems can be bought.

You really have to be stupid to think there even is an investigation going on. So far, three Cons have admitted this is all about bringing down Clinton's poll numbers and nothing else.

Talk about stupid. The FBI doesn't work for the GOP. If anything, they would be controlled by Obama. So, you really should think before you insert foot in your mouth, figuratively speaking. Got any other points of wisdom you wish to make? :1rotfl:

Wow..you have to get out more.

First of all, NO "cons" have "admitted" anything. A number of opinions were given, construed by the media as an opinion not shared by the committee on Benghazi.

It was the committee on Benghazi that had the comments, and NOT the FBI investigation. You have your spin all mixed up and confused.

FBI is not controlled by any party, that I know of.

Lastly, please explain WHY anyone would ever in a million years have a conspiracy of ANY KIND to affect POLLS.

POLLS ? A group of about 1000 people are asked questions.

Please get up to speed and know what you are speaking of before you post.

:clap2:....:thumbup:

This thread is like listening to 50 different people telling the same joke they all heard last night!!
:1rotfl:
:clap2:

Perhaps a history lesson is in order at this point....

How many US Presidents have been impeached?

Answer: None The House voted impeachment for Andrew Jackson and Bill Clinton but the Senate acquitted them.

Why wasn't Nixon impeached for Watergate? The Democrats could have done that but allowed the Republican's to go to Nixon and talk him into leaving...for the good of the country.

Bill Clinton and Hillary were the subjects of a long investigation which cost mllions of dollars only to find out what the American public already knew...Bill Clinton couldn't keep it, like most men, in his pants.

The Democrats could and really thought about bring articles of impeachment against Bush for war crimes and lying in the run up to the war but they had learned a lesson during the Clinton impeachment. Clinton got more popular, with the public, after his impeachment and won re-election.

For a number of years we have been hearing about impeaching Obama and now there are calls to impeach Hillary on the first day she take office.

Oh please keep it up... You all boosted her up in the polls when a bunch of mostly white guys hammered on her for 11 hours.

Keep of the impeachment talk she will win.

That is the main difference between Democrat's and Republican's we learn our lessons and you are just out to get anyone who disagrees with you. Point in fact when have to ever seen or heard a protestor dragged out of a Democratic prep rally? The only thing close to that in the past was GW Bush's campaign who would have protestors arrested.

Release the hounds!!!!

Did those past presidents jeopardize national security by mishandling classified material? It's quite obvious that Hillary is guilty of blatantly mishandling high level classified information. I have the statutes she violated if you need them.

Did Bush torture?

Revisionist history, once again sans any facts

1. The impeachment proceedings against Clinton were based on perjury and bstruction of Justice, not his "cigaring" in the Oval Office.

Also to remind you, he and Hillary also lied to the entire nation right before his first election. He and Hillary both looked into those 60 Minute cameras and denied the entire Genifer Flowers item.

Good thing about his impeachment proceedings he finally admitted under oath that he lied, but that lie on 60 minutes is what got him elected.

If you think the Clintons first run at lying was in Washinton, you are very naive. Volumes on the Arkansas time, all proven and not denied.

They are accomplished liars.

2. You make the Democrats out like nice guys with Nixon and have no idea where you came up with that fantasy. Nixon, cheat and stupid bum he was, would have stayed as long as possible. He resigned because one single tape, a smoking gun, lost all his Republican support and he knew it was over.

3. The Bush talk is like the Obama talk and the new Clinton talk. Political rhetoric and that's it.

While you assessment of Democrats and Republicans is also an exercise in fantasy, it exposes nativity.

To answer your question about protestors, I refer you to the 1968 RIOTS IN THE STREETS of Chicago during the Democratic convention.

I would hope that some posters stop revising history to fit their narrative. There are enough real things to discuss without making things up or leaving things out.
.

Clinton Impeachment
 

You poor thing....go lay down.It's time for your nap.When you wake up
we will find your coloring book.

I'm sure you are MORE (or less) knowledgeable than the committee that hammered Hilary for 11 hours to NO avail!....Give it up.. and get ready for the First Female President:BigApplause:

Just a reminder, if I may.

NOBODY knew about the Clinton and her, at that time, hidden emails and hidden servers. They were hidden until the committee found out.

While she might win, I cannot believe the mileage that she and her minnions like you are getting out of this. A victory lap because she did not blow her top. A few more inconsistencies came out and much more to come.

But, you have your parties, enjoy yourself. She testified without losing her temper. Practice makes perfect and she surely has had a ton of that practice.

He lied about sex...pure and simple. And yes the Democratic National convention did see rioting in the streets. What happened yesterday at a Trump rally is completely different.

Not sure what you are speaking of ? I know about the disruption but was responding to a post on impeachment !!

Did I miss something ?

Listen, the groups are out there and will interrupt. It is not reserved for Trump at all.

Again will just keep quiet because I have NO earthly idea why your brought that up. It happened and there will be more. Black Lives Matter has said so and been encouraged, not to interrupt, but to continue on their way by the President. It will happen to both parties and all candidates.

BOTH parties have histories and if someone feels it is worthwhile to bring those histories up, so be it.....I don't see the point at all.

AND by the way.......

I would not have posted except the poster who wrote about impeachment was so wrong and so far off base, it needed to be corrected.

Here is the link....

Video Shows Immigration Protester Dragged Across The Ground And Kicked At Trump Rally | ThinkProgress

This student was kicked by attendees while the crowd chanted USA USA USA

Well, I am sure not going to vote for those guys !!!!

Thanks for the link, but I try and avoid THINK PROGRESS at all costs. I try and avoid any website sponsored and run by any political party that is not a news site like this one.

But, still thanks for the concern and effort.

Please explain your point. Does it not reflect poorly on those who insist on being rude. We have rights to protest, but whether it be Republican or Democrat, rude behavior like this is just plain stupid.

We are still a country of laws.

Note in the article by an arm of the Democratic party...

" At one point, he appeared to endorse the use of violent tactics against these protesters."


I am nowhere near a Trump supporter, but do support good behavior and law.

Bush did not.

You are obviously ignorant and should refrain from posting until you understand what is being discussed.

No one "hammered Hilary" about her illegal use of an unauthorized server or her mishandling of classified material. That is an investigation being conducted by the FBI. And yes, I do know more than most in congress regarding the State Dept regulations and Federal Law pertaining to handling of classified material. I have briefed and debriefed cleared personnel as well as handled diplomatic pouch, and worked in a vaulted area (SCIF). I do know that she blatantly violated federal law and put national security at risk. Unlike you, I do not worship celebrity politicians, including the president. I took my job very seriously, unlike the casual attitude liberals have with America's national security.

OK so some are prepared to give her an 'A' for her PERFORMANCE!

What does that have to do with her being a liar, unethical, untrustworthy, self serving, crony politician.

Notice since the grilling she has given up her matron uniforms; lottsa more make up; laughs a lot trying to avoid the cackle; even takeing selfies with the little people. She is now in the fool as many as possible while the media isolates her from ANY negative commentary to get her numbers back up.

It is sorta like cleaning up Charles Manson, put him in a new suit, have him smile a lot, take selfies with everyone and have the media say what a great guy he is.

What do you have? The same Charles Manson!

What do we have? SAme old Clinton!

Water boarding IS torture....GW Bush authorized the use of water boarding so

Bush used torture..... Well documented.

...and we should listen to a Federal employee drone, why? Weren't you slopping at the public trough for your 30 years producing absolutely no product?

Despite your unsubstantiated, non relative personal attack, maybe just maybe because he knows what he is talking about.

And why would you talk in such a disparaging, sleazy way about ALL government workers ?

SO...why should we listen to a person who demonizes a group of people in such an offensive and stupid manner ?

Bush did NOT torture. You asked if Bush tortured anyone. He didn't. And beside, I really don't care. We've been using means of torture throughout history to get information and water boarding was the least harmful of the ones that I know of. And yes, they did torture in Vietnam. And who's war was that? If you think that water boarding is something, then you should see what hatpins under the thumb nail is like, or electric shock from a crank telephone, or throwing one of two prisoners out a helicopter door. But, nice diversion. Liberals will do anything to divert from the topic when it does not bode favorable for them.

Most of America would give just about anything to swap our Obama for a return to Bush. If you don't believe me, check the polls.

Yes, we have seen your "product" as you were flipping them at Burger King and asking "would you like fries with your burger?" :1rotfl::1rotfl:

You have lost all credibility....you admit that the Bush Administration used torture during the middle east war. The United States signed at least 2 treaties against torture which we turned around and violated.

You know he tortured but you just don't care....your bad.

If the population wanted to return to the Bush era they would not have elected Obama twice.