- Nov 15, 2006
- 43,920
- 14,014
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Charismatic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Actually, the economy did extremely well during the Clinton administration. The best in the decades both before and after. He cannot take the entire credit but it was accomplished under his leadership.
Yes, we know....it was benefiting from the Reagan era.....tax cuts and economic reform take time to work through the economy....unfortunately most progressive leftists expect an immediate result.....Actually, the economy did extremely well during the Clinton administration.
Juanita Broaddrick accused him in 1999. By that point the statute of limitations was already up if I recall correctly, so there could be no prosecution without DNA evidence. So it is not particularly new. I remember hearing about the case way back when.
A pass? Not for adultery. Her suit involved harassment, though, and it was dismissed by the judge. Who knows if the appeal would be granted. He settled to get it all over with.Folks are giving a Bill a pass for settling the suit against Jones?
There was evidence to support the lawsuit.They didn't give Trump a pass for settling the racial discrimination cases (and he didn't deserve one from what I can tell).
Hard to claim they had sex with kids. There could be other reasons to be in contact.Also, both Trump and Bill had contact with Epstein who was involved in a child sex ring. In Clinton's case he was on the plane numerous times and sometimes ditched secret service.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/14/bill-clinton-ditched-secret-service-on-multiple-lo/
All allegations of rape need to be looked into for both. And allegations that Hillary harassed them too.
I don't know, just because someone has not been tried and convicted does that mean they did not do what they are accused of?I don't know, is it unethical to blame someone for something they haven't been tried and convicted for?
tulc(is just curious)
uhmmm...that's pretty much what the Constitution says. If you have a problem with it you might want to go argue with it.I don't know, just because someone has not been tried and convicted does that mean they did not do what they are accused of?
Guilty or not guilty is a legal judgement based on the ability to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. It has nothing to do with whether or not someone actually did or did not commit a crime. Try again.....uhmmm...that's pretty much what the Constitution says. If you have a problem with it you might want to go argue with it.
tulc(knows how crabby conservatives get when they have to argue with the Constitution but there it is)
...again, your argument isn't with me it's with hundreds of years of the US legal system. Otherwise it's just a couple of guys on line arguing about who has the strongest opinion about something. Because in the end, it's just your opinion about something and holds no more weight or "truth" then the opinion of anyone else.Guilty or not guilty is a legal judgement based on the ability to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. It has nothing to do with whether or not someone actually did or did not commit a crime. Try again.....
So, you believe that all people accused of, but not charged with, a crime are really innocent?....simply because there is not enough evidence for a conviction?...again, your argument isn't with me it's with hundreds of years of the US legal system. Otherwise it's just a couple of guys on line arguing about who has the strongest opinion about something. Because in the end, it's just your opinion about something and holds no more weight or "truth" then the opinion of anyone else.
tulc(opinions are like noses: everyone can pick their own)
I'm saying you can't call someone a rapist if he's never been convicted of rape.So, you believe that all people accused of, but not charged with, a crime are really innocent?....simply because there is not enough evidence for a conviction?
Even if they have raped someone?I'm saying you can't call someone a rapist if he's never been convicted of rape.
tulc(believes that's true no matter what their politics are)
please guy.Yes, we know....it was benefiting from the Reagan era.....tax cuts and economic reform take time to work through the economy....unfortunately most progressive leftists expect an immediate result.....
And where do you think the money to finance it came from?......yep, the 80"s tax cuts......if left money in people's pockets so they could invest......please guy.
The Tech boom was why the 90s were awesome.
Prove what of whom?Prove it.