![]() |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
Capt. JG wrote:
"Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
"katy" wrote in message
... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:35:37 -0500, Capt. JG wrote
(in article ): "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. When you speak of impeachment just remember who is next inline. Probably why it has not happened yet. Who knows maybe someone will hang cheney out to dry during the trial. -- Mundo, The Captain who is a bully and an ass |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message ink.net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:45:52 -0500, katy wrote
(in article ): Capt. JG wrote: "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. Are you suggesting this was a conspiracy to make Bush look stupid. We don need no stinkin conspiracy. I will stand as an American (Canadian when I travel) and say it. He intentionally deceived the american public. Like religeon.. the only proof was faith. The american public needs to grow some. -- Mundo, The Captain who is a bully and an ass |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
Mundo wrote:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:45:52 -0500, katy wrote (in article ): Capt. JG wrote: "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message hlink.net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. Are you suggesting this was a conspiracy to make Bush look stupid. We don need no stinkin conspiracy. I will stand as an American (Canadian when I travel) and say it. He intentionally deceived the american public. Like religeon.. the only proof was faith. The american public needs to grow some. No..I didn't sat that at all. I said that it has not been proven in a court if law and that like any other citizen of these United States, he is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, it's opinion. |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:53:32 -0500, katy wrote
(in article ): Mundo wrote: On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:45:52 -0500, katy wrote (in article ): Capt. JG wrote: "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. Are you suggesting this was a conspiracy to make Bush look stupid. We don need no stinkin conspiracy. I will stand as an American (Canadian when I travel) and say it. He intentionally deceived the american public. Like religeon.. the only proof was faith. The american public needs to grow some. No..I didn't sat that at all. I said that it has not been proven in a court if law and that like any other citizen of these United States, he is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, it's opinion. I think bush is a liar. I think he intentionally deceived the american people I think he is in so deep in the BS bag that all he can smell at this point is his own ass. I think Cheney is dirty I think that he also deceived the American people intentionally I think the religious right ought to spend more time acting as "christians" rather than interpreting story books to their personal needs. I will agree with you that all are innocent until proven guilty unless you are a casualty of this lie... to date there are at least 3700 of our troops and mercenaries. I have no idea of the amount of civilians killed. I am sure it adds up. -- Mundo, The Captain who is a bully and an ass |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
"Mundo" wrote in message
. net... On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:35:37 -0500, Capt. JG wrote (in article ): "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message .net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. When you speak of impeachment just remember who is next inline. Probably why it has not happened yet. Who knows maybe someone will hang cheney out to dry during the trial. -- Mundo, The Captain who is a bully and an ass I'm thinking they should impeach Cheney actually. Bush isn't worth the effort. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
"katy" wrote in message
... Capt. JG wrote: "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message link.net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. Sorry to tell you, but a trial is supposed to discover the facts and bring the guilty party to justice or set the not guilty free. I'm asking for a trial. Clinton got one. I can say Bush lied, because I believe it to be the case. There is a lot of smoke pointing to both him and Cheney lying. Sure from the media... like all the major books written about it... from well-respected authors. You're saying they've all been mislead, that the facts don't add up. Have you read any of them? FYI, I am calling for impeachment, and I'm sorry Pelosi "took it off the table." -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Ronald Reagan Freedom Square
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "katy" wrote in message ... Capt. JG wrote: "Maxprop" wrote in message hlink.net... "Capt. JG" wrote in message He lied about a consenual affair between two adults. President of the United States and a youthful intern. This would be sexual harassment of the most grievous kind. It would be if she wasn't interested or felt pressure. It was her idea I believe. Wrongwtongwtong...that's quid pro quo sexual harassment ...if they had been peers at work then it would have been a consenting adult situation where the worplace rules (and I'm sure the Federal Government rules state that secual activity on the job is a fireable offense) would take over. In quid pro quo events, though, it does not matter who starts it. It is implied that because one person is in a position of power that that supercedes anything else and causes a situation where the other may not be able to control what happens. The on;y reason Clinton didn't get nailed for that was because Monica did not pursue that avenue and there was no supervisor to investigate. His staff, though, were bound by law that if they knew it was going on, to report it to someone, I suspect the Judiciary in this case, and to investigate. There is no such thing as consenting secual acts in the workplace between an superior and employees. I have a great idea! We should impeach him. Oh wait, that happened and during the trial in the Senate, Clinton was more popular than Bush now. So, please compare and contrast how Bush's lies are in any way the equal of Clinton's lie about a blow job. For heaven's sake, let's not impeach him or Cheney for the lies. That would be wrong, wrong, wrong. Were they lies? Or were they mislead by the Pentagon or CIA? You have the definitive answer for that? There's been a trial or hearing that has decided that? I thought the American way was to pronounce innocence until proven guilty...what court of law has decided that? Or have they appointed you a Supreme Court Justice and we just haven't heard about it? I'm not SAYING i LIKE THE WAR. i'M NOT Aying I like Bush. But your auppositions are based on the media and not on proven fact..yet...So..if you want to hold on to those veliefs, you'd better be calling for impeachment so that your OPINIONS are validated. Until then, all you can say us "I think Bush lied" You cannot say "Bush lied". You don't have that power as a citizen. Sorry to tell you, but a trial is supposed to discover the facts and bring the guilty party to justice or set the not guilty free. I'm asking for a trial. Clinton got one. I can say Bush lied, because I believe it to be the case. There is a lot of smoke pointing to both him and Cheney lying. Sure from the media... like all the major books written about it... from well-respected authors. You're saying they've all been mislead, that the facts don't add up. Have you read any of them? FYI, I am calling for impeachment, and I'm sorry Pelosi "took it off the table." If Pelosi, who hates his guts, took it off the table, there must ve some underlying facts that she has become privy to since her acceptance as Speaker...maybe you should trust your own party leaders? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com