The last elected POTUS is back!
 

That was not the point of my post. It was to show that you didn't
understand what impeachment meant. Unfortunately it went right over your
head.

Main Entry: 1im·peach Pronunciation: im-'pEch
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English empechen, from Middle French empeechier to hinder,
from Late Latin impedicare to fetter, from Latin in- + pedica fetter, from
ped-, pes foot -- more at FOOT
1 a : to bring an accusation against b : to charge with a crime or
misdemeanor; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent
tribunal with misconduct in office


wrote in message
ink.net...
And so the news says he was impeached... The news also said he was
acquitted...

Lets see, acquittal, means he was found not guilty.

That was verified by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:
"It is therefore ordered and adjudged that William Jefferson Clinton be
and
hereby is acquitted of the charges in the said articles," declared Chief
Justice William Rehnquist in the Senate chamber.

Sorry, you were outvoted by the United States Senate, you were also called
a
liar by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Get over it, Clinton was found INNOCENT by a jury of his peers.

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:_Ffpc.3425$gr.255065@attbi_s52...
The New York Times, December 20, 1998, p. A1, col. 6

CLINTON IMPEACHED
_____

HE FACES A SENATE TRIAL, 2D IN HISTORY; VOWS TO DO JOB TILL TERM'S 'LAST
HOUR'

By ALISON MITCHELL

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 - William Jefferson Clinton was impeached on charges
of
perjury and obstruction of justice today by a divided House of
Representatives, which recommended virtually along party lines that the
Senate remove the nation's 42d President from office.

A few hours after the vote, Mr. Clinton, surrounded by Democrats, walked
onto the South Lawn of the White House, his wife, Hillary, on his arm,
to
pre-empt calls for his resignation. The man who in better days had
debated
where he would stand in the pantheon of American Presidents said
he would stay in office and vowed "to go on from here to rise above the
rancor, to overcome the pain and division, to be a repairer of the
breach."
Later, Mr. Clinton called off the bombing in Iraq, declaring the mission
accomplished. Mr. Clinton became only the second President in history to
be
impeached, in a stunning day that also brought the resignation of the
incoming Speaker of the House, Robert L. Livingston.

wrote in message
nk.net...
He was charged, he was not convicted. With no conviction he is
innocent.

Sorry but your impeachment song doesn't play any longer

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Wow...the lunatic fringe element of right-wing obviously is getting
*very* nervous. How delightful. And with a really good chance now that
their dumb boy Bush will lose the election (beyond fixing it), we've
only begin to see their bile.

Poor Jackoff.


Jack,
It looks like you have gotten the best of Harry. You can always see when he
starts his diatribe concerning the "right wing".

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

LOL, he was impeached. Accept it..


wrote in message
ink.net...
im·peach (m-pch)
tr.v. im·peached, im·peach·ing, im·peach·es
1..
1.. To make an accusation against.
2.. To charge (a public official) with improper conduct in office
before
a proper tribunal.
I see nothing in this definition that says he is guilty of anything... It
mearly says to make an accusation... The accusation was proven false.

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...

wrote:

Get over it, Clinton was found INNOCENT by a jury of his peers.

So was OJ. But get over it already, Clinton was IMPEACHED. Look up the
meaning, and have a 10 year old explain it to you. Spin it all you
want,
but he was IMPEACHED.

He *was* IMPEACHED. Get it yet?

Jack





"John Smith" wrote in message
news:_Ffpc.3425$gr.255065@attbi_s52...
The New York Times, December 20, 1998, p. A1, col. 6

CLINTON IMPEACHED
_____

HE FACES A SENATE TRIAL, 2D IN HISTORY; VOWS TO DO JOB TILL TERM'S
'LAST
HOUR'

By ALISON MITCHELL

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 - William Jefferson Clinton was impeached on
charges
of
perjury and obstruction of justice today by a divided House of
Representatives, which recommended virtually along party lines that
the
Senate remove the nation's 42d President from office.

A few hours after the vote, Mr. Clinton, surrounded by Democrats,
walked
onto the South Lawn of the White House, his wife, Hillary, on his
arm,
to
pre-empt calls for his resignation. The man who in better days had
debated
where he would stand in the pantheon of American Presidents said
he would stay in office and vowed "to go on from here to rise above
the
rancor, to overcome the pain and division, to be a repairer of the
breach."
Later, Mr. Clinton called off the bombing in Iraq, declaring the
mission
accomplished. Mr. Clinton became only the second President in
history
to
be
impeached, in a stunning day that also brought the resignation of
the
incoming Speaker of the House, Robert L. Livingston.

wrote in message
nk.net...
He was charged, he was not convicted. With no conviction he is
innocent.

Sorry but your impeachment song doesn't play any longer

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 15 May 2004 22:18:06 +0000, Jack Goff wrote:


You *do* understand that acquittal in a court of law, and being innocent
of the charge you were acquitted of have little to do with each other,
right? That there are many reasons an acquittal can be reached, and true
*innocence* of the charge levied is only one of them?

Excuse me, but not in this country. In this country, you are *innocent*
until *proven* guilty.


Not if you're a Patriot (with a capital "P"), like Jack.



By almost all rational criteria, our country is in far worse shape than
it was before Bush assumed office.

We're mired in a trumped-up war, with hundreds of American soldiers dead.

The budget deficit is through the roof.

Civil liberties are under attack.

Our standing in the world has fallen.

Anti pollution regs have been softened.

Workers rights have diminished.

And the list goes on and on and on.


We have an affable idiot in the white house now. We deserve better.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Jack Goff wrote:


wrote:


I'll make it easy on you guys... A charge is nothing if they can't get a
conviction.....


Spoken like a law breaking thug that's had many brushes with the

courts...

figures you'd be a LIEberal.

Jack




Uh, Jackoff...if the US House at that time was not controlled by rabid
right-wing Republicans out for blood at any cost, the results of the
vote would have been quite different.


If Clinton had told the truth he wouldn't have been impeached.



Bull****. The rabid Republicans in the House were out for blood.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Again, charges mean nothing if they are unable to convict...

Your impeachment song doesn't play any longer

Really a shame you have nothing better to do than hang onto a bad charge...

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:tuypc.9227$qA.976547@attbi_s51...
LOL, he was impeached. Accept it..

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:tuypc.9227$qA.976547@attbi_s51...
LOL, he was impeached. Accept it..

Right. And the main mouthpiece behind that impeachment was Newt Gingrich. Do
you remember what silenced HIM?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Jack Goff wrote:


wrote:


I'll make it easy on you guys... A charge is nothing if they can't
get a
conviction.....



Spoken like a law breaking thug that's had many brushes with the


courts...

figures you'd be a LIEberal.

Jack




Uh, Jackoff...if the US House at that time was not controlled by rabid
right-wing Republicans out for blood at any cost, the results of the
vote would have been quite different.



If Clinton had told the truth he wouldn't have been impeached.



Bull****. The rabid Republicans in the House were out for blood.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

So, what have we learned from this?

1) Except for mine, we know that nobody's dick is so big that a blowjob
requires a month or two (the length of Bush's vacation) to finish.

Hehe... is there really any possibility now that Doug is carrying a full
6-pack?

What a dim-wit... too funny.
Maybe Harry will come around and circle-jerk you to make you feel better.

In the meantime... has anyone offered GW Bin Laden's head on a platter?
Answer: NO.

Did anyone offer Clinton Bid Laden's head on a platter? Answer: YES

Now go away and come back when you're all grown up.

Jack

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

so much bogus crap

Too funny Doug. Can you crack me up some more?

My wife pegged Clinton the first time she saw him. Used car salesman.

Jack

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

So, what have we learned from this?

1) Except for mine, we know that nobody's dick is so big that a blowjob
requires a month or two (the length of Bush's vacation) to finish.

Hehe... is there really any possibility now that Doug is carrying a full
6-pack?

What a dim-wit... too funny.
Maybe Harry will come around and circle-jerk you to make you feel better.

In the meantime... has anyone offered GW Bin Laden's head on a platter?
Answer: NO.

Did anyone offer Clinton Bid Laden's head on a platter? Answer: YES

Now go away and come back when you're all grown up.

Jack



There was no way ANYONE was going to get OBL's head on a platter. You know.
that.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Wow. Harry is so shaken that he posted this and forgot to add a comment of
his own!!

Too funny! I'll bet Harry is looking for a stiff drink and hoping his nurse
wife stole some more drugs from the clinic so he can calm back down and make
a sane (for him) post again.

Too funny.

Jack

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Jack Goff wrote:


wrote:


I'll make it easy on you guys... A charge is nothing if they can't
get a
conviction.....



Spoken like a law breaking thug that's had many brushes with the


courts...

figures you'd be a LIEberal.

Jack




Uh, Jackoff...if the US House at that time was not controlled by rabid
right-wing Republicans out for blood at any cost, the results of the
vote would have been quite different.



If Clinton had told the truth he wouldn't have been impeached.



Bull****. The rabid Republicans in the House were out for blood.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

so much bogus crap

Too funny Doug. Can you crack me up some more?

My wife pegged Clinton the first time she saw him. Used car salesman.

Jack



You find the truth to be funny? You have no real problem with Clinton and
his sexual escapades. They bear no relationship to the reality of running a
country or world politics. You know that.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

There was no way ANYONE was going to get OBL's head on a platter. You
know.
that.


He was in custody, and was offered. Don't be such a mental lightweight.

Jack

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

You find the truth to be funny? You have no real problem with Clinton and
his sexual escapades. They bear no relationship to the reality of running
a
country or world politics. You know that.

Earth to Doug...

There's nothing funny about Clinton's mis-management of our country. He is
the person *most* responsible for 9/11 and the stock market "crash" we
experienced. No one was home in the White House during most of his reign.

Sorry you can't see that with the liberal blinders you're wearing.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

His wife is not a nurse she is a social worker.


"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...
Wow. Harry is so shaken that he posted this and forgot to add a comment
of
his own!!

Too funny! I'll bet Harry is looking for a stiff drink and hoping his
nurse
wife stole some more drugs from the clinic so he can calm back down and
make
a sane (for him) post again.

Too funny.

Jack

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Jack Goff wrote:


wrote:


I'll make it easy on you guys... A charge is nothing if they can't
get a
conviction.....



Spoken like a law breaking thug that's had many brushes with the


courts...

figures you'd be a LIEberal.

Jack




Uh, Jackoff...if the US House at that time was not controlled by
rabid
right-wing Republicans out for blood at any cost, the results of the
vote would have been quite different.



If Clinton had told the truth he wouldn't have been impeached.



Bull****. The rabid Republicans in the House were out for blood.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

The gentleman did not say anything about wither he was found guilty, but
everyone knows he was not. The gentleman said he was impeached, which he
was. You are the one who said he was not impeached. I hate to tell you
this, but you were incorrect.


wrote in message
ink.net...
Again, charges mean nothing if they are unable to convict...

Your impeachment song doesn't play any longer

Really a shame you have nothing better to do than hang onto a bad
charge...

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:tuypc.9227$qA.976547@attbi_s51...
LOL, he was impeached. Accept it..

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Jack Goff wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote:

so much bogus crap

Too funny Doug. Can you crack me up some more?

My wife pegged Clinton the first time she saw him. Used car salesman.

Jack




Your wife pegged Clinton? Wow...what an interesting comment.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Jack Goff wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

You find the truth to be funny? You have no real problem with Clinton and

his sexual escapades. They bear no relationship to the reality of running

a

country or world politics. You know that.


Earth to Doug...

There's nothing funny about Clinton's mis-management of our country. He is
the person *most* responsible for 9/11 and the stock market "crash" we
experienced. No one was home in the White House during most of his reign.

Sorry you can't see that with the liberal blinders you're wearing.




Hehehhehe...you guys prepping for Bush's loss, right?

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

You find the truth to be funny? You have no real problem with Clinton
and
his sexual escapades. They bear no relationship to the reality of
running
a
country or world politics. You know that.

Earth to Doug...

There's nothing funny about Clinton's mis-management of our country. He
is
the person *most* responsible for 9/11 and the stock market "crash" we
experienced. No one was home in the White House during most of his reign.

Sorry you can't see that with the liberal blinders you're wearing.



OK...now you've left the impeachment behind. How did Clinton cause a stock
market crash?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

wrote in message
ink.net...
in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an
innocent
child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally
blameless:
was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for me
to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/
McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice but
the
judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent verdict
in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again


Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I looked
juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

wrote in message news:s9ypc.7804

Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

There's a big, big difference between innocent and not guilty. Grown-ups
know this.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

wrote in message
ink.net...

in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an

innocent

child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally

blameless:

was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for me
to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/
McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice but

the

judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent verdict
in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again



Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I looked
juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.





In the good old days of newspaper reporting, we were taught to write
"innocent" if someone on trial were found not guilty, because of the
danger of the word "NOT" falling on the floor in the composing room.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

wrote in message
ink.net...

in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an

innocent

child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally

blameless:

was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for
me
to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...


http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/
McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice but

the

judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent
verdict
in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again



Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I
looked
juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.





In the good old days of newspaper reporting, we were taught to write
"innocent" if someone on trial were found not guilty, because of the
danger of the word "NOT" falling on the floor in the composing room.

So, you agree that there is no finding of innocence by a court of law, only
guilty and not-guilty!

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Bert Robbins wrote:


wrote in message
thlink.net...


in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an

innocent


child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally

blameless:


was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for

me

to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...



http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/

McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice but

the


judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent

verdict

in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again



Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I

looked

juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.





In the good old days of newspaper reporting, we were taught to write
"innocent" if someone on trial were found not guilty, because of the
danger of the word "NOT" falling on the floor in the composing room.


So, you agree that there is no finding of innocence by a court of law, only
guilty and not-guilty!



No, Bertie, I merely was adding anecdotal information.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Bert Robbins wrote:


wrote in message
thlink.net...


in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an

innocent


child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally

blameless:


was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for

me

to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...



http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/

McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater
figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice
but

the


judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on
two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent

verdict

in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says
the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again



Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I

looked

juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.





In the good old days of newspaper reporting, we were taught to write
"innocent" if someone on trial were found not guilty, because of the
danger of the word "NOT" falling on the floor in the composing room.


So, you agree that there is no finding of innocence by a court of law,
only
guilty and not-guilty!



No, Bertie, I merely was adding anecdotal information.

So, the journalists are instructed to change the truth in order to make
mistakes less often.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Bert Robbins wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


Bert Robbins wrote:



wrote in message
arthlink.net...



in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an

innocent



child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally

blameless:



was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for

me


to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...



http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/


McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater

figure

Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice

but

the



judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on

two

criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent

verdict


in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says

the

jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again



Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I

looked


juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.





In the good old days of newspaper reporting, we were taught to write
"innocent" if someone on trial were found not guilty, because of the
danger of the word "NOT" falling on the floor in the composing room.


So, you agree that there is no finding of innocence by a court of law,

only

guilty and not-guilty!




No, Bertie, I merely was adding anecdotal information.


So, the journalists are instructed to change the truth in order to make
mistakes less often.




So, what's between your ears is no different than the difference between
a rock and a hard place, eh?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...
wrote in message news:Yycpc.6160

He was charged, he was not convicted. With no conviction he is innocent.

Sorry but your impeachment song doesn't play any longer

If you can't play with the big boys, go home. Read your Constitution (if
you have a copy). Learn what words mean.

Clinton was impeached. Period. On the record, forever. He was not
convicted by the Senate, but the impeachment stands on record for all time.

Lightweights.

And how many millions of dollars did it cost the U.S. taxpayers to
find out Bill likes sex?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

wrote in message news:s9ypc.7804

Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

There's a big, big difference between innocent and not guilty. Grown-ups
know this.



There's also a big difference between an extramarital affair, and using your
country's armed forces as a no-charge mercenary force to protect your
family's investments. Unfortunately, hypocrites pretend not to know this.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

Bert

It is a matter of the word chosen.



"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
ink.net...
in·no·cent
adj.
1.. Uncorrupted by evil, malice, or wrongdoing; sinless: an
innocent
child.
2..
1.. Not guilty of a specific crime or offense; legally
blameless:
was innocent of all charges.
2.. Within, allowed by, or sanctioned by the law; lawful.
ac·quit
tr.v. ac·quit·ted, ac·quit·ting, ac·quits
1.. Law. To free or clear from a charge or accusation.
Funny, they both say the same thing... Bill Clinton was found
INNOCENT, he was ACQUITTED

Sorry you guys can't seem to see this... It is very difficult for
me
to put things in laymen's terms if you want to change the rules.

Here let me give you a reference point...


http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...ougal.verdict/
McDougal not guilty on one count; mistrial declared on other two
charges

April 12, 1999
Web posted at: 5:51 p.m. EDT (2151 GMT)


LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AllPolitics, April 12) -- Whitewater figure
Susan McDougal was found not guilty Monday of obstruction of justice but
the
judge declared a mistrial after jurors said they were "hopelessly
deadlocked" on the criminal contempt charges.

U.S. District Judge George Howard Jr. declared the mistrial on two
criminal contempt counts just before jurors delivered the innocent
verdict
in the courtroom.

I see here it doesn't say McDougal was acquitted... No it says the
jury delivered the "innocent" verdict.

Sorry Bert, you've been beat again


Where does it say the a jury returns a verdict of innocence? Last I looked
juries returned verdicts of guilty or not-guilty.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Actually, I never said he was not impeached, I simply said that he was found
innocent.... Actually, I made the bold statement, by way of the conservative
news... Yes one of those right wing news publishers..

"At high noon Friday, the Senate rejected both articles of impeachment
against President Clinton, failing to get a simple 51 vote majority on
neither the perjury charge nor the obstruction of justice charge."

You know what rejected means???

re·ject
tr.v. re·ject·ed, re·ject·ing, re·jects
1.. To refuse to accept, submit to, believe, or make use of.
2.. To refuse to consider or grant; deny.
3.. To refuse to recognize or give affection to (a person).
4.. To discard as defective or useless; throw away.
Even the right wing "refuse to accept, submit to, believe, or make use of"

Must be bad that all the wanna-be pundits are holding on to something nobody
else is....

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:hzApc.8567$gr.647885@attbi_s52...
The gentleman did not say anything about wither he was found guilty, but
everyone knows he was not. The gentleman said he was impeached, which he
was. You are the one who said he was not impeached. I hate to tell you
this, but you were incorrect.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

I was wondering what stock market crash... Last one I heard of was back in
the 20's... Come to think of it, Clinton wasn't alive yet, it must have been
his fault.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...


Earth to Doug...

There's nothing funny about Clinton's mis-management of our country. He
is
the person *most* responsible for 9/11 and the stock market "crash" we
experienced. No one was home in the White House during most of his
reign.

Sorry you can't see that with the liberal blinders you're wearing.



OK...now you've left the impeachment behind. How did Clinton cause a stock
market crash?

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"Jack Goff" wrote in message .com...
wrote:
I'll make it easy on you guys... A charge is nothing if they can't get a
conviction.....

Spoken like a law breaking thug that's had many brushes with the courts...
figures you'd be a LIEberal.

Jack

Quite the opposite. The law IS that a charge can not be held against
you for ANYTHING. A conviction can. So, you see, if you righties are
saying that a charge is punishable, then you are a "law breaking
thug".

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

Actually, 1987, but I don't think Clinton had a hand in that one, either.

wrote in message
link.net...
I was wondering what stock market crash... Last one I heard of was back in
the 20's... Come to think of it, Clinton wasn't alive yet, it must have
been
his fault.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. com...


Earth to Doug...

There's nothing funny about Clinton's mis-management of our country.
He
is
the person *most* responsible for 9/11 and the stock market "crash" we
experienced. No one was home in the White House during most of his
reign.

Sorry you can't see that with the liberal blinders you're wearing.



OK...now you've left the impeachment behind. How did Clinton cause a
stock
market crash?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"basskisser" wrote in message

And how many millions of dollars did it cost the U.S. taxpayers to
find out Bill likes sex?

It cost nothing. Everyone already knew that. It cost money to establish
that Bill, among other things, obstructed justice, attempted to suborn
witnesses, possibly committed rape, and specifically and knowingly lied to
Congress, a Grand Jury, and the American public on at least seventeen
documented occasions.

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"basskisser" wrote in message

..... So, you see, if you righties are
saying that a charge is punishable, then you are a "law breaking
thug".

God, I wish you folks would read and learn.

Articles of Impeachment are *not* the same as an indictment handed down by a
Grand Jury. Somewhat similar, but not the same. Press sources tout this
analogy to help simple minds grasp what's going on, but it doesn't always
work, as we see. The issue does *not* become meaningless upon failure to
convict. The fact of impeachment remains on record forever.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message

There's also a big difference between an extramarital affair, and using
your
country's armed forces as a no-charge mercenary force to protect your
family's investments.

There certainly is! As soon as a President has been impeached for having an
affair, and as soon as it is documented that a President has used the US
Armed Forces to protect his/her personal wealth, then we can investigate and
debate. Until such events transpire, try to stick with facts.

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message

And how many millions of dollars did it cost the U.S. taxpayers to
find out Bill likes sex?

It cost nothing. Everyone already knew that. It cost money to establish
that Bill, among other things, obstructed justice, attempted to suborn
witnesses, possibly committed rape, and specifically and knowingly lied to
Congress, a Grand Jury, and the American public on at least seventeen
documented occasions.



It cost PLENTY, in terms of diverting the attention of legislators from
things that were actually important. Tell me - if you were an elected
official and a putz like Newt Gingrich decided to pry into parts of your
life that were none of anyone's business, what would YOU do?

The last scumbag POTUS is back!
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message

..... So, you see, if you righties are
saying that a charge is punishable, then you are a "law breaking
thug".

God, I wish you folks would read and learn.

Articles of Impeachment are *not* the same as an indictment handed down by
a
Grand Jury. Somewhat similar, but not the same. Press sources tout this
analogy to help simple minds grasp what's going on, but it doesn't always
work, as we see. The issue does *not* become meaningless upon failure to
convict. The fact of impeachment remains on record forever.



So?

The last elected POTUS is back!
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message

There's also a big difference between an extramarital affair, and using
your
country's armed forces as a no-charge mercenary force to protect your
family's investments.

There certainly is! As soon as a President has been impeached for having
an
affair, and as soon as it is documented that a President has used the US
Armed Forces to protect his/her personal wealth, then we can investigate
and
debate. Until such events transpire, try to stick with facts.



He was impeached for having an affair. There was nothing else his opponents
could needle him with.