On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote:


Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to
understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or
not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find
nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some
probably think it's right cool. But it isn't.

Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of
one, but we was not guilty of the other.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:05:49 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote:


Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to
understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or
not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find
nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some
probably think it's right cool. But it isn't.

Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of
one, but we was not guilty of the other.

Of which was he guilty? Wouldn't lying be a subset of perjury?


--
***** Hope your day is better than decent! *****

John H

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:24:53 -0500, Kippered wrote:


Of which was he guilty? Wouldn't lying be a subset of perjury?

He was guilty of lying. Perjury is a crime, and in this country, to be
guilty, one needs to be convicted. Clinton was never convicted of
perjury.

On Jan 26, 7:13*am, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:24:53 -0500, Kippered wrote:
Of which was he guilty? Wouldn't lying be a subset of perjury?

He was guilty of lying. *Perjury is a crime, and in this country, to be
guilty, one needs to be convicted. *Clinton was never convicted of
perjury. *

OJ was not convicted either...

wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote:


Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to
understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or
not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find
nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some
probably think it's right cool. But it isn't.

Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of
one, but we was not guilty of the other.

Don't you remember Bill pointing his finger at us and saying "I did not
have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski!" Let's ask the wives if a
blow job is sex or not before you parse Bill's answer.

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote:


Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to
understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or
not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find
nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some
probably think it's right cool. But it isn't.

Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of
one, but we was not guilty of the other.

Don't you remember Bill pointing his finger at us and saying "I did not
have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski!" Let's ask the wives if a blow
job is sex or not before you parse Bill's answer.


I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want,
wherever they want.

I said ILLEGAL.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:55:10 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want,
wherever they want.

I said ILLEGAL.

Well there's ILLEGAL and there's IMPROPER.
Example.
Guy is tired of his wife putting him off on sex every weekend until
after Mass at church on Sunday.
She starts this every Saturday. "Oh honey, we're going the Mass
tomorrow. It wouldn't be proper."
So this guy goes to see the priest and asks him, "Father, is it
IMPROPER to have sex with my wife before the Mass?"
Priest says, "No son, it not IMPROPER. Just don't block the aisles."

--Vic

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...



I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want,
wherever they want.

I said ILLEGAL.


Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in
a lawful investigation. It's called perjury.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...



I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they
want, wherever they want.

I said ILLEGAL.


Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not
in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury.

Eisboch



Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is
it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've
written my question more clearly.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...



I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they
want, wherever they want.

I said ILLEGAL.


Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not
in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury.

Eisboch



Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now
is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I
could've written my question more clearly.


Your question is impossible to answer. First of all, you are leaving out a
whole bunch of contributing factors, including the stupid woman (forget her
name) that Monica confided in and became a potential blackmail threat.
People in positions of responsibility .... even lowly enlisted military
people with access to classified information ... are subject to
investigation if the potential for a security leak exists.

Stop playing lawyer. You'd make a lousy one.

Eisboch