Clinton was impeached on lying before a federal judge and grand jury under oath and obstruction of justice...impeachable offences.
Clinton should have resigned over the affair but Clinton had no decency about it..
Bergdahl- Obama's stellar swap
- Thread starter crossnote
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Clinton should have resigned over the affair but Clinton had no decency about it..
1
1still_waters
Guest
Republicans are always wishing Obama's administration was more like the Reagan administration. Well this deal is a step in that direction.
Anyone remember that administration selling arms to terrorist Iran for release of hostages?
Anyone remember that administration selling arms to terrorist Iran for release of hostages?
From Wikipedia: (my emp)
"Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages".[SUP][17]
[/SUP]
Several investigations ensued, including those by the U.S. Congress and the three-person, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither found any evidence that President Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[SUP][8][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP] Ultimately the sale of weapons to Iran was not deemed a criminal offense but charges were brought against five individuals for their support of the Contras."
"Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages".[SUP][17]
[/SUP]
Several investigations ensued, including those by the U.S. Congress and the three-person, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither found any evidence that President Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[SUP][8][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP] Ultimately the sale of weapons to Iran was not deemed a criminal offense but charges were brought against five individuals for their support of the Contras."
1
1still_waters
Guest
His administration showed other terrorists the US is willing to negotiate to free hostages, thus making Americans more valuable. I'd say his administration's upping of the bounty price on Americans has cost many more American lives.
I kinda enjoy seeing the wink and nod to selling a terrorist nation arms simply because Americans weren't killed. Or maybe it's because Reagan has an R by his name and not a D?
1
1still_waters
Guest
More from the Wikipedia article.
Iran–Contra affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The guy Reagan lovers love to support indicates something else.
Oliver North wrote that "Ronald Reagan knew of and approved a great deal of what went on with both the Iranian initiative and private efforts on behalf of the contras and he received regular, detailed briefings on both...I have no doubt that he was told about the use of residuals for the Contras, and that he approved it.
But he might get a pass because he has an R by his name too.
1
1still_waters
Guest
The more I think about it, Reagan was very weak on terror.
He cut and run after the Beirut bombing.
He sent a few planes to blow up a few tents in Libya.
His administration showed terrorists worldwide that we're willing to negotiate for hostages.
His administration funded terrorists in Afghanistan.
Pretty weak compared to an administration that ordered the killing of Osama, participated in actions that topped Ghadafi, etc etc.
"Negotiating with terrorists" isn't the actual issue, but that is what the media is wanting the public to draw their attention to to divert the real problem.
I had the opportunity to attend a birthday celebration for Congresswoman Marsh Blackburn last night and she touched on the subject a little. Her explanation was that while Bush and Reagan "did the same thing" the reason why it was "ok" for them and not Obama is 3 years ago a law was put in place that Congress had to be consulted 30 days before actions like this take place. She stated that some had no idea anything happened until they saw it on the news. Some of these were democrats and die hard Obama lovers that were clueless. This is a law that was put in place during Obamas reign. Obama did not obey the law despite the fact that Jay Carney stated in 2013 that nothing would happen until Congress was legally consulted to be in accordance with the law.
According to some reports some members were notified by phone 5 hours before the release. 5 hours is not 30 days. We also don't need to forget that Congress gave a big fat NO to this in 2012.
One question I have is why were these particular 5 men released? Why not release the children that are at Guantanamo Bay? Why were 5 terrorists released when one of the 5 hung a 7 year old boy for having American money.
I had the opportunity to attend a birthday celebration for Congresswoman Marsh Blackburn last night and she touched on the subject a little. Her explanation was that while Bush and Reagan "did the same thing" the reason why it was "ok" for them and not Obama is 3 years ago a law was put in place that Congress had to be consulted 30 days before actions like this take place. She stated that some had no idea anything happened until they saw it on the news. Some of these were democrats and die hard Obama lovers that were clueless. This is a law that was put in place during Obamas reign. Obama did not obey the law despite the fact that Jay Carney stated in 2013 that nothing would happen until Congress was legally consulted to be in accordance with the law.
According to some reports some members were notified by phone 5 hours before the release. 5 hours is not 30 days. We also don't need to forget that Congress gave a big fat NO to this in 2012.
One question I have is why were these particular 5 men released? Why not release the children that are at Guantanamo Bay? Why were 5 terrorists released when one of the 5 hung a 7 year old boy for having American money.
How do you know what is or isn't true about Bergdahl? Did you serve with him? Did you know him personally?
You really need to watch it on the CONSTANT accusations of "bearing false witness" You should never use to the bible to excuse your own hate for people which is exactly what you are doing when you bear false witness against the Republican party.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
Are you an honorably discharged veteran Drett? I am. Or, more likely, are you an armchair general hypocritically calling everyone else an armchair general?
No need to answer Drett. The British armed forces doesn't take Muslim potheads into its ranks.
There are legitimate mechanisms in the military that enlisted personnel can use to stand down from combat. They range from a request for a temporary period of evaluation away from the front line to permanent reassignment and even an honorable medical discharge for mental health issues.
What you don't do is leave a note saying bye and saunter off with some locals because you've become disillusioned with the war. That's desertion and usually results in a court martial with a military prison sentence followed by a dishonorable discharge. In times of war, it can be punished by life in prison or a death sentence.
Five Muslim terrorists have just been released by the Obama Administration, in what looks like an illegal trade, to get him back. They'll go right back to what they do: terrorism to further Islam. But it's all good because you're a Muslim right Drett?
No need to answer Drett. The British armed forces doesn't take Muslim potheads into its ranks.
There are legitimate mechanisms in the military that enlisted personnel can use to stand down from combat. They range from a request for a temporary period of evaluation away from the front line to permanent reassignment and even an honorable medical discharge for mental health issues.
What you don't do is leave a note saying bye and saunter off with some locals because you've become disillusioned with the war. That's desertion and usually results in a court martial with a military prison sentence followed by a dishonorable discharge. In times of war, it can be punished by life in prison or a death sentence.
Five Muslim terrorists have just been released by the Obama Administration, in what looks like an illegal trade, to get him back. They'll go right back to what they do: terrorism to further Islam. But it's all good because you're a Muslim right Drett?
More from the Wikipedia article.
Iran–Contra affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The guy Reagan lovers love to support indicates something else.
Oliver North wrote that "Ronald Reagan knew of and approved a great deal of what went on with both the Iranian initiative and private efforts on behalf of the contras and he received regular, detailed briefings on both...I have no doubt that he was told about the use of residuals for the Contras, and that he approved it.
But he might get a pass because he has an R by his name too.
Again, the Tower Commission "determined that President Reagan did not have knowledge of the extent of the program, especially about the diversion of funds to the Contras" and the Congressional Committee found no evidence either.
There were people indicted over Iran-Contra, the only question is will Obama be rightfully indicted for blatantly breaking the law.
Despite Clinton's Many Chances to Kill Bin Laden Media Love Obama Using Him to Imply Romney Wouldn't Have | NewsBusters
Clinton had the opportunity to take Bin Laden out but refused to do, but instead wanted to treat Bin Laden as a common criminal....and we all know how that turned out.
Bush had put all the military assets in place, Obama just happened to be President when Bin-Laden was killed.
First day of Reagan's Presidency, Iran let go hostages after 444 days after Carter not being able to do anything.
I CAN HONESTLY SAY IF ALL OF YOU ARE MAKING DECISIONS & JUDGEMENTS ABOUT THIS GUY, ALL OF YOU ARE WRONG!!
Now that I have your attention.......
To everybody that's making snap judgements about what they've heard in the news...... When has the media been honest about anything??
If Obama did all of this against the law, then he had his reasons. Usually, it's because that person is valuable for what they know..... or that person was a spy for the CIA, NSA, etc.... My hypothesis from the military's colorful history is that the guy was brainwashed like many good soldiers & he cracked.
I don't believe we'll ever find out what really happened because liars have a problem telling the truth...... so don't believe anything they say...... that's my $.02 worth.
Now that I have your attention.......
To everybody that's making snap judgements about what they've heard in the news...... When has the media been honest about anything??
If Obama did all of this against the law, then he had his reasons. Usually, it's because that person is valuable for what they know..... or that person was a spy for the CIA, NSA, etc.... My hypothesis from the military's colorful history is that the guy was brainwashed like many good soldiers & he cracked.
I don't believe we'll ever find out what really happened because liars have a problem telling the truth...... so don't believe anything they say...... that's my $.02 worth.
Oh, maybe he was following Jimmy's example who also threw the Shah under the bus opening up the Iranian can of worms to begin with.
I wouldn't say that toppling Mubarak and Ghadafi was exactly a stellar move either. Fortunately Egypt recovered from the Muslim Brotherhood reign of terror that was about to take place.
1
1still_waters
Guest
Lol blaming Clinton and giving credit to Bush.
I LOVE how this works.
If Obama blames something in his presidency on Bush, then it's "blaming Bush".
Yet if Osama isn't killed during Bush, then it's blamed on Clinton, but it's not called "blaming Clinton".
Then if Osama is killed while Bush isn't president, then we need to give Bush credit, even though Bush wasn't president. In that case it's ok to "blame Bush".
Gotsa love me some politics!
YEE HAW!!
1
1still_waters
Guest
Guess that makes the uber-hero Olly North a liar when he suggested the opposite. :O
Can't have our love of Olly and love of Reagan at the same time.
Sumfins gotsa give!
More from the Wikipedia article.
Iran–Contra affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The guy Reagan lovers love to support indicates something else.
Oliver North wrote that "Ronald Reagan knew of and approved a great deal of what went on with both the Iranian initiative and private efforts on behalf of the contras and he received regular, detailed briefings on both...I have no doubt that he was told about the use of residuals for the Contras, and that he approved it.
But he might get a pass because he has an R by his name too.
1
1still_waters
Guest
I CAN HONESTLY SAY IF ALL OF YOU ARE MAKING DECISIONS & JUDGEMENTS ABOUT THIS GUY, ALL OF YOU ARE WRONG!!
Now that I have your attention.......
To everybody that's making snap judgements about what they've heard in the news...... When has the media been honest about anything??
If Obama did all of this against the law, then he had his reasons. Usually, it's because that person is valuable for what they know..... or that person was a spy for the CIA, NSA, etc.... My hypothesis from the military's colorful history is that the guy was brainwashed like many good soldiers & he cracked.
I don't believe we'll ever find out what really happened because liars have a problem telling the truth...... so don't believe anything they say...... that's my $.02 worth.
Who is to say your creative writing is any more accurate than the media's supposed creative writing?
