You want REAL Obstruction of Justice?

[Highmark]

Check out the WaPo article on the Clinton/Paula Jones lawsuit.  Most people have no clue as to all that went on in that case.  

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/thompsontext021399.htm

Everything from Clinton trying to get Lewinsky a job to giving her suggestions as to how to testify.  I have to wonder why he told her that Ms. Currie's brother had been killed.   Was it a vague threat?  Take a look at his death.   Another suspicious one to say the least.

 

On December 5, 1997, attorneys for Ms. Jones notified the President's attorneys of their list of witnesses. That list included Ms. Lewinsky. Although she was unaware at the time that her name was on the Jones litigation witness list, Lewinsky coincidentally decided to terminate her relationship with the President the following day, but was unable to see him at the White House. President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky initially exchanged angry words that day over the telephone, but later that day, she came to the White House at his invitation. During this meeting, Ms. Lewinsky told the President that Mr. Jordan had not appeared to have done anything to help her in her job search. In a conversation Ms. Lewinsky described as `sweet' and `very affectionate,' he told her that he would speak to Mr. Jordan about her job situation. The President did not at that time inform Ms. Lewinsky that her name was on the witness list.

Ms. Currie again called Mr. Jordan, and on December 8, 1997, Ms. Lewinsky called to set another appointment with Mr. Jordan for December 11. Although Ms. Lewinsky provided Mr. Jordan with a list of corporations in which she was interested in obtaining employment, Mr. Jordan determined based on his own contacts which companies he would pursue on Ms. Lewinsky's behalf. Following his meeting with Ms. Lewinsky, acting by his own admission at the behest of the President, Jordan called three corporate executives in New York. He also called the President to report on his efforts on behalf of Ms. Lewinsky

On December 17, 1997, between 2:00 and 2:30 a.m., the President telephoned Ms. Lewinsky. He informed her that Ms. Currie's brother had been killed, as well as that her name was on the Jones witness list. The President indicated that if Ms. Lewinsky were subpoenaed, she should let Ms. Currie know. He also told her that she might be able to sign an affidavit in that event to avoid testifying. In addition, he suggested that she could say that she was coming to see Betty or was bringing him papers. Ms. Lewinsky says that she understood implicitly that she was to continue to deny their relationship.

Ms. Lewinsky pursued filing an affidavit to obviate the need for her to testify in the Jones case. On January 6, 1998, she communicated to Mr. Jordan concerns she had about the affidavit that Mr. Carter had drafted for her. Jordan telephoned Carter with her suggestions. Although Mr. Jordan denies the allegations, Ms. Lewinsky contends that she informed Jordan about the details of Carter's proposed affidavit, and that she and Jordan made changes to it prior to her signing it. Lewinsky also spoke with the President about Carter's questions to her about how she obtained her Pentagon job. The President told her that she `could always say that the people in Legislative Affairs got it for you or helped you get it.'

During his deposition, President Clinton made numerous false statements while under oath. These included the sexual nature of his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, and whether they had exchanged gifts. He relied on the same cover stories as he had discussed with Ms. Lewinsky. The President's lawyer used Ms. Lewinsky's affidavit in an attempt to deflect questions about the President's relationship with her, specifically stating that the President had already seen that affidavit. As the President appeared to be paying close attention, he did not contradict his attorney when he represented to the court that `there is absolutely no sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form with President Clinton. . . .' And he testified, when asked by his attorney, that Ms. Lewinsky's affidavit was absolutely true. However, the judge insisted that President Clinton answer additional questions about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. These questions were asked based on the judge's peculiar ruling that used only one-third of a standard courtroom definition of `sexual relations' and the plaintiff's attorneys' insistence in using that truncated definition as a reference for questions they posed to the President about the nature of his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, rather than asking specific questions concerning what had occurred. In six instances, the President answered questions by referencing Betty Currie, such as in using the cover story that Ms. Lewinsky had come to the White House to visit Ms. Currie, and on one occasion, expressly stated that his questioners should `ask Betty.' Indeed, Ms. Jones' attorneys later placed Ms. Currie's name on their witness list.

After the deposition, at 7 p.m. that evening, the President called his secretary, Betty Currie, at home. She later testified that she could not remember the President ever calling her at home so late on a Saturday. In that conversation, he asked Ms. Currie to see him in the Oval Office the following day, a Sunday. This was also an unusual occurrence. While in the Oval Office, and contrary to the admonition from the Jones case judge not to discuss his deposition testimony with anyone, the President made the following statements to Ms. Currie: (1) `I was never really alone with Monica, right?' (2) `You were always there when Monica was there, right?' (3) `Monica came on to me, and I never touched her, right?' (4) `You could see and hear everything, right?' (5) `She wanted to have sex with me, and I could not do that.'

Once the President met with Ms. Currie on January 18, Ms. Currie began to seek Ms. Lewinsky. She paged Ms. Lewinsky four times that night. Later than 11:00 p.m. that evening, the President called Ms. Currie at home to determine if she had yet reached Ms. Lewinsky. She had not. In a period of less than two hours on the morning of the 19th, Ms. Currie paged Ms. Lewinsky an additional eight times. The President then called Mr. Jordan, who called the White House three times, paged Ms. Lewinsky, and called Mr. Carter, all within twenty-four minutes of receiving the President's call. Mr. Jordan called Mr. Carter again that afternoon and learned that Mr. Carter had been replaced as Ms. Lewinsky's attorney. Mr. Jordan then called the White House six times in the next twenty-four minutes trying to relay this information. Mr. Jordan called Mr. Carter again, and then called the White House again.

Later on January 21, the President told his aide, Sidney Blumenthal, that Lewinsky had made a sexual demand on him, and that he rebuffed her. The President told Blumenthal that Lewinsky had threatened him. President Clinton also indicated that Lewinsky said that she was known among her peers as the stalker, that she hated it, and that she would say that she had an affair with the President whether it was true or not, so that she would not be known as the stalker any more. He also told Blumenthal that he felt like a victim who could not get out the truth. Blumenthal later testified that he believes the President lied to him. The President testified that he was aware at the time that he made his statements that his aides might be summoned before the grand jury.

 

Edited June 14, 2017 by Highmark

[Rod]

The Clintons are sick fucks. It's a good thing only Russian votes were counted in the election 

[Highmark]

Just now, Rod Johnson said:

The Clintons are sick fucks. It's a good thing only Russian votes were counted in the election 

Read the whole article.   Clinton obstructs justice so many times it will make your head spin.   Now the left is calling "I hope you can let this go" as obstruction of Justice.   Something the POTUS has every constitutional right to say to a FBI director.   The hypocrisy is mind boggling.  

[racer254]

4 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Read the whole article.   Clinton obstructs justice so many times it will make your head spin.   Now the left is calling "I hope you can let this go" as obstruction of Justice.   Something the POTUS has every constitutional right to say to a FBI director.   The hypocrisy is mind boggling.  

I had many conversations about this when it was happening.  If anyone else would have lied on the stand like this, we would be in jail.  The clintons are the epitome of corrupt politicians.  They are the worst family to ever get into politics as far as this country is concerned. 

[T1R9sledder]

5 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Read the whole article.   Clinton obstructs justice so many times it will make your head spin.   Now the left is calling "I hope you can let this go" as obstruction of Justice.   Something the POTUS has every constitutional right to say to a FBI director.   The hypocrisy is mind boggling.  

That was then this is now for the Dems.....they don't care.

[racer254]

1 minute ago, T1R9sledder said:

That was then this is now for the Dems.....they don't care.

It sure did set a precedence for the current supporters.

[Highmark]

Notice the libtards are leaving this alone like the plague.

I think its hilarious that people think any congress would impeach Trump for saying "I hope you can let Flynn go" after Clinton getting off on what he did.

 

[Snoslinger]

1 minute ago, Highmark said:

Notice the libtards are leaving this alone like the plague.

I think its hilarious that people think any congress would impeach Trump for saying "I hope you can let Flynn go" after Clinton getting off on what he did.

 

for good reason. it's 2017 dude, and Russia is fucking with our election process.

Edited June 15, 2017 by Snoslinger

[Rw06GT]

2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

for good reason. it's 2017 dude, and Russia is fucking with our election process.

Mindless Dem robot says what?

[Highmark]

5 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

for good reason. it's 2017 dude, and Russia is fucking with our election process.

You forgot collusion and obstruction of justice.   

 

[Mainecat]

I am sure George Washington was involved in a similar Trumpisode too Highmark

[Snake]

1 hour ago, Snoslinger said:

for good reason. it's 2017 dude, and we have been fucking with other country's election process.

 

[Snoslinger]

top patriot snakey being OK with Russian meddling in our elections is the perfect indicator of how pathetic the rwws have become.

[Momorider]

2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

top patriot snakey being OK with Russian meddling in our elections is the perfect indicator of how pathetic the rwws have become.

ZERO EVIDENCE, NONE NADDA, ZILCH  

Oh100% 100% of the time about everything for over two years faggot 

[Snoslinger]

snakey has said otherwise momo, you dumb fuck. the fact you can't pick up on that in that post alone is telling.

 

[Momorider]

11 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

snakey has said otherwise momo, you dumb fuck. the fact you can't pick up on that in that post alone is telling.

 

100% 100% of the time about everything for over two years faggot 

[Rod]

3 hours ago, Snoslinger said:

top patriot snakey being OK with Russian meddling in our elections is the perfect indicator of how pathetic the rwws have become.

You're cool with obunga interfering in other countries election so connect them dots Mr Appley Orange 

[ICEMAN!]

An article from 1999...

 

OT move this to the Historical Events forum please

[Skidude600]

53 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

An article from 1999...

 

OT move this to the Historical Events forum please

Yet it has relavence considering Clintons wife was running for president in 2017 and more than likely was a part of it. And before you ask can I prove it? No, but then again you and the sno twins are the kings of conjecture.