Top | Newest First | Oldest First
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
windinhishair · 61-69, M
The US had partisan divisions in the 1970s, though they were not as severe as they are now. The majority of Republicans supported Nixon right up to a few days before his resignation, when it became clear that he had lied to the American people about his personal involvement in the Watergate coverup. At that point, Nixon lost quite a bit of support, including in Congress, and resignation was the only option short of impeachment. But even following his resignation in disgrace, there was still a sizable minority that supported him, and continued to support him.
Clinton absolutely was wrong, but his crime didn't rise to the level needed to remove him from office.
It is ironic that Nixon was forced to resign for lying, while Trump lied over 30,000 times in office and his Cult and colleagues continued to support him. Trump should have been removed from office during both impeachments, and he should be disqualified from seeking any office in the future.
Clinton absolutely was wrong, but his crime didn't rise to the level needed to remove him from office.
It is ironic that Nixon was forced to resign for lying, while Trump lied over 30,000 times in office and his Cult and colleagues continued to support him. Trump should have been removed from office during both impeachments, and he should be disqualified from seeking any office in the future.
Reason10 · 61-69, M
@SomeMichGuy I have provided plenty of sources, and they are reliable whether or not you have enough education to read them.
spjennifer · 56-60, T
Nixon deserved what he got, he cheated and lied to the American public about his involvement, he resigned in order to avoid prosecution. As for Clinton, his affair was something many other Presidents did, only thing was, they didn't get caught. Clinton's offense was more of a moral one rather than criminal like Nixon, so no, he shouldn't have resigned and didn't. As for tRump, he was a symptom of the Republican Party and its supporters, racism and misogyny were still there but not widely accepted so remained mostly hidden and quiet. tRump made it ok for them to speak out publicly once again all while covertly robbing America blind. tRump is a schiester, a complete dirt bag and a con man and always has been, nothing more, nothing less, his supporters love him because he doesn't care what people think of him, as long as they think of him and keep giving him lots of money...
This message was deleted by its author.
fanuc2013 · 51-55, F
The big problem with Clinton was not the affair, it was lying about it under oath, which is perjury! That was the crime, not the affair. Now, it is my understanding that Nixon did not orchestrate the break-in, but after he discovered his buddies had done it, he tried to cover for them. That was his crime, and at least he did the right thing and resigned.
Reason10 · 61-69, M
@SomeMichGuy I read more than ANY single digit IQ liberal here. You ALL are children.
SomeMichGuy · M
@Reason10 Then you don't read good sources or you don't understand what you read, because you reject proven facts left and right.
And you don't understand IQ either...
And you don't understand IQ either...
Northwest · M
The GOP, at the time, did a little better than today's GOP, but not by that much.
On the 3 articles of impeachment, in the judiciary committee, only 1 out of 17 GOP members, voted yes. 5 voted yes, on 2 articles, and 1 voted yes on 1 article.
Of the 21 Democrats on the same committee, 19 voted yes on all 3 articles of impeachment, and 2 voted yes on 2 out of the 3 articles of impeachment.
Then Gerald Ford, pardoned Nixon, to make sure we did not have a trial.
On the 3 articles of impeachment, in the judiciary committee, only 1 out of 17 GOP members, voted yes. 5 voted yes, on 2 articles, and 1 voted yes on 1 article.
Of the 21 Democrats on the same committee, 19 voted yes on all 3 articles of impeachment, and 2 voted yes on 2 out of the 3 articles of impeachment.
Then Gerald Ford, pardoned Nixon, to make sure we did not have a trial.
BohemianBoo · M
The difference is that America didn't have right-wing media like it does now. From 1949 to 1987 we had the Fairness Doctrine, which required news media to have representatives of multiples sides debate the issues. There were still far-right lunatic pundits similar to Tucker Carlson, but they were required to bring on people that disagreed with them. This meant that right-wing arguments were dismantled on right-wing shows. After 1987, right-wing media was able to get consistently more insane with no push back. There's also the internet and social media now which creates pipelines into far-right circles. This is why so many Libertarians end up becoming literal Neo-Nazis.
Reason10 · 61-69, M
@BohemianBoo @BohemianBoo In other words, for you FAIR is allowing ONLY left wing lying Woke goose stepping left wing NAZI fake news sources.
The Fairness Doctrine was an attack on the First Amendment.
The free market has decided that FoxNews is the top source for news and information, probably because it gives BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE equal time.
And goose steppers like you do not like that.
The Fairness Doctrine was an attack on the First Amendment.
The free market has decided that FoxNews is the top source for news and information, probably because it gives BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE equal time.
And goose steppers like you do not like that.
BohemianBoo · M
@Reason10 [quote] left wing lying Woke goose stepping left wing NAZI fake news sources.
[/quote]
That's a lot of buzzwords.
[/quote]
That's a lot of buzzwords.
SomeMichGuy · M
Nixon was on the verge of being impeached, and he would have been convicted, which is what he was told and why he resigned in August of 1974.
(Oddly, the break-in to Democratic HQ gave the Republican "dirty tricks" squad nothing...and Nixon won re-election by a landslide. It was the lying & coverup by Nixon & his Administration/White House which really helped sink him, and the bizarre cast of characters involved.)
At *that* time, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the country were shocked and appalled at Nixon's behavior, incl. the "Saturday Night Massacre"... The country had previously very much honored and admired Presidents. Nixon shattered that.
And yes, EVERYONE knew it.
Clinton...yes, he was wildly inappropriate in the Oval Office (maybe more in the coffee room next to/off of it...). The time between Nixon & Clinton had jaded people, though, and we were much further along the trajectory which brought us here.
It was scandalous. Most people agreed. But Clinton balanced the budget, etc.
Sad.
But Trump...I think you got it right, esp. what it means for our country.
(Oddly, the break-in to Democratic HQ gave the Republican "dirty tricks" squad nothing...and Nixon won re-election by a landslide. It was the lying & coverup by Nixon & his Administration/White House which really helped sink him, and the bizarre cast of characters involved.)
At *that* time, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the country were shocked and appalled at Nixon's behavior, incl. the "Saturday Night Massacre"... The country had previously very much honored and admired Presidents. Nixon shattered that.
And yes, EVERYONE knew it.
Clinton...yes, he was wildly inappropriate in the Oval Office (maybe more in the coffee room next to/off of it...). The time between Nixon & Clinton had jaded people, though, and we were much further along the trajectory which brought us here.
It was scandalous. Most people agreed. But Clinton balanced the budget, etc.
Sad.
But Trump...I think you got it right, esp. what it means for our country.
SomeMichGuy · M
@fanuc2013
[quote]Now, let's get things straight, Clinton did NOT balance the budget! It was PROJECTED the budget would be balanced, but in the long run, it didn't happen.[/quote]
[b][c=BF0000]No. Stop lying. Get your facts right. We had the first budget SURPLUS since the 1960s in FY 1998, under Bill Clinton[/c].[/b]
Clinton's time in office
[quote]Bill Clinton's tenure as the 42nd president of the United States began with his first inauguration on January 20, 1993, and ended on January 20, 2001.[/quote] (See [i]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Bill_Clinton[/i])
US Government's Fiscal Year (FY)
[quote]The federal government’s fiscal year runs from the first day of October of one calendar year through the last day of September of the next. For example, Fiscal Year 2021 (FY 2021) started on Oct.1, 2020, and ended on Sept. 30, 2021.[/quote] (See [i]https://www.federaltimes.com/management/budget/2022/09/20/why-the-us-federal-fiscal-year-2023-starts-in-october/[/i])
This means budgets proposed by/under Clinton would have started on 1 Oct. 1993 (the beginning of FY 1994) and ended with 30 Sept. 2001 (the end of FY 2001).
Deficits under Clinton
From info from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) summarized at [i]https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306[/i]
[quote][b]FY DEFICIT (IN BILLIONS)[/b] DEBT INCREASE (IN BILLIONS) DEFICIT-TO-GDP RATIO
[b]1998 ($69)[/b] $113 (0.8%)
[b]1999 ($126)[/b] $130 (1.3%)
[b]2000 ($236)[/b] $18 (2.3%)
[b]2001 ($128)[/b] $133 (1.2%)[/quote] (Emphasis added.)
[b][c=359E00]Thus, Clinton's last four budgets ALL had SURPLUSES of AT LEAST $69 BILLION, with a TOTAL SURPLUS of $559 BILLION, or OVER [i]ONE-HALF TRILLION DOLLARS[/i].[/c][/b]
[quote][c=BF0000][b][u]Clinton inherited major budget deficits left over from the Reagan and Bush administrations[/u][/b]; fiscal year 1992 had seen a $290 billion deficit.[/c]
...
[b][c=359E00]In 1998, the federal government experienced the first budget surplus since the 1960s.[/c][/b] Reflecting the importance of the budget surplus, the New York Times described the end of budget deficits as "the fiscal equivalent of the fall of the Berlin Wall."[42][/quote](See [i]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Bill_Clinton[/i]; emphasis added.)
[quote]Now, let's get things straight, Clinton did NOT balance the budget! It was PROJECTED the budget would be balanced, but in the long run, it didn't happen.[/quote]
[b][c=BF0000]No. Stop lying. Get your facts right. We had the first budget SURPLUS since the 1960s in FY 1998, under Bill Clinton[/c].[/b]
Clinton's time in office
[quote]Bill Clinton's tenure as the 42nd president of the United States began with his first inauguration on January 20, 1993, and ended on January 20, 2001.[/quote] (See [i]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Bill_Clinton[/i])
US Government's Fiscal Year (FY)
[quote]The federal government’s fiscal year runs from the first day of October of one calendar year through the last day of September of the next. For example, Fiscal Year 2021 (FY 2021) started on Oct.1, 2020, and ended on Sept. 30, 2021.[/quote] (See [i]https://www.federaltimes.com/management/budget/2022/09/20/why-the-us-federal-fiscal-year-2023-starts-in-october/[/i])
This means budgets proposed by/under Clinton would have started on 1 Oct. 1993 (the beginning of FY 1994) and ended with 30 Sept. 2001 (the end of FY 2001).
Deficits under Clinton
From info from the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) summarized at [i]https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306[/i]
[quote][b]FY DEFICIT (IN BILLIONS)[/b] DEBT INCREASE (IN BILLIONS) DEFICIT-TO-GDP RATIO
[b]1998 ($69)[/b] $113 (0.8%)
[b]1999 ($126)[/b] $130 (1.3%)
[b]2000 ($236)[/b] $18 (2.3%)
[b]2001 ($128)[/b] $133 (1.2%)[/quote] (Emphasis added.)
[b][c=359E00]Thus, Clinton's last four budgets ALL had SURPLUSES of AT LEAST $69 BILLION, with a TOTAL SURPLUS of $559 BILLION, or OVER [i]ONE-HALF TRILLION DOLLARS[/i].[/c][/b]
[quote][c=BF0000][b][u]Clinton inherited major budget deficits left over from the Reagan and Bush administrations[/u][/b]; fiscal year 1992 had seen a $290 billion deficit.[/c]
...
[b][c=359E00]In 1998, the federal government experienced the first budget surplus since the 1960s.[/c][/b] Reflecting the importance of the budget surplus, the New York Times described the end of budget deficits as "the fiscal equivalent of the fall of the Berlin Wall."[42][/quote](See [i]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Bill_Clinton[/i]; emphasis added.)
Reason10 · 61-69, M
@SomeMichGuy That is a LIE.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget#
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2011/10/03/time-for-some-truth-bill-clinton-never-balanced-a-budget-and-never-ran-a-surplus/
Bush also inherited a recession from KKKlinton.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/what-bush-inherited-and-what-he-left-left-behind-victor-davis-hanson/
https://www.cato.org/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget#
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2011/10/03/time-for-some-truth-bill-clinton-never-balanced-a-budget-and-never-ran-a-surplus/
Bush also inherited a recession from KKKlinton.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/what-bush-inherited-and-what-he-left-left-behind-victor-davis-hanson/
ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M
Nixon had a cult following a bit like Trump's, but not as extreme. And Nixon believed in the "Big Lie" just like Trump; keep telling a lie again and again and half the people will believe you no matter how the facts stack up against you. He was hated by many, but loved by many. The only goof thing about him was he probably actually believed in this country -- or at least his warped vision of it -- and thought he was actually doing the right things.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@Reason10 So you are saying that your source, a movie made by someone CONVICTED OF ELECTION FRAUD, is better source of facts than regular media sources?
You are either a false flag troll trying to make republicans look bad, or the biggest idiot I have encountered in my 30 years on the internet.
You are either a false flag troll trying to make republicans look bad, or the biggest idiot I have encountered in my 30 years on the internet.
Reason10 · 61-69, M
@trollslayer Whenever an immature entitled Woke idiot loses an argument, out comes the word "Troll."
Grow up, boy. You just lost another argument, and you are whining like a stuck pig.
Grow up, boy. You just lost another argument, and you are whining like a stuck pig.
SomeMichGuy · M
@Reason10 You don't understand what facts or sources of facts are...but think you win arguments based on ZERO evidence.
Phil McGraw used to mention your ilk rather frequently.
Phil McGraw used to mention your ilk rather frequently.
tindrummer · M
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@Slade I'm guessing you live in a red state. The most populous states in the country are blue. Most major cities are blue. Just because Biden is unpopular (most presidents in the last 20 years are) doesn't mean the majority of Americans (as a whole, not in your particular state) subscribe to liberal platforms. Poll after poll show people want more regulations on big businesses, want abortion to be legal, favor health care reforms, etc. There has only been ONE GOP president to win the national popular vote in an election since 1988. That's over 30 years! What does that tell you?
SomeMichGuy · M
@trollslayer
FYI you need to add "don't":
[quote]Just because Biden is unpopular (most presidents in the last 20 years are) doesn't mean the majority of Americans (as a whole, not in your particular state) [b]don't[/b] subscribe to liberal platforms.[/quote]
A clearer rewrite would be:
"Don't confuse 'Biden is unpopular' (like most presidents in the past 20 years) with 'Americans aren't liberal'. Even though people in your area/state might not be liberal Americans [u]as a whole[/u] DO subscribe to liberal notions."
FYI you need to add "don't":
[quote]Just because Biden is unpopular (most presidents in the last 20 years are) doesn't mean the majority of Americans (as a whole, not in your particular state) [b]don't[/b] subscribe to liberal platforms.[/quote]
A clearer rewrite would be:
"Don't confuse 'Biden is unpopular' (like most presidents in the past 20 years) with 'Americans aren't liberal'. Even though people in your area/state might not be liberal Americans [u]as a whole[/u] DO subscribe to liberal notions."
SomeMichGuy · M
@trollslayer
[quote]There has only been ONE GOP president to win the national popular vote in an election since 1988. That's over 30 years! What does that tell you?[/quote]
It says that the GOP is a party which is NOT representative of the people generally.
[quote]There has only been ONE GOP president to win the national popular vote in an election since 1988. That's over 30 years! What does that tell you?[/quote]
It says that the GOP is a party which is NOT representative of the people generally.
This is the nature of the beast -that being politics and those we call politicians. None were “ Boy Scouts” or “ altar boys” if you will. They, both men and women
are shrewd, conniving, manipulative crave power, and often ruthless in their political lives. We as a people have for too long been led down the primrose path, and it is and was our fault for being baffled by their bullshit.
are shrewd, conniving, manipulative crave power, and often ruthless in their political lives. We as a people have for too long been led down the primrose path, and it is and was our fault for being baffled by their bullshit.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
It's not possible to have an honest president so pretending it is seems pretty dumb.
I just go by the money. If prices are low and wages are up we got a good one.
Otherwise we got a bad one.
I just go by the money. If prices are low and wages are up we got a good one.
Otherwise we got a bad one.
BackyardShaman · 61-69, M
Nixon should have been executed by electrocution, this is what real USA citizens were saying.
JP1119 · 36-40, M
We are doomed.
Budwick · 70-79, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This message was deleted by its author.
SomeMichGuy · M
@swirlie Some Dems might be so inclined, but I hope not.
This message was deleted by its author.
SomeMichGuy · M
@swirlie No. I haven't been enamored of lies by either, incl. the DNC which conspired to make Mrs. Clinton the nominee.
Trump's continual lying also fouled up our pandemic response and our ability to actually get CoViD under control; now it's ENdemic, which sucks.
And I would never support a person trying to overthrow the government from any party or group.
I can't speak for others who are liberal.
Trump's continual lying also fouled up our pandemic response and our ability to actually get CoViD under control; now it's ENdemic, which sucks.
And I would never support a person trying to overthrow the government from any party or group.
I can't speak for others who are liberal.