Today on Blogcritics
Home » Kay Bailey Hutchison Used To Think Perjury Was Serious

Kay Bailey Hutchison Used To Think Perjury Was Serious

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Kay Bailey Hutchinson, in a pre-emptive strike against the perceived, imminent indictments for perjury and obstruction of justice, of Karl Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, has come out and said such charges are not severe ones, just “technicalities” in her words, and the Senator implored the prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald not to indict them for anything frivolous like that.

liberal newsIts an amzing turn of events, because Hutchison voted to impeach Bill Clinton for an imagined “perjury” and “obstruction of justice” that he was never charged with in a court of law. Hutchison and the other Republicans dreamed up “perjury” and “obstruction of justice” charges, which Bill Clinton was never shown to have committed, and those were the ONLY charges the partisan Republican Congress leveled against President Clinton.

In fact, given the number of special prosecutors and partisan zealots like Ken Starr hounding the former President, it is guaranteed that if Clinton had actually perjured himself and / or obstructed justice he would have at least been charged with something, somewhere, in a real court of law.

Hutchison should know about “technicalities” anyways. She once escaped criminal covictionin Texas on a “technicality”, when a partisan Republican judge refused to rule in advance on whether the evidence showing her guilt could be admitted for the jury to see, thereby destroying the prosecutor’s case.

But uncharged political “crimes” against Bill Clinton were serious enough for Hutchison and the partisan Republicans to play judge and jury and to distract the attention of the American government for years, away from Osama Bin Laden and towards investigating whether they could detect DNA from the President’s semen on a woman’s dress. Then she and her cohorts had the audacity to pretend that Clinton’s imagined, uncharged “crimes”, were actually “high crimes” under the constitution –serious enough to impeach a sitting president.

Wow, what a flip-flop Hutchison has undergone regarding these “technicalities”, or maybe she is just a complete hypocrite. Shouldn’t a “real” perjury and obstruction of justice charge be enough to sideline a devious political aide who harmed America’s national security, if a dreamed up one was enough to impeach a President who “lied about sex”?

liberal news

More liberal politics at Alpha Liberal Blog, News, and Opinion.

Powered by

About Balletshooz

  • Nancy

    I’m getting SO damned sick of two-faced politicians who are so out of touch with reality they think lying is “mis-speaking”, stealing & graft are common entitlements & perks of the job, and perjury is a technicality. Anyone that lacking in ethics & morality should not be in a public service position.

  • Matt

    Bill Clinton not only WAS charged in a “real court”, he was found guilty by his plea and disbarred.

    Of course, you can take the Clinton approach of personal attack on the prosecutor, as you have, or you can show them the respect that is being shown Fitzgerald. What people are doing is not attacking him, but showing that no crime has been committed.

    But, you can show me that you are not a hypocrite by calling for the resignation of Hillary Clinton. Read the 1990 report of Robert Ray’s investigation of Travelgate, where he found that Hillary had lied to the grand jury by denying any involvement.

  • Nancy

    “anyone” means anyone & everyone. Which means we’ll have total vacancies in the w.h. & congress, I guess, since every damned one of the bastards seems to be a moral bankrupt & an ethical idiot.

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    so me are less equal than others.

    I’m with Nancy on the bald-faced, two-faced bare-assed people who pass for leaders these days.

    I sick a little.

  • Dave Ward

    To the idiot who thinks Clinton was found guilty: Did you have your head up your ass the entire time? This was major world news while this was happening, and SURELY you must know better than that!

    Clinton was tried in the Senate, and was acquitted of all charges. That is, he was not found guilty of anything at all.

    Ken Starr, however, essentially threatened to stalk Clinton and never stop chasing him even though he’d done nothing wrong. In order to avert the harassment, on the last day of his presidency Clinton made a deal with Starr, in which he agreed to a voluntary five-year suspension of practice in the state of Arkansas.

    He didn’t even bother to even TRY to argue against having a suspension against arguing before the Supreme Court because he had no intention of ever arguing a case before them. You might as well suspend me from participating in the pole vault in the Olympics; I have no intention of ever doing that, so why would I waste time, money and energy arguing against it? Likewise, Clinton conservatively saved his time, money and energy by not arguing a suspension which was utterly irrelevant.

    Bottom line, Clinton was not only never found guilty of anything whatsoever, but he was never even charged with any crime at any point.