RON PAUL OWNZ THE ESTABLISHMENT .. GROW UP KIDDIES AND REALIZE IT.
A VOTE FOR PAUL IS A VOTE TO RESTORE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!
ALL NEWT CAN DO IS DESPERATELY ACT THE OUTSIDER BY PARROTING PAUL'S TALKING POINTS LIKE A CLOWN. ANYONE WHO CAN TYPE CAN FIND OUT PAUL HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE FED, AND GOLD STANDARDS, ETC ETC FOR 30+ YEARS!
Not 10 years. No one would know about it if he hadn't owned up to it in his divorce proceedings. Of course, if he had tried to save face like Clinton did, and perjured himself, I wouldn't be interested. He didn't. He did tell the truth, and he did straighten up and fly right. You can call either of them whatever you want, but it's a d
it's a delusion to insist that they are the same. Don't let me stop you, though. Your anti-Newt reasoning skills are a better ad FOR Newt than anything I can do. When true genius is among you, you'll know it in this way: all the dunces will be in confederation against him.
He didn't "go after" Clinton for having an affair. He "went after" him for committing perjury. Whether you say "went after" or "impeached", it was still about breaking the law and not about offending someone's moral code. It still isn't the same thing, and all caps still doesn't make you persuasive.
Which article of impeachment was for adultery? I rememeber one for obstruction of justice, one for perjury (for which Clinton was disbarred, and banned from appearing before the SCOTUS), but I can't find the adultery article.
He made a mistake, for which he apologized, but Newt wasn't committing perjury while he forced Clinton to be accountable for his. Not the same thing, not hypocrisy.
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL OWNZ THE ESTABLISHMENT .. GROW UP KIDDIES AND REALIZE IT.
A VOTE FOR PAUL IS A VOTE TO RESTORE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!
ALL NEWT CAN DO IS DESPERATELY ACT THE OUTSIDER BY PARROTING PAUL'S TALKING POINTS LIKE A CLOWN. ANYONE WHO CAN TYPE CAN FIND OUT PAUL HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE FED, AND GOLD STANDARDS, ETC ETC FOR 30+ YEARS!
LIBERTYALONE 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm a doctor in newtology, and I have to say...you don't look much like a newt. lol thanks for the vid
AskDrNewt 4 years ago
Not 10 years. No one would know about it if he hadn't owned up to it in his divorce proceedings. Of course, if he had tried to save face like Clinton did, and perjured himself, I wouldn't be interested. He didn't. He did tell the truth, and he did straighten up and fly right. You can call either of them whatever you want, but it's a d
xues1984 4 years ago
it's a delusion to insist that they are the same. Don't let me stop you, though. Your anti-Newt reasoning skills are a better ad FOR Newt than anything I can do. When true genius is among you, you'll know it in this way: all the dunces will be in confederation against him.
xues1984 4 years ago
Both cheated on their wives. One owned up to it when it came time to face the music. The other committed perjury to save face.
When you "so then" at the beginning of sentence, it's expected that what you are saying is compatible with what you're responding to. You missed.
xues1984 4 years ago
He didn't "go after" Clinton for having an affair. He "went after" him for committing perjury. Whether you say "went after" or "impeached", it was still about breaking the law and not about offending someone's moral code. It still isn't the same thing, and all caps still doesn't make you persuasive.
xues1984 4 years ago
Which article of impeachment was for adultery? I rememeber one for obstruction of justice, one for perjury (for which Clinton was disbarred, and banned from appearing before the SCOTUS), but I can't find the adultery article.
He made a mistake, for which he apologized, but Newt wasn't committing perjury while he forced Clinton to be accountable for his. Not the same thing, not hypocrisy.
xues1984 4 years ago
Great idea Newt.
We could certainly use a candidate who has great ideas. When are you going to get into the race?
Run Newt Run
ManwithAx 4 years ago
Keep your eye on this idea.
I'm hoping that if the candidates say no, that they will have to explain why. There is absolutely no plausible reason they could refuse.
iloveconsistency 4 years ago