Why Won't Clinton Release Those Archived Documents? (Congress, Iraq, president)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
who really cares BUSH lied when he ran and nobdy cared bush lied about everything all you repuke lie to the american people and get away with it you know the dem are going to win in 08 lol
who really cares BUSH lied when he ran and nobdy cared bush lied about everything all you repuke lie to the american people and get away with it you know the dem are going to win in 08 lol
who really cares BUSH lied when he ran and nobdy cared bush lied about everything all you repuke lie to the american people and get away with it you know the dem are going to win in 08 lol
What did Bush lie about?
They won't release the documents because they are incriminating.
Clintons are dishonest, here is a thesaurus definition for dishonest:
Who cares. The current nutjob is about to start World War III and people want to bring back WhiteWater and the stain on the dress. Nice sense of priorities.
And as others have mentioned, it's not like the current Pres. had not withheld documentation from the American people and Congress consistently since he took office. Part of his MO. The other part is bungling multisyllable words and laughing in speeches at inopportune moments when discussing torture and terrorism.
What did Bush lie about?
They won't release the documents because they are incriminating.
Clintons are dishonest, here is a thesaurus definition for dishonest:
bush is responsible for issuing Executive Order 13223 in 2001 ending openess in government in order to block records from the Reagan administration and bush senior. I think it's hypocritical to ask Bill Clinton to release records based on the
the present administration's penchant for secrecy. Hillary should be considered an advisor to Bill Clinton.
"And if someone asks to see records never made public during a presidency but deposited in the National Archives by a former president, the requester will now have to receive the permission of both the former president and the current one."
Has anyone asked bush to release Clinton's papers? No, because that would really open a "can of worms".
BTW- New polling shows Hillary unscathed from the last debate so it's a non issue whether the papers are released.
I enjoy how when asked something "uncomfortable" about Clinton, her followers immediately try to deflect attention to Bush or Cheney or ANYONE else instead of answering the question. She's corrupt from start to finish. I'm so anxious to see how the "Chinese connection" contributions are going to pan out. Clinton is finished, I think.
Wouldn't it be all too amusing if the archives were to have something so horrendous that the entire public would have their jaws stuck in the "" position for at least 5 minutes?
What if the archives were to show that the CLINTONS were the root of 9/11 and that it was their plot if Bush won?
I'm just kidding on that note.
However, I think the archives would most likely show that she had either had little to nothing to do with her husbands presidency.. or that she had "too much" involvement with things that.. weren't so good.
Either way, it was Bill Clinton's Presidency - not hers. I don't consider her time as the First Lady to be worth anything.
Wouldn't it be all too amusing if the archives were to have something so horrendous that the entire public would have their jaws stuck in the "" position for at least 5 minutes?
What if the archives were to show that the CLINTONS were the root of 9/11 and that it was their plot if Bush won?
I'm just kidding on that note.
However, I think the archives would most likely show that she had either had little to nothing to do with her husbands presidency.. or that she had "too much" involvement with things that.. weren't so good.
Either way, it was Bill Clinton's Presidency - not hers. I don't consider her time as the First Lady to be worth anything.
But she's the one who's trying to make her time as first lady part of her "experience" to be president.
But she's the one who's trying to make her time as first lady part of her "experience" to be president.
I don't know of a good way to put this - but IMO - Unless she had direct influence other than "oh honey, I think this way," then her time as First Lady means nothing to me as a voter.
She may have had a huge impact on the decisions in Bill's presidency - but I don't care. In the end, it was his choices, his decisions. I only care about the things she directly advocated.
So unless the archives were to prove that she tied Bill up and forced him to do everything he did like a puppy in training... First Lady does not equal experience.
Then again, I really don't care what she's attempting to use as experience because I wouldn't vote for her anways. We don't need to have sooo many presidencies with the same two families. Let's get some other family in the White House. That and I don't agree with any of her platforms.
I am curious though, as to what Dirt/Light/Evil/Good/etc would actually come out the archives.
I'd have to laugh if it were 9/11 plots, or love letters, or anything that... you really wouldn't expect to actually be archived over destroyed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The clincher
