IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Re: Different world views.
From what I recall, Monica was as much a predator as he was.

I wouldn't exactly call her a predator (there's no tabloids yacking about her preying on other men), but she was certainly a willing participant. Others were less so (his groping of Kathleen Willy the day her husband committed suicide?)

As time went on, though, she apparently became a bit concerned and saved up some evidence (the stained blue dress).

Monica was a willing participant and is apparently an exhibitionist (eg, her HBO special) despite her whinings about how she wants the media to stop focusing on her.

But what she is or does has nothing to do with Clinton's perjury.
Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt
New That's not true either...

From what I recall, Monica was as much a predator as he was.

I wouldn't exactly call her a predator (there's no tabloids yacking about her preying on other men), but she was certainly a willing participant.


Didn't Monica's first..er...affair have to do with a married doctor? (I seem to recall tabloids mentioning that fact.)



As time went on, though, she apparently became a bit concerned and saved up some evidence (the stained blue dress).

Frankly I'm more interested in what the legal system was willing to do to demand her to testify. Didn't they arrest her mother and threaten to charge her?

Hell, look at what they did to [link|http://www.juliehiattsteele.com/| Julie Hiatt Steele ]
New That's what I meant about "character".
Monica seemed to be intent on sex with the President. Whether you'd classify her as a "predator" or not depends upon your definition of the word. Clinton did not "prey" on her. She wanted it.

So, asking Clinton about sex with Monica establishes what about his character? That he'd have sex with someone who wanted to have sex with him? How is that relevant to the case?

But what she is or does has nothing to do with Clinton's perjury.
*sigh* Whatever. I thought the "perjury" was when he offered a different definition for "sex" that didn't cover what he and Monica did. Or am I wrong on that?

So, asking about Monica did nothing to establish whether he'd rape someone (I've had sex with willing women and I don't rape people) or anything else. So why was it asked?
     Ind. counsel: Robert Ray let Clinton off easy. - (marlowe) - (19)
         That explains the massive public uprising. - (Brandioch) - (17)
             ROFL! great title -NT - (boxley)
             You seem to forget the venue - (wharris2) - (15)
                 Nope. - (Brandioch) - (14)
                     Disagree with your logic - (Simon_Jester) - (13)
                         I don't see the disagreement. - (Brandioch) - (10)
                             We're arguing 2 different forms of attack, possibly... - (Simon_Jester) - (2)
                                 Crimes vs Politics. - (Brandioch) - (1)
                                     Okay...we're in agreement.. - (Simon_Jester)
                             My $0.02 - (rsf) - (6)
                                 Hmmmm. - (Brandioch) - (5)
                                     Re: Hmmmm. - (rsf) - (4)
                                         Different world views. - (Brandioch) - (3)
                                             Re: Different world views. - (wharris2) - (2)
                                                 That's not true either... - (Simon_Jester)
                                                 That's what I meant about "character". - (Brandioch)
                         Going easy on Ken Lay? - (marlowe) - (1)
                             That's right.... stall. -NT - (Simon_Jester)
         I wonder...who's going to let Robert Ray off easy.... - (Simon_Jester)

Dead people voting?
53 ms