That is debatable.
Well Weimar pled guilty and is in the process of ratting out all his corrupt buddies. But are they saying there are show trials? Hell Yes! That has been the mantra since the day Stevens was found guilty until now. Republicans screaming at the top of thier lungs that Stevens didnt get a trial of his peers. Among even worse things.
Enough excuses to make the vote very close considering Stevens and Young winning easily.
Really? I don't see anyone here saying it was a show trial. I haven't met any republicans saying it's a show trial.
On the other hand, I could list off a dozen names of those who after seeing the felonies committed by Clinton, still claimed it was all fabricated.
I have yet to meet a democrat that thinks a democrat convicted of something, should be removed. They always have some lame excuse. You can't prove that Kennedy really ... blaw blaw blaw killed under age blaw blaw found at the bottom of the river blaw blaw. There's always some "vast right wing conspiracy" involved.
The only show trial involved that I can see, was the Palin thing. That was obviously bogus. I read through that twice because I couldn't figure out on what basis they accused her. Unsurprisingly, as soon as people a bit less bias reviewed it, they threw out the prior stupidity.
So lying about an otherwise private matter, means no morals and values, whereas collectively taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes, those morals and values are left in tact?
Oddly, your post here proves exactly what I'm talking about. You made my whole case for me. Show me one republican here on this forum who is saying taking bribes and such is really not wrong, it's a vast left-wing conspiracy? You can't. But here you are making excuses for previous felony. It's a private matter... yes yes of course. Case and point!
Obstruction of justice is not a private matter. Witness tampering, is not a private matter. Lying under oath for any reason, is not a private matter. Basically... if it is considered a felony under the law, it's not a private matter.
Maybe I should repost the Starr Report again. I don't understand how people can have facts and evidence of felonies displayed publicly, and call it a private matter.
Question, are you in favor of women being abused? If your wife worked some place, and the owner abused her and sexually harassed her, would you say it's just a private matter and he shouldn't be sued or required to testify on it? Just curious since that's effectively what your saying about Paula Jones.