Hacker News Reader

Comment by jebblue | Hacker News Reader

Including the stuff that took place in Iraq during the 8 year reign of Clinton. Oh, his wife was on the legal team that blew Watergate out of proportion forcing a fine and honorable president to leave office on his own accord. Bill, her husband didn't leave even after getting caught undermining the US justice system. He just rode it out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_and_conservatism_in_...

"In 1974 she was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal.[52] Under the guidance of Chief Counsel John Doar and senior member Bernard Nussbaum,[35] Rodham helped research procedures of impeachment and the historical grounds and standards for impeachment.[52] The committee's work culminated in the resignation of President Richard Nixon in August 1974."

View on HN

  | honorable president to leave office on his
  | own accord

I'm not sure if this is a troll, or some form of satire... Calling Nixon on "honorable President" in a discussion of an article about hard evidence that he sabotaged peace talks for his own personal gain?

  | undermining the US justice system

Now who's blowing things out of proportion? He lied about having an affair. He did so under oath, so it's perjury. Is this wrong? Yes. Is this "undermining the US justice system?" Not really. Committing a crime is not a undermining the justice system, no matter how much you might dislike the person.

Actually he walked a semantic tightrope in which he chose to define "sexual relations" as sexual intercourse and the public and congress disagreed. The larger point was that he was pursued over a personal matter by a special prosecutor who had spent tens of millions on one or another fishing expedition and turned up nothing of consequence.

I can't believe you made it from Nixon to Hillary Clinton in a mere three or so steps. We could call it the reductio ad hilarium.

It's a tangent, but, one of the things apparent sometimes when politics is discussed is that reductio ad absurdum is absolutely not guaranteed to work as an argument technique. It depends on everyone involved being able to recognize the absurd.

Go back to /r/politics and leave HN to grownups.

Do you disagree or agree with me? Your comment sounds more like flamebait rather that substantive commentary.

You're comparing Monicagate to Watergate? Nice.

I'm comparing undermining the US justice system, one president stepped down, the other just hung around. Or do you think that doing the right thing after doing the wrong thing is only something that Republicans should do?

The US justice system is pretty weak if it relies on the President to step down. Is this what you are suggesting?

False equivalency is a major logical fallacy. If you aren't trolling you have some damage to repair in your brain.

So you feel you're justified in attacking me personally because you disagree with me?

Lying about having an affair (even while under oath) is hardly "undermining the US justice system".

Nixon committed treason, for crying out loud. Before he was elected, even.

I think your missing the point that was being made. There are different rights for democrats, they have it so easy. /s

No, I got the point he was trying to make. His point is incorrect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com