No actually there is zero difference. Lying under oath is the crime. Jesus Christ LOL
the impeachment was solely about the felony perjury.
Don't you get it yet? Nothing is a crime when the Democrats do it. NOTHING.
Oh God, it's the same bullshit dualism again, eh? Since I recognize a clear distinction in context between the two cases, I must be for one side, no?
Clinton did perjure himself, yes, and should have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That decision was yet another shameful cases of not holding our leader in the highest office accountable.
And yet, it was about a blowjob, and not an international extortion scheme by the POTUS, his staff and mobsters. A scheme that you guys staunchly pretend didn't happen. Yet you screech of partisanship to me.
Let us talk about breaking the law, shall we?
Since you guys are always so confident, yet have failed, even once, to address these questions in the least bit seriously or coherently, I ask again:
If the President and his staff didn't engage in the extortion/bribery scheme with the Ukrainians, why don't they release any and all information they have that clears this situation up? The President got impeached over this, and at no point did they release any information to counter the steady stream of facts, leaked or FOIA released documents, audio testimonies from involved parties and sworn statements from officials directly implicated in the scheme.
Also, why doesn't the President allow a single one of his involved staffers like Mulvaney, Pompeo, Pence or others testify and clear this up? You guys sound so confident in insisting this is a coup and a sham, surely it couldn't be easy for the gang who couldn't piss straight in the White House, no?
