General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDid Scott Walker Lie Under Oath to Congress?
John Nichols The Nation
When Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker met with a billionaire campaign donor a month before he launched his attack on the collective-bargaining rights of public-sector workers and public-school teachers, he engaged in a detailed discussion about undermining unions as part of a broader strategy of strengthening the position of his Republican party.
After he initiated those attacks, Governor Walker testified under oath to a Congressional committee. He was asked during the April 2011 hearing to specifically address the question of whether he set out to weaken unionswhich traditionally back Democrats and which are expected to play a major role in President Obamas 2012 re-election campaignfor political purposes. Walker replied: Its not about that for me.
During the same hearing, Walker was asked whether he ever had a conversation with respect to your actions in Wisconsin and using them to punish members of the opposition party and their [union] donor base?
Walker replied, not once but twice, that the answer was no.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167881/did-scott-walker-lie-under-oath-congress
catbyte
(34,382 posts)with that Crook Extraordinaire, Darrell Issa, in charge of things.
Diane
Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Leo, Sophie, Taz & Nigel, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division
"We ride inside--HISS!
Bake
(21,977 posts)There it is.
Name ONE, just one, ANY ONE Repub who isn't a liar. I double-dog dare you.
Bake
benld74
(9,904 posts)11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)lastlib
(23,225 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)But there's apparently something different now. Oh, what could it possibly be???
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)And it would if YOU did it!
hughee99
(16,113 posts)on point
(2,506 posts)This is one of those myths that rose up from repetition and intentional mis-characterization by the pukes, but never actually happened.
It would be good to stamp this out if possible to stop the pukes from continually lying about history.
Clinton was asked while on the stand, did he have sex with Monica?
Like the good lawyer he is, he asked THEM to define it. They did, and according to THEIR definition provided, he answered TRUTHFULLY that he did not.
This has been taken out of context to say he lied on the stand by saying he did not have sex with Monica, when he answered their question as they framed it truthfully.
Now parsing of words and all that, but HE NEVER LIED!
Pass it on and help kill off this malignant myth.
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)The repukes have been twisting the truth to death and serving up self serving bullshit, disguised as the"Truth" to fill the void, since Ivy Lee showed them how to infect people's minds with, mass media based lies in the 20s and 30s.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)"Did you have sex with her?"
I answered, "no. Well, she did give me a blowjob, but we didn't have sex."
And not one person thought that answer was odd. And in my case we really did use the word "sex". In Clinton's case they did not. They said "sexual relations" which would have definitely required a definition.
For that matter the judge rejected the GOP's definition the first time they proposed it and asked them to come back in a couple days with a better one. When the GOP returned with the same definition the judge demured and let them continue. The GOP obviously knew that Clinton could honestly deny "sexual relations" and would. But knew it was vague enough that they could fool a lot of the American public.
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)To make it clear, I do not believe he should have been impeached and I do not think that Ken Starr or his staff deserved the time of day if any of them had asked for it.
However, Clinton volunteered the remark after a press conference, "I did not have sex with that woman." At that point, he was lying to me. To me, and to most people, blow job is a subset of sex.
At the presser, Clinton should have said nothing unless asked and, if asked, could have said that he had no comment under the advice of an attorney (even if the attorney was his own better judgment at the spur of the moment).
My own reaction to that (muttering to the TV set) was, "Why did you just say that? You're lying and just asking for trouble."
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)that pesky federal case in milwaukee has another person that was granted immunity....
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,357 posts)Thanks for the thread, Ellipsis.
madinmaryland
(64,932 posts)then Harry Reid will feign outrage, and then keep his powder dry.
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)will gladly pay next Tuesday for a hamburger today.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)gop!
AllyCat
(16,187 posts)He's an evil, heartless dreadful Governor and needs to be out of our state house now.
hue
(4,949 posts)CanonRay
(14,101 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)Seriously, it is a family tradition in the GOP! It is a core value!
Hey, these are people who tell their children there really is a Santa Claus, and God too!
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)You should see the email chain letters they put out and pass along to everyone else and 10 out of 10 they are pure lies. I get so tired of debunking them. I think they pass them on and know full well they are nothing but lies and propaganda.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)They train their children to believe lies with Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Boogy Man, et.al.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)... but it WAS about that for the Kochs.
For Snotty, it was about THE MONEY he was going to get from them to carry out their wishes.
malaise
(268,986 posts)Duh!!