Actually bad question. There is nothing being asked, just trying to make a point by stretching the truth yourselves.Originally posted by: moshquerade
good question.Originally posted by: piasabird
Why does the President Clinton need to certify that a terrorist with an indictment from a US Court as a terrorist, is a terrorist. Clinton is a lawyer and an expert liar. Why would anyone believe anything President Clinton had to say?
Clinton did not need to certify that a terrorist is a terrorist. He needed to certify that a terrorist was in a position to be killed.
And Clinton is no more of an expert liar than either of you. He lied about sex (although based on the ground rules that he understood, he did not lie about it in court), he got caught at it, and he admitted it was a weak and stupid thing to do.