,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
This is either intentionally dishonest or ignorant. The crimes were perjury and obstruction. The evidence for each were significant, but spin like this and partisan support benefited BC. Clinton lied, tried to bribe witnesses, and tried to convince others to lie under oath.
Trying to portray it as removal over a bj gives away the game because it shows you don’t actually care about process crimes like obstruction. And yet you are arguing for Trump to be impeached over those same process crimes (only w evidence that is less clear).
I’m open to arguments that attempted obstruction is sufficient for impeachment, but not from hacks who want to dismiss it and perjury in Clinton’s case.
P.s it’s interesting to see how even in the #MeToo era with a bunch of people on the left conceding they should have taken the allegations against Clinton more seriously, you still have attempts by WaPo writers to suggest concern over his abuse amounted to just Puritan scolding.
