Looks like ami isnt satisfied with just misconstruing facts. Now he wants to make them up as he goes along like his fellow idiot, Bushenfuehrer
Here is the House's Congressional Record page for June 8th, 1999: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=1999_record&page=H3774&position=all
You will note that David Vitter is sworn in on this day.
Bill Clinton was impeached by the House on December 19th, 1998 and was acquitted of the charges by the Senate on February 12th, 1999.
Last time I checked, June 8th, 1999 came after both December 19th, 1998 and February 12th, 1999.
Only person around here that is making up facts is Ms. Knuttia.
His swearing in hasn't got a goddamned thing to do with his writing the oped which appeared in 1998, you strawman-constrcuting bullshit artist, and you fucking know it.
He condemned Clinton and called for his impeachment BEFORE Clinton was actually impeached.
And in an October 29, 1998, opinion piece for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Vitter took issue with a previous article, written by two law professors who had argued that impeachment "is a process of removing a president from office who can no longer effectively govern; it is not about punishment." Given that Clinton was still a capable chief executive, they had maintained, impeachment was not in order.
Vitter, a graduate of Harvard University and Tulane law school and a Rhodes scholar, was aghast at this amoral position. He blasted the law professors for criticizing those congressional Republicans pushing for Clinton's impeachment. Their argument that impeachment is "not primarily about right and wrong or moral fitness to govern," he wrote, was utterly wrongheaded. He continued:
Some current polls may suggest that people are turned off by the whole Clinton mess and don't care -- because the stock market is good, the Clinton spin machine is even better or other reasons. But that doesn't answer the question of whether President Clinton should be impeached and removed from office because he is morally unfit to govern.
The writings of the Founding Fathers are very instructive on this issue. They are not cast in terms of political effectiveness at all but in terms of right and wrong -- moral fitness. Hamilton writes in the Federalists Papers
(No. 65) that impeachable offenses are those that "proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust."
GOD DAMNIT, just admit you're fucking wrong.
http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2007/07/a_blast_from_vi.php
