The Goopers will wail like banshees about the Democrats, but they sure can't beat any political party for corruption. In that, they are NUMBER 1!
| ADMINISTRATION | PARTY |
YEARS IN
OFFICE
|
CRIMINAL
INDICTMENTS
|
CRIMINAL
CONVICTIONS
|
PRISON
SENTENCES
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BARACK OBAMA | Democratic | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GEORGE W. BUSH | Republican | 8 | 16 | 16 | 9 |
| BILL CLINTON | Democratic | 8 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| GEORGE H. W. BUSH | Republican | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| RONALD REAGAN | Republican | 8 | 26 | 16 | 8 |
| JIMMY CARTER | Democratic | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| GERALD FORD | Republican | 2.4 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| RICHARD NIXON | Republican | 5.6 | 76 | 55 | 15 |
16 comments:
It’s no contest.
Republicans 120 criminal indictments
Democrats 3 criminal indictments
Republicans 89 criminal convictions
Democrats 1 criminal conviction
Republicans talk law and order
Democrats live law and order
Ford is looking pretty good isn't he?
A man too good to be a GOP President.
Interesting statistics but one of those Presidents was found guilty and voted to impeach, if you guessed BJC you guessed correctly. If you talk about corruption look no further than the DNC.
Think tRump can top Nixon?
Scud , Clinton was NOT found guilty. Look up the definition of "impeach." You're confused. We are talking about Democratic vs. republican presidential administrations. Your comment is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the fact that GOP administrations are far more corrupt than the Democrats. FACT.
Think of impeachment as an indictment by the House skudrunner and removal by the Senate as being found guilty, ie a conviction.
Does that help skudrunner?
Yes, an impeachment is like an indictment.
Republican administrations have had 3900% more criminal indictments and 8800% more criminal convictions than Democratic administrations.
You tell me which party is the party of corruption!
Indictment does not mean found guilty. That is like being sued, you can sue anyone for anything and out legal system punished the innocent because they have to pay their legal bill.
You have yet to accept that All politicians are crooks who only care about themselves. When was the last time a politician too a stance because it was the right thing to do and not dictated by their party. Look at Madam Botox who says the tax cuts are bad for the American people and then admitted she had not seen the bill yet.
WTF is your point skudrunner? That all politicians are supported by special interests and therefore are somewhat beholden to them? If so their is some truth to that.
However, the data clearly shows which party is the most corrupt. Or put another way has more corrupt members in places of influence and authority.
Facts are facts and the data is there to support them skudrunner. Why continue to push foolishness?
Well Skud, as to your question, few Dems wanted Obama to deal with health care early in his admin, but the acquiesced because he wanted it. It was 100% what he believed the "right thing to do" even though his party did not support it.
As for Pelosi, one need not see a bill, or even read it, to speak to the fact tax cuts in general when the deficit is growing, are bad.
Now when it is time to vote, of course people should see, read and understand the bills they are voting on.
Your view, that all politicians are crooks, is one that smacks of more cynicism than even I can muster on a regular basis. Are there no honorable politicians? I believe there are, but I would say I seem to be in a minority with that view.
Jerry, blinders really serve their purpose. What is troubling are the great number of seemingly intelligent folks who choose to willfully put them on themselves.
Astounding really.
If we go back in history, which is fair, the numbers tend to even out. Then there are the unconstitutional acts presidents have taken which never saw the justice of a courtroom. In the last 100 years the Republicans have this distinction, by far.
LBJ was just as guilty of lies about the Gulf of Ton-kin as Bush was about the mushroom clouds from Iraq. Hopefully that tells us our bureaucratic justice systems are working better than they used to.
And today we learn, after yet another mass shooting here in the US, that our Sec of Commerce is literally in business with the son in law of Vladimir Putin. And of course, he forgot to mention this on his conflict of interest forms.
Once again, for folks like Skud and the crowd at the Mother Ship... if this was a cabinet secretary under Bush, Clinton or Obama, would you have dismissed it as a nothing burger, like you will under Pres Trump?
Blinders work nicely for the Trumpian Republicans and the alt-right cons.
Dave, You make no sense with your last statement. Also what does a mass shooting have to do with Putin?
Politicians lie, that is the only thing they are good at and until we hold them accountable they will continue. I agree with you on your pelosi comment. I doubt she has read a bill in the last decade because we know she didn't read the disastrous obamacare bill, but to her credit neither did anyone else.
Makes perfect sense if you read it and give any thought to it skudrunner. IMNHO anyway.
Post a Comment