SC Govenor admits to affair.......Argentina trip.

Lucas McCain wrote:

It wasn't just the lies, but the numerous law suits against him, and his questionable legal defense fund, and the time out of office to be in court, etc..

The republicans spent more time and money on that little witch hunt then they did on Hurricane Katrina. It was blown totally out of proportion (no pun intended) and the cost was astronomical. I certainly didn't want my tax dollars going towards such a stupid investigation that in the end didn't change anything. It was just a republican witch hunt that hurt the American people in the wallet more than it hurt anything else. Bill Clinton surely isn't the first president to cheat on his wife nor will he be the last. Bill was just the one who got caught with his pants down.

Lucas McCain wrote:

Not more than a reach as Sanford being MIA as you stated.. He didn't just disappear, he just lied about his whereabouts..

So, you think that his staff knew where he was? I didn't realize that was what he had been saying. So, his staff lied, too?

Annie Oakley wrote:

My problem with Clinton's affair (if memory serves correct) was that he lied under oath about it - also known as perjury. He also urged Lewinsky to lie about it under oath - obstruction of justice. So there is where my problem with Clinton lies. Again I think I have my facts straight, but his cigar days were a while ago.

Remind me of WHY it became an issue that warranted being asked about under oath?[/quote]

I don't remember why the questions were pertinent to his testimony but neither Clinton nor his defense attorney challenged the question and neither did the judge so in some way shape or form it must have be related to the testimony that was going on in that case.

Clinton must have known the question was coming and that the judge would allow it since he encouraged Lewinsky to lie under oath also so in some way shape or form the question must have been warranted.

Annie Oakley wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

Not more than a reach as Sanford being MIA as you stated.. He didn't just disappear, he just lied about his whereabouts..

So, you think that his staff knew where he was? I didn't realize that was what he had been saying. So, his staff lied, too?

Annie...All that accounts I have read said his staff had no idea where he was. They were as clueless as everyone else. At least that is what is being said. Who really knows the truth on that issue. I guess it's a good thing something horrible didn't happen while he was away on his tryst.

Annie Oakley wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

Not more than a reach as Sanford being MIA as you stated.. He didn't just disappear, he just lied about his whereabouts..

So, you think that his staff knew where he was? I didn't realize that was what he had been saying. So, his staff lied, too?

Anyone else have anything on this? (Thanks, gringa.)

His staff knew he was taking a few days off.. Not sure, but I think he told them he would be hiking in the mountains somewhere but instead went to Argentina.. Big mistake.. Regardless what happened or who knows what, he should resign..

Lucas McCain wrote:

His staff knew he was taking a few days off.. Not sure, but I think he told them he would be hiking in the mountains somewhere but instead went to Argentina.. Big mistake.. Regardless what happened or who knows what, he should resign..

What is your definition of MIA then? This seems like a classic case to me. He's supposed to be somewhere and isn't...for five days.

He wasn't on duty... He was on leave... Just lied about where he was... Don't matter much, he was wrong... My definition would be if he was scheduled for duty and wasn't there would be worse... It wasn't like a big man hunt for him was on...

Isn't a governor similar to a president and must be available, even when on leave?

Yep..

That's my only beef with him. Go be in Argentina with your...new love. Just be truthful about where you are. The people that elected you deserve to feel secure in that you are in control of their state.

^ Agreed..

Everyone make sure to take a look at the new "sticky" posted at the top of the political forum. Thanks.

So the man had an affair. No big deal in my eyes, but I do think that he should be charged with dereliction of duty for leaving his state unattended to for a week, regardless the reasons. Either he lied to his staff about where he was or his staff lied for him. I've yet to hear of any of his staff being fired.

Geronimo wrote:

So the man had an affair. No big deal in my eyes, but I do think that he should be charged with dereliction of duty for leaving his state unattended to for a week, regardless the reasons. Either he lied to his staff about where he was or his staff lied for him. I've yet to hear of any of his staff being fired.

Yes, he needs to be investigated. Leaving your post when you have such responsibility could have put his state at extreme risk. He should be asked to step down for that reason alone.