Reply #210: Oh, yes you did. You're being disingenuous to try to weasel out of it now. [View All]

Your entire OP was about Congress. You NEVER said anything in your OP about "investigations in general" (which you've now later come up with to facetiously include a criminal trial against the Watergate burglars which had absolutely nothing to do with Nixon or Congress or the White House). You compared our current Congress to past Congresses and in the one I've focused on, Watergate, you couldn't be more wrong in your points.

You falsely rewrote the history of Watergate in your OP, and now you're falsely trying to rewrite the points you made about Congress in your OP.

I don't see any point in continuing discussions with people who behave in that manner.

I've said more than enough to correct you and point out how wrong your points are when it comes to the Nixon/Watergate issues. If I knew as much about your other examples (Reagan, Clinton, etc.) as I do about the Watergate affair, I would undoubtedly rip those points of your to shreds as well with the real facts but I'm not the kind of person that goes around lecturing people about how ignorant they are when I don't know what I'm talking about. Hopefully, some of that kind of good sense humility may rub off on you someday and you'll learn to stop putting up posts like your OP in this thread. I get the impression you're young enough to still learn from experience and aging. Someday.

Good luck on that journey.