funny thing about Jeb! business dealings

[Dawg]

Really? Could you name a couple of the convicted associates?

easily:

http://www.gargaro.com/clintonconvicts.html
4th addiction

need more________________________?

quite a legacy the C's have:

http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

record breaking legacy

 

[Dawg]

The Clintons haven't been "convicted" of a godamned thing, since Bill started running for the presidency. Frankly, I think that's why they've been given to "misplaying" some of these Fox/GOP attacks over the years. They know they aren't guilty and they've assumed that's good enough.

In any case, I don't give a shit what the ODS-ers, Clinton-haters, and other assorted effluent think. My problem is with those who should know better, but appear to've fallen for the Fox/GOP's mission to flood the Clintons with so many charges, that the simpler will believe that they must be up to at least something bad.

Neither Sanders nor Warren are going to be on the 11/16 ballot. Get over yourselves.

yet, so many of their associates have:

http://www.gargaro.com/clintonconvicts.html

and even though you goddamned, Slick was impeached, you forget that?

 

[Dawg]

Really? Could you name a couple of the convicted associates?

LOL should have known you would like that link since it sank your row boat

 

[Caroljo]

you're doing the same as Mike....trying to change the subject from Jeb! who had 5 associates convicted of crimes.
what did Jeb! say? he gave the Sgt Schultz reply, "I know nothing." LOL

I don't really care what Jeb! says....I don't plan on voting for him.

 

[Caroljo]

1. From what I remember, and certainly from my own posts....if I am responding to a post about how Obama is the worst president ever it invites a comparison to the guy I think actually is the worst ever....and you guys, instead of responding to the facts in my post...simply dismiss it as "Boooooooshh".
2. I have brought up the hypocrisy from the right when they criticized Obama for Benghazi, but said nothing about the 13 or 14 attacks on embassies or consulates while "W" was in charge.....again "BOOOOOOSSHH" from you guys.

You've come to the thread with "what about Clinton" and no facts.....

Bush never made up lies about any embassy attacks while he was in office. BIG difference.

 

[Caroljo]

easily:

http://www.gargaro.com/clintonconvicts.html
4th addiction

need more________________________?

quite a legacy the C's have:

http://prorev.com/legacy.htm

record breaking legacy

Her brother in law (BILL'S BROTHER?) was convicted of drug trafficking??
Then there's....
Felony convictions?
Loan Fraud??
Bank Fraud??
Illegal campaign contributions??
Money laundering???
Perjury?
Tax Faud??

Wow...and that's not covering everything! How the hell can she even run for President???

 

[JuliefromOhio]

Bush never made up lies about any embassy attacks while he was in office. BIG difference.

there were no lies about embassy attacks.
now Bush DID made up lies about WMD so he could invade Iraq and end up with 4,000+ troops dead, countless maimed, not to mention all those innocent dead Iraqis.

 

[Caroljo]

there were no lies about embassy attacks.
now Bush DID made up lies about WMD so he could invade Iraq and end up with 4,000+ troops dead, countless maimed, not to mention all those innocent dead Iraqis.

I responded to Middleview about his comment on the attacks when Bush was President....do you have a rebuttal on that? Did Bush make up lies about those Embassies that were attacked? THAT is what the conversation was about. It had nothing to do with your rant.

 

[middleview]

Bush never made up lies about any embassy attacks while he was in office. BIG difference.

1. There had been attacks in over a dozen cities on the same day as the attack in Benghazi and those attacks on the embassies in Cairo and other cities had clearly been about the video.
2. AP, Al Jazeera and others were reporting there had been a demonstration before the attack.
3. Libyan government officials were saying the attack had been related to the video.

I guess all those people were lying as well.....
Read this...
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/20129112108737726.html

Yes...the BIG difference was about 4,500 American lives and $3 trillion dollars. Bush lied but you don't seem to mind. The Obama administration was wrong and you call it a lie...revisit their statements...."Our initial information"....later corrected.

 

[Caroljo]

1. There had been attacks in over a dozen cities on the same day as the attack in Benghazi and those attacks on the embassies in Cairo and other cities had clearly been about the video.
2. AP, Al Jazeera and others were reporting there had been a demonstration before the attack.
3. Libyan government officials were saying the attack had been related to the video.

I guess all those people were lying as well.....
Read this...
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/20129112108737726.html

Yes...the BIG difference was about 4,500 American lives and $3 trillion dollars. Bush lied but you don't seem to mind. The Obama administration was wrong and you call it a lie...revisit their statements...."Our initial information"....later corrected.

Yes, I believe they were lying. More proof has come out....it's not over yet. You actually believe Aljazeera??????? It's been proven that video had NOTHING to do with it and there was no protest! Even your hero Kerry stated that...and it's been proven that Rice lied for WEEKS about the video. Obama AND Clinton knew the first day it had NOTHING to do with a video, and that there had been NO protests. This is going to eventually hang them.

 

[middleview]

Yes, I believe they were lying. More proof has come out....it's not over yet. You actually believe Aljazeera??????? It's been proven that video had NOTHING to do with it and there was no protest! Even your hero Kerry stated that...and it's been proven that Rice lied for WEEKS about the video. Obama AND Clinton knew the first day it had NOTHING to do with a video, and that there had been NO protests. This is going to eventually hang them.

1. There is no motive to lie.
2. You have numerous sources claiming that there was a demonstration in the day or days after the attack.
3. There had been attacks on US embassies and consulates in over a dozen cities because of the video.

In the end does the video matter more than the attack itself...because that is the impression you give. You don't care about the four dead Americans, just like you don't really care about the 4,500 dead Americans who were sent to Iraq based on a lie.....

So within a few days the administrations says "No, it was a planned attack" and you still think it had something to do with attempting to hide something from the voters.

 

[fairsheet]

1. There is no motive to lie.
2. You have numerous sources claiming that there was a demonstration in the day or days after the attack.
3. There had been attacks on US embassies and consulates in over a dozen cities because of the video.

In the end does the video matter more than the attack itself...because that is the impression you give. You don't care about the four dead Americans, just like you don't really care about the 4,500 dead Americans who were sent to Iraq based on a lie.....

So within a few days the administrations says "No, it was a planned attack" and you still think it had something to do with attempting to hide something from the voters.

Prior to the '12 election, Fox had convinced its saps that the Obama Administration was covering up the fact that some terra-ism was going down and that they weren't all over it. You have to have bought into that silliness, in order for Benghazi-gate to make any sense to you.

 

[middleview]

Prior to the '12 election, Fox had convinced its saps that the Obama Administration was covering up the fact that some terra-ism was going down and that they weren't all over it. You have to have bought into that silliness, in order for Benghazi-gate to make any sense to you.

I know. Somehow the early September attack was supposed to give Romney the White House and Obama/Clinton lies robbed him....poor, poor Mutt. The fact is that the right wing can't accept that Obama won...there had to be more to it....he cheated...he lied that Al Qaeda was on the run...look they got a hundred guys to attack us in Benghazi.

So the revelation that it was a Sunni group in Libya that had declared allegiance to Al Qaeda in late September is ignored in the GOP narrative....because they want to keep up the 'He didn't win...he cheated" nonsense.....

 

[fairsheet]

I know. Somehow the early September attack was supposed to give Romney the White House and Obama/Clinton lies robbed him....poor, poor Mutt. The fact is that the right wing can't accept that Obama won...there had to be more to it....he cheated...he lied that Al Qaeda was on the run...look they got a hundred guys to attack us in Benghazi.

So the revelation that it was a Sunni group in Libya that had declared allegiance to Al Qaeda in late September is ignored in the GOP narrative....because they want to keep up the 'He didn't win...he cheated" nonsense.....

The redloons were REALLY bought into that angle about the Obamans covering up the islamo-fascist scourge though. They were more bought into it than reasonable people might imagine. That's why this Benghazi thing has been able to drag out so far past anything even remotely rational.

 

[Caroljo]

1. There is no motive to lie.
2. You have numerous sources claiming that there was a demonstration in the day or days after the attack.
3. There had been attacks on US embassies and consulates in over a dozen cities because of the video.

In the end does the video matter more than the attack itself...because that is the impression you give. You don't care about the four dead Americans, just like you don't really care about the 4,500 dead Americans who were sent to Iraq based on a lie.....

So within a few days the administrations says "No, it was a planned attack" and you still think it had something to do with attempting to hide something from the voters.

The video matters because it was a LIE that they kept repeating for week, even after they knew the truth! Because you will only believe what you want to...you will never accept that they lied to us. You believe anything they tell you.

• There were no protesters at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack, even though Obama and others repeatedly said the attackers joined an angry mob that had formed in opposition to the anti-Muslim film that had triggered protests in Egypt and elsewhere. The State Department disclosed this fact Oct. 9 — nearly a month after the attack.
• Libya President Mohamed Magariaf insisted on Sept. 16 — five days after the attack — that it was a planned terrorist attack, but administration officials continued for days later to say there was no evidence of a planned attack.

Read the rest here.....
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

• 
  
  
  

 

[middleview]

The video matters because it was a LIE that they kept repeating for week, even after they knew the truth! Because you will only believe what you want to...you will never accept that they lied to us. You believe anything they tell you.

• There were no protesters at the Benghazi consulate prior to the attack, even though Obama and others repeatedly said the attackers joined an angry mob that had formed in opposition to the anti-Muslim film that had triggered protests in Egypt and elsewhere. The State Department disclosed this fact Oct. 9 — nearly a month after the attack.
• Libya President Mohamed Magariaf insisted on Sept. 16 — five days after the attack — that it was a planned terrorist attack, but administration officials continued for days later to say there was no evidence of a planned attack.

Read the rest here.....
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

• 
  
  

So the fact check article admits that the administration said on Sept 19th that it was a planned attack.

Obama called it an act of terrorism the day after the attack.

I say that there was information both from the media and the Libyan government that said there was a demonstration and that calling it that was simply a mistake that was corrected within a few days.

What was to be gained by putting the movie in as a motivation for the attack if they knew it wasn't?