A question for my Democrat friends

[kaz]

So they didn't know Pearl Harbor was pre-planned until at least the next day? The scale and organization of the attack were that the retired generals all knew it was pre-planned to pull that off. Yet Obama, Rice and Clinton were saying a week and a half later it wasn't

I said there was no way to know it was pre planned that day you bring up a military strike as a comparison?

You lose.

It was a military strike, moron. You lose. That's the whole point. You know being a k-k-klown you're supposed to act like an idiot, not actually be one

You keep saying that but can't back it up

Back what up? You still don't know it was a large scale coordinated attack? Even the Obama administration gave up after a week and a half of lying about it. You are a k-k-klown, that's for sure

You cant prove that everyone knew it was cooridinated. You keep saying it but when pointed out there is no way to know that you brought up Pearl Harbor.

Even the corrupt Obama administration finally conceded it was a planned attack. It's funny how you continue to suck their balls for their lies even after they admitted what they said wasn't true

 

[Juan de Fuca]

That was the opinion of what the liberal media thinks the report said. Show where the report said that.

And it still doesn't contradict that Obama, Rice and Clinton lied, which I sure would call wrongdoing and it doesn't justify Obama's obstruction

None of the investigations have come up with an iota of wrongdoing. Eight separate investigations, 33 hearings and nothing. Not a single referral to the DOJ, nothing.

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

Clearly you are in denial. The House Select Committee on Intelligence was the sixth report that came to the same conclusions

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people. http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf

 

[LoneLaugher]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

What are you referring to? Can we address the lies first. Which three are the most offensive to you?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I said there was no way to know it was pre planned that day you bring up a military strike as a comparison?

You lose.

It was a military strike, moron. You lose. That's the whole point. You know being a k-k-klown you're supposed to act like an idiot, not actually be one

You keep saying that but can't back it up

Back what up? You still don't know it was a large scale coordinated attack? Even the Obama administration gave up after a week and a half of lying about it. You are a k-k-klown, that's for sure

You cant prove that everyone knew it was cooridinated. You keep saying it but when pointed out there is no way to know that you brought up Pearl Harbor.

Even the corrupt Obama administration finally conceded it was a planned attack. It's funny how you continue to suck their balls for their lies even after they admitted what they said wasn't true

I asked you how do you know everyone knew it was coordinated THAT DAY.

 

[kaz]

That was the opinion of what the liberal media thinks the report said. Show where the report said that.

And it still doesn't contradict that Obama, Rice and Clinton lied, which I sure would call wrongdoing and it doesn't justify Obama's obstruction

None of the investigations have come up with an iota of wrongdoing. Eight separate investigations, 33 hearings and nothing. Not a single referral to the DOJ, nothing.

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

Clearly you are in denial. The House Select Committee on Intelligence was the sixth report that came to the same conclusions

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people. http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf

What a load of crap, they were still saying it a week and a half later

 

[kaz]

It was a military strike, moron. You lose. That's the whole point. You know being a k-k-klown you're supposed to act like an idiot, not actually be one

You keep saying that but can't back it up

Back what up? You still don't know it was a large scale coordinated attack? Even the Obama administration gave up after a week and a half of lying about it. You are a k-k-klown, that's for sure

You cant prove that everyone knew it was cooridinated. You keep saying it but when pointed out there is no way to know that you brought up Pearl Harbor.

Even the corrupt Obama administration finally conceded it was a planned attack. It's funny how you continue to suck their balls for their lies even after they admitted what they said wasn't true

I asked you how do you know everyone knew it was coordinated THAT DAY.

How did they know Pearl Harbor was a coordinated attack THAT DAY?

 

[ClosedCaption]

You keep saying that but can't back it up

Back what up? You still don't know it was a large scale coordinated attack? Even the Obama administration gave up after a week and a half of lying about it. You are a k-k-klown, that's for sure

You cant prove that everyone knew it was cooridinated. You keep saying it but when pointed out there is no way to know that you brought up Pearl Harbor.

Even the corrupt Obama administration finally conceded it was a planned attack. It's funny how you continue to suck their balls for their lies even after they admitted what they said wasn't true

I asked you how do you know everyone knew it was coordinated THAT DAY.

How did they know Pearl Harbor was a coordinated attack THAT DAY?

See? You dont know and cant explain it. Like I said, you keep saying things you cant prove

 

[Timmy]

None of the investigations have come up with an iota of wrongdoing. Eight separate investigations, 33 hearings and nothing. Not a single referral to the DOJ, nothing.

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

Clearly you are in denial. The House Select Committee on Intelligence was the sixth report that came to the same conclusions

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people. http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf

What a load of crap, they were still saying it a week and a half later

Just because they were wrong doesn't mean they lied . It was a surprise attack ! You act as if they knew everything instantly .

People thought the 911 anthrax attacks were done by alqueda . Turns out it wasn't .

So there is no proof of lying .

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

This fails as a straw man fallacy, and as such does not warrant any serious replies.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

That was the opinion of what the liberal media thinks the report said. Show where the report said that.

And it still doesn't contradict that Obama, Rice and Clinton lied, which I sure would call wrongdoing and it doesn't justify Obama's obstruction

None of the investigations have come up with an iota of wrongdoing. Eight separate investigations, 33 hearings and nothing. Not a single referral to the DOJ, nothing.

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

After a two year multiple investigation, If there weren't any criminal charges then I suggest you are getting worked up over nothing.

 

[Bassman007]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

I agree isn't it hysterical how Hillary did not vote for the Iraq war.......when history says different

 

[Bassman007]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

This fails as a straw man fallacy, and as such does not warrant any serious replies.

You fail at doing anything other than babbling about scarecrows...................

 

[NYcarbineer]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

You're a partisan hack trying to pretend you're not. Stop.

 

[BlindBoo]

Correct, I'm not interested in hearing from people who pretend that everything is on the up and up with this administration. If that means you need to stay out of the thread, then by all means do so.

Do you have details? And examples of how its like super egregious that rises to the level above political into criminal?

Sure I do, if you need to be spoon fed like a little baby bird b/c you are so blinded by your own partisan politics to see them for yourselves, but why would I bother since anyone who won't acknowledge these things without being told isn't going to read a post on a message board and say "yeah you are right, those were some lies an deception"

In other words, I totally had you in mind when I wrote about the kind of Democrat I didn't want to hear from in this thread. There are literally a million threads on this board where you can go pretend like Obama and other Democrats didn't do anything wrong.

Damn, I get all that when I ask what the hell you are talking about? Sheesh, nevermind then...

Alright, let's run a simple test.

The IRS obviously targeted conservative 501c(3) organizations . This is indisputable.

Now , I'll assume that you won't concede that someone high up in the Executive , perhaps even Obama himself, ordered the to do so. But would you at least concede that doing so was illegal, and that there is noway the IRS wouldn't have done so if they didn't believe they had the approval of the White House, if not the ACTUAL approval?

The articles on it said the IRS targeted them for extra scrutiny. It didn't mention any criminal activity. I'll agree it was right, I just don't know that it was illegal.

That's because the extra scrutiny is called verification. The IRS is required to verify a certain number of applications. In reality it was the way they picked applications for further verification. They focused their sample based on names such as "Tea Party" or "Patriot" when they should have used some kind of random generator. No group was denied their tax free status while the process was going on either.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

In this coming election there will be two candidates with the possibility of winning.

One Republican and one Democrat.

I choose between the two candidates- and I find Trump to have ore scandals, lies and deceptive tactics than Clinton.

I find that the Republican Party is more likely to engage in scandals, lies and deceptive tactics than the Democratic Party.

But yes- I agree with you- both parties are guilty of engaging in them.

By any objective measure, actual corruption (illegal/unethical conduct in return for personal benefit) has been far more common among Democrats than Republicans.

For example, the three most celebrated GOP "scandals" (Watergate, Iran-Contra and WMDs) did not involve any personal benefit to Nixon, Reagan or Bush. Compare those with the Clinton scandals, all of which involve personal benefit to the Clintons.

Oh please spare me your cherry picking.

There are no examples of the Clinton's being found guilty of anything that involved personal gain- despite years and years of Republicans attempt to prove such a thing.

Watergate was all about 'personal gain' for Nixon- he wanted to rig the election in his favor. And you amazing leave out Spiro Agnew

In 1973, Agnew was investigated by the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland on charges of extortion, tax fraud, bribery, and conspiracy. He was charged with having accepted bribes totaling more than $100,000 while holding office as Baltimore County Executive, Governor of Maryland, and Vice President. On October 10 that same year, Agnew was allowed to plead no contest to a single charge that he had failed to report $29,500 of income received in 1967, with the condition that he resign the office of Vice President.

Try again with that 'objective measure'- because all you have done is cite gossip and ignore Republican convictions.

Yeah, like RWNJ hero Ronnie RayGun. Doesn't get worse than Reagan.

 

[kaz]

Back what up? You still don't know it was a large scale coordinated attack? Even the Obama administration gave up after a week and a half of lying about it. You are a k-k-klown, that's for sure

You cant prove that everyone knew it was cooridinated. You keep saying it but when pointed out there is no way to know that you brought up Pearl Harbor.

Even the corrupt Obama administration finally conceded it was a planned attack. It's funny how you continue to suck their balls for their lies even after they admitted what they said wasn't true

I asked you how do you know everyone knew it was coordinated THAT DAY.

How did they know Pearl Harbor was a coordinated attack THAT DAY?

See? You dont know and cant explain it. Like I said, you keep saying things you cant prove

Even the Obama administration admitted it was a coordinated attack and they denied it a week and a half. I'm not proving water is wet just because you demand I do either. Your intellect is not in play, nothing would override the programming. But you do know one thing, you are a k-k-k-lown

 

[EriktheRed]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

In this coming election there will be two candidates with the possibility of winning.

One Republican and one Democrat.

I choose between the two candidates- and I find Trump to have ore scandals, lies and deceptive tactics than Clinton.

I find that the Republican Party is more likely to engage in scandals, lies and deceptive tactics than the Democratic Party.

But yes- I agree with you- both parties are guilty of engaging in them.

By any objective measure, actual corruption (illegal/unethical conduct in return for personal benefit) has been far more common among Democrats than Republicans.

For example, the three most celebrated GOP "scandals" (Watergate, Iran-Contra and WMDs) did not involve any personal benefit to Nixon, Reagan or Bush. Compare those with the Clinton scandals, all of which involve personal benefit to the Clintons.

Oh please spare me your cherry picking.

There are no examples of the Clinton's being found guilty of anything that involved personal gain- despite years and years of Republicans attempt to prove such a thing.

Watergate was all about 'personal gain' for Nixon- he wanted to rig the election in his favor. And you amazing leave out Spiro Agnew

In 1973, Agnew was investigated by the United States Attorney for the District of Maryland on charges of extortion, tax fraud, bribery, and conspiracy. He was charged with having accepted bribes totaling more than $100,000 while holding office as Baltimore County Executive, Governor of Maryland, and Vice President. On October 10 that same year, Agnew was allowed to plead no contest to a single charge that he had failed to report $29,500 of income received in 1967, with the condition that he resign the office of Vice President.

Try again with that 'objective measure'- because all you have done is cite gossip and ignore Republican convictions.

Yeah, like RWNJ hero Ronnie RayGun. Doesn't get worse than Reagan.

Oooooh, you did it now!

 

[kaz]

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

Clearly you are in denial. The House Select Committee on Intelligence was the sixth report that came to the same conclusions

In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people. http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi Report.pdf

What a load of crap, they were still saying it a week and a half later

Just because they were wrong doesn't mean they lied . It was a surprise attack ! You act as if they knew everything instantly .

People thought the 911 anthrax attacks were done by alqueda . Turns out it wasn't .

So there is no proof of lying .

Everyone else knew it, Timmy!

Obama wasn't very well connected, was he?

 

[kaz]

That was the opinion of what the liberal media thinks the report said. Show where the report said that.

And it still doesn't contradict that Obama, Rice and Clinton lied, which I sure would call wrongdoing and it doesn't justify Obama's obstruction

None of the investigations have come up with an iota of wrongdoing. Eight separate investigations, 33 hearings and nothing. Not a single referral to the DOJ, nothing.

Begging the question, you still aren't responding to my points, just repeating your inane claim

What part of nothing don't you understand?

What part of "wrongdoing" don't you understand? That there weren't criminal charges does not equate with there was no wrongdoing when we know there was wrongdoing. They LIED. That is wrongdoing regardless of whether or not there was an indictable offense. And there was obstruction through the process and, obstruction is wrongdoing regardless of whether they could indict them for it or not

After a two year multiple investigation, If there weren't any criminal charges then I suggest you are getting worked up over nothing.

Nope, the administration being caught lying and obstructing justice should always be investigated. You agree, but only when a Republican is involved

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Aren't you fed up with the lies, the scandals, the secrecy, the duplicity?

Please no "the GOP does it to" , yes of course, but that isn't what THIS thread is about, so kindly go start your own.

THIS thread is about all the scandals and lies and deceptive tactics we've seen since one Barrack Obama took office.

And if all you're going to do is come in here and deny these things occurred, please go elsewhere. I'm looking for serious comments from people who are mature enough to admit what there own party has been up to these last 7 1/2 years and almost certainly would continue to do under one Hillary Clinton.

You're looking for "serious" discussion - but we can only post if we accept all of your ridiculous premises as truth?

You can't have a "serious discussion" when you won't let anyone disagree with you.