McCarthy Admits Benghazi Designed to Flatten Hillary Poll Numbers

[rdean]

it's only "ruined" in the minds of hopeful idiots watching her campaign self-destruct

Democrats here at the USMB have been saying for years that Republicans are creating "scandals" for political reasons only.

USMB Republicans made wild accusations that Democrats don't and never did care about the four dead at Benghazi and here comes the next speaker admitting that the entire scandal had a political motivation. That it's Republicans who don't care and never did care about those for Americans that died in Libya. That the entire made up scandal was to take down Hillary.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So $20 Million spent on a select committee investigation into the death of an Ambassador and three others serving their country, as the result of a sitting President, Secretary of State, and their minions claiming it was the result of a video and not gross incompetence, due to their failure, for political reasons, to admit that the attack was a well planned terrorist operation, has someone's panties in a bunch? Come on, if they had simply told the truth in the first place would this have resulted in a $20 million dollar investigation? I think not, but this administration chose to lie, and when one lies there is a price to be paid.Then again would we have known, courtesy of the FOIA, that the Secretary of State was conducting high level and top secret state business on non approved non secure private server, that she owned, in violation of federal protocol? Count the lies, contradictions, and misstatements, then tell me what you have, the reincarnation of the plumbers and one Richard M Nixon. But that is OK provided its a democrat, right?

Republicans own investigations have vindicated those involved, so something is clearly wrong with your findings. The $20 million investigation was a front to take down a legitimate candidate for office and if that isn't a crime it should be.

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

 

[Wry Catcher]

This case?

The top Republican just admitted the "case" was a sham.

No outrage from the right wing.

Just an attempt at denial.

Complete nonsense...look I don't like Republican's or this new speaker. He's a moron like the rest of them, but he didn't say anything was a sham. He pointed out that nobody would have known that Hillary couldn't be trusted had they not put together this committee. This whole Benghazi thing continues to bring her down and this latest spin/lie on what this guy said won't change that. Dems are frantically trying to make this go away for her and nothing is working. This latest one won't go anywhere. No matter how many headlines claim he said it was a sham doesn't make it so.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense understands what he was getting at.

That's not what he said.

Not at all.

Thats exactly what he said. Listen to it again. He's pointing out that without them pursuing this Benghazi issue people would have not understood how untrustworthy Hillary is.

What has been said is an effort to convict HRC without evidence. Such comments suggest she is guilty sans evidence and due process. She may appear "untrustworthy" but what Pol is not?

How many investigations have been conducted? How many have concluded HRC was culpable of anything but misjudgment? How many have alleged any crime was committed?

What harm was done to the USA? The right wing commends Snowden for his release of secret information, and condemns HRC for a regulations violation.

Enough crap to make me want to puke.

 

[Lakhota]

The GOP Taliban will milk Benghazi until Hillary becomes Madam President.

 

[Political Junky]

Check out Rachel Maddow's rerun tonight or later on her website. She shows some vocal clips of Kevin McCarthy which will cause you concern, I hope. Among other things he says he visited "Hungria".

 

[Vigilante]

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

So $20 Million spent on a select committee investigation into the death of an Ambassador and three others serving their country, as the result of a sitting President, Secretary of State, and their minions claiming it was the result of a video and not gross incompetence, due to their failure, for political reasons, to admit that the attack was a well planned terrorist operation, has someone's panties in a bunch? Come on, if they had simply told the truth in the first place would this have resulted in a $20 million dollar investigation? I think not, but this administration chose to lie, and when one lies there is a price to be paid.Then again would we have known, courtesy of the FOIA, that the Secretary of State was conducting high level and top secret state business on non approved non secure private server, that she owned, in violation of federal protocol? Count the lies, contradictions, and misstatements, then tell me what you have, the reincarnation of the plumbers and one Richard M Nixon. But that is OK provided its a democrat, right?

Republicans own investigations have vindicated those involved, so something is clearly wrong with your findings. The $20 million investigation was a front to take down a legitimate candidate for office and if that isn't a crime it should be.

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

What does any of that have to do with obama and HR Haldeman Clinton and their Benghazi failure and coverup?

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Wry Catcher]

Republicans own investigations have vindicated those involved, so something is clearly wrong with your findings. The $20 million investigation was a front to take down a legitimate candidate for office and if that isn't a crime it should be.

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

What does any of that have to do with obama and HR Haldeman Clinton and their Benghazi failure and coverup?

a. Your conclusion based on a conclusion unproved.

b. Your logical fallacy, assumption of facts not in evidence.

c. Your pretense.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Fortunately, your lies never lets you get away without being laughed at.

 

[Vigilante]

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

What does any of that have to do with obama and HR Haldeman Clinton and their Benghazi failure and coverup?

a. Your conclusion based on a conclusion unproved.

b. Your logical fallacy, assumption of facts not in evidence.

c. Your pretense.

 

[Vigilante]

Fortunately, your lies never lets you get away without being laughed at.

 

[healthmyths]

So $20 Million spent on a select committee investigation into the death of an Ambassador and three others serving their country, as the result of a sitting President, Secretary of State, and their minions claiming it was the result of a video and not gross incompetence, due to their failure, for political reasons, to admit that the attack was a well planned terrorist operation, has someone's panties in a bunch? Come on, if they had simply told the truth in the first place would this have resulted in a $20 million dollar investigation? I think not, but this administration chose to lie, and when one lies there is a price to be paid.Then again would we have known, courtesy of the FOIA, that the Secretary of State was conducting high level and top secret state business on non approved non secure private server, that she owned, in violation of federal protocol? Count the lies, contradictions, and misstatements, then tell me what you have, the reincarnation of the plumbers and one Richard M Nixon. But that is OK provided its a democrat, right?

Republicans own investigations have vindicated those involved, so something is clearly wrong with your findings. The $20 million investigation was a front to take down a legitimate candidate for office and if that isn't a crime it should be.

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

WHAT F...king LIES????
To tell a LIE means you know that what you are saying is NOT TRUE!
Maybe you should ask THESE PEOPLE WHY they were lying also!!!
Reasons for War: Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.

"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path."
Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies..."
John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

ALL DEMOCRATS!!! Are they LIARS ALSO?

 

[sealybobo]

the party of death (progressive/democrat party) comes to Hillary's rescue again. the hell with Mr. Stevens an INNOCENT American civilian who was KILLED because of her and Obama Screw ups

Like lying us to war? Don't forget everyone the GOP will take us to war with Iran.

 

[nuhuh]

Republicans own investigations have vindicated those involved, so something is clearly wrong with your findings. The $20 million investigation was a front to take down a legitimate candidate for office and if that isn't a crime it should be.

The lie that was told and retold by the administration until long after everyone knew otherwise that they thought it was a spontaneous attack alone easily justified the cost of the investigation. Obama and Rice both clearly lied whatever you want to call it, they both knew it wasn't. If Republicans knowingly lied, you'd be screaming for their heads, not arguing that somehow it wasn't illegal

But it never was a legitimate investigation. It was a charade and a fraud used to discredit a legitimate candidate for office.

It certainly was a legit investigation. Four Americans were killed and it was important enough for those who were indirectly responsible to coverup their failure. That's a warrant for an investigation if ever there was one.

hmmm, how about a warrant issued for the deaths of 4,500 Americans based on the lies by George W, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neo conservatives?

WHAT F...king LIES????
To tell a LIE means you know that what you are saying is NOT TRUE!
Maybe you should ask THESE PEOPLE WHY they were lying also!!!
Reasons for War: Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.

"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path."
Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies..."
John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

ALL DEMOCRATS!!! Are they LIARS ALSO?

When you realize the CIA put out bad intelligence it will hit you like lightning. When you realize that Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Colin Powell, George Bush, Donald Rumselfeld et al, purposefully twisted intelligence to deliver a false narrative you will be thunderstruck.

 

[BULLDOG]

This constant whining from Hillary supporters about the "cost" of investigations is rather amusing since the reason that they have dragged on for as long as they have is that the Clinton's have a long history of stonewalling any investigation into their activities.

First they deny anything happened and blame the whole thing on "Right Wing Conspiracies"...
Then they hide evidence from investigators...
Then when enough time has passed they declare that the scandal is "old news"...and that the investigation is costing the taxpayers millions and needs to stop!

It's what Slick Willie and Hilly DO!

Funny how you can sit here and pontificate over "right wing conspiracy" while destroying the memories of the fallen who died at Benghazi to score political points. Now we know who the real scum in Washington politics are.

Yes we do know who the real scum are.. Politicizing those tragic deaths just to hinder Hillary's voter count is disgusting. The next Speaker of the House just admitted that's what the entire investigation is about.

 

[Mertex]

So now we know why Republicans spent $20 Million dollars, to affect the poll numbers of a Democratic front runner for the party's nomination.




Current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview on Monday night that the Select Committee, chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) that Clinton’s dropping poll numbers are evidence of the effectiveness of the committee.

McCarthy, who is reportedly running to take over for recently deposed House Speaker John Boehner, told Hannity:

“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee — a Select Committee — what are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”

There you go, now Republicans can start by paying back that $20 million in wasted public money. What scum.

Geez....these Republican leaders are so stupid....they keep giving the Democratic party one gift after another. And this guy is supposed to be their new "Speaker" of the House? You can't make this shit up.

 

[Mertex]

the party of death (progressive/democrat party) comes to Hillary's rescue again. the hell with Mr. Stevens an INNOCENT American civilian who was KILLED because of her and Obama Screw ups

Give it up, Stephanie. This 9th Benghazi committee, wasting tax-payer's money on a rabbit chase by the party that claims they want to cut waste spending.....hasn't and won't find anything that Hillary or Obama did wrong on Benghazi.

Why don't you all write your Congressmen and tell them to put their efforts on investigating Bush/Cheney and their bogus war that killed over 4000 innocent Americans because of their screw up in starting a war with a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, another attack that happened on Bush/Cheney's watch where another 3000+ innocents died due to their screw up? Because you are complicit with the lying scumbags in Congress who lie to their constituents and then are too stupid to keep their mouths shut about it.

 

[Political Junky]

Check out Rachel Maddow's rerun tonight or later on her website. She shows some vocal clips of Kevin McCarthy which will cause you concern, I hope. Among other things he says he visited "Hungria".

Here's that tape on Kevin McCarthy -
The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC

 

[Mertex]

WHAT F...king LIES????

Another mushroom kept in the dark and fed bullshit.

Everyone knows that Bush/Cheney lied......where have you been keeping yourself? I just skimmed through your linked comments, most of them were spoken way before Bush/Cheney made the decision to invade Iraq....and many are from conservative sources who want to believe they didn't lie, like you.