Which comes first: Irrefutable proof...or an investigation toward that irrefutable proof?

[Markle]

Learn to read.

The Health Care claim was LIE of the Year.....one single lie.

Obama was not named LIAR of the year.

You're a hoot! Petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama made that lie dozens of times, so how is the lie of the year NOT his?

Grow up.

 

[Slade3200]

GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security

THANK YOU! You cannot prove that any cuts made by Congress caused the refusal by Secretary Clinton and petulant former President Obama to allow the additional security at an Embassy.

"Stevens was visiting Benghazi at the time to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital.[74] The ambassador also "needed to [prepare a] report ... on the physical and the political and security environment in Benghazi to support an action memo to convert Benghazi from a temporary facility to a permanent facility".[42][43][44][45][46] Surplus funds originally dedicated for use in Iran for fiscal year 2012 were to be redirected and obligated for use in Benghazi: an action that had to be completed before the end of the fiscal year—September 30, 2012.[42][43][45][46]"

2012 Benghazi attack - Wikipedia

Cute try but, as you can see, there was plenty of money available.

How do you have the cojones to post such a blatant lie. You want people to believe that an administration who managed to spend $10 TRILLION in just EIGHT YEARS, did not have funds to protect an embassy in the volatile country of Libya.

Show some stones, face the facts.

The Obamas admin spent plenty of money, too much in my opinion, but facts in this case are the GOP was responsible for cutting 300 million that was allocated to embassy security.

 

[OKTexas]

This is the post I originally responded to: my B/U

Remind me again who opened their paragraph talking about maobamas lies?

Read your post that I was responding to and my post before that.

It wasn't my post you were responding to dip.

So what? You're doing the same thing as the poster I was talking to. Deflecting from talking about Trumps lies by pointing at Obama. My point is who fucking cares what Obama did? Nothing that one person does justifies the actions of another. If Obama lies it's wrong if Trump lies it's wrong... pretty simple

Really, I simply pointed out the obvious since you didn't recall.

Thanks. Really added a lot to the conversation!

Happy to help. LOL

 

[Slade3200]

Learn to read.

The Health Care claim was LIE of the Year.....one single lie.

Obama was not named LIAR of the year.

You're a hoot! Petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama made that lie dozens of times, so how is the lie of the year NOT his?

Grow up.

What's with the stating the full name thing? Are you thinking it's an insult or something?

 

[Markle]

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

PLENTY of money was available. How you can make a sickening attempt to blame funding votes instead of placing the blame on those responsible is pathetic. Once again, for your personal edification.

"Stevens was visiting Benghazi at the time to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital.[74] The ambassador also "needed to [prepare a] report ... on the physical and the political and security environment in Benghazi to support an action memo to convert Benghazi from a temporary facility to a permanent facility".[42][43][44][45][46] Surplus funds originally dedicated for use in Iran for fiscal year 2012 were to be redirected and obligated for use in Benghazi: an action that had to be completed before the end of the fiscal year—September 30, 2012.[42][43][45][46]"

2012 Benghazi attack - Wikipedia

 

[Slade3200]

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

PLENTY of money was available. How you can make a sickening attempt to blame funding votes instead of placing the blame on those responsible is pathetic. Once again, for your personal edification.

"Stevens was visiting Benghazi at the time to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital.[74] The ambassador also "needed to [prepare a] report ... on the physical and the political and security environment in Benghazi to support an action memo to convert Benghazi from a temporary facility to a permanent facility".[42][43][44][45][46] Surplus funds originally dedicated for use in Iran for fiscal year 2012 were to be redirected and obligated for use in Benghazi: an action that had to be completed before the end of the fiscal year—September 30, 2012.[42][43][45][46]"

2012 Benghazi attack - Wikipedia

I did blame the ones responsible... terrorist. I don't think GOP votes were the cause, nor do I think Obama or Clinton or our military was the cause. It was a horrible terror attack and y'all are mad at the wrong people so you can politicize the situation... that's the sick thing

 

[OKTexas]

Show us the proof that Republicans prevented the desperately requested increase in security by Christopher Stephens.

GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

“No, sir,” said Lamb.

Read more at: Libya Isn't about Funding Cuts

I thought it was pretty well known that terrorist were responsible for the attack on Benghazi

You posted a link in response to this which dealt with security, not the motivation for the attack.

Show us the proof that Republicans prevented the desperately requested increase in security by Christopher Stephens.

Now who's deflecting? Funding had nothing to do with the security decisions in Benghazi as you regressives keep implying in spite of proof otherwise. In fact, in her testimony, Lamb went on to say an appearance of normalcy was the primary driver of her decisions.

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

Hey it was the bitch and her minions that went for an appearance of normalcy in a hot bed of terrorism, the woman that made the decision said funding had nothing to do with her decision. (see the provided quote) So stop the bullshit deflection already. It's just another example of the bitches state dept, and to think you wanted to make that incompetent bitch president.

 

[Markle]

What's with the stating the full name thing? Are you thinking it's an insult or something?

I don't stoop to your level and disparage our former president. Sometimes I simply use the name he used in taking the oath of office.

How is using his proper name an insult? My take is that it would only be someone as desperate and hateful as you to even imagine such a thing.

 

[Slade3200]

GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

“No, sir,” said Lamb.

Read more at: Libya Isn't about Funding Cuts

I thought it was pretty well known that terrorist were responsible for the attack on Benghazi

You posted a link in response to this which dealt with security, not the motivation for the attack.

Show us the proof that Republicans prevented the desperately requested increase in security by Christopher Stephens.

Now who's deflecting? Funding had nothing to do with the security decisions in Benghazi as you regressives keep implying in spite of proof otherwise. In fact, in her testimony, Lamb went on to say an appearance of normalcy was the primary driver of her decisions.

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

Hey it was the bitch and her minions that went for an appearance of normalcy in a hot bed of terrorism, the woman that made the decision said funding had nothing to do with her decision. (see the provided quote) So stop the bullshit deflection already. It's just another example of the bitches state dept, and to think you wanted to make that incompetent bitch president.

I wanted to make her president? Really? Haha, you're a presumptive idiot

 

[Slade3200]

What's with the stating the full name thing? Are you thinking it's an insult or something?

I don't stoop to your level and disparage our former president. Sometimes I simply use the name he used in taking the oath of office.

How is using his proper name an insult? My take is that it would only be someone as desperate and hateful as you to even imagine such a thing.

My question is why do you take the time to type out the full name? I was asking if you thought it an insult as you obviously are not trying to be respectful. So what's the deal?

 

[OKTexas]

“It has been suggested that budget cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

“No, sir,” said Lamb.

Read more at: Libya Isn't about Funding Cuts

I thought it was pretty well known that terrorist were responsible for the attack on Benghazi

You posted a link in response to this which dealt with security, not the motivation for the attack.

Show us the proof that Republicans prevented the desperately requested increase in security by Christopher Stephens.

Now who's deflecting? Funding had nothing to do with the security decisions in Benghazi as you regressives keep implying in spite of proof otherwise. In fact, in her testimony, Lamb went on to say an appearance of normalcy was the primary driver of her decisions.

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

Hey it was the bitch and her minions that went for an appearance of normalcy in a hot bed of terrorism, the woman that made the decision said funding had nothing to do with her decision. (see the provided quote) So stop the bullshit deflection already. It's just another example of the bitches state dept, and to think you wanted to make that incompetent bitch president.

I wanted to make her president? Really? Haha, you're a presumptive idiot

You sure have been defending her, it was her fault that Stevens didn't get the additional security he begged for.

 

[Oldstyle]

Show me something that a single one of these "investigations" have proven, Nat

Glad you asked......

Flynn (who was once loved by the orange clown) proved to be an agent for a foreign government, Turkey and possibly even for Russia..he got fired.

Carter Page (once called by Trump one of his top foreign advisers) proved to be a prime target for Russian spies....He got fired.

Paul Manafort (once head of Trump's campaign) proved to be an agent for the communist former Ukrainian leaders and crook....He got fired...

You see, investigations cause your ilk a bit of a problem, don't you think?

When was Flynn ever proven to be an "agent for a foreign government"? Are you smoking crack today?

 

[oreo]

Evidence yet no arrests huh? Weird

Yet you think your no evidence is going to end up in impeachment. Weird.

Personally I don't think there will be impeachment. I think it's a bunch of petty lies for PR purposes. He needs to be called out for all that dishonest shit though, he is our president now.

What dishonest shit?

Seriously now you forgot about Obama's lies?

I don't recall us ever having a discussion about Obamas lies, so you don't really know what the fuck I think about that do ya? I don't accept lies from anybody on capital hill and I find it curious that you bitch about Obama and Hillary but seem to excuse Trump. What a hypocrite you are.

[


Not buying into you trying to divert the thread

You are the stupid Moon Bat that wanted to talk about a lying President and you voted for the biggest piece of lying shit since Slick Willy.

Don't blame if if your thread isn't going exactly as you planned with you fake news bullshit hatefest against Trump.

You Moon Bats talking about honesty in the Presidency after electing Slick Willy, Obama and then supported Crooked Hillary is absolutely one of the most hypocritical things imaginable, isn't it?

Attempted diversion ignored

You never answered my question Moon Bat.

Do you want me to post some of the articles and videos about Slick Willy's, Obama's or Crooked Hillary's massive lies?

Or are you in denial that they are lying scumbags that you voted for? What the hell is the matter with you? How dumb do you have to be to believe that Crooked Hillary was honest and that Obama didn't lie out his ass about almost everything?

You don't really give a shit about Presidents lying, do you? At least you don't as long as they are telling Democrat lies, right?

Yeah post some quotes or videos of Obama lying... and make sure they are real lies not things like Keep your plan keep your doctor which was a bad assumption for a plan he was trying to roll out not a lie

So you don't know about Obama's lies? There are plenty more of your hypocrisy.

Obama & Hillary Clinton are out of the picture now. Trying to spin this into something it's not is not going to help you. All EYEBALLS are focused on the Ass Clown that is sitting in the Oval office--while 3 Russian investigations are ongoing--that look to be headed toward impeachment.

It's doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if Republicans can do 8 investigations into Benghazi--what Democrats will do with Treason, Obstruction and Lies when they take over in 2018.

Analysis | 5 times Donald Trump’s team denied contact with Russia







You really couldn't have given Democrats a more powerful weapon than electing Donald Trump. They are going to ride this one to hell and back. You'll also get a great education on what that Emoluments clause in the Constitution means.
The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump | Brookings Institution

For more detailed information on the Russian investigation--go back to post # 128 on this thread.

 

[Oldstyle]

Since your 20 million people getting health insurance for the first time is a lie in and of itself, Nat...what difference does it make what "ilk" they are?

Well, you can put your head back up your arse....but you should check out those town halls in red states when citizens are told that you're going to take away their ACA.....Seriously, check it out how that is going.....LOL

You think that I'm in any way shocked that the people who were given huge subsidies under ObamaCare are now upset that that might be coming to an end? I told anyone who would listen way back in 2009 that you couldn't make the numbers work with the way that the ACA was structured and that it would lead to increases in healthcare coverage costs for middle class Americans or massive increases in the National debt! That's the game that you progressives played...you did what you love to do...gave out free stuff and obligated the tax payer to foot the bill...knowing that when the adults in the room pointed out that the costs were going to be unsustainable that they'd face enormous political pressure because once people GET free stuff it's almost impossible to then take it away from them! Barry, Harry and Nancy lied their asses off when they were ramming the ACA through before the Republicans could stop them following the 2010 midterms. They set this whole mess up to fail thinking that they could then pass Medicaid for all, once Hillary took the Oval Office and the GOP lost seats in the House and Senate! Now that hasn't happened...you progressives are demanding to know why Republicans can't fix the FUBARED healthcare system that you've bequeathed them!

 

[Oldstyle]

Next time...try running a candidate who isn't a pathological liar, who isn't for sale to the highest bidder, and who doesn't have more scandals than any ten other people put together!

Agreed that Clinton was a FLAWED candidate....but to vote for an orange charlatan instead of her is the equivalent of chopping off your hand because of a nail infection.

"FLAWED"? She was an awful candidate, Nat! She's dishonest. She's corrupt. Worst of all...she had ZERO new ideas. People voted for Trump because Clinton promised them nothing more than four years of unfulfilled promises. You can't seem to get it through your head that the great progressive "experiment" that was the first two years of the Obama Administration failed MISERABLY! The GOP (to use Barack Obama's description) shellacked the Democrats in 2010 and it was because it was already very apparent that progressive policies like "leading from behind" and the "Affordable Care Act" were not helping the average American!

 

[Oldstyle]

Russia saved our constitution from you

So much unrequited love.....Sad, really......LOL
View attachment 122671

You lost commie pinko...


You should be thankful

So once again, it's party over country. You prefer to be governed by Putin's pick than that of the American people. That's not democracy or anything close to it. So much for the Constitution or the will of the people.

When people want this.

Russia saved our constitution from you

So much unrequited love.....Sad, really......LOL
View attachment 122671

You lost commie pinko...


You should be thankful

So once again, it's party over country. You prefer to be governed by Putin's pick than that of the American people. That's not democracy or anything close to it. So much for the Constitution or the will of the people.

Letting anti democracy pinko liberals win is not democracy

Neither is using the Russian propaganda machine to spread lies and disinformation about your opponent.

What lies or disinformation was spread about Hillary Clinton, Dragonlady? The sad fact for her is that although her campaign savagely attacked WHERE the leaks about her came from...they never really claimed they weren't true! Her minions at the DNC really DID screw over Bernie Sanders! Her supporters at CNN really DID give her the questions that would be asked in the CNN debate in advance!

Is it really anti democratic to tell the truth about someone?

 

[Slade3200]

I thought it was pretty well known that terrorist were responsible for the attack on Benghazi

You posted a link in response to this which dealt with security, not the motivation for the attack.

Show us the proof that Republicans prevented the desperately requested increase in security by Christopher Stephens.

Now who's deflecting? Funding had nothing to do with the security decisions in Benghazi as you regressives keep implying in spite of proof otherwise. In fact, in her testimony, Lamb went on to say an appearance of normalcy was the primary driver of her decisions.

You're right funding doesn't make decisions, and saying the the video was an instigating factor didn't kill anybody either. Fact is, when you cut funding you lessen resources and increase risk.

Hey it was the bitch and her minions that went for an appearance of normalcy in a hot bed of terrorism, the woman that made the decision said funding had nothing to do with her decision. (see the provided quote) So stop the bullshit deflection already. It's just another example of the bitches state dept, and to think you wanted to make that incompetent bitch president.

I wanted to make her president? Really? Haha, you're a presumptive idiot

You sure have been defending her, it was her fault that Stevens didn't get the additional security he begged for.

Whatever you say poncho. Curious if you know the details about the following. How many embassies made requests for additional security and/or resources? What would the costs be to fulfill all of these requests? What was the budget that was available? Make sure to factor In the 300 million dollar cut made by congress

 

[Oldstyle]

Lerner was railroaded...

How? She came out and admitted the wrongdoing of her department, the IRS.

link where she said she did anything criminal???

She was doing the right thing in questioning these groups with political party names and affiliations and investigating before giving them CHARITY status and the tax write offs for those donating to these so called primary Charities.

Where she went wrong, was the net was not wide enough to capture all party PACS based on the key identifiers they chose to use.

If she was doing the "right thing", Care...you'll have to explain why she'd feel the need to take the 5th!

 

[Markle]

link where she said she did anything criminal???

She was doing the right thing in questioning these groups with political party names and affiliations and investigating before giving them CHARITY status and the tax write offs for those donating to these so called primary Charities.

Where she went wrong, was the net was not wide enough to capture all party PACS based on the key identifiers they chose to use.

Wow, you really do live in another universe? Are you being facetious or are you really this ignorant?

Politics
IRS admits targeting conservatives for tax scrutiny in 2012 election

By Zachary A. Goldfarb and Karen Tumulty May 10, 2013
The Internal Revenue Service on Friday apologized for targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, confirming long-standing accusations by some conservatives that their applications for tax-exempt status were being improperly delayed and scrutinized.

Lois G. Lerner, the IRS official who oversees tax-exempt groups, said the “absolutely inappropriate” actions by “front-line people” were not driven by partisan motives.

[...]

IRS admits targeting conservatives for tax scrutiny in 2012 election

###


Second IRS official resigns after scandal
Aamer Madhani and Gregory Korte, USA TODAYPublished 11:23 a.m. ET May 16, 2013 | Updated 10:01 p.m. ET May 16, 2013

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Thursday he is naming a trusted White House budget official, Daniel Werfel, to serve as his new acting IRS commissioner.

The appointment of Werfel comes as a second top IRS official announced Thursday that he is stepping down in the aftermath of revelations that the agency targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny.

Joseph Grant, commissioner of the agency's tax-exempt and government entities division, will retire on June 3, according to an IRS statement. Grant joined the IRS in August 2005 and became the deputy commissioner of the tax exempt division in 2007. He became the second senior IRS official in as many days to offer his resignation.

[...]

Second IRS official resigns after scandal

Your desperation is again, duly noted!

 

[Slade3200]

Show me something that a single one of these "investigations" have proven, Nat

Glad you asked......

Flynn (who was once loved by the orange clown) proved to be an agent for a foreign government, Turkey and possibly even for Russia..he got fired.

Carter Page (once called by Trump one of his top foreign advisers) proved to be a prime target for Russian spies....He got fired.

Paul Manafort (once head of Trump's campaign) proved to be an agent for the communist former Ukrainian leaders and crook....He got fired...

You see, investigations cause your ilk a bit of a problem, don't you think?

When was Flynn ever proven to be an "agent for a foreign government"? Are you smoking crack today?

How about you tell us what we do know about Flynn... be objective and honest if your capable.