RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Sanity -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/24/2015 6:22:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


quote:

The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.



DAM YOO REPUBLICUNSES!!!!

DAM YOO TO HALE!!!!!





hot4bondage -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/24/2015 7:28:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: electorate


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

FR

Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


She lied about being shot at during her last presidential campaign. Former NBC news anchor Brian Williams may have permanently wrecked his career by telling similar tales. She wants to be leader of the free world and he wants to be seen reading from a teleprompter. Why was he held to a higher standard?




KenDckey -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/24/2015 12:19:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage


quote:

ORIGINAL: electorate


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

FR

Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


She lied about being shot at during her last presidential campaign. Former NBC news anchor Brian Williams may have permanently wrecked his career by telling similar tales. She wants to be leader of the free world and he wants to be seen reading from a teleprompter. Why was he held to a higher standard?

I think it is because what is between their legs




Lucylastic -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/24/2015 12:52:02 PM)

Bill o reilly has a vag?




joether -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/24/2015 10:35:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


Your accusing the GOP/TP of....NOT...having something useful to offer this nation, except as an example to the next ten generations of US Citizens of what....NOT....to vote into elected office!

Every decent poll shows Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead among the top GOP picks. Against everyone else, its anywhere from 20-50 points (yeah Santorium doesnt have a prayer). Most people like Clinton for many different reasons. If it comes down to the pick between two evils, the population will still side with Clinton. Better her than some religious nutcase, gun fucknut, or someone that wants to undermine the nation financially.





HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/27/2015 5:42:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


Every decent poll shows Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead among the top GOP picks. Against everyone else, its anywhere from 20-50 points (yeah Santorium doesnt have a prayer). Most people like Clinton for many different reasons. If it comes down to the pick between two evils, the population will still side with Clinton. Better her than some religious nutcase, gun fucknut, or someone that wants to undermine the nation financially.




Ah, Jees joether, your facts are really sucking here as well.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Maybe a week ago you were correct. Today it's 2 to 5 points while having unfavorables over 50 percent.




joether -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 1:22:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


Every decent poll shows Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead among the top GOP picks. Against everyone else, its anywhere from 20-50 points (yeah Santorium doesnt have a prayer). Most people like Clinton for many different reasons. If it comes down to the pick between two evils, the population will still side with Clinton. Better her than some religious nutcase, gun fucknut, or someone that wants to undermine the nation financially.




Ah, Jees joether, your facts are really sucking here as well.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Maybe a week ago you were correct. Today it's 2 to 5 points while having unfavorables over 50 percent.


Yes, we can find favorable/unfavorable rating for a US Citizen that is not even in elected office right now. But can't find a steady poll for Congress. How fucked up is that?

Likewise, Clinton seems focus on figuring out what are the issues and dialogue of US Citizens. Yet those seeking the GOP nomination seem to be a one trick pony "attack Clinton". We can look at President Obama an he is handling a number of issues at once; but that Republican controlled Congress can't seem to get anything useful out the door.

We we are going to have a 'favorable/unfavorable' chart for Mrs. Clinton, we do it for all the other conservatives running for the GOP nomination. That would be fair, right? Wonder how many of those candidates are seen by the general public as 'having a clue they are on planet Earth'?




thishereboi -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 5:19:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


You blew him completely out of the water. Beautiful. Total obliteration.


Youve appointed yourself "the decider" now

Pretty funny... [:D]


Come now sanity,the result was fairly obvious .

Certainly you see that ?


Any old cretin could [;)]


Only to those who read the posts and followed the links. To anyone like me it was a couple of seconds of them slapping each other followed by the boy cheerleading squad showing us how excited he can get when he thinks someone won on the internet. Now the only question is what did he win and who gives a shit.




HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:19:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


Every decent poll shows Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead among the top GOP picks. Against everyone else, its anywhere from 20-50 points (yeah Santorium doesnt have a prayer). Most people like Clinton for many different reasons. If it comes down to the pick between two evils, the population will still side with Clinton. Better her than some religious nutcase, gun fucknut, or someone that wants to undermine the nation financially.




Ah, Jees joether, your facts are really sucking here as well.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Maybe a week ago you were correct. Today it's 2 to 5 points while having unfavorables over 50 percent.


Yes, we can find favorable/unfavorable rating for a US Citizen that is not even in elected office right now. But can't find a steady poll for Congress. How fucked up is that?

Likewise, Clinton seems focus on figuring out what are the issues and dialogue of US Citizens. Yet those seeking the GOP nomination seem to be a one trick pony "attack Clinton". We can look at President Obama an he is handling a number of issues at once; but that Republican controlled Congress can't seem to get anything useful out the door.

We we are going to have a 'favorable/unfavorable' chart for Mrs. Clinton, we do it for all the other conservatives running for the GOP nomination. That would be fair, right? Wonder how many of those candidates are seen by the general public as 'having a clue they are on planet Earth'?



Joether, you were wrong and full of shit. Admit it, don't make up new Area 51 fantasies. Repeat after me, "I'm hateful, that's why I'm a loony leftist and I make things up to make myself feel better." Once more now, "I'm hateful, that's why I'm a loony leftist and I make things up to make myself feel better." One more time now...on your own. I promise it will help you live in the real world.




HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:28:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


Every decent poll shows Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead among the top GOP picks. Against everyone else, its anywhere from 20-50 points (yeah Santorium doesnt have a prayer). Most people like Clinton for many different reasons. If it comes down to the pick between two evils, the population will still side with Clinton. Better her than some religious nutcase, gun fucknut, or someone that wants to undermine the nation financially.




Ah, Jees joether, your facts are really sucking here as well.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

Maybe a week ago you were correct. Today it's 2 to 5 points while having unfavorables over 50 percent.


Yes, we can find favorable/unfavorable rating for a US Citizen that is not even in elected office right now. But can't find a steady poll for Congress. How fucked up is that?

Likewise, Clinton seems focus on figuring out what are the issues and dialogue of US Citizens. Yet those seeking the GOP nomination seem to be a one trick pony "attack Clinton". We can look at President Obama an he is handling a number of issues at once; but that Republican controlled Congress can't seem to get anything useful out the door.

We we are going to have a 'favorable/unfavorable' chart for Mrs. Clinton, we do it for all the other conservatives running for the GOP nomination. That would be fair, right? Wonder how many of those candidates are seen by the general public as 'having a clue they are on planet Earth'?



Clinton seems focused on figuring out what are the issues and dialogue with US Citizens. My god, that is the most dumbass thing I've ever heard. Joether, I'll bet even you can find about six idiot ideas inside that statement. Come on I'll get you started. Clinton has been in politics since the 80's and it's now necessary for her to "dialogue" with US Citizens so she can understand the issues. Keep going joether. You'll get that foot out of your mouth. What an idiot idea. But, then, that's what Clinton is selling and what the loony left seems prepared to have crammed down their throats. It takes a village joether and every village has a village idiot.




mnottertail -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:32:30 AM)

Well, 'conservatives' have had over thirty years to figure out how to legislate a living minimum wage (#EPICFAIL) Nationalized healthcare for 60 (#EPICFAIL) and campaign finance reform and immigration law (#EPICFAILS) and a host of other things.(#EPICHOSTFAIL)

But you have been out here hooting for how long? What do the people of Minnesota want? Her politics has been either mechanical-wonky or New York, not national policy stuff.




HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:34:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

FR

Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

Except after the dozen or so 'Benghazi' incidents under Bush makes the whole issue hyperbole and hypocrisy at its worse.



Can you provide links to six of those dozen Bush Benghazi incidents? I'll be patient.




HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:39:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, 'conservatives' have had over thirty years to figure out how to legislate a living minimum wage (#EPICFAIL) Nationalized healthcare for 60 (#EPICFAIL) and campaign finance reform and immigration law (#EPICFAILS) and a host of other things.(#EPICHOSTFAIL)

But you have been out here hooting for how long? What do the people of Minnesota want? Her politics has been either mechanical-wonky or New York, not national policy stuff.


Jester, usually you're a much more subtle idiot. Let's see...eight years in the White House(no....no national concerns there), one term in the Senate(not remotely even a national body with national concerns) four years as Secratery of State(no national concerns there and never invited to meeting where national concerns were discussed). This women obviously has no qualifications except she's a woman who rode Bill's coattails. That's what you're saying...right?





HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 8:42:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

FR

Regardless of what the report says, or when it's released, Benghazi and the email situation is going to be an election issue.

Hillary can't win without serious answers that will set the public's minds at ease. I don't think we saw that in the Congressional hearings.

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there is any public unease about these matters. I do know that there are a lot of unsubstantiated accusations floating around, emanating from Republican minds that are anything but at ease, but that's quite a different thing.

In the absence of any proof, my guess is that the public will pay the usual amount of attention it pays to such party political jockeying and mudslinging ie it will offer a great big yawn and insist on moving onto more substantial issues. If you wish to gain the public's attention produce the proof. It would be prudent to hold your silence until such time as you can produce proof of your suspicions and allegations.


You might want to check the link to polls I posted and modify your statement to, "well in my circle of friends, who all think exactly a like or they wouldn't be tolerated, there has been so evidence that paying attention to events in the news affects our thinking at all."




mnottertail -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 9:25:35 AM)

Links to polls are like flies to shit, essentially meaningless, certainly not factual.




HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 9:30:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Links to polls are like flies to shit, essentially meaningless, certainly not factual.


Yes, to the ostrich with its head in the sand. Which, as I recall, is your usual condition. Unfortunately, you prefer to hate than to understand.




mnottertail -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 9:35:56 AM)

No, I have an excellent understanding. Who will be the President if not Hillary? You may only choose democrats, none of the clowns in the bus will be given a license to drive for years to come.

Your ignorance of reality has been demonstrated continuously and repeatedly out here.







HunterCA -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 9:52:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

No, I have an excellent understanding. Who will be the President if not Hillary? You may only choose democrats, none of the clowns in the bus will be given a license to drive for years to come.

Your ignorance of reality has been demonstrated continuously and repeatedly out here.






One of the things I always laugh at is when the liberal rag mainstream media begins to teach conservative what they need to think. It happens all of the time. Such is the arrogance of the left. What I really enjoyed after 2008 was how the liberals all jumped on the idea that conservative were completely done and would never come back. Of course that was hundreds of house seats, governors, offices, state houses, and senate seats ago. So, I'm going to have to be honest with you and point out how cliche and typical kool aide quaffing you're being. It amuses me.




mnottertail -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (4/28/2015 10:09:13 AM)

Was the width of this widely held belief larger than one? What I always laugh at is when rightwing rags make stupid shit up, and its constant. I laugh at idiots. You are felching it up in torrents. I am laughing.

In the meantime, which democrat will be president?




CreativeDominant -> RE: Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! (5/5/2015 7:03:40 PM)

Well...given what's come out about the Clinton Foundation (how about that 10%! going to real causes?) And now this:

Rep. Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina Republican who exposed the private emails as part of his investigation into the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, has urged Mrs. Clinton to turn the server over to a neutral third party while questions get sorted out, but Mrs. Clinton has refused, saying she believes she has now complied with the law by finally going through and turning emails over.

The law at the time Mrs. Clinton was in office urged federal employees doing government business to use their official accounts, but said those who used personal accounts were required to forward all government-related messages to their official accounts for storage. Mrs. Clinton rejected using an official account and did not forward her messages, but after Mr. Gowdy’s inquiries the State Department asked her to belatedly turn her emails over.

The State Department has turned about 300 emails over to the Benghazi probe, but has refused to release the other tens of thousands of messages, saying it wants to process and clear them all at the same time, which will take months. (But it's only the Republicans slowing things down.

But the department has admitted in court that it was remiss in not searching the emails earlier, and has agreed to reopen some previous open-records requests from Judicial Watch that had sought Clinton emails.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/5/huma-abedins-emails-face-disclosure-suit/

It is just AMAZING how "malfunctioning" all these government computers and servers are (Lois Lerner) and how many emails get inadvertently destroyed (Lerner, Clinton) or belatedly turned over, then held up for study (Clinton, State Department).




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875