Was Hillary Clinton A Woman Scorned?

[Guest]

Yep nothing new learned from the Benghazi Select Committee meeting Thursday October 22 2015.

Yep Hillary Clinton was composed and presidential looking and her polls numbers and campaign contributions increased following this meeting...
but so did the beloved and honest Putin during his reelection because the media in Russia said so . It takes a real scoundrel to be able to lie and deny without blinking an eye.

In my view Clinton was a woman scorned because she lost the White House to Obama and so she used her position as Secretary of State as a beginning to formulate her next run for president. That is why the personal server that it why she was always distracted and that is why she traveled extensively pressing the flesh accepting campaign contributions from foreign governments etc. What better way to get prepared. What better way to be in the mix to get close to people receive information that only the privilege have access to. I believe she was as surprised as many other American that Obama got reelected and so ended her tour of duty because she could no longer account for her do nothing performance and decided to spend full time campaigning

From Newsmax
By Nick Sanchez | Friday, 23 Oct 2015 11:19 AM
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified to the House Select Committee on Benghazi

During the hearing, congressional panelists sought to hold her accountable for her role in the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA contractors, Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty.

Gathered below are 13 of the most shocking revelations from the hearing.

1. Clinton originated the false narrative about a YouTube video protest — Using Clinton's emails and calls as proof, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, accused her of lying to the American people, telling them that the incident in Benghazi was a protest that got out of hand, instead of what it really was: a terrorist attack.

"So if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start? It started with you, Madam Secretary," said Jordan, Real Clear Politics reported. "Here's what you said at 11 o'clock that night, approximately one hour after you told the American people it was a video, you say to your family, 'Two officers were killed today in Benghazi by an al-Qaida- like group.' You tell — you tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story. Also on the night of the attack, you had a call with the president of Libya. Here's what you said to him: 'Ansar al-Sharia is claiming responsibility.' It's interesting; Mr. Khattala, one of the guys arrested in charge actually belonged to that group. And finally, most significantly, the next day, within 24 hours, you had a conversation with the Egyptian prime minister. You told him this: 'We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.'"

2. Clinton avoided responsibility for Stevens' death — "I was responsible for sending Chris Stevens to Libya. I was responsible for supporting a temporary facility in Benghazi," Clinton said during her testimony, The Kansas City Star reported. "I was not responsible for specific security requests and decisions," she concluded, saying that some of the Benghazi outfit's security requests were granted after departmental review, while others were not.

"Chris Stevens had an opportunity to reach me anytime he thought there was something of importance," she said, adding that Stevens and his team in Benghazi "very well understood the dangers that they were confronting. They did the best they could under the circumstances that they were confronting."

3. Clinton likely never spoke to Stevens — Asked by Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, if she'd ever spoken to Stevens between his swearing-in in May 2012 and before his death on Sept. 11, 2012, Clinton responded "Yes, I believe I did. I don't recall," CNN reported. In turn, Brooks responded, "Had you talked to him in July, he would have told you that he had asked to keep the security in Libya that he had. He was told no by your State Department."

4. Stevens didn't have Clinton's email address — "I do not believe he had my personal email . . . He had the direct line to people he had worked with for years," Clinton admitted to the Benghazi committee, according to the Boston Herald.

5. Clinton said she "knew and admired" Chris Stevens, but called him "Chris Smith" on night of his death — Clinton claimed she "knew and admired" Stevens during her opening statement, and later told the congressional panel she'd "lost more sleep than all of you put together" over the terrorist attack that killed him. Recently disclosed emails show, however, that she didn't get his name right on the night of the attack. In an email to her top aides, she called him "Chris Smith," possibly conflating Chris Stevens and diplomat Sean Smith, who was also killed that night, The Daily Caller reported.

6. Clinton knew "nothing" about Stevens’ meeting with al-Qaida affiliate — "Were you aware that our folks were either wittingly or unwittingly meeting on the ground with members of al-Qaida hours before the attack?" Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, asked Clinton. "I know nothing about this, Congressman," Clinton replied, according to National Review.

7. Sidney Blumenthal had direct access to Clinton; Stevens did not — "A man who was a friend of yours, who had never been to Libya, didn't know much about it, at least that was his testimony, didn't know much about it, every one of those reports that he sent on to you that had to do with situations on the ground in Libya, those made it to your desk," said Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, according to Politico. "You asked for more of them. You read them. You corresponded with him. And yet the folks that worked for you didn't have the same courtesy."

8. Blumenthal was Clinton's "most prolific emailer on Libya" — "The documents show he was your most prolific emailer on Libya and Benghazi, and my question to you is did the president, the same White House that said you can’t hire him, did he know that he was advising you?" committed chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, asked Clinton. "He was not advising me, and I have no reason to have ever mentioned that or know that the president knew that," said Clinton, according to Townhall.com.

9. President Barack Obama's White House didn't know Blumenthal was emailing Clinton — "What was he doing when you hired him when the White House rejected him?" Gowdy asked Clinton, according to RushLimbaugh.com. "He was, in fact, working for my husband," said Clinton. Gowdy clarified, asking, "So he was working for The Clinton Foundation?" Clinton responded, "Yes, that's right, Mr. Chairman." In the year following the 2012 Benghazi attacks, the William J. Clinton Foundation was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

10. Blumenthal's emails weren't entirely unsolicited — Clinton denied during the hearing that Sidney Blumenthal advised her on Libya, but admitted she responded to his emails "Thanks and please keep them coming," "Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?" and "What are you hearing now?" She also said she frequently forwarded his intelligence to colleagues, oftentimes redacting his name so they wouldn't know the source.

11. Clinton says she didn't know where Blumenthal's intel was coming from — "I don’t know where he got the information," Clinton said of Sidney Bluementhal, who'd never been to Libya himself. "I did learn later that he was talking to . . . former American intelligence officials."

12. The committee doesn't have all of Stevens' emails — "I might add for the record: we do not, still, to this day, have all of Chris Stevens' emails," Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, said to Clinton, according to Mediate. "We received 1,300 more this week, we received most of them last week. We don't have the universe, yet, of Ambassador Stevens' emails."

13. Clinton suggested Stevens was joking about security — "One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor. And I just see him smiling as he’s typing this [email], because it is clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few 'fire sale' items from the Brits," Clinton said about one of Stevens' December emails, Mediate reported. Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, did not think Clinton's suggestion was at all funny. "Those 'fire sale' items, by the way, are barricades. They are additional requests for security for the compound," she told Clinton



Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

She is a liar, plain and simple. Only a stupid liberal with no brains and Anti-American sentiment would vote for such a despicable person that has no respect for national security or the people that work for her.

I had no doubt about what she would say regarding Benghazi, but I am very interested in seeing how she can possibly weasel out of the FBI investigation. So far, she has no excuse for the Federal Laws she has broken regarding the mishandling of classified material. She blatantly disregarded and violated federal laws. This is the most corrupt administration in U.S. history, so I am interested to see how they will cover this one up. Even if they don't charge her with a felony, she still broke State Dept regulations regarding official State Dept business on a non-official computer system.

[Guest]

Her stock answer....it was not illegal.

She has no concept of right or wrong.....only politically and letter of the law expedient for herself!

[Guest]

The thread subject is: "Was Hillary Clinton A Woman?...... Scorned?" ......:1rotfl:

[Guest]

She is a liar, plain and simple. Only a stupid liberal with no brains and Anti-American sentiment would vote for such a despicable person that has no respect for national security or the people that work for her.

I had no doubt about what she would say regarding Benghazi, but I am very interested in seeing how she can possibly weasel out of the FBI investigation. So far, she has no excuse for the Federal Laws she has broken regarding the mishandling of classified material. She blatantly disregarded and violated federal laws. This is the most corrupt administration in U.S. history, so I am interested to see how they will cover this one up. Even if they don't charge her with a felony, she still broke State Dept regulations regarding official State Dept business on a non-official computer system.

Unfortunately, that accounts for about 50% of the electorate.

[Guest]

Yep nothing new learned from the Benghazi Select Committee meeting Thursday October 22 2015.

Yep Hillary Clinton was composed and presidential looking and her polls numbers and campaign contributions increased following this meeting...
but so did the beloved and honest Putin during his reelection because the media in Russia said so . It takes a real scoundrel to be able to lie and deny without blinking an eye.

In my view Clinton was a woman scorned because she lost the White House to Obama and so she used her position as Secretary of State as a beginning to formulate her next run for president. That is why the personal server that it why she was always distracted and that is why she traveled extensively pressing the flesh accepting campaign contributions from foreign governments etc. What better way to get prepared. What better way to be in the mix to get close to people receive information that only the privilege have access to. I believe she was as surprised as many other American that Obama got reelected and so ended her tour of duty because she could no longer account for her do nothing performance and decided to spend full time campaigning

From Newsmax
By Nick Sanchez | Friday, 23 Oct 2015 11:19 AM
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified to the House Select Committee on Benghazi

During the hearing, congressional panelists sought to hold her accountable for her role in the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA contractors, Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty.

Gathered below are 13 of the most shocking revelations from the hearing.

1. Clinton originated the false narrative about a YouTube video protest — Using Clinton's emails and calls as proof, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, accused her of lying to the American people, telling them that the incident in Benghazi was a protest that got out of hand, instead of what it really was: a terrorist attack.

"So if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start? It started with you, Madam Secretary," said Jordan, Real Clear Politics reported. "Here's what you said at 11 o'clock that night, approximately one hour after you told the American people it was a video, you say to your family, 'Two officers were killed today in Benghazi by an al-Qaida- like group.' You tell — you tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story. Also on the night of the attack, you had a call with the president of Libya. Here's what you said to him: 'Ansar al-Sharia is claiming responsibility.' It's interesting; Mr. Khattala, one of the guys arrested in charge actually belonged to that group. And finally, most significantly, the next day, within 24 hours, you had a conversation with the Egyptian prime minister. You told him this: 'We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.'"

2. Clinton avoided responsibility for Stevens' death — "I was responsible for sending Chris Stevens to Libya. I was responsible for supporting a temporary facility in Benghazi," Clinton said during her testimony, The Kansas City Star reported. "I was not responsible for specific security requests and decisions," she concluded, saying that some of the Benghazi outfit's security requests were granted after departmental review, while others were not.

"Chris Stevens had an opportunity to reach me anytime he thought there was something of importance," she said, adding that Stevens and his team in Benghazi "very well understood the dangers that they were confronting. They did the best they could under the circumstances that they were confronting."

3. Clinton likely never spoke to Stevens — Asked by Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, if she'd ever spoken to Stevens between his swearing-in in May 2012 and before his death on Sept. 11, 2012, Clinton responded "Yes, I believe I did. I don't recall," CNN reported. In turn, Brooks responded, "Had you talked to him in July, he would have told you that he had asked to keep the security in Libya that he had. He was told no by your State Department."

4. Stevens didn't have Clinton's email address — "I do not believe he had my personal email . . . He had the direct line to people he had worked with for years," Clinton admitted to the Benghazi committee, according to the Boston Herald.

5. Clinton said she "knew and admired" Chris Stevens, but called him "Chris Smith" on night of his death — Clinton claimed she "knew and admired" Stevens during her opening statement, and later told the congressional panel she'd "lost more sleep than all of you put together" over the terrorist attack that killed him. Recently disclosed emails show, however, that she didn't get his name right on the night of the attack. In an email to her top aides, she called him "Chris Smith," possibly conflating Chris Stevens and diplomat Sean Smith, who was also killed that night, The Daily Caller reported.

6. Clinton knew "nothing" about Stevens’ meeting with al-Qaida affiliate — "Were you aware that our folks were either wittingly or unwittingly meeting on the ground with members of al-Qaida hours before the attack?" Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, asked Clinton. "I know nothing about this, Congressman," Clinton replied, according to National Review.

7. Sidney Blumenthal had direct access to Clinton; Stevens did not — "A man who was a friend of yours, who had never been to Libya, didn't know much about it, at least that was his testimony, didn't know much about it, every one of those reports that he sent on to you that had to do with situations on the ground in Libya, those made it to your desk," said Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, according to Politico. "You asked for more of them. You read them. You corresponded with him. And yet the folks that worked for you didn't have the same courtesy."

8. Blumenthal was Clinton's "most prolific emailer on Libya" — "The documents show he was your most prolific emailer on Libya and Benghazi, and my question to you is did the president, the same White House that said you can’t hire him, did he know that he was advising you?" committed chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, asked Clinton. "He was not advising me, and I have no reason to have ever mentioned that or know that the president knew that," said Clinton, according to Townhall.com.

9. President Barack Obama's White House didn't know Blumenthal was emailing Clinton — "What was he doing when you hired him when the White House rejected him?" Gowdy asked Clinton, according to RushLimbaugh.com. "He was, in fact, working for my husband," said Clinton. Gowdy clarified, asking, "So he was working for The Clinton Foundation?" Clinton responded, "Yes, that's right, Mr. Chairman." In the year following the 2012 Benghazi attacks, the William J. Clinton Foundation was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

10. Blumenthal's emails weren't entirely unsolicited — Clinton denied during the hearing that Sidney Blumenthal advised her on Libya, but admitted she responded to his emails "Thanks and please keep them coming," "Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?" and "What are you hearing now?" She also said she frequently forwarded his intelligence to colleagues, oftentimes redacting his name so they wouldn't know the source.

11. Clinton says she didn't know where Blumenthal's intel was coming from — "I don’t know where he got the information," Clinton said of Sidney Bluementhal, who'd never been to Libya himself. "I did learn later that he was talking to . . . former American intelligence officials."

12. The committee doesn't have all of Stevens' emails — "I might add for the record: we do not, still, to this day, have all of Chris Stevens' emails," Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, said to Clinton, according to Mediate. "We received 1,300 more this week, we received most of them last week. We don't have the universe, yet, of Ambassador Stevens' emails."

13. Clinton suggested Stevens was joking about security — "One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor. And I just see him smiling as he’s typing this [email], because it is clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few 'fire sale' items from the Brits," Clinton said about one of Stevens' December emails, Mediate reported. Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Indiana, did not think Clinton's suggestion was at all funny. "Those 'fire sale' items, by the way, are barricades. They are additional requests for security for the compound," she told Clinton



Personal Best Regards:

I will have to research more into this. I am a fan of Hillary Clinton but do try to do due diligence about the integrity of the political system.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1134441]She is a liar, plain and simple. Only a stupid liberal with no brains and Anti-American sentiment would vote for such a despicable person that has no respect for national security or the people that work for her.
QUOTE]

Remember that Sec. Clinton does not need to win all the districts in a state in order to win ALL the electoral votes. In Florida, the solid Democrat strongholds of Tampa-Clearwater, Orlando, and Miami-Dade are enough to put Florida in the Clinton "win column".

[Guest]

Benghazi: GOP's helping hand for Hillary Clinton - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinions/gergen-gop-helping-hand-for-hillary/)

I am having a little trouble really with the continued attacks on Hillary Clinton.

[Guest]

Benghazi: GOP's helping hand for Hillary Clinton - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinions/gergen-gop-helping-hand-for-hillary/)

I am having a little trouble really with the continued attacks on Hillary Clinton.

Well deserved "attacks."

[Guest]

Benghazi: GOP's helping hand for Hillary Clinton - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinions/gergen-gop-helping-hand-for-hillary/)

I am having a little trouble really with the continued attacks on Hillary Clinton.

It is like the Republican Gowdy has nailed one of his feet to the floor and is just walking in a circle jibber-jabbing about Benghazi and emails. Americans are tired of hearing that jibber-jabber.

Gowdy may as well be on Mrs. Clinton's payroll as he is helping her achieve the presidency.

[Guest]

Benghazi: GOP's helping hand for Hillary Clinton - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinions/gergen-gop-helping-hand-for-hillary/)

I am having a little trouble really with the continued attacks on Hillary Clinton.

I have no problem "attacking" an incompetent, lying, unprincipled, unethical self-serving elitist like Hillary Clinton.

[Guest]

It is like the Republican Gowdy has nailed one of his feet to the floor and is just walking in a circle jibber-jabbing about Benghazi and emails. Americans are tired of hearing that jibber-jabber.

Gowdy may as well be on Mrs. Clinton's payroll as he is helping her achieve the presidency.

The idea of the committee is supposed to be more of an after action debriefing, not a trial.

One thing that some on here apparently don't seem to realize is that Hilary proved to the world that she lied about the video. Her emails revealed that it was a terrorist attack, and NOT a protest over the video. It also proves that the guy was falsely arrested in the middle of the night, as if the KGB yanked him out of his house and carted him off to Siberia.

So Hilary handled herself ok when questioned. Well, she IS a lawyer and she had plenty of MONTHS to get ready for it.

Can't wait for the FBI to reveal the results of their investigation. If they don't indict her, then there is no justice in America.

[Guest]

I have no problem "attacking" an incompetent, lying, unprincipled, unethical self-serving elitist like Hillary Clinton.

:agree:....totally.

[Guest]

Great. Vote Republican.

[Guest]

Great. Vote Republican.

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

[Guest]

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

Keep thinking that. I think that even idiots learn something some day. And the idiots are probably going to learn how stupid they are to think that she cares anything about them. You'll see a lower liberal turn out and a higher GOP turn out this time. So, keep thinking your delusional dreams that she will be your next president. You can waste your vote on her, if you wish.

Even if she pulls out a miracle and gets elected, she will be impeached and thrown in jail shortly afterward. She is a felon and should be in jail now. Only her money and political clout has saved her so far. Let's see her get away with jeopardizing national security.

[Guest]

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

There won't be ANY electoral votes going to Hilary from Florida.

[Guest]

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

Miami-Dade may not be the automatic lock for a Dem this time around given this Administration`s constant scorn toward Israel .
Ms. Clinton was running State as our President was treating the Pres. of Israel with disdain . Also as he undertook " tilting / pivoting " US Foreign Policy toward those Nations which have pledged to vaporize Israel and her people .
So how does she manage to convince those in places such as " Miami/ Dade " that she will reverse the policies of her former boss and act in the best interests of Israel ?
Just wondering if you could please speculate as to how she would pull that off ?

[Guest]

I have great difficulty understanding democrats celebrating this woman.

Last day or so, she has been in the words of the media "taking victory laps".

For what ??

She lied during the testimony, added to her tales from the past, but they celebrate I suppose because she did not fall apart.

The confidence shown by democrats and the media, I think, is really very very very premature.

General election time, we get to hear a lot more and repeats

Like when she said she was under gun fire in Bosnia, which was shown to be a lie. She said "it was a mistake"

Like the ongoing lies on Benghazi. How the Democrats are celebrating is amazing to me. She has a number of lies on the record, yet they and the media applaud.

Like the fact that the Clinton Foundation box has not even been opened yet and that is a full box.

Like the fact that "outsiders" like the victim families from Benghazi cannot wait to be heard, like the women who are lining up to talk about her and Bill.

Celebrate now, because all the discussions on electoral college, etc will fall on deaf ears.

[Guest]

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

What your post assumes is that Hillary's constituens, many of which are too lazy to seek meaningful employment, will take the initiative and actually show up at the polls and vote.

[Guest]

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/10/21/a-comprehensive-guide-to-myths-and-facts-about/206289

There is this.

[Guest]

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/10/21/a-comprehensive-guide-to-myths-and-facts-about/206289

There is this.

Media matters is a liberal opinion rag. In this case, they are wrong on a lot of the "Facts."

I can dispute them, but we have already gone over this a million times and no matter what I say, libtards will keep singing the same old mantra of adoration for Hilary the liar and Obama the racist.

If you doubt what I have just said, read SF312 that Hilary signed and the State Dept FAM related to handling of classified materials. She violated both and is a felonious criminal of highest level. She jeopardized national security and that makes her offenses very/very serious.

[Guest]

The thread subject is: "Was Hillary Clinton A Woman?...... Scorned?" ......:1rotfl:

OK you show us you can read the Title now please tell us your assessment.

[Guest]

Unfortunately, that accounts for about 50% of the electorate.

Unfortunately I believe the % is higher

[Guest]

I will have to research more into this. I am a fan of Hillary Clinton but do try to do due diligence about the integrity of the political system.

We would welcome your research

[Guest]

That's right, vote Republican - if you want to waste your time. As I explained earlier about ALL the electoral votes in Florida will be going to the Democratic nominee (Hillary) due to the 3 areas that are Democrat locks - and their populations are higher than counties like Lake, Sumter, and Marion.

In short, it is Miami-Dade, Orlando, and Tampa-Clearwater who will decide how Florida goes.

You may want to rethink this situation

[Guest]

I have great difficulty understanding democrats celebrating this woman.

Last day or so, she has been in the words of the media "taking victory laps".

For what ??

She lied during the testimony, added to her tales from the past, but they celebrate I suppose because she did not fall apart.

The confidence shown by democrats and the media, I think, is really very very very premature.

General election time, we get to hear a lot more and repeats

Like when she said she was under gun fire in Bosnia, which was shown to be a lie. She said "it was a mistake"

Like the ongoing lies on Benghazi. How the Democrats are celebrating is amazing to me. She has a number of lies on the record, yet they and the media applaud.

Like the fact that the Clinton Foundation box has not even been opened yet and that is a full box.

Like the fact that "outsiders" like the victim families from Benghazi cannot wait to be heard, like the women who are lining up to talk about her and Bill.

Celebrate now, because all the discussions on electoral college, etc will fall on deaf ears.

Its really not a mystery when you consider that the benchmark progressives are working from are people like Obama, Biden, Sanders, Pelosi, Reid, Box, Dodd, Frank Rangel , Weiner. I mean Hillary most look really really good to them.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Media matters is a liberal opinion rag. In this case, they are wrong on a lot of the "Facts."

I can dispute them, but we have already gone over this a million times and no matter what I say, libtards will keep singing the same old mantra of adoration for Hilary the liar and Obama the racist.

If you doubt what I have just said, read SF312 that Hilary signed and the State Dept FAM related to handling of classified materials. She violated both and is a felonious criminal of highest level. She jeopardized national security and that makes her offenses very/very serious.

Organizations like Media Matters, and the vast majority of liberal media are destroying America because the won't tell the truth hide the truth or alter the truth Our educational institutions have been pumping out good little Marxist for so long that many voters do not understand the reason for our founding fathers writing our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and U S Constitution. In fact that are taught that our founders were hateful white greedy men They are also taught to believe that socialism trumps capitalism.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Organizations like Media Matters, and the vast majority of liberal media are destroying America because the won't tell the truth hide the truth or alter the truth Our educational institutions have been pumping out good little Marxist for so long that many voters do not understand the reason for our founding fathers writing our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and U S Constitution. In fact that are taught that our founders were hateful white greedy men They are also taught to believe that socialism trumps capitalism.

Personal Best Regards:

Give it up Rubicon.

[Guest]

Give it up Rubicon.

"Media Matters for America (MMfA) is a politically progressive media watchdog in the United States. The organization has a stated mission of "comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media".[2][3] Set up as a tax-exempt, nonprofit organization, MMfA was founded in 2004 by journalist and political activist David Brock as a counterweight to the conservative Media Research Center.[4] It is known for its aggressive criticism of conservative journalists and media outlets, including its "War on Fox News."[5][6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America

"In November, a researcher at Media Matters for America, the liberal press-watchdog group that Brock founded seven years ago, noticed that the website *Charitybuzz was auctioning a “friendly lunch” with Murdoch to benefit the Global Poverty Project. That one of Brock’s worker bees would be keeping tabs on the News Corp. chairman’s calendar should not be terribly surprising. At Media Matters’ headquarters in Washington, D.C., scores of headphone-wearing staffers spend their days (and nights) staring into their television screens and computer monitors, waiting for the latest bits of “conservative misinformation” to emerge from the Fox News Channel and other corners of the right-wing media landscape, all of which are saved on “the big TiVo”—270 terabytes’ worth of hard drive that store over 300,000 hours of TV shows—so that the offending clips can be uploaded to Media Matters’ website. Are you in need of a compendium of the “50 Worst Things Glenn Beck Said on Fox News”? Fear not, Media Matters’ site has one.

How Media Matters Founder David Brock Is Trying to Gain Respect From the White House -- New York Magazine (http://nymag.com/news/media/david-brock-media-matters-2011-5/)

"The brick carriage house is usually the headquarters of the Mathematical Association of America, but for a few days in the middle of March, the left-wing organization Media Matters for America converted it into a partisan boot camp where rebel forces were trained for combat on Fox News. Over four grueling days, Harvard-honed instructors drilled a dozen softie policy wonks, molding them into an elite unit of smiling, succinct and well-coiffed talking heads.

Since its inception in August 2009, the Progressive Talent Initiative, or PTI, has trained nearly 100 pundits who have appeared 800 times on television and radio. Media Matters uses that metric to pitch donors for more contributions, but its leadership believes that the surge of camera-ready liberals has recaptured lost ground in the media wars against conservatives."


https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1134752

Now all the non thinking liberals understand how they have been brainwashed.

AND GUESS WHAT...both parties do similar things but most people can recognize it. Those who have no thought process as a person rely on these kind of places.

Sad but true.

[Guest]

Media Matters, BY THEIR OWN DEFINITION IS NOT A NEWS SOURCE.


They have one job...one...destroy Fox specifically and conservatives in general.

But surely NOT anything associated with real news.

[Guest]

"Media Matters for America (MMfA) is an IRS tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization that purports to document supposed conservative media bias. Media Matters Action Network (MMAN) is the affiliated 501(c)(4) organization that is the advocacy arm of MMfA.

Media Matters original goal was to serve as a “fact-checker” that focused on conservative media programming. But in practice, the organization primarily criticizes the opinions of Rush Limbaugh and the hosts and guests of Fox News Channel. MMfA was particularly focused Glenn Beck and was credited with leading the campaign to remove the host from Fox News airwaves.

In 2004, Democratic political operative and journalist David Brock received $2 million from several rich progressives to start Media Matters, with the goal of “monitoring” conservative commentators and to note any factual errors that they present on their television and radio programs. There was also an expectation that the material could be used by liberal talk radio hosts to help fill air time. MMfA was developed with help from the Center for American Progress.

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/media-matters-for-america/

[Guest]

While speaking of the left media onslaught, here are a few others often quoted on this forum....

"he Center for American Progress (CAP) and its parallel advocacy arm the Center for American Progress Action Fund (CAP Action) are two key cogs in the left-wing policy and message machine. Using the institutional imprimatur of CAP’s “think tank” and CAP Action’s blog ThinkProgress, CAP’s directors and funders — who include left-wing hedge fund titan George Soros — attempt to move national policy debates ever leftward."

"In a feature article on the expansion of ThinkProgress, POLITICO illustrated how the site differs from a mainstream news organization. POLITICO reported:

ThinkProgress [… is] hardly just another media organization. […] Further, CAP Action Fund openly runs political advocacy campaigns, and plays a central role in the Democratic Party’s infrastructure, and the new reporting staff down the hall isn’t exactly walled off from that message machine, nor does it necessarily keep its distance from liberal groups organizing advocacy campaigns targeting conservatives."

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/528-center-for-american-progress/

So when you see a source like THINK PROGRESS, it is an arm of the Democratic party !!!!!!

[Guest]

"Media Matters for America (MMfA) is an IRS tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization that purports to document supposed conservative media bias. Media Matters Action Network (MMAN) is the affiliated 501(c)(4) organization that is the advocacy arm of MMfA.

Media Matters original goal was to serve as a “fact-checker” that focused on conservative media programming. But in practice, the organization primarily criticizes the opinions of Rush Limbaugh and the hosts and guests of Fox News Channel. MMfA was particularly focused Glenn Beck and was credited with leading the campaign to remove the host from Fox News airwaves.

In 2004, Democratic political operative and journalist David Brock received $2 million from several rich progressives to start Media Matters, with the goal of “monitoring” conservative commentators and to note any factual errors that they present on their television and radio programs. There was also an expectation that the material could be used by liberal talk radio hosts to help fill air time. MMfA was developed with help from the Center for American Progress.

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/media-matters-for-america/

Sounds excellent to me. There should be more of these liberal fact checkers around to counter all the garbage Fox News puts on the airways each day.
One good thing about Fox News are the good looking ladies on the channel. Too bad they have to talk.

[Guest]

OK you show us you can read the Title now please tell us your assessment.

Let's see. Hilary is married to Bill. Bill is a scumbag, but his being married to her, I fully empathize with him. Is she scorned? Hmmm, good question. Define "scorned." However, I do believe her to be a bottom feeder.

[Guest]

Sounds excellent to me. There should be more of these liberal fact checkers around to counter all the garbage Fox News puts on the airways each day.
One good thing about Fox News are the good looking ladies on the channel. Too bad they have to talk.

Looks like Fox pays taxes and reports news, which the others mentioned do not.

I suppose if you simply want to be brainwashed....your choice is a good one.

I prefer to make up my own mind, but you enjoy yourself.

[Guest]

Watch what happens now.....

Our "intelligent" democrat posters (and I apologize to the many many real intelligent democrats for my sarcasm intended for the group that posts on here) will now begin an assault on Fox.

Not realizing that Fox is a real news site. Do they err...you betcha....do they have a bias on their NON news shows....yep, they do. BUT they do news.

The left wings sites make no pretense about NOT being about news...simply doing the wishes of the Democratic party.

Now, how dumb and easy can you be to come on here, accept from an organization that is telling you up front that they are brainwashing and yet criticizing a legitimate news source (MOST watched in the world) who does make errors at times.

You make that call, but the upcoming crap will show you who the dumb and easy is and who wants to be brainwashed and cares little about any facts at all.

Must be easier that way....no thinking of any kind involved.

[Guest]

Sounds excellent to me. There should be more of these liberal fact checkers around to counter all the garbage Fox News puts on the airways each day.
One good thing about Fox News are the good looking ladies on the channel. Too bad they have to talk.

There always needs to be someone who is just fine and happy with being brainwashed. Saves a lot of thinking and learning.

[Guest]

Sounds excellent to me. There should be more of these liberal fact checkers around to counter all the garbage Fox News puts on the airways each day.
One good thing about Fox News are the good looking ladies on the channel. Too bad they have to talk.

Funny that Fox is the number one news cable network in the world. They only got that way with the help of the liberal viewers.

"Garbage?" Would you care to elaborate? I watch several local news channels and find that there are many news items that they refuse to air, so I have to turn it to FOX in order to see what's going on in the world.

I see that you are one of those that prefer to be coddled and lied to. You like to be taken care of and kept in the dark like a mushroom. I feel sorry for you.

[Guest]

There always needs to be someone who is just fine and happy with being brainwashed. Saves a lot of thinking and learning.

That's why liberals like the Community Organizer-in-chief. They want to be kept in the dark and taken care of. They are followers, not leaders. And they prefer than others fight for their freedom, so that they can stay home with their mothers.

[Guest]

Let's see. Hilary is married to Bill. Bill is a scumbag, but his being married to her, I fully empathize with him. Is she scorned? Hmmm, good question. Define "scorned." However, I do believe her to be a bottom feeder.

Interesting; the many books written about the Clintons and their...only word that fits is...disgusting personal life and extremely shady dealing have NEVER been challenges to my knowledge and no suits filed for libel.

Some are truly disgusting actually. Monetarily, politically, sexually and certainly their very distant relationship with the truth.

[Guest]

Watch what happens now.....

Our "intelligent" democrat posters (and I apologize to the many many real intelligent democrats for my sarcasm intended for the group that posts on here) will now begin an assault on Fox.

Not realizing that Fox is a real news site. Do they err...you betcha....do they have a bias on their NON news shows....yep, they do. BUT they do news.

The left wings sites make no pretense about NOT being about news...simply doing the wishes of the Democratic party.

Now, how dumb and easy can you be to come on here, accept from an organization that is telling you up front that they are brainwashing and yet criticizing a legitimate news source (MOST watched in the world) who does make errors at times.

You make that call, but the upcoming crap will show you who the dumb and easy is and who wants to be brainwashed and cares little about any facts at all.

Must be easier that way....no thinking of any kind involved.

Real thought full people have Trump, Carson, and Cruz leading for their party candidate for president. Who are the idiots?

What is the percentage of viewers of the Fox national news are Republicans? Do these viewers have another Republican party favoring station to go to? Does anyone believe that they are fair, and balanced? You want to watch a real news programs watch "Morning Joe", or MTP Daily.

The question a Democratic member of the committee should asked the head of the CIA at the time in a closed door Benghazi hearing is, "Did the CIA have anything to do with the statement that the attack on the embassy was in response to the anti-Muslim movie?" There may have been a reason for the statement other than the political one being put forward, or maybe not.

[Guest]

Real thought full people have Trump, Carson, and Cruz leading for their party candidate for president. Who are the idiots?

What is the percentage of viewers of the Fox national news are Republicans? Do these viewers have another Republican party favoring station to go to? Does anyone believe that they are fair, and balanced? You want to watch a real news programs watch "Morning Joe", or MTP Daily.

The question a Democratic member of the committee should asked the head of the CIA at the time in a closed door Benghazi hearing is, "Did the CIA have anything to do with the statement that the attack on the embassy was in response to the anti-Muslim movie?" There may have been a reason for the statement other than the political one being put forward, or maybe not.

First, speaking of the candidates as you did, a FULL year ahead before any primaries serves no purpose. Of course, you know the list of leaders in polls at this time is filled with mostly non Presidents so will not respond to that part. I also find it offensive and rude calling people idiots. Does not do anything but make you look bad frankly but that is your call. Mostly when I speak negative, as I do and will, on Clinton for example or even our President, I offer a backup for what I am saying and have never referred to anyone as you did WITHOUT backing it up.

You are misunderstanding the idea here. I am taking no side on the continuing debate on Fox news. That debate was begun by Media Matters and the Democrat party in concert with their media outlets. I am neither a watcher of Fox news on a steady basis, nor any of the cable news channels.

I am being a bit self centered here, but want to insure you understand where I am coming from. I watch Morning Joe every morning of my life actually and have since the day it began. I also will watch CNN and MSNBC depending on what I am looking for.

Not sure I understand your question on other stations, but the implication is that Fox is favored to watch because they lean right and that Republicans have no other place to go. Now that gets to the crux of my point.

I subscribe to theory that you learn by investigating. Investigate by reading. If you want to add some tv watching to your background, so be it. Most of the basis for my information and posts are from reading.

The very nature of my comments revolve about people who actually use Media Matters or other sources (THINK PROGRESS for one). Those sites do not lean left; THEY ARE ACTUAL WORKING PARTS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY and using them as a source of information is totally dumb because you will only read revisionist history or revisionist facts. YOU WILL NOT LEARN ANYTHING. YOU WILL BE BRAINWASHED.

You are presenting your brain with information you know by its very essence is skewed and it is not hidden that is what it is. I am not inventing these things. Heck, Media Matters is a tax exempt orginization and THINK PROGRESS was set up by and for the Democratic party.

Then, to use that as a source on a political forum to make a point simply shows how naive and brainwashed you are.

I do not ever want to be that way. I respect people disagreeing with me but based on the facts and not spoon fed revised and mostly screened information.

Do the Republicans have such sites ? OF COURSE THEY DO. I see very little of them used to make a point on here and have just grown every frustrated with people using all these sites that are not even pretending to be news sites.

Fox is biased...ok.....but it is in fact a news orginization despite the cute little remarks that the sheep use on here use to describe them. I am not defending Fox in anyway and totally understand that their NON NEWS PROGRAMMING is skewed right.

What your point is I am not sure, but hope I clarified mine. Presenting things as news that are diatribes from a political party is sort of self degeneration of a sort. You simply admit you are brainwashed and have nothing to add from your own mind.

On the Benghazi question you raise, I think we have just begun with the questions and they will sharpen as more information is known. Ms Clinton is on the record on a number of things that she cannot take back. It was a political action, both hers and the Presidents and the commitee.

As I said, so what to the politics of the committee. Every black person shot by a white policeman is used by the Democratic party and the WH...every multiple shooting is used by anti gun people and if you are anywhere near as smart as you purport yourself to be, you know how it works. Benghazi committee was and is only part 1

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1134813...and they prefer than others fight for their freedom, so that they can stay home with their mothers.[/QUOTE]

Well, tell us when the last time was that Americans fought in a war for our freedom.

Sure was not Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea. World War II was the last time. That war ended 70 years ago.

How many soldiers died in all those wars after WWII? I bet their mothers would have liked them to stay home instead of being involved in civil wars or wars based on lies.

[Guest]

Well, tell us when the last time was that Americans fought in a war for our freedom.

Sure was not Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea. World War II was the last time. That war ended 70 years ago.

How many soldiers died in all those wars after WWII? I bet their mothers would have liked them to stay home instead of being involved in civil wars or wars based on lies.

Ever wonder if your freedom and mine would be the same or even exist if we did not participate in those wars ?

[Guest]

Well, tell us when the last time was that Americans fought in a war for our freedom.

Sure was not Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea. World War II was the last time. That war ended 70 years ago.

How many soldiers died in all those wars after WWII? I bet their mothers would have liked them to stay home instead of being involved in civil wars or wars based on lies.

Each "war" has its own story and to present them in this manner as if they were all the same, in the same time period with all the same 'actors" is extremely short sighted.

You have a very distorted and very naive view of history.

Of course, each has negatives...each had people who did not want us in them.

Heck, you mention WW2 as the last time, etc. Do you know how many history books have been written as to how many died BECAUSE WE WAITED TO GET INVOLVED ?

You make history sound simple....trust me...it is not.

[Guest]

Well, tell us when the last time was that Americans fought in a war for our freedom.

Sure was not Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea. World War II was the last time. That war ended 70 years ago.

How many soldiers died in all those wars after WWII? I bet their mothers would have liked them to stay home instead of being involved in civil wars or wars based on lies.

I would have rather stayed home, but I didn't think your bed was large enough for us both to hide under.

[Guest]

Well, tell us when the last time was that Americans fought in a war for our freedom.

Sure was not Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, or Korea. World War II was the last time. That war ended 70 years ago.

How many soldiers died in all those wars after WWII? I bet their mothers would have liked them to stay home instead of being involved in civil wars or wars based on lies.


"The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

"Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, WAR has Never done much of anything good... "

"You can lead a liberal to the truth, but you can't make them THINK !"

[Guest]

I would have rather stayed home, but I didn't think your bed was large enough for us both to hide under.

:BigApplause:

[Guest]

"Media Matters for America (MMfA) is an IRS tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization that purports to document supposed conservative media bias. Media Matters Action Network (MMAN) is the affiliated 501(c)(4) organization that is the advocacy arm of MMfA.

Media Matters original goal was to serve as a “fact-checker” that focused on conservative media programming. But in practice, the organization primarily criticizes the opinions of Rush Limbaugh and the hosts and guests of Fox News Channel. MMfA was particularly focused Glenn Beck and was credited with leading the campaign to remove the host from Fox News airwaves.

In 2004, Democratic political operative and journalist David Brock received $2 million from several rich progressives to start Media Matters, with the goal of “monitoring” conservative commentators and to note any factual errors that they present on their television and radio programs. There was also an expectation that the material could be used by liberal talk radio hosts to help fill air time. MMfA was developed with help from the Center for American Progress.

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/media-matters-for-america/


So why didn't the IRS investigate Media Matters tax exempt 501 (c) (3) status as they had virtually ever conservative organization seeking such relief? Why did the IRS go on such a witch hunt ( criminal in nature) following Citizens United?

Progressives have a corner on unethical and dare I say tipping close to criminal dealings in order to prevail .

[Guest]

First, speaking of the candidates as you did, a FULL year ahead before any primaries serves no purpose. Of course, you know the list of leaders in polls at this time is filled with mostly non Presidents so will not respond to that part. I also find it offensive and rude calling people idiots. Does not do anything but make you look bad frankly but that is your call. Mostly when I speak negative, as I do and will, on Clinton for example or even our President, I offer a backup for what I am saying and have never referred to anyone as you did WITHOUT backing it up.

You are misunderstanding the idea here. I am taking no side on the continuing debate on Fox news. That debate was begun by Media Matters and the Democrat party in concert with their media outlets. I am neither a watcher of Fox news on a steady basis, nor any of the cable news channels.

I am being a bit self centered here, but want to insure you understand where I am coming from. I watch Morning Joe every morning of my life actually and have since the day it began. I also will watch CNN and MSNBC depending on what I am looking for.

Not sure I understand your question on other stations, but the implication is that Fox is favored to watch because they lean right and that Republicans have no other place to go. Now that gets to the crux of my point.

I subscribe to theory that you learn by investigating. Investigate by reading. If you want to add some tv watching to your background, so be it. Most of the basis for my information and posts are from reading.

The very nature of my comments revolve about people who actually use Media Matters or other sources (THINK PROGRESS for one). Those sites do not lean left; THEY ARE ACTUAL WORKING PARTS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY and using them as a source of information is totally dumb because you will only read revisionist history or revisionist facts. YOU WILL NOT LEARN ANYTHING. YOU WILL BE BRAINWASHED.

You are presenting your brain with information you know by its very essence is skewed and it is not hidden that is what it is. I am not inventing these things. Heck, Media Matters is a tax exempt orginization and THINK PROGRESS was set up by and for the Democratic party.

Then, to use that as a source on a political forum to make a point simply shows how naive and brainwashed you are.

I do not ever want to be that way. I respect people disagreeing with me but based on the facts and not spoon fed revised and mostly screened information.

Do the Republicans have such sites ? OF COURSE THEY DO. I see very little of them used to make a point on here and have just grown every frustrated with people using all these sites that are not even pretending to be news sites.

Fox is biased...ok.....but it is in fact a news orginization despite the cute little remarks that the sheep use on here use to describe them. I am not defending Fox in anyway and totally understand that their NON NEWS PROGRAMMING is skewed right.

What your point is I am not sure, but hope I clarified mine. Presenting things as news that are diatribes from a political party is sort of self degeneration of a sort. You simply admit you are brainwashed and have nothing to add from your own mind.

On the Benghazi question you raise, I think we have just begun with the questions and they will sharpen as more information is known. Ms Clinton is on the record on a number of things that she cannot take back. It was a political action, both hers and the Presidents and the commitee.

As I said, so what to the politics of the committee. Every black person shot by a white policeman is used by the Democratic party and the WH...every multiple shooting is used by anti gun people and if you are anywhere near as smart as you purport yourself to be, you know how it works. Benghazi committee was and is only part 1

It seems, sir, that you have no problem with the initial person making insulting remakes about someone, but have a problem with the person that responds in kind. If that is the way you want to play things, fine.

I have never read Media Matters. So, I have no idea what you are talking about. Why do you people always do this? Always try to place on someone that doesn't agree with you on the extreme. You always want to pigeonhole someone to the far left, that makes it easier to get your point across. You have a hard time dealing with a moderate independent, which I am, but very little problem dealing with a far left Democratic.

You watch Morning Joe. So, you heard that the only person asking questions that related to the Benghazi attacks was Representative Duckworth. Everybody else was either attacking Hillary Clinton, or defending her. There will be no sharper questions as the hearing goes on, just more political nonsense. That may include the Democrats walking out of the hearing. There is a big difference between using Benghazi as a political attack on your opponent, and gun violence as a trigger for stricter gun laws. What legislation s going to come out of the Benghazi hearing?

Back to the Republicans running for president, you watch Morning Joe, so you saw the interview with John Kasich. This is the fifth time I asked this question with no responses. What is wrong with John Kasich as the Republican's candidate for president? You had to see that he was a clear thinking, well informed, reasonable person running for president. He knows that he has to work with Democrats to get things done, and this makes him unacceptable as Republican candidate for president.

[Guest]

It seems, sir, that you have no problem with the initial person making insulting remakes about someone, but have a problem with the person that responds in kind. If that is the way you want to play things, fine.

I have never read Media Matters. So, I have no idea what you are talking about. Why do you people always do this? Always try to place on someone that doesn't agree with you on the extreme. You always want to pigeonhole someone to the far left, that makes it easier to get your point across. You have a hard time dealing with a moderate independent, which I am, but very little problem dealing with a far left Democratic.

You watch Morning Joe. So, you heard that the only person asking questions that related to the Benghazi attacks was Representative Duckworth. Everybody else was either attacking Hillary Clinton, or defending her. There will be no sharper questions as the hearing goes on, just more political nonsense. That may include the Democrats walking out of the hearing. There is a big difference between using Benghazi as a political attack on your opponent, and gun violence as a trigger for stricter gun laws. What legislation s going to come out of the Benghazi hearing?

Back to the Republicans running for president, you watch Morning Joe, so you saw the interview with John Kasich. This is the fifth time I asked this question with no responses. What is wrong with John Kasich as the Republican's candidate for president? You had to see that he was a clear thinking, well informed, reasonable person running for president. He knows that he has to work with Democrats to get things done, and this makes him unacceptable as Republican candidate for president.

:ho:

[Guest]

It seems, sir, that you have no problem with the initial person making insulting remakes about someone, but have a problem with the person that responds in kind. If that is the way you want to play things, fine.

I have never read Media Matters. So, I have no idea what you are talking about. Why do you people always do this? Always try to place on someone that doesn't agree with you on the extreme. You always want to pigeonhole someone to the far left, that makes it easier to get your point across. You have a hard time dealing with a moderate independent, which I am, but very little problem dealing with a far left Democratic.

You watch Morning Joe. So, you heard that the only person asking questions that related to the Benghazi attacks was Representative Duckworth. Everybody else was either attacking Hillary Clinton, or defending her. There will be no sharper questions as the hearing goes on, just more political nonsense. That may include the Democrats walking out of the hearing. There is a big difference between using Benghazi as a political attack on your opponent, and gun violence as a trigger for stricter gun laws. What legislation s going to come out of the Benghazi hearing?

Back to the Republicans running for president, you watch Morning Joe, so you saw the interview with John Kasich. This is the fifth time I asked this question with no responses. What is wrong with John Kasich as the Republican's candidate for president? You had to see that he was a clear thinking, well informed, reasonable person running for president. He knows that he has to work with Democrats to get things done, and this makes him unacceptable as Republican candidate for president.


You give yourself much credit. I was not responding to YOU; I was responding to the posts on Media Matters.

Let's understand, all is not about YOU. Nobody did anything to you, yet you seem to always feel put upon.


Again, let me help you understand. Republicans criticized for using Benghazi for political purpose. I say, so what...every black shooting by a white is made a political issue by the Democratic Party....every multiple victim shooting is made political by the Democratic Party. That was the extent of it.

My perception of candidates and yours is different, thankfully, and since we are so far away, while I have preferences, my mind is not made up. The debates might help if they are finally able to discuss issues.

[Guest]

I might add to the last post, the continuing politicizing of black/white continues as the President AND VALARIE JARRETT met with Black Lives Matter last week, and encouraged them to keep going.

He says he understands them. While blacks continue to be slaughtered in Chicago and elsewhere, NOBODY goes there to March. In NYC where another policeman was just killed, there was an anti police rally.

No politics here, right ?

[Guest]

I might add to the last post, the continuing politicizing of black/white continues as the President AND VALARIE JARRETT met with Black Lives Matter last week, and encouraged them to keep going.

He says he understands them. While blacks continue to be slaughtered in Chicago and elsewhere, NOBODY goes there to March. In NYC where another policeman was just killed, there was an anti police rally.

No politics here, right ?

He is padding the future positions of the Barry and Michelle movement.
A new law firm....Sharpton, Jackson, Obama and Obama; Special interest, minority and racial bias experts. If you don't have the problem we can get it for you!!!

[Guest]

He is padding the future positions of the Barry and Michelle movement.
A new law firm....Sharpton, Jackson, Obama and Obama; Special interest, minority and racial bias experts. If you don't have the problem we can get it for you!!!

You are assuming that the Obama's will ever wish to work again.

[Guest]

Benghazi: GOP's helping hand for Hillary Clinton - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/opinions/gergen-gop-helping-hand-for-hillary/)

I am having a little trouble really with the continued attacks on Hillary Clinton.

She is a snake and a sneaky horrible person! SHE and her husband are all about power and making money. Remember when she gave a fund manager a $1,000 and within months it was $100,000!!!!

What about all the other scandals during their time in Arkansas while she was with the Law Firm there.

The other day she went off talking about Republicans and women's issues. She compared the Republicans to the Terrorists in how they treat their woman. She should have compared the terrorists to her husband in how he treated women!!!!!
She is a joke!

[Guest]

She is a snake and a sneaky horrible person! SHE and her husband are all about power and making money. Remember when she gave a fund manager a $1,000 and within months it was $100,000!!!!

What about all the other scandals during their time in Arkansas while she was with the Law Firm there.

The other day she went off talking about Republicans and women's issues. She compared the Republicans to the Terrorists in how they treat their woman. She should have compared the terrorists to her husband in how he treated women!!!!!
She is a joke!


:thumbup:

[Guest]

You give yourself much credit. I was not responding to YOU; I was responding to the posts on Media Matters.

Let's understand, all is not about YOU. Nobody did anything to you, yet you seem to always feel put upon.


Again, let me help you understand. Republicans criticized for using Benghazi for political purpose. I say, so what...every black shooting by a white is made a political issue by the Democratic Party....every multiple victim shooting is made political by the Democratic Party. That was the extent of it.

My perception of candidates and yours is different, thankfully, and since we are so far away, while I have preferences, my mind is not made up. The debates might help if they are finally able to discuss issues.

You simply can't help yourself. In the real world when you hit "quote post", most normal people think that you are replying to them. In your world when you get called on a stupid assumption, you reply with the above attack someone that actually has a brain.

You don't watch Morning Joe. So you have no idea, what John Kasich said during that interview. I am looking for a candidate that is willing to work the Democrats to get things done. You are looking for someone that literally wants to continue with deadlock in Washington. Getting something done requires something that they don't have any respect for opposing views. I am right. You are wrong. So, why should a bother lowering myself to even talk with an interior being? All men are created equal, but Republicans are more equal.

Concerning Benghazi, since it is nothing more than a political stunt, the Republican National committee should reimburse the government for the cost of the hearing.

[Guest]

You know Hillary to me never did answer the questions like they were asked, she side step the question & answered it just the way she wanted. When she didn't answer the question the way it was asked, what do we think she'll do as president if something like this come up when she's running the country. She can turn the whole situation around & probably continue to blame it on Bush & sound convincing enough that we'll buy & if we don't like it what she says, what are we going to do about it, NOTHING! Hillary to me is a pathetic liar & dishonest person. Besides did we really think Hillary would be thrown out of the campaign, she's the Dem. best candidate out of the 5 that's running. Don't know why the other 4 are wasting money!

[Guest]

You simply can't help yourself. In the real world when you hit "quote post", most normal people think that you are replying to them. In your world when you get called on a stupid assumption, you reply with the above attack someone that actually has a brain.

You don't watch Morning Joe. So you have no idea, what John Kasich said during that interview. I am looking for a candidate that is willing to work the Democrats to get things done. You are looking for someone that literally wants to continue with deadlock in Washington. Getting something done requires something that they don't have any respect for opposing views. I am right. You are wrong. So, why should a bother lowering myself to even talk with an interior being? All men are created equal, but Republicans are more equal.

Concerning Benghazi, since it is nothing more than a political stunt, the Republican National committee should reimburse the government for the cost of the hearing.

Should Obama reimburse the gov for his waste of five million bucks to train five useless soldiers?

Since the Benghazi disaster was lied about from the start, do you not think that Americans (and victim's families) wanted to know the truth and not a fabrication for politics of the upcoming elections? Personally, I would be interested in knowing where the lie originated and also why Obama did not take the attack seriously enough to postpone his trip to Vegas. Of course, when you are a blindly led lemming, I guess you would rather not think about it.

Also, from these hearings, we also found out about Hilary's felonious criminal activity. It's probably better that the FBI found out about it before we get to the elections.

A waste of money was extending unemployment for two years.
A waste of money is paying Planned Parenthood to butcher baby parts for resale.
A waste of money is when Obama, his family and their dog all take separate flights when they go on vacation.
A waste of money is when Michelle takes all her family and friends to Africa on a vacation.
A waste of money is when the Obama's take a date night in NY costing the taxpayer thousands.

But, you aren't worried about it. You'll vote for more of the same and then blame it on Bush.

[Guest]

Should Obama reimburse the gov for his waste of five million bucks to train five useless soldiers?

Since the Benghazi disaster was lied about from the start, do you not think that Americans (and victim's families) wanted to know the truth and not a fabrication for politics of the upcoming elections? Personally, I would be interested in knowing where the lie originated and also why Obama did not take the attack seriously enough to postpone his trip to Vegas. Of course, when you are a blindly led lemming, I guess you would rather not think about it.

Also, from these hearings, we also found out about Hilary's felonious criminal activity. It's probably better that the FBI found out about it before we get to the elections.

A waste of money was extending unemployment for two years.
A waste of money is paying Planned Parenthood to butcher baby parts for resale.
A waste of money is when Obama, his family and their dog all take separate flights when they go on vacation.
A waste of money is when Michelle takes all her family and friends to Africa on a vacation.
A waste of money is when the Obama's take a date night in NY costing the taxpayer thousands.

But, you aren't worried about it. You'll vote for more of the same and then blame it on Bush.

I am simply overwhelmed at people on here and Ms Clinton taking a "victory lap".

This committee discovered her secret server and emails and the ensuing disaster has cost our country a huge amount simply to access and read something that if she had done it right...no cost.

This committee has uncovered a number of lies that she has told, and there will be much more on that issue in months to come.

This committee has "begun" and just begun to unfold the disaster which was our policy in totally destroying Libya.

And frankly, I could care less if at the end it became political. She deserves that kind of treatment, and this committee has done well and will continue to do well. If anyone is making this about politics, it is the shrill, non caring democrats on that committee.

The fellow who wrote the post to which your responded is in another world. You can point out all you want and he has an excuse or a reason that the Republican party is at fault.

BOTH parties are at fault in most cases, but the Democrats seem to be so comfortable with what I can only call "mean" attacks comparing the opposition party to terrorists (and that was the President) or making other such remarks.

[Guest]

I am simply overwhelmed at people on here and Ms Clinton taking a "victory lap".

This committee discovered her secret server and emails and the ensuing disaster has cost our country a huge amount simply to access and read something that if she had done it right...no cost.

This committee has uncovered a number of lies that she has told, and there will be much more on that issue in months to come.

This committee has "begun" and just begun to unfold the disaster which was our policy in totally destroying Libya.

And frankly, I could care less if at the end it became political. She deserves that kind of treatment, and this committee has done well and will continue to do well. If anyone is making this about politics, it is the shrill, non caring democrats on that committee.

The fellow who wrote the post to which your responded is in another world. You can point out all you want and he has an excuse or a reason that the Republican party is at fault.

BOTH parties are at fault in most cases, but the Democrats seem to be so comfortable with what I can only call "mean" attacks comparing the opposition party to terrorists (and that was the President) or making other such remarks.

Let me add that the committee also uncovered the lies told by Ms Clinton in the days after as to the cause.

Again, how can you take a "victory lap" when confronted with all these lies ?

[Guest]

Yes, Hillary was composed, but she certainly didn't look Presidential! She put her face in her hands and looked like a female in distress! You might say her female or "catty" side held her own during the interview. Being aggressive and adamant does NOT make a person an honest person. Hillary has been in Washington far too long. She is a professional liar and knows how to hold her own. Washington has become a cesspool for corrupt politicians and liars who want to line their pockets and foundations. Why do you think Bill has kept Hillary around for so long? She does his dirty work while he plays with the Interns.

[Guest]

The hearing just proved that Hilary is a pretty poor actress and should not be invited to be on SNL anymore. They don't want their ratings to go down.

[Guest]

Clinton is a lying,cheaten,cold hearted women who cares only about herself.

[Guest]

Old lady CLINTON dresses like Kim Jung un from North Korea.

[Guest]

Old lady CLINTON dresses like Kim Jung un from North Korea.

But with more civilized treachery .........:BigApplause:

[Guest]

Rubio hit it "out of the park" with this....

"During the congressional hearing on Benghazi "it was revealed that Hillary Clinton knew early on and was telling her family and telling her friends that the attack on the consulate was by terrorists, al-Qaeda-like terrorists," Rubio said on CNN.

"The Clintons are nothing but masters of self-preservation," he added. "She was telling her relatives and friends early on that she clearly had doubts."

There was "never a single shred of evidence" that the attack was caused by a controversial video, an explanation that Clinton and Obama administration officials provided in the days after the attacks."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/29/rubio-avoids-attacking-bush-on-morning-shows/

Even on this forum, many mentioned how she really stretched the truth and believablity during that hearing, and yet she and the media took a "victory lap".

Oh, but what she explained...

"Clinton called the changing narratives after the attacks a "fog of war" moment in her testimony before the hearing. "

The media asked a lot of "gotcha" questions last night and someday maybe someone will go after this woman on FACTS. She has been either the principle involved or an auxiliary to, so many many investigations. She have been proven a liar and yet.......well, let us wait until next year and hope that in general election someone steps up before the Republican candidate does and asks the tough questions.

Her selection of interviews and, if you read you know the conditions placed by her campaign on what she will talk about, ability and it is an ability to lie and twist things and then giggle and laugh at anyone who dares call her on her lies.

Some of the books written by close associates and even secret service folks mention that cackle and how she turns on anyone who calls her on her lies.

[Guest]

"Bill is the greatest husband and father I know. No one is more faithful, true, and honest than he." - Hillary Clinton (Quoted 1998)

[Guest]

"Bill is the greatest husband and father I know. No one is more faithful, true, and honest than he." - Hillary Clinton (Quoted 1998)

That is a fabulous testimony to her lying, deceiving and role playing/acting.

A true full blooded PHONY in everything she did/does. Proof positive there is not a sincere bone in her body!

[Guest]

"Bill is the greatest husband and father I know. No one is more faithful, true, and honest than he." - Hillary Clinton (Quoted 1998)


That's cause who they hang with are worse than Bill, so he probably is the least sleazy scumbag she knows.
:censored:

[Guest]

Let me simplify all this jibber-jabber... You get one vote, I get one vote..

Oh and one more thing.. I'll be celebrating in a year!:22yikes:

[Guest]

Let me simplify all this jibber-jabber... You get one vote, I get one vote..

Oh and one more thing.. I'll be celebrating in a year!:22yikes:

Me too, Hillary will probably be indicted by then.

[Guest]

Let me simplify all this jibber-jabber... You get one vote, I get one vote..

Oh and one more thing.. I'll be celebrating in a year!:22yikes:

I would rather be RELIEVED than celebrating. Since Biden is not in the race for pres, I will be relieved when I know there is no chance for any of the Dems currently running to get elected. On the other hand, I am no problems with any of the Republican candidates getting elected.

And I will be voting straight party on my ballot, so I won't have to worry about which way any votes on issues might possibly go. I have seen Democrats go completely left, but even if a Republican goes moderate/center it's better than a socialist vote.