- Joined
- Sep 17, 2013
- Messages
- 48,281
- Reaction score
- 25,273
- Location
- Western NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
The Amerikan liberal sure does whine a lot.
Hillary is no babe in the woods - but neither is Gowdy. Bill just got done saying that we can trust Hillary because she told him unequivocally that she didn't do anything improper. So we are to expect that a verified liar accepts the statement of another verified liar as gospel. I think Gowdy knows the Clinton schtick well enough.
Please enlighten us on investigations 2 through 8, when they were held and what Hillary had to say.
Or is this more socialist swill, "poor me" exaggerated clap trap.
The Amerikan liberal sure does whine a lot. It's been six long years of "they won't let me" from "the first black president" I guess we're in for more of the same from "they're picking on me because I'm a woman" first woman president.
I wonder if America is ready to simply elect a president instead of a label to try to fool the world you're actually in the 21st century.
Its going to get real interesting, with what else Gowdy is going to bring up about Libya and her whole policy there and not just Benghazi. But that wont be until her next hearing.
Gowdy should force her to take a deposition. Then go with this testimony.
I'm amused that the left here is laughing about the investigations. It's very much like they are celebrating obfuscation and intransigence as tactics we all should endorse. I'm going to make a leap here, and bet they wouldn't be so celebratory if the shoe was on the other foot.
They always have.
It's like they know there's something there and it's a game to see if honest people can find it.
For me, honest people stand up and say "I have nothing to hide" and hand it all over.
The Clintons have never done that. It's always to be dragged kicking and screaming amid "I did not have sex with that woman" or "I never heard of Benghazi" or some slimy reptilian **** with them
I'm amused that the left here is laughing about the investigations. It's very much like they are celebrating obfuscation and intransigence as tactics we all should endorse. I'm going to make a leap here, and bet they wouldn't be so celebratory if the shoe was on the other foot.
Well, really a lot of them avoid a lot that's being brought out on Hillary. It must be ruff for them knowing all their hopes and dreams and their last hurrah is teetering on the edge of falling and not being able to ever get back up. You know how they are with pressure.
Oh, they can take it. Just ask 'em. We asked for answers eight times, and we haven't gotten any. That's how it works with them, and they laugh about it as some kind of success. The truth ain't in 'em.
Uhm HB. They have to be able to be around to do that. :mrgreen:
That can apply to any Administration.
Do you actually think she will co-operate?
The reason this bitch is under so much heat is that she's a snow maker, as in snow the committee, wait a year to be found out as less than forthcoming, then return with a big, impatient sigh, saying "OK, see, I have nothing up my sleeve."
The only problem? We will never see those emails she deliberately destroyed. We will never know what actually happened, it's all snow.
But, but Bill said Hillary is believable. How can you argue with that, anymore than you can argue with Mao's wife telling the whole world that Mao was a good man?
I have no doubt its spin. And its clear she's got something up her sleeve, I doubt she just decided to do this.
Are you kidding?
They're blowing about a million a month on adviser's salaries, nothing is spur of the moment, nothing is "Oh, ****, why not?"
There is a plan here, a suitably Clintonian nasty plan.
Yup, the question is what. She's got this albatross hanging around her neck, and probably realizes its weighing her down.
So what does she do? Probably put on an impassioned little performance where she does not give up any info, and then she can tell the gruberites that she's a transparent as can be.
trey grandstanding
check out his questions
http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/rep...se.gov/files/TG letter to Kendall 4.23.15.pdf
he's just begging hillary to kick his lame ass
a very stupid attorneyLooks like a list appropriate to a prosecuting attorney during examination.
Why is that?a very stupid attorney
Why is that?
It looks like Mr. Gowdy is attempting to get her to commit to factual detail, where he'll have the opportunity to verify it's voracity in conjunction with other evidence & witnesses - then he can claim she perjured herself & use that politically while calling her back to Congress for further questioning.
This would seem to match his & his party's goals, I believe.
No?
Why is that?
It looks like Mr. Gowdy is attempting to get her to commit to factual detail, where he'll have the opportunity to verify it's voracity in conjunction with other evidence & witnesses - then he can claim she perjured herself & use that politically while calling her back to Congress for further questioning.
This would seem to match his & his party's goals, I believe.
No?
I bet Benghazi investigation #9 comes to the same conclusion as Benghazi investigation #8.
Heya OS. :2wave: I think Gowdy has another plan in mind. May 18th.
The Hill
✔ @thehill
House Benghazi chairman officially calls Clinton to testify: Benghazi chairman calls Clinton to testify | TheHill
Clinton should expect some questions on the personal email server she employed while serving with the State Department. Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, showed he is not about to give Clinton a pass on her personal email use, including a list of 136 sample questions on the topic in his missive to Kendall. “Suffice it to say our members have more questions,” he wrote.
Cox Radio reporter Jamie Dupree has a brief list of some sample questions. A copy of Gowdy’s letter, including all 136 sample questions, can be found in PDF format here......snip~
Trey Gowdy sends Hillary Clinton 136 questions for May appearance before Benghazi committee | Twitchy
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?