LET THE MAKEOVER BEGIN!

Since our Democrat visitors are gloating over their supposed success in tarring Donald Trump as this villain, that villain, and every other kind of villain, it only seems fair to give them an equal opportunity to sing the praises and accomplishments of their wonderful candidate.

Here we have a report on one of the more immediate results of that famed “Arab Spring” that Hillary Clinton and her then boss, President Barack Obama, promoted as a great harbinger of change in the Middle. And what a change it was!

I apologize. Some of the links don’t work anymore. As H. Clinton is wont to say, this is old news. It just part of her record, after all.

Fortunately, this post, https://citizentom.com/2012/09/22/the-liberal-democrat-partys-collapsing-middle-east/, still contains a link to “The Anti-Anti-Islam Film TV Ad By US in Pakistan Repudiating Film”.

Don’t you remember? Were you not thrilled when H. Clinton and our president blamed the attack on our embassy in Benghazi, Libya on an unknown video.

This is one for the history books folks. Make certain you see that short, tiny, one-minute video. When the first Tuesday in November 2016 comes, you will be in just the right mood to vote for H. Clinton.

Citizen Tom

newsBecause I see little reason to fund a newspaper not fit to wrap and bury fish waste, I don’t read The New York Times. Unfortunately, others do, and some of those others will believe something just because it is in a “prestigious” newspaper. Therefore, other news outlets often repeat or comment on the content of The New York Times.

So what is the The New York Times latest big story?

On Sunday, The New York Times printed a comprehensive, no-nonsense article beginning on the front page under the headline: “Deadly Mix in Benghazi: False Allies, Crude Video — Interviews Show Militia and Insults to Islam Fed Attack — No Qaeda Link Seen.” The author is David D. Kirkpatrick, one of the best journalists we have, and the article was the result of “months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi…

View original post 539 more words

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “LET THE MAKEOVER BEGIN!

  1. Tony

    Forgive me, but I saw nothing diabolical in the video. Since this seems to be more topical to this article, I will repost with some typographical correction a previous comment that I just made on a previous thread:

    Just saw this one from you Tom:

    “Tony – Instead of dealing with the facts and the choice before us, you engage in character assassination. The fact you are not alone in doing so does not excuse your behavior.”

    Hah! How laughably ironic. You don’t even try to defend the indefensibly indecent actual words and actions from your own candidate, but instead you aid and abet him in the “character assassination” of a Gold Star parent. You have no principled good thing to say about Trump, you can’t actually explain his public indecencies, so your only response is to engage in the “character assassination” of Clinton based on little less than unproven hearsay, conjecture, slander, innuendo, and outright lies.

    Republicans have been maliciously investigating Clinton for decades, and in recent years, unsuccessfully attempting to try her by no standard that any other Secretary of State, Republican or Democrat, has ever had to meet – a cabinet head is supposed to be personally in charge of security of every mission around the world? The Secretary of State is to be sent to prison because maybe (and it’s a big maybe) a couple of emails that came to her personal account from someone else could “possibly” be classified after the fact, although they were not classified at the time? What if I were to post something classified here, not mark it so and you did not even know it was classified, but it may or may not be considered classified years after the fact, are you supposed to go to prison for that?

    Look at the results of the sickeningly partisan and endlessly exhaustive Republican lead investigations of both these incidents. You may be ideologically blinded sometimes, but you’re no fool Tom. Don’t you think that if Republicans could have actually hung anything really illegal around Clinton’s neck after all these years and all this politcially motivated waste of taxpayer money, then they would have gladly done so?

    You indulge here in nothing more than ridiculous and scurrilous “character assassination” based on no actual facts and on nothing more than enraged magical thinking, and everyone here, including Republicans, are supposed to respond to it before we can point out the actual indecent things that come out of Trump’s own big mouth, and yet you accuse me of “character assassination”? Sometimes dear brother, you are a living anachronism.

    Like

    1. @Tony

      You wonder why the Republicans have investigated H. Clinton for years. it is the only thing they can do. It takes a two thirds majority to impeach and throw a sitting official in office.

      You know more about jury trials than I do. Consider your own bias. What good would it do to bring H. Clinton to trial? The security breach with the email server is right out there. You know she had no business having such a thing. You should also know that a Republican cabinet official was removed from office when he took classified material home.

      Regardless of H. Clinton’s guilt too many would choose to ignore the evidence, just as you have.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. You did not see anything in the video. It was just a lie to cover up the fact they had not done anything to provide the people at the embassy help.

    Then you launch into the same diatribe again. Are you okay?

    Like

  3. Tony

    “You know she had no business having such a thing. You should also know that a Republican cabinet official was removed from office when he took classified material home.”

    Are you referring to General Petraeus here? You do realize that Petraeus was still in the military holding a command when he committed a crime – not a cabinet level official, and was therefore bound by the UCMJ. He was a married man who gave unambiguously marked classified material on our strategy against our enemies to his mistress/biographer and then, when it was discovered, tried to cover it up – sure evidence that he not only knew what he did was wrong, but was willing to commit obstruction of justice to hide his guilt. Petraeous eventually admitted to all of this. The fact that Petraeus somehow managed to be let off with pleading a misdemeanor is the real justice department scandle here, not the fact that he was charged and had to resign his post.

    If you hold even the most damning alleged (but subsequently unsubstantiated) actions of Secretary Clinton’s up to the Petraeous standard, then she doesn’t even get investigated, much less charged. In fact, Clinton did nothing by having a private email server that her previous two Republican predecessors did not do.

    Perhaps you should find a better example than Petraeous, who admitted to violating several UCMJ provisions (including adultery) and national security acts, if you really want to tar Clinton with seeking favorable treatment from a life long Republican FBI Director (who, I’ve heard was furious about Petraeus getting off so easy, perhaps because it would make it even harder for him to claim with a straight face that prosecuting Clinton made any legal, rather than political, sense). You need to learn the facts Tom rather than just echoing uninformed falsities and slanders.

    Like

  4. Pingback: HOW DO WE KNOW IF SHE IS GUILTY? => TARGET HILLARY CLINTON – Citizen Tom

Comments are closed.