One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
“I knew exactly what we were doing in B******i”
Page <prev 2 of 7 next> last>>
Oct 25, 2015 17:24:15   #
MarvinSussman
 
payne1000 wrote:
Were Bush and Cheney unaware the towers were r****d with explosives? Surely the Secret Service and CIA who had offices in WTC7 alerted them to that fact. Sorry, LIHOP has never passed the smell test.


R****d by whom for what reason. Out with it!

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 17:39:59   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
If Gowdy couldn't prove that crap, you can't either. Can it!


Marvin-it was the Secretary's direct responsibility to either protect her ambassador or withdraw from the area. She did neither and has blood on her hands. Why ? Because it did not fit the Obama narrative that all was well in Libya and terrorism had been dealt with. That is why Susan Rice, with the approval of both Hillary and Obama, went on with her video story. Both Obama and Hillary knew better but the video story fit the narrative when the t***h did not. You are allowing your ideology to overshadow your common sense. We all know why Rice, Clinton and Obama lied and it was to make Obama look good for his re-e******n. Hillary continues to lie because that is her nature to do so even when the t***h would serve her better. It is sad indeed that the democrats have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with a candidate who is viewed by a majority of Americans as dishonest and untrustworthy. Ironically, you seem to be OK with it. Good Luck America !!!

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 17:42:05   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
R****d by whom for what reason. Out with it!


payne-get off the strong meds or quit smoking that stuff. You are going off the deep end. Good Luck America !!!

Reply
 
 
Oct 25, 2015 17:42:57   #
okie don
 
As far as I'm concerned they're AL a bunch of criminals.
Well, Ron Paul and a few others are deeply concerned about our nation.
We need a new political party that's for "We The People". Trump is 'shaking 'um up'and TGE internet too!

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 19:39:24   #
MarvinSussman
 
Ricko wrote:
Marvin-it was the Secretary's direct responsibility to either protect her ambassador or withdraw from the area. She did neither and has blood on her hands. Why ? Because it did not fit the Obama narrative that all was well in Libya and terrorism had been dealt with. That is why Susan Rice, with the approval of both Hillary and Obama, went on with her video story. Both Obama and Hillary knew better but the video story fit the narrative when the t***h did not. You are allowing your ideology to overshadow your common sense. We all know why Rice, Clinton and Obama lied and it was to make Obama look good for his re-e******n. Hillary continues to lie because that is her nature to do so even when the t***h would serve her better. It is sad indeed that the democrats have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with a candidate who is viewed by a majority of Americans as dishonest and untrustworthy. Ironically, you seem to be OK with it. Good Luck America !!!
Marvin-it was the Secretary's direct responsibilit... (show quote)


You started complaining only after Bush’s last “B******i”:

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are k**led.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, k*****g 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are k**led.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, k*****g 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, k*****g two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are k**led.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate k*****g four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are k**led, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school k*****g two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are k**led.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are k**led, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weekswhen the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

There were 13 “B******i” attacks on US embassies and consulates.

Twelve of them happened during the Bush administration, during which at least 10 Americans were k**led, including a diplomat. No big deal.

Why didn’t Republicans investigate Bush’s 13 B******is?

Where was the outrage?

No hay to be made?

Is it that Bush has a White skin and didn’t need investigating?

Was it just another day at the Oval Office?

Ho hums!

From all the emails released by the CIA, the “talking points” were written by the CIA as a cover story. The question is: why do Republicans want to blow a CIA cover story? Do you want to make political hay with the lives of our agents in the field? Isn’t this close to treason? Why do you h**e America?

Government-shrinking conservatives cut $11B from the State Departments budget.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-…

In May 2012, Ambassador Steven continued to make requests for additional security. The State Department official replied that, due to other commitments and limited resources, “unfortunately, MSD cannot support the request.” http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/up…

When State robbed Peter to pay Paul, the cons complained that Peter was being whacked. “Why didn’t Obama do something?” Missing $11B! = “other commitments and limited resources”.

The CIA’S problem is that they don’t tell anyone what they are doing. When they call for help, there are no fully-loaded planes ready for take-off. Resources have to be gathered and deployed. Pr********n is the only substitute for time. Help came from Tripoli but not in time. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/d…
Official Pentagon time-line: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/africa/libya-b******i-timeline

Actually, the whole idea was something the CIA has been doing for years, offering lots of money for anti-aircraft weapons. The cost of losing a plane is so high that one heat-seeker is worth a bundle. The enemy is h**eful but not toward money.

The operation in B******i just followed up the fall of Qaddafi which released all kinds of stuff. Stevens was hot after them and took one risk too big.

For Obama, this operation was just one of a hundred going on and of little relative importance - until the attack. As ambassador, Stevens was in complete command of the operation, including pr********n and provision for contingencies.

We know as much about the attack and the defense as the CIA wants us to know. You may not like the cover story the CIA provided for Susan Rice, but nobody cares whether you like it or not. So let your imagination run wild. If you can d**g Obama into the story, it will make you feel better but it won't amount to a small hill of beans.

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 20:11:22   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
You started complaining only after Bush’s last “B******i”:

January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are k**led.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, k*****g 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are k**led.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, k*****g 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, k*****g two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are k**led.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate k*****g four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are k**led, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school k*****g two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are k**led.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are k**led, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weekswhen the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

There were 13 “B******i” attacks on US embassies and consulates.

Twelve of them happened during the Bush administration, during which at least 10 Americans were k**led, including a diplomat. No big deal.

Why didn’t Republicans investigate Bush’s 13 B******is?

Where was the outrage?

No hay to be made?

Is it that Bush has a White skin and didn’t need investigating?

Was it just another day at the Oval Office?

Ho hums!

From all the emails released by the CIA, the “talking points” were written by the CIA as a cover story. The question is: why do Republicans want to blow a CIA cover story? Do you want to make political hay with the lives of our agents in the field? Isn’t this close to treason? Why do you h**e America?

Government-shrinking conservatives cut $11B from the State Departments budget.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-…

In May 2012, Ambassador Steven continued to make requests for additional security. The State Department official replied that, due to other commitments and limited resources, “unfortunately, MSD cannot support the request.” http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/up…

When State robbed Peter to pay Paul, the cons complained that Peter was being whacked. “Why didn’t Obama do something?” Missing $11B! = “other commitments and limited resources”.

The CIA’S problem is that they don’t tell anyone what they are doing. When they call for help, there are no fully-loaded planes ready for take-off. Resources have to be gathered and deployed. Pr********n is the only substitute for time. Help came from Tripoli but not in time. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/d…
Official Pentagon time-line: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/africa/libya-b******i-timeline

Actually, the whole idea was something the CIA has been doing for years, offering lots of money for anti-aircraft weapons. The cost of losing a plane is so high that one heat-seeker is worth a bundle. The enemy is h**eful but not toward money.

The operation in B******i just followed up the fall of Qaddafi which released all kinds of stuff. Stevens was hot after them and took one risk too big.

For Obama, this operation was just one of a hundred going on and of little relative importance - until the attack. As ambassador, Stevens was in complete command of the operation, including pr********n and provision for contingencies.

We know as much about the attack and the defense as the CIA wants us to know. You may not like the cover story the CIA provided for Susan Rice, but nobody cares whether you like it or not. So let your imagination run wild. If you can d**g Obama into the story, it will make you feel better but it won't amount to a small hill of beans.
You started complaining only after Bush’s last “B*... (show quote)


Marvin-you should be able to distinguish between a suicide attack ,not preventable, and 600 requests for added security. The battle raged on for 13 hours and nobody was sent to help . Four Americans pleading for help, but abandoned. A real president would have sent someone even if late in arriving. Who gave the stand-down order to the three private security people who said they received one ? Just tell the families the t***h and they will live with it. Keep lying and obfuscating and they will not have the benefit of closure. The scenario offered by the Obama administration was designed to make him look good and a complete lie and you know it. PS. its all Bushs' fault as he should have called Obama and reminded him of the unrest in the area and the anniversary of 911. Good Luck America !!!

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 20:13:40   #
payne1000
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
R****d by whom for what reason. Out with it!


The reason is obvious. It was a terrorist act by rogue operatives of our government, military and intelligence agencies in partnership with Israel, Great Britain, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and probably Turkey. Americans were terrorized enough to allow the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

General Wesley Clark names some of those who were behind the foreign policy c**p which took place on 9/11. Many of them are Z*****ts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oJUnG3Z6WI

Reply
 
 
Oct 25, 2015 22:28:42   #
MarvinSussman
 
Ricko wrote:
Marvin-you should be able to distinguish between a suicide attack ,not preventable, and 600 requests for added security. The battle raged on for 13 hours and nobody was sent to help . Four Americans pleading for help, but abandoned. A real president would have sent someone even if late in arriving. Who gave the stand-down order to the three private security people who said they received one ? Just tell the families the t***h and they will live with it. Keep lying and obfuscating and they will not have the benefit of closure. The scenario offered by the Obama administration was designed to make him look good and a complete lie and you know it. PS. its all Bushs' fault as he should have called Obama and reminded him of the unrest in the area and the anniversary of 911. Good Luck America !!!
Marvin-you should be able to distinguish between a... (show quote)


Foreign Policy published an interesting item from Billy Birdzell, a retired Marine Corps infantry officer and special operations team leader, responding to Fox's secret informant. http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/201… His conclusion:

“Even if the CIF was on ready 5 (fully armed, sitting in the aircraft with pilots at the controls) in Sigonella (the closest European base to B******i) with advanced warning of an attack but unsure of the time, and they launched at 2232 on only-in-Hollywood orders from someone other than the president, they would not have been able to do anything about Stevens and Smith's deaths, nor stopped the mortar rounds.”

Mr. Petraeus said the names of groups suspected in the attack — including Al Qaeda’s franchise in North Africa and a local Libyan group, Ansar al-Shariah — were removed from the public explanation of the attack immediately after the assault to avoiding alerting the militants that American intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/…

The other problem with the CIA is that they always need a cover story in case their operation is blown. So they OK a story that conceals wh**ever they want to conceal. And everyone on the team goes along with the story. That’s the entire story. End of story.

You probably forgot to mention that 100 other ambassadors were also asking for more security which could not be afforded since Republicans had take a chainsaw to the State Department's budget proposal, cutting it back by $12B, which would have paid for 100,000 guard-years.

Bush had much more money for embassy and consulate guards and still suffered 12 attacks without a single Congressional hearing. Why? Could it be politics?

The Republican House k**led 4 great Americans. Congratulations!

Reply
Oct 25, 2015 22:31:48   #
okie don
 
We're there because the Rothschield Banking Cabal ( RKM) want us there.
American youth dyjng or committing suicide when they return home. What, 22 a day commit suicide. Something like that.
All wars are Bankers Wars.(:

Reply
Oct 26, 2015 05:40:18   #
Orrie
 
JMHO wrote:
Clinton has perjured herself before the House Committee and likely committed numerous felony acts by mishandling classified information through unsecured email t***smissions.

This is the admission from Hillary Clinton to Rep. Martha Roby in her testimony to the House Select Committee on B******i October 22, 2015. Amid her expert dancing around substantive answers, what emerged was culpability in the lack of action to either secure or extract the embassy team from B******i.

Revealed facts include the 600 requests for additional security in less than a year, beginning with the previous ambassador, Gene Cretz, who was afterward posted to Ghana. The newly confirmed ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, had more than 20 urgent requests included in that total (83 from May to September) and, although Secretary of State Clinton acknowledged that she “knew exactly” what was t***spiring in B******i, she did not allocate resources to the embassage protection. Instead, Clinton delegated the whole issue to “security professionals,” evidently in order to wipe her hands of the situation. Plausible deniability is the accepted term among the political class avoiding responsibility.

It was brought forth that, despite the escalating peril of the mission, for some reason Stevens did not have direct access to Clinton and was shoved off on the security professionals while Sidney Blumenthal had unlimited contact with the secretary. During the testimony, Clinton repeatedly noted that the ambassador had protection supplied by five trained individuals, though, in her responses she included in that number three who were added from another agency to perform the duty.

Rep. Mike Pompeo noted that the head of Ansar al Sharia, Mohamed al Zahawi, met with Wissam ben Hamid who was associated with mission security. On the day of the attack, Stevens cabled that ben Hamid (whom another agency identified as affiliated with Al Qaeda in August) had met with the B******i mission officials to discuss their security two days previous. Pompeo asked the secretary if she knew that her people had been meeting with an al Qaeda operative discussing security issues, “wittingly or unwittingly.”

Her answer? “Since we didn’t have ongoing personnel in B******i, I don’t know to whom you are referring.” A wholly unsatisfactory response considering the B******i mission was unofficial (and thus unrecognized as requiring a waiver to deny further security) and reliant on Libyan nationals to supply additional security. What Pompeo brought forth was the strong possibility of the attack being engineered from the inside.

But why? Not a single answer was forthcoming from the former Secretary of State who preferred to continue giving credence to the debunked blame placed on an inflammatory video. And this, even after she sent emails to her family and had conversations with the Libyan president and Egyptian prime minister admitting that the attack was an act of terrorism conducted by likely al Qaeda operatives.

The only conclusions that can be reached is that either Secretary Clinton was in the dark about occurrences in B******i, which could not be the case as she stated that she “knew exactly” what was going on there… or, that she was incompetent in her post… or that she did not care what was t***spiring… or that she fully understood not only the danger for her personnel but that she had reason to ignore Stevens’ pleas for additional security.

One other choice bit of information that has been uncovered since the hearing is that the ambassador had indeed requested the closure of the mission and to be extracted. Yet Clinton repeatedly testified that she deferred to Stevens’ superior understanding of the mission’s safety and that he had not requested extraction.

Throughout the whole 11-hour testimony, Clinton displayed consistent disdain, boredom and arrogance with every republican questioner. When fawned over by democrat representatives, the self-satisfied smile was unabated. In t***h, despite Representatives Smith and Sanchez apologizing for the grueling grilling by Clinton’s obvious enemies (all republicans), they suggested that the former secretary should not be submitted to such draining circumstances.

Should she be elected president, Clinton would need a good deal more stamina when a real crisis occurs than what’s necessary to ride out a congressional hearing. Oh, wait, she was serving in one of the most important cabinet offices when she failed to adequately respond to a crisis where her charge, Ambassador Stevens, and three other courageous men were murdered in an intricately engineered attack on an unsecured mission. A mission that Clinton appears to have virtually ignored for a grander scheme, which was possibly to obscure the illegal trafficking of arms through Libya to the “rebels” in Syria. And it has all led to naught but a swamp of Islamic State proliferation from Libya to Syria that is spreading throughout Europe and knocking on America’s door in the form of “refugees.”

There can be no other conclusion than Clinton has perjured herself before the House Committee and likely committed numerous felony acts by mishandling classified information through unsecured email t***smissions. The facts make it clear that Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted to serve in any office of government, let alone that of the Presidency.

http://canadafreepress.com/article/76267?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=530b9c2a3c-5_20_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-530b9c2a3c-297717381
b Clinton has perjured herself before the House C... (show quote)


But guess what? Hillary will be placed into the Oval Office by her handlers. Just as Obama was given the reins of power over our country.

Hillary will pick up the baton and run America into the ground! We can all count on it!

Reply
Oct 26, 2015 05:43:57   #
Orrie
 
Ricko wrote:
Marvin-it was the Secretary's direct responsibility to either protect her ambassador or withdraw from the area. She did neither and has blood on her hands. Why ? Because it did not fit the Obama narrative that all was well in Libya and terrorism had been dealt with. That is why Susan Rice, with the approval of both Hillary and Obama, went on with her video story. Both Obama and Hillary knew better but the video story fit the narrative when the t***h did not. You are allowing your ideology to overshadow your common sense. We all know why Rice, Clinton and Obama lied and it was to make Obama look good for his re-e******n. Hillary continues to lie because that is her nature to do so even when the t***h would serve her better. It is sad indeed that the democrats have had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with a candidate who is viewed by a majority of Americans as dishonest and untrustworthy. Ironically, you seem to be OK with it. Good Luck America !!!
Marvin-it was the Secretary's direct responsibilit... (show quote)




:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
 
 
Oct 26, 2015 05:45:49   #
Orrie
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
You probably forgot to mention that 100 other ambassadors were also asking for more security which could not be afforded since Republicans had take a chainsaw to the State Department's budget proposal, cutting it back by $12B, which would have paid for 100,000 guard-years or 1,000 guard-years per ambassador.

Bush had much more money for embassy and consulate guards and still suffered 12 attacks without a single Congressional hearing. Why? Could it be politics?

The Republican House k**led 4 great Americans. Congratulations!
You probably forgot to mention that 100 other amba... (show quote)


Bulls**t! :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

Reply
Oct 26, 2015 07:38:22   #
Radiance3
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
You probably forgot to mention that 100 other ambassadors were also asking for more security which could not be afforded since Republicans had take a chainsaw to the State Department's budget proposal, cutting it back by $12B, which would have paid for 100,000 guard-years or 1,000 guard-years per ambassador.

Bush had much more money for embassy and consulate guards and still suffered 12 attacks without a single Congressional hearing. Why? Could it be politics?

The Republican House k**led 4 great Americans. Congratulations!
You probably forgot to mention that 100 other amba... (show quote)

=================
Our fellow Americans serving our country have been dying.
600 requests for securities from the ambassador in B******i never reached Clinton's ear? The security requests were addressed to Clinton, not one of them reached her? Impossible, it is a complete lie. It was a malicious intent to lie.

Clinton is responsible to her duties as Sec. of State, and manage all her personnel underneath her, with the flow of information coming to her, and from her. Lack of communication out of 600 requests? No one must excuse these chronic lies.

She is accountable to Obama's and Obama is accountable to the American people who elected him, and who he'd sworn an oath to protect and defend. What did they do? They said, they knew nothing what was going on? Why are here holding the highest office of he land when they could not handle it? Another complete lie.

Another reason is budget funding, and t***sferring blames to other people, even people 15 years ago.

Where are our budget priorities? ObamaCare which made every working taxpaying Americans suffer for more cost, but less medical care. As a result it is not a healthcare at all. It was designed for more coverage of additional tens of millions of i*****l a***ns including those committing crimes against the American people. Purpose is to multiply their v**ers and followers to make them majority ensuring victory in every e******n.

Recently it was reported by GAO that $5 billion was missing from the initial launching of Obamacare. Medicare system was one of the victims because there was $650 billion taken out from that system to initiate funding of this monstrous project at the expense of the dying seniors whose care diminished due to budget constraints.

Where are our budget priorities? Lavish vacations,
feeding, and educating 10 of millions of i*****l a***ns and their millions of children in public schools, plus the cost of medical care. But depriving our own fellow Americans serving this country, including the veterans who served and got hurt and disabled. Tens of thousands of them died waiting for medical doctors' care that never happened. As the officials running the VA system got bonuses and salary increases every year. Where are our budget priorities?

Reply
Oct 26, 2015 08:13:06   #
JMHO Loc: Utah
 
Two absolute morons (sussman & payne) arguing, I love it!

Reply
Oct 26, 2015 08:40:04   #
MTHolster69
 
I agree that Clinton isn't qualified to serve as POTUS. Unfortunately the B******i Committee spent most of their time s**tting in each other's soup which put a foul taste on the whole affair.
Clinton clearly waded thru the piles of s**t and came out smelling like gardenias.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 7 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.