Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/15 11:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. The problem with not electing Hillary is that equals a Republican victory, which would be a fate worse than death for this country. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/2015 12:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/23/15 11:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. The problem with not electing Hillary is that equals a Republican victory, which would be a fate worse than death for this country. The problem is that Hillary is the only Democratic choice. You left out a couple of details contained in your Quinnipiac poll post. A. Only 60 percent of Democrats support Hillary. Shotgun Joe has 10%. Where's the other 30 percent? B. More than half of *all* voters consider Hillary to be untrustworthy. |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/15 12:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/23/2015 12:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. The problem with not electing Hillary is that equals a Republican victory, which would be a fate worse than death for this country. The problem is that Hillary is the only Democratic choice. You left out a couple of details contained in your Quinnipiac poll post. A. Only 60 percent of Democrats support Hillary. Shotgun Joe has 10%. Where's the other 30 percent? B. More than half of *all* voters consider Hillary to be untrustworthy. Undecided. It's a year and a half to the elections. So? What's the basis of comparision to the GOPers? |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:13:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 4/23/2015 12:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. The problem with not electing Hillary is that equals a Republican victory, which would be a fate worse than death for this country. The problem is that Hillary is the only Democratic choice. You left out a couple of details contained in your Quinnipiac poll post. A. Only 60 percent of Democrats support Hillary. Shotgun Joe has 10%. Where's the other 30 percent? B. More than half of *all* voters consider Hillary to be untrustworthy. http://www.webb2016.com/ -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner behavior causes problems. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() You read Think Progress? No wonder you are so ignorant. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/23/2015 12:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/23/15 11:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 11:45 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/23/15 11:43 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/23/2015 10:47 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: ThinkProgress Report: Schweizer Admits He Cannot Prove Allegations In Clinton Cash; ThinkProgress Finds First Embarrassing Error: Schweizer Cites A Hoax Press Release Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash reportedly does not prove its speculative attacks on the Clintons and even relies on a hoax press release to support a claim, according to ThinkProgress. Clinton Cash will be released on May 5, and media reports have already hyped the book's supposed revelations about connections between Hillary Clinton's time as secretary of state, donations to the Clinton Foundation, and paid speeches given by the Clintons. According to ThinkProgress, which obtained an advance copy of the book, "Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun": Schweizer makes clear that he does not intend to present a smoking gun, despite the media speculation. The book relies heavily on timing, stitching together the dates of donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees with actions by the State Department. Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. "Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don't know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do," he writes. Later, he concludes, "We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates." ThinkProgress details several of Schweizer's claims, and highlights one major error already found in the book. According to the site, Schweizer at one point uses a press release to bolster one of his many speculative claims, citing it to suggest there may have been a link between a private company that was paying Bill Clinton for speeches (and which supposedly issued the press release) and a State Department report released when Hillary Clinton was secretary. However, ThinkProgress notes, the press release Schweizer cites was revealed as a hoax back in 2013. This apparently sloppy sourcing from Schweizer is nothing new. As Media Matters extensively documented, Schweizer's career as a Republican activist and researcher is riddled with errors, retractions, and investigations that find his facts "do not check out" and his sources "do not exist." Our analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which journalists called out Schweizer for his botched reporting. Eisboch's favorite investigative reporter... ![]() Typical of a liberal, you are making some erroneous assumptions. As I already said I had never heard of Schweizer before this hit the news. Indeed, he has not claimed to be able to "prove" anything. Apparently his story is a timeline of events that has raised the suspicion of many, both on the right and of those on the left. As you correctly stated, he leaves the proof finding to others. Interestingly, there seems to be more of a negative clamor about it by Democrats than Republicans so far. Hopefully you will remember how he operates when he releases his book on Jeb Bush's financial activities. Oh, I don't give a damn about Jeb, really. He's not going anywhere. I'm hoping for a Cruz-Carson ticket, or something equally bizarre. It's important for the crazy wing of the GOP to get its ass slammed to the ground in 2016 so that by 2020, the GOP returns to the center of sensibility and electability. Offering reasons not to elect Hillary Clinton as POTUS is also fun. Good news is: Support for your only candidate is waning while my objective is gaining. The problem with not electing Hillary is that equals a Republican victory, which would be a fate worse than death for Harry Krause. So true. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The shit around Rand Paul gets...deeper | General | |||
Higher gun ownership equals higher rate of homicide | General | |||
NRA slides deeper into its pit of slime. | General | |||
Sarah digs herself a deeper hole | General | |||
McCain piles it higher and deeper | General |