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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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."

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."