• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate probe clears gov

Ockham said:
So you're saying the Fed DoJ is covering up for Christie?
Click to expand...
No no...he is saying Obama and the IRS are totally covered in stink from their cover up and should all go to jail.

Wait...wait...that is that 'immunity' double standard thing, isnt it?
 
Why are GOPs currently asking for the administration to have the IRS quit investigating dark money.
In exchange for Ukraine aid--some way to run/ruin a Nation .
VanceMack said:
No no...he is saying Obama and the IRS are totally covered in stink from their cover up and should all go to jail.

Wait...wait...that is that 'immunity' double standard thing, isnt it?
Click to expand...
 
tres borrachos said:
And of course Holder sees "No conflict of interest there". :roll:
Click to expand...

That's what some of the Obama faith cult would prefer us to believe. Sorry, but I'm a lot more skeptical than that. That investigation is little more than a white wash.
 
Ockham said:
Report: Chris Christie?s Bridgegate probe clears gov - Lucy McCalmont - POLITICO.com


Surely just one important step showing the Gov didn't lie (unlike our many other prominent Washington politicians who have). The Christie haters will continue to hate, the Christie supporters will be rewarded for their steadfast support. The media will likely not say much since this denies a smoking gun and the demise of a rising star Republican. Whether or not Christie runs in 2016 probably hasn't changed - from a political standpoint the damage was done; mission accomplished.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you that the damage was done. Christie has lost about half of his one time independent voter support. It is not impossible for him to get it back, but it will be awfully tough and he probably will never have the support among the indies he had prior to bridgegate.
 
sangha said:
That is as obvious as why you're not even trying
Click to expand...

There's no reason to try. I don't care. I'm on here because of Chris Christie's name being in the subject line. Romney is passe.

I'm surprised to see you cite Politifact as a source. Do you believe that what's on Politifact is to be believed?
 
And all three are fair game on this political web-site, as I've been told many times in your position.
Keep that in mind the next time you quote on me first .
tres borrachos said:
Um, I wasn't talking to you, dear.
Click to expand...

I didn't ask for any links.
Click to expand...
You questioned politifact.
Fox News isn't being discussed.
Click to expand...
foxnews is an acceptable link going forth .
 
tres borrachos said:
You ignored my question, so I'll post it again.

Do you believe that what's on Politifact is to be believed?
Click to expand...

I know that Romney said what that link quoted him as saying, and that they were lies

But what do you expect from a candidate who hires campaigners who say things like “we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”?
 
sangha said:
I know that Romney said what that link quoted him as saying, and that they were lies

But what do you expect from a candidate who hires campaigners who say things like “we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”?
Click to expand...

Interesting that you keep avoiding my question.

I'm asking you about Politifact, the website. Not about Romney.

Did you cite Politifact because you think they are to be believed, or not. It's a simple question.
 
tres borrachos said:
Interesting that you keep avoiding my question.

I'm asking you about Politifact, the website. Not about Romney.

Did you cite Politifact because you think they are to be believed, or not. It's a simple question.
Click to expand...

You can obsess over sources all you want; I choose to focus on substance.

And why are you avoiding my question: But what do you expect from a candidate who hires campaigners who say things like “we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”?
 
NIMBY said:
Why are GOPs currently asking for the administration to have the IRS quit investigating dark money.
In exchange for Ukraine aid--some way to run/ruin a Nation .
Click to expand...
I suppose for the same reason dems really didnt have much stomach for going after Bush after they took control of the house and senate...because they are both dirty up their hairlines and they know it.

but that wasnt really the point, was it. Dood implied anyone that pleads for immunity must be dirty as hell. Well...OK...we can go with that. Universally.
 
sangha said:
You can obsess over sources all you want; I choose to focus on substance.

And why are you avoiding my question: But what do you expect from a candidate who hires campaigners who say things like “we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”?
Click to expand...

Because I don't care about Romney.

So what you're saying is that anything on Politifact's site is credible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom