Chris Christies Press Conference Claims Don't Add Up

Started by skews13

This political chat room is for you to sound off about any political ideology and discuss current political topics. Everyone is welcome, yes, even conservatives, but keep in mind, the nature of the No Holds Barred political chat forum platform can be friendly to trolling. It is your responsibility to address this wisely. Forum Rules

Next
163 replies to this topic Sticky this thread

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 09 Jan 2014, 4:03 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Log in or register to remove this ad..
So, let's review so far.
Like Obama, Christie has claimed no knowledge of the events.
Unlike Obama, Christie held a marathon press conference, answering every question leveled at him.
Unlike Obama, Christie has fired everyone involved in this event.
Unlike Obama, Christie has accepted responsibility for the actions of his subordinates.

I don't like Christie, but it fun to watch the Obamatrons attack him, for acting responsibly after their years of defense of Obama's irresponsibility.

BTW, did you know that more people have been fired over "bridgegate" than have been fired for Benghazi, the IRS Scandal and the failure of Obamacare, combined?
Ouch.
0
Log in or register to remove this ad..

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 09 Jan 2014, 4:16 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



skews13 » 09 Jan 2014 3:13 pm wrote:
Hell no. Benghazi is trumped up bullshit that has been totally debunked as the bullshit that it is.
This is a real scandal, with real evidence, pointing to real players, that committed real crimes.
Now you rightwards are dragging the four dead in Benghazi through the mud again as a counter argument to this scandal?
Do you people have any sense of shame? Because apparently you have no sense of moral integrity.

I'm sorry, can you quote the laws broken in this "real scandal" of "real crimes"?
Bet you can't.

Let's review, shall we?

Like Obama, Christie has claimed no knowledge of the events.
Unlike Obama, Christie held a marathon press conference, answering every question leveled at him.
Unlike Obama, Christie has fired everyone involved in this event.
Unlike Obama, Christie has accepted responsibility for the actions of his subordinates.
I don't like Christie, but it fun to watch the Obamatrons attack him, for acting responsibly after their years of defense of Obama's irresponsibility.
BTW, did you know that more people have been fired over "bridgegate" than have been fired for Benghazi, the IRS Scandal and the failure of Obamacare, combined?
Ouch.
Last edited by golfboy on 09 Jan 2014, 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 09 Jan 2014, 4:34 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Misty » 09 Jan 2014 3:32 pm wrote:
It is illegal for public assets to be used for a political purpose.
The executive director of the Port Authority said violations of not only state but federal law have occurred.

The executive director of the Port Authority is not a law enforcement position, it is a political one.
Did you notice he cited no laws which were violated?

And did you hold the same position when the IRS was used to target people for political purposes.
Or when the Obama Administration closed the national parks and monuments, for political purposes?
Or when they sent public assets out to lie about what happened in Benghazi?
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 8:48 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 7:46 am wrote:

Already said the IRS needs new policies. But, scandal?? BOTH SIDES WERE TARGETED, so where's the scandal?

No, both sides were NOT targeted, the IRS already admitted that.
Why do you idiots keep lying about this, when the people who did it have already admitted their guilt?
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 8:53 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 7:51 am wrote:

Already posted a link showing as much, goofball.

Your post is nothing but spin. The IRS admitted they targeted TEA Party groups, and people were fired over it.
Sorry.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 8:58 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 7:56 am wrote:

They also targeted progressive groups. No Obama scandal, sparky.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/politics/irs-scandal/

No, they claimed "progressive" was on the bolo list later, but liberal groups were not targeted.
Again, the IRS admitted they targeted TEA party groups, and fired people for it.
You can cling to this meme until your fingernails bleed, but that's not going to change the facts.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 9:24 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Huey » 10 Jan 2014 8:19 am wrote:

I didn't mention Obama's name. Who said investigate Obama? I am simply telling YOU to take your gripes and concerns to the Justice Department. YOU tell THEM that these are not scandals. Make shit up much?

I don't watch FOX. I don't watch MSNBC. I don't watch ANY televised news channels.

Again, I will await the results of the Justice Department investigation, thank you.

That's the liberal shiny distraction... if Obama didn't do anything himself, he's not responsible (as if he ever is responsible for anything).
But if Christie's people did something, than Christie is responsible.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 10:47 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 9:41 am wrote:

All they said was they used the term 'progressive.'

Progressives ARE liberals, you idiot.

Isn't it strange that the term "progressive" never came up in the hearings, or by the people fired for targeting the TEA Party, or by the IRS when they admitted they had targeted the TEA Party?
No, the claim that "progressive" appears to have been added after the fact, to provide political cover.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 10:52 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 9:49 am wrote:

It also 'appeared' to you that Romney would be elected and Nate Silver was completely wrong.

BOTH groups were targeted.

And you were too afraid to take my bet, which clearly indicates you didn't disagree with my position.
Both groups were not targeted, no matter how often you repeat that lie.
The IRS admitted it targeted TEA Party groups, and never said anything about "progressive".
Sorry, you lose.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 10:55 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



GOP SS » 10 Jan 2014 9:52 am wrote:
A real man on honor would resign...CC isn't one....

Why would he resign if he wasn't involved?
If he is telling the truth, which of course is in question, he's held the people who did it accountable by firing them.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:08 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 9:56 am wrote:

Not afraid. Just don't bet, lemming.

BOTH groups WERE targeted and the IRS said so.

Now, what ties Obama or his staff to this pseudo-scandal, lemming?

You didn't bet because you didn't have the courage of your convictions.
You're a typical liberal, all talk.

And no both groups were not targeted. the "progressive" bolo didn't exist until months after the hearings and people were fired.
Tell me something... if you were being grilled in front of congress and asked, "why did you only target TEA Party groups", if you had also included "progressive" groups, wouldn't you have made that point?
Of course you would, but not ONE of them did so.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:16 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:12 am wrote:

Assume what you wish - that tendency makes you the moron you are.


Yes, BOTH groups were targeted -- ACCORDING TO THE IRS.

Your 'bolo' argument has all the credibility of your 'Democratic oversampling," lemming.

So once again, we see that when you are presented with a simple truth, you can't defend your position.
How weird.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:17 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:14 am wrote:

Now, what ties Obama or his staff to this pseudo-scandal, lemming?

You know that the IRS works for Obama, and one of the people tied to the scandal met with Obama the day before he issued the TEA Party bolo...
Right? Tell me you DID know this simple fact, because I'd hate to believe you're so woefully uninformed.


















Again.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:34 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:20 am wrote:

The IRS is a government agency who works for the American People. It is not his personal collection agency, nitwit.

Now, what ties Obama or his staff to this pseudo-scandal, lemming?


So when Obama said he would use the IRS to punish his political opponents, he didn't know what he was talking about?
Question: Do you know who runs the IRS?
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:36 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:30 am wrote:

None of what you say connects Obama or his staff to any of the behavior of the IRS. For it to be an actual scandal involving Obama, you would have to do that.

The lemming, goofboy, is enough of a nitwit to believe anything wrong with the government is Obama's fault - even if the fault was set up by his predecessor. Hopefully, you have more sense.

LOL, skeptic is unaware that the IRS works directly for/under Obama.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:44 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:38 am wrote:

LOL Goofy thinks a federal agency is the president's personal servants.

So you DIDN'T know that the Secretary of the Treasury, aka Obama's "staff" runs the IRS.
Wow.
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 11:44 am

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:39 am wrote:

Source any such claim by Obama. Tie it to this pseudo-scandal.

Look it up yourself, you lazy bastard.
I'm too busy laughing at your ignorance!
:rofl:
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 12:27 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:48 am wrote:

Then, you've taken some phrase entirely out of context, like your "Democratic oversampling," which is still hilarious.

Yea, it's was just an accident that he said he'd do this, then it happened.
Just a miraculous coincidence!!! :rofl:
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 12:29 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 10:51 am wrote:

So, you think Obama micro-manages every agency? Isn't that what bureaucracies are for.

Answer my question, for once, lemming: What ties this pseudo-scandal to Obama or his staff?

You're still evading your own assertion.

No, but do you think he doesn't control what happens under him?
I'm sure it's just some huge coincidence that the guy responsible for the bolo alert on the TEA Party, met with Obama the day before issuing those guidelines... Yea, Obama had NOTHING to do with it. ;)
0

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
  48,014 10 Jan 2014, 12:36 pm

golfboy Liberal Anti-Matter
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 51,295
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 48,013.97



Skeptic » 10 Jan 2014 11:34 am wrote:

No context == no reality.

Provide it or realize what a willing lemming you are.

LOL, yea, cling to that stupidity.
I'll just stand over here and laugh... :rofl:
0


Next

Return to No Holds Barred Political Forum

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest

Who has visited this topic