What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Corruption by the numbers. Who is more corrupt, Republicans or democrats?

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
92,999
Reaction score
9,525
Points
2,060
Location
Michigan
It is a demonstrable fact that Republican adminstrations produce more criminal acts.

in all fairness though, not all corruption is illegal.

criminal acts? what?

these are political questions none of these administrations are committing actual crimes

You can execute americans summarily....Yea you can go rob the DNC too

Nixon had a point when he said I'm the president....

All of this is just norms and standards not law. If they were held to any of those standards they'd all leave office and go right to prison.

Obama executed an American minor with a fucking missile....


As far as I'm aware no president has ever committed a worse crime in my lifetime against Americans.
Please defend this American minor.

What about Waco? Wasn’t that worse?

Do you think Clinton ordered them to do that?

Because Obama ordered them to execute that kid, directly.

All these kill orders went directly through him, although he could have shunted it off to somewhere else he didn't

I doubt clinton signed a kill order on those kids in waco.
Was the kid a terrorist training with terrorists?

no he hadn't done anything

all his father ever did was talk too

no doubt what they feared he would do as an American born Muslim who speaks english he's their worst propaganda nightmare. "i was born in colorado they killed my dad and betrayed my family" blah blah blah

First amendment protects him in Yemen tho, he was one of us.
And you defend this kid?

Yea i defend his right to free speech as an American? What the fuck?

Should i start killing white supremacists kids? For the crime of loving their father?

What the fuck/

Did you miss the part where i said he only talks? And he hadn't even started. That was just the fear.
He talks anti American? Abroad?
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
92,999
Reaction score
9,525
Points
2,060
Location
Michigan
It is a demonstrable fact that Republican adminstrations produce more criminal acts.

in all fairness though, not all corruption is illegal.

criminal acts? what?

these are political questions none of these administrations are committing actual crimes

You can execute americans summarily....Yea you can go rob the DNC too

Nixon had a point when he said I'm the president....

All of this is just norms and standards not law. If they were held to any of those standards they'd all leave office and go right to prison.

Obama executed an American minor with a fucking missile....


As far as I'm aware no president has ever committed a worse crime in my lifetime against Americans.
Please defend this American minor.

What about Waco? Wasn’t that worse?

Do you think Clinton ordered them to do that?

Because Obama ordered them to execute that kid, directly.

All these kill orders went directly through him, although he could have shunted it off to somewhere else he didn't

I doubt clinton signed a kill order on those kids in waco.
Was the kid a terrorist training with terrorists?

no he hadn't done anything

all his father ever did was talk too

no doubt what they feared he would do as an American born Muslim who speaks english he's their worst propaganda nightmare. "i was born in colorado they killed my dad and betrayed my family" blah blah blah

First amendment protects him in Yemen tho, he was one of us.
And you defend this kid?

We should kill you for being a dumb **** not worthy of the civil liberties you enjoy
Did you defend John walker lindh the American taliban?
 

August West

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
9,071
Reaction score
2,157
Points
290
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

So is this premise true? I suppose it is if all those Presidents were treated fairly and held to the same standards, but they were not as I shall show.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power by the Swamp. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on their own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
Fast and Furious was a sting operation that went bad. That`s not a scandal dumbass. A scandal would be a president who lies his country into war and kills 4,400 U.S. soldiers for absolutely no reason.
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
28,869
Reaction score
11,588
Points
940
Location
On a hill
It is a demonstrable fact that Republican adminstrations produce more criminal acts.

in all fairness though, not all corruption is illegal.
That is hilariously ignorant.
Name me the top most corrupt cities in America. Go ahead. And what party is found is every singly one?
After saying this to you, I do not believe corruption is more prevalent in either party. Only different.
After reading this, if you still think Republicans are more corrupt - then you are simply willing at this point.
 

DrLove

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
34,518
Reaction score
17,375
Points
1,915
Location
Central Oregon Coast
Here's something easier for the class to understand.
The only category the last dope is behind Nixon in is jail sentences.
But there will be many more to come. :)

main-qimg-e76a46d3a326742beafd34427f7d7f6e
 

22lcidw

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
22,011
Reaction score
7,948
Points
345
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

So is this premise true? I suppose it is if all those Presidents were treated fairly and held to the same standards, but they were not as I shall show.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power by the Swamp. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on their own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
Trumpkins are delusional
When I watch TV programs I see an endless variety of programs where women beat the shit out of men. 100 pound women beating the living daylights out of men who were special forces even. And modern Prog women believe this. they even attack men in public today. And we still live in a culture where you can't hit them back. but more and more are starting to and most go down and go down hard. Delusional? So now we have 4th rate male athletes transgendered into women who are beating the living daylights out of most women in sporting events. Delusional? Prog women are destroying this nation. And the Western world. And they will not be forgiven so easily when we are not running things and the Far East takes control.
 

Juicin

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
4,158
Reaction score
1,224
Points
140
It is a demonstrable fact that Republican adminstrations produce more criminal acts.

in all fairness though, not all corruption is illegal.

criminal acts? what?

these are political questions none of these administrations are committing actual crimes

You can execute americans summarily....Yea you can go rob the DNC too

Nixon had a point when he said I'm the president....

All of this is just norms and standards not law. If they were held to any of those standards they'd all leave office and go right to prison.

Obama executed an American minor with a fucking missile....


As far as I'm aware no president has ever committed a worse crime in my lifetime against Americans.
Please defend this American minor.

What about Waco? Wasn’t that worse?

Do you think Clinton ordered them to do that?

Because Obama ordered them to execute that kid, directly.

All these kill orders went directly through him, although he could have shunted it off to somewhere else he didn't

I doubt clinton signed a kill order on those kids in waco.
Was the kid a terrorist training with terrorists?

no he hadn't done anything

all his father ever did was talk too

no doubt what they feared he would do as an American born Muslim who speaks english he's their worst propaganda nightmare. "i was born in colorado they killed my dad and betrayed my family" blah blah blah

First amendment protects him in Yemen tho, he was one of us.
And you defend this kid?

We should kill you for being a dumb **** not worthy of the civil liberties you enjoy
Did you defend John walker lindh the American taliban?

THere are questions about what lindh was doing, assuming it was only talking, killing him would be blatantly unconstitutional

The state claims he was doing more

No such claims were made about that boy
 

evenflow1969

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2016
Messages
7,554
Reaction score
2,092
Points
140
Location
Ohio
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power that potentially occurred to target Trump. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on the
ir own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA--total-TOTAL bullshit
...here is a perfect example of what that is like--and I use it because it is a perfect example ----which is the MAIN news' issue:
...it's like saying whites are more evil than blacks--but blacks:
murder whites at TEN times the rate of vice versa
commit hate crimes at TWICE the rate
rape TWICE the rate
etc etc
--a total BULLSHIT article
Aw, truth hurt your poor little feelings. Hillarious
 

TroglocratsRdumb

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
21,482
Reaction score
14,761
Points
1,415
Left Wingers evaluating the corruption of Left Wingers is more corruption.
The sad thing is that we have millions of dolts who still trust Liberals.
 

evenflow1969

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2016
Messages
7,554
Reaction score
2,092
Points
140
Location
Ohio
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

So is this premise true? I suppose it is if all those Presidents were treated fairly and held to the same standards, but they were not as I shall show.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power by the Swamp. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on their own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
Trumpkins are delusional
When I watch TV programs I see an endless variety of programs where women beat the shit out of men. 100 pound women beating the living daylights out of men who were special forces even. And modern Prog women believe this. they even attack men in public today. And we still live in a culture where you can't hit them back. but more and more are starting to and most go down and go down hard. Delusional? So now we have 4th rate male athletes transgendered into women who are beating the living daylights out of most women in sporting events. Delusional? Prog women are destroying this nation. And the Western world. And they will not be forgiven so easily when we are not running things and the Far East takes control.
Lol ya getting attacked by 100 pound ladies often. Hillarious Strange I have never had that problem. Lol. My God Ronald Reagan and John Wayne gotta be rolling in their graves seeing today's, I don't even know what to call you conservative just don't fit. God help us if this is what the country is like today.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
41,360
Reaction score
17,357
Points
2,300
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power that potentially occurred to target Trump. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on the
ir own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA--total-TOTAL bullshit
...here is a perfect example of what that is like--and I use it because it is a perfect example ----which is the MAIN news' issue:
...it's like saying whites are more evil than blacks--but blacks:
murder whites at TEN times the rate of vice versa
commit hate crimes at TWICE the rate
rape TWICE the rate
etc etc
--a total BULLSHIT article
Aw, truth hurt your poor little feelings. Hillarious
I state the truth and back it up--you people babble crap
I ENJOY refuting you people's babble crap--it's so easy
HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
41,360
Reaction score
17,357
Points
2,300
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power that potentially occurred to target Trump. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on the
ir own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA--total-TOTAL bullshit
...here is a perfect example of what that is like--and I use it because it is a perfect example ----which is the MAIN news' issue:
...it's like saying whites are more evil than blacks--but blacks:
murder whites at TEN times the rate of vice versa
commit hate crimes at TWICE the rate
rape TWICE the rate
etc etc
--a total BULLSHIT article
Nice how you tried to totally change the subject to blacks.
hahhahahahahhahahhah
it is the perfect analogy
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
31,419
Reaction score
16,466
Points
1,905
Left Wingers evaluating the corruption of Left Wingers is more corruption.
The sad thing is that we have millions of dolts who still trust Liberals.
[/QU
Left Wingers evaluating the corruption of Left Wingers is more corruption.
The sad thing is that we have millions of dolts who still trust Liberals.
It's a cult
 

TheParser

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
6,555
Reaction score
4,265
Points
940
Of course, I do NOT know who is more corrupt.


But if I were forced to choose one, I guess that I would choose the Dems.

Why?

Because of the many different constituencies that make up the Democratic Party. (I dare not be more specific.)
 

donttread

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
350
Reaction score
228
Points
193
Corruption By The Numbers: Republicans Versus Democrats (peacock-panache.com)

This partisan article tries to make the case that Republicans are far more corrupt than democrats. To prove this the author compares criminal indictments of those serving in the executive branch of presidential administrations for the last 25 years, as well as criminal convictions. and prison sentences.

So here is the run down


Obama (D) – 8 yrs in office. Zero criminal indictments, zero convictions and zero prison sentences. So the next time somebody describes the Obama administration as “scandal free” they aren’t speaking wishfully, they’re simply telling the truth.

Bush, George W. (R) – 8 yrs in office. 16 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 9 prison sentences.

Clinton (D) – 8 yrs in office. 2 criminal indictments. One conviction. One prison sentence. That’s right nearly 8 yrs of investigations. Tens of millions spent and 30 yrs of claiming them the most corrupt ever and there was exactly one person convicted of a crime.

Bush, George H. W. (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. One conviction. One prison sentence.

Reagan (R) – 8 yrs in office. 26 criminal indictments. 16 convictions. 8 prison sentences.

Carter (D) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment. Zero convictions and zero prison sentences.

Ford (R) – 4 yrs in office. One indictment and one conviction. One prison sentence.

Nixon (R) – 6 yrs in office. 76 criminal indictments. 55 convictions. 15 prison sentences.

Johnson (D) – 5 yrs in office. Zero indictments. Zero convictions. Zero prison sentences.

So is this premise true? I suppose it is if all those Presidents were treated fairly and held to the same standards, but they were not as I shall show.

We shall start with LBJ. There is no controversy over the fact that LBJ stages an attack to launch the US into the Vietnam war. It is referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Essentially LBJ lied his arse off saying that the Vietnamese attacked the US thus justifying the US entering the conflict. I'm sorry, where is the outrage here in academia, the media, or pretty much anywhere? Are there no laws against staging an attack so you can destroy another nation and send thousands of US Americans to their deaths in a war that left a scar on the American psyche forever? Who was calling for criminal convictions for these lies? In fact, are any crimes as bad as sending hundreds of thousands of men and women and children, on both sides, to their deaths? So where were the checks and balances for the democrat administration? In fact, what has Trump done that was remotely as bad as murdering all of those people? Woops,. Trump was the only President in decades to not start a war. LOL. So where was the press to drive this home and have LBJ removed? I'm sorry, LBJ was a Progressive darling who embraced the Civil Rights Act and implemented his Great Society programs, so he gets a free pass I reckon. You remember the Civil Rights laws, it was the law LBJ said he would have n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years. And yes, this is the man who continually used the "N" word, yet never is cancelled. No statues are ever torn down of his. Why? Well ask the media and Swamp to refused to ever hold him to account for anything.

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)

President Carter is perhaps a valid example here. Although I don't agree with his politics, the man seemed to have integrity, and as such, the Swamp chewed him up and spat him out in 4 short years. An example of what I'm talking about is Carter's observation that the surveillance state was a threat to US freedom. He then began to take steps to address this such as creating the FISA court. Even the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that Carter signed in 1978, which seemed to put serious restrictions on the federal government’s surveillance powers, had loopholes that subsequent administrations would exploit to the hilt. Today, the FISA court — which operates entirely in secret, authorizing electronic surveillance and drone strikes completely out of reach of the public eye — approves nearly every request that comes before it, making a mockery of its original purpose. In February, the Supreme Court ruled that no American has any standing to challenge the government’s surveillance powers in court because the very secrecy of the program means that no one can prove that they are being targeted. In fact, the FISA court recently obtained power to go after Trump officials which has been highly controversial in terms of the abuse of power by the Swamp. Sadly, Carter oversaw a deterioration of the nation's economy, with stagflation, and a period where the US was seen as weak internationally with the Iran Hostage crisis. Carter is a conundrum in that, it simply proves that having better moral fiber does not mean you will do a better job. Then again,, can a good man succeed in a corrupt system? Perhaps not.

The Clintons? LOL. Oh, where to begin? Whitewater anyone?
The most egregious form of presidential corruption, however, involves presidential abuse of power as a part of a criminal conspiracy. This was the Watergate scandal that brought about the downfall of Richard Nixon’s presidency. This too is the form of corruption involved in the allegations raised about both President Clinton and his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in connection with the three major scandals that continue to be investigated by independent prosecutors and Congressional committees: Whitewater, "Travelgate," and "Filegate." Unlike Watergate–the underlying crime of which was, as it has been aptly described, a "third-rate burglary"–Whitewater involves a far more serious underlying crime, the looting of a savings and loan association, that cost American taxpayers approximately $60 million. As in Watergate, however, in Whitewater the critical matter is not the underlying crime but the cover-up. The President and Mrs. Clinton, acting on their own and with their subordinates, are charged with, among other things, withholding relevant and material evidence; making false or misleading statements to the FBI and Congressional investigators; interfering with FBI and Justice Department investigations (including that of the death of White House counsel Vince Foster, who was deeply involved in the Whitewater fraud); obstructing justice by destroying documentary evidence that might be used against them; and willfully disobeying Congressional subpoenas. All of these allegations of wrongdoing are astonishingly similar to those specified in the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon in 1974.

Clinton Presidency: The Most Corrupt in American History - Ashbrook

But this is by far my most favorite clip of all time, showing how the FBI allows some people to lie like Hillary, while selectively destroying others like General Flynn for only one supposed lie.

Hillary Clinton vs. James Comey: Email Scandal Supercut - YouTube

And lastly, Barak HUUSANE Obama. Really? Are you really going to try and convince anyone who has followed this corrupt administration to any degree that illegal activity did not occur?


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show
Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics
In the closing days of the Obama administration, the press lauded a presidency they asserted had been largely free of scandal. When the White House itself argued it had escaped major scandal over its eight years, the Washington Post’s fact-checker stayed neutral, declining to refute its claims. In contrast, the word “scandal” has become a common refrain in media descriptions of the Trump presidency. Yet a closer look shows that during Barack Obama’s second term, the media used “scandal” to refer to his administration almost as often as they have the Trump administration.
The timeline below shows the number of times that “scandal” or “scandals” or “scandalous” appeared within 15 seconds of a mention of “Obama” or “Trump” on the combined airtime of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News from July 2009 through September 29, 2019, using data from the Internet Archive’s Television News Archive processed by the GDELT Project.
Click on the chart for a larger image.
489842_5_.png




Immediately clear is that while Obama’s first term was largely free of scandal references, his second term was defined by a steady stream of them.
In late 2011, Operation Fast & Furious captured headlines, followed in April 2012 by the behavior of Secret Service personnel on an overseas trip. The June 2013 Edward Snowden disclosures led to almost twice as many mentions of scandal as any point in the Trump presidency. The May 2014 breaking of the VA health care story saw more mentions of Obama scandal than all but one month of the Trump presidency.

In all, over the past decade, Obama has been mentioned in the context of scandal a total of 6,520 times on the three news channels, compared with 5,103 times for Trump.


Trump Scandals vs. Obama Scandals: What the Numbers Show | RealClearPolitics




So what to take from all this? The media and the Swamp are now only focused on corruption from one side of the isle, if even that. I'm not going to sit here and waste my time defending the GOP because I know for a fact that they have done far worse than what they have been held accountable for as it is. No, my only goal is to perhaps wake a few people up as to the level of corruption that exists, which threatens the freedoms that they think they still have.
The bipartisan swamp defines the term corruption and nether "side" has any monopoly on that. These investigations are pure theater and distraction. Even hilary who essentially admitted to felonies didn't go down for the. Sure once in a while a pawn , like an FBI lawyer, has to be sacrificed. Most of the convictions this article is based upon were simply those pawns.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$166.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top