- Oct 31, 2012
- 53,468
- 52,155
- 3,605
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
