Will democrats led by Pelosi break the house rules on ethics just to "get Newt"?

[Jackson]

OK that made little sense, now why don't you want to know what Newt did before you vote for him?

OK. Fair enough...

So let me ask you this....

During the Obama campaign, it was found that Obama had purchased a house/lot from Tony Resko. It was nothing of any consequence until the details were found out...
These are the basic details:

1) Tony Resko was found guilty of unethical business dealings and sent to jail
2) The property Obama bought from Resko was part of a larger plot of land.
3) The purchase price per suare foot for that partial lot was well below market value
4) Resko breaking up that plot of land into two smaller lots decreased the overall value of the plot of land.

Fox News questioned Bill Burton as to the details of the deal and Obamas relationship with Resko.

All Bil Burton would reveal and all the Obama camp would reveal was that nothing unethical was done.

So tell me.....why did you vote for Obama without knowing the details of why Resko, a now convicted felon, took a beating in a deal with Obama?

Dude that one HAS been gone over.

Nothing illegal happened.

Newt broke the laws and had to end up admitting he had broken the laws AND lied to the people investigating it.


Rumor on your side.

GUILT and proof of it on this side.

The right holds others to higher standards than they do themselves

Former Obama fundraiser Rezko gets 10-year sentence

A U.S. judge on Tuesday sentenced Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a former Chicago fundraiser for President Barack Obama, to 10-1/2 years in prison for corruption and extortion.

Rezko became a minor campaign issue for Obama during the 2008 presidential race. The two had become close friends and Rezko had raised tens of thousands of dollars for the then-Illinois state senator's successful U.S. Senate and presidential campaigns.
At one point, the Republican National Committee referred to Rezko as Obama's "money man".

Rezko also advised Obama in the purchase of the future president's large home on the south side of Chicago. Rezko's wife purchased and then resold to the Obama family a side yard to the home they could not afford initially.
When Rezko was convicted, Obama said he was "saddened"

It would be unbecoming for a president to be a cellmate of Rezko. That why he’s still in the WH.
BBM..
*Minor campaign issue, like Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Acorn.
Former Obama fundraiser Rezko gets 10-year sentence | Reuters

 

[Jarhead]

Forgive and forget? Bullshit.

So you never forgave Clinton for outright lying to congress?

I will never forgive that jackass for putting the democrats into a position of having to defend him.

Interesting...you had no issue asnwering THIS question that was not directly in line with the thread....

But you refusae to asnwer the other.

Interesting.

So YOUR rules of debate change as it pertains to whether or not your answer will make you look silly.

You sir, are a hypocrite.

 

[occupied]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

Maybe you can get these people to address the topic, they are making my head hurt.

 

[Jarhead]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

where is the outrage about the fact that Pelosi has some "smut" on Gingrich...but refused to release it to the public until it proved to be advantageous to her party.....15 years later?

In other words, you pay Pelosi to find crap out and she gets the info, but does not let you know what it is unless she gains from it.

Sounds like SHE should be on your shit list along side of Newt.

 

[occupied]

So you never forgave Clinton for outright lying to congress?

I will never forgive that jackass for putting the democrats into a position of having to defend him.

Interesting...you had no issue asnwering THIS question that was not directly in line with the thread....

But you refusae to asnwer the other.

Interesting.

So YOUR rules of debate change as it pertains to whether or not your answer will make you look silly.

You sir, are a hypocrite.

Do you actually think what we are doing is debating? LOL

 

[Jackson]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

House confidentiality rules . Got it! Rules for others but not dems. Bet you are a live wire when the rules apply to others, but not to you.

 

[Jarhead]

I will never forgive that jackass for putting the democrats into a position of having to defend him.

Interesting...you had no issue asnwering THIS question that was not directly in line with the thread....

But you refusae to asnwer the other.

Interesting.

So YOUR rules of debate change as it pertains to whether or not your answer will make you look silly.

You sir, are a hypocrite.

Do you actually think what we are doing is debating? LOL

Actually....yes...that is what I am doing...

You just want to orate.

Look...the topic is Newt....there is no question about the topic.....there is nothing more to debate about the topic....at least until Pelosi reveals the details...

SO now the debate has transofrmed into a debnate about ethics...and whether or not one should vote for someone without knowing if and when they acted unethically.

You claimed one should...and I agree....

But then I wanted to see who I was debating...so I asked you why you didnt feel the same way when you voted for Obama.

And you STILL refuse to answer.

 

[Avatar4321]

They engage in insider trading, legal graft, and IPOs on a daily basis. You honestly think they are concerned about ethics?

 

[rightwinger]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

where is the outrage about the fact that Pelosi has some "smut" on Gingrich...but refused to release it to the public until it proved to be advantageous to her party.....15 years later?

In other words, you pay Pelosi to find crap out and she gets the info, but does not let you know what it is unless she gains from it.

Sounds like SHE should be on your shit list along side of Newt.

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

 

[occupied]

Interesting...you had no issue asnwering THIS question that was not directly in line with the thread....

But you refusae to asnwer the other.

Interesting.

So YOUR rules of debate change as it pertains to whether or not your answer will make you look silly.

You sir, are a hypocrite.

Do you actually think what we are doing is debating? LOL

Actually....yes...that is what I am doing...

You just want to orate.

Look...the topic is Newt....there is no question about the topic.....there is nothing more to debate about the topic....at least until Pelosi reveals the details...

SO now the debate has transofrmed into a debnate about ethics...and whether or not one should vote for someone without knowing if and when they acted unethically.

You claimed one should...and I agree....

But then I wanted to see who I was debating...so I asked you why you didnt feel the same way when you voted for Obama.

And you STILL refuse to answer.

Irritating isn't it?

 

[Jarhead]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

where is the outrage about the fact that Pelosi has some "smut" on Gingrich...but refused to release it to the public until it proved to be advantageous to her party.....15 years later?

In other words, you pay Pelosi to find crap out and she gets the info, but does not let you know what it is unless she gains from it.

Sounds like SHE should be on your shit list along side of Newt.

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

I didnt ask that.
Personallyt, I want to know what dirt Pelosi has on Newt. I like to make educated decisions when voting.

But I am a bit disturbed that Pelosi hgeld back information for over 15 years now and decided to use that informatyion for party advantage.

When are we all going to realize that our congress is playing with us....we are their empoloyers...and everydqay we are seeing how they hide crap from us...and then ask us to "trust them"...

Doesnt that bother you?

It does me...thats for sure.

 

[rightwinger]

So what Newt is whining about is that it would be unethical for Pelosi to provide the details of his ethics violations

Shouldnt the American people know what the guy did before we vote for President? His hiding behind House confidentiality rules makes him sound like a criminal

Damn......are Republicans really this stupid?

They whine about the release of Obamas birth certificate and college transcripts but fight to conceal Gingrich's ethical violations

House confidentiality rules . Got it! Rules for others but not dems. Bet you are a live wire when the rules apply to others, but not to you.

All criminals have protections that they can hide behind too

Doesn't mean I want them to be President

Newt should voluntarily release the information. It is something the voters need to know. Maybe Donald Trump can fund his own investigation. Newts ethics violations are more relevant than Obamas birth certificate

 

[Claudette]

Gotta laugh.

Newts doing well in the polls so Pelosi, that icon of upright ethical behavior, is gonna dig through decades old "stuff" to try to sink him?? The same Pelosi who as Speaker tried her dmandest to give Wrangle a pass?? That Pelosi??

Wonder how Pelosi would survive an investigation into the insider trading fiasco currently brewing in Congress??

 

[occupied]

where is the outrage about the fact that Pelosi has some "smut" on Gingrich...but refused to release it to the public until it proved to be advantageous to her party.....15 years later?

In other words, you pay Pelosi to find crap out and she gets the info, but does not let you know what it is unless she gains from it.

Sounds like SHE should be on your shit list along side of Newt.

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

I didnt ask that.
Personallyt, I want to know what dirt Pelosi has on Newt. I like to make educated decisions when voting.

But I am a bit disturbed that Pelosi hgeld back information for over 15 years now and decided to use that informatyion for party advantage.

When are we all going to realize that our congress is playing with us....we are their empoloyers...and everydqay we are seeing how they hide crap from us...and then ask us to "trust them"...

Doesnt that bother you?

It does me...thats for sure.

Practically everything congress does bothers me.

 

[Jarhead]

Gotta laugh.

Newts doing well in the polls so Pelosi, that icon of upright ethical behavior, is gonna dig through decades old "stuff" to try to sink him?? The same Pelosi who as Speaker tried her dmandest to give Wrangle a pass?? That Pelosi??

Wonder how Pelosi would survive an investigation into the insider trading fiasco currently brewing in Congress??

Rangle deserved a pass.
That was a witch hunt.

 

[rightwinger]

where is the outrage about the fact that Pelosi has some "smut" on Gingrich...but refused to release it to the public until it proved to be advantageous to her party.....15 years later?

In other words, you pay Pelosi to find crap out and she gets the info, but does not let you know what it is unless she gains from it.

Sounds like SHE should be on your shit list along side of Newt.

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

I didnt ask that.
Personallyt, I want to know what dirt Pelosi has on Newt. I like to make educated decisions when voting.

But I am a bit disturbed that Pelosi hgeld back information for over 15 years now and decided to use that informatyion for party advantage.

When are we all going to realize that our congress is playing with us....we are their empoloyers...and everydqay we are seeing how they hide crap from us...and then ask us to "trust them"...

Doesnt that bother you?

It does me...thats for sure.

I look at it differently

Newt had his hearing, was punished and went into private life as a political commentator. I think he has an expectation of privacy because it is not really relevant to his job

However, I find it highly relevant to being elected president and I think Newt is acting like a criminal by hiding behind House Confidentiality rules

 

[Jarhead]

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

I didnt ask that.
Personallyt, I want to know what dirt Pelosi has on Newt. I like to make educated decisions when voting.

But I am a bit disturbed that Pelosi hgeld back information for over 15 years now and decided to use that informatyion for party advantage.

When are we all going to realize that our congress is playing with us....we are their empoloyers...and everydqay we are seeing how they hide crap from us...and then ask us to "trust them"...

Doesnt that bother you?

It does me...thats for sure.

Practically everything congress does bothers me.

Both parties spin the intentions and motives of the opposiing party.

And why do they do that?

Becuase they see their constituants as too naive to seer through the spin.

And reading this board?

It works.

 

[Jarhead]

Personally, I don't care if a FoxNews commentator has ethical violations in his past. I do care when that commentator chooses to run for president and fights to prevent the release of that information

I think it is relevant information that the voters should know

I didnt ask that.
Personallyt, I want to know what dirt Pelosi has on Newt. I like to make educated decisions when voting.

But I am a bit disturbed that Pelosi hgeld back information for over 15 years now and decided to use that informatyion for party advantage.

When are we all going to realize that our congress is playing with us....we are their empoloyers...and everydqay we are seeing how they hide crap from us...and then ask us to "trust them"...

Doesnt that bother you?

It does me...thats for sure.

I look at it differently

Newt had his hearing, was punished and went into private life as a political commentator. I think he has an expectation of privacy because it is not really relevant to his job

However, I find it highly relevant to being elected president and I think Newt is acting like a criminal by hiding behind House Confidentiality rules

I dont disagree.

Newt has been my choice since the primary campaigns began.
Now I want to hear mnore about his past.

But I still question why a congressperson feels she has the right to hide this info 15 years ago and not release it until she can gain from it.

To me? That in itself is an ethics violation.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Gotta laugh.

Newts doing well in the polls so Pelosi, that icon of upright ethical behavior, is gonna dig through decades old "stuff" to try to sink him?? The same Pelosi who as Speaker tried her dmandest to give Wrangle a pass?? That Pelosi??

Wonder how Pelosi would survive an investigation into the insider trading fiasco currently brewing in Congress??

Rangle deserved a pass.
That was a witch hunt.

WTF?!? Seriously?

 

[Avatar4321]

Gotta laugh.

Newts doing well in the polls so Pelosi, that icon of upright ethical behavior, is gonna dig through decades old "stuff" to try to sink him?? The same Pelosi who as Speaker tried her dmandest to give Wrangle a pass?? That Pelosi??

Wonder how Pelosi would survive an investigation into the insider trading fiasco currently brewing in Congress??

Rangle deserved a pass.
That was a witch hunt.

Actually, I think the hunt was more over tax evasion than being a witch