WOW! Amazing Statement By A Very Frustrated Glenn Beck.....

[colfax_m]

The point is the emails revealed Hillary had been fraudulently given the debate questions ahead of time, and Bernie had not.

This is false. It was not a debate. The pearl clutching over the vague substance of an audience question is beyond absurd.

Edit to add: Clinton had nothing to do with the decision whether to send troops. That was Sec Defense. Feasibility of sending troops in a few hours is absurd. The idea they were selling guns to Syria from Libya was investigated and is fallacious.

 

[Dragonlady]

Same thing Democrats did with Hillary and Russia in 2016. We have a country full of poor losers.

No, not the same thing. Republican accusations of fraud are fabricated. There really was Russian involvement in 2016. That is factual.

No it isn't. Someone supposedly posting meme's from Russia had nothing to do with the outcome. The Democrats lost for one reason. Hillary.

The Russians did a whole lot more than post meme's from Russia. They hacked the DNC and fed DNC emails to WikiLeaks for strategic leaks throughout the election season. The promoted false and misleading propaganda and lies about Hillary's health, and corruption in the Clinton Foundation.

You really need to read Part I of the Mueller Report.

 

[Rigby5]

The point is the emails revealed Hillary had been fraudulently given the debate questions ahead of time, and Bernie had not.

This is false. It was not a debate. The pearl clutching over the vague substance of an audience question is beyond absurd.

Edit to add: Clinton had nothing to do with the decision whether to send troops. That was Sec Defense. Feasibility of sending troops in a few hours is absurd. The idea they were selling guns to Syria from Libya was investigated and is fallacious.

It most certainly was labeled and billed as a "debate".
And Bernie Sanders was never told it was anything but a "debate".
Certainly is it fraudulently unfair to give the questions to one candidate and not another.
And that was the case.
Hillary got them and Bernie did not.
There is no possible excuse for that.

Nor was troops relevant.
Since it was a foreign country, that would have been illegal.
No one cares about that.

But you are lying and trying to cover up or make stuff up.
No one said anyone was selling guns to Syria.
They openly and admittedly were giving weapons to rebels in Benghazi, with the intent they be used against Assad.
It has been investigated and verified.
The CIA annex in Benghazi was full of weapons. with no other purpose than for Syria.

 

[Rigby5]

Same thing Democrats did with Hillary and Russia in 2016. We have a country full of poor losers.

No, not the same thing. Republican accusations of fraud are fabricated. There really was Russian involvement in 2016. That is factual.

No it isn't. Someone supposedly posting meme's from Russia had nothing to do with the outcome. The Democrats lost for one reason. Hillary.

The Russians did a whole lot more than post meme's from Russia. They hacked the DNC and fed DNC emails to WikiLeaks for strategic leaks throughout the election season. The promoted false and misleading propaganda and lies about Hillary's health, and corruption in the Clinton Foundation.

You really need to read Part I of the Mueller Report.

Anyone thinking any email server is secure, is an idiot.
And no one ever verified who hacked the DNC email server, because that isn't possible.
Hacking does not leave any evidence.
Nor would anyone need to hack the DNC email server if they then were going to make stuff up.
So it likely is all true.

 

[colfax_m]

The point is the emails revealed Hillary had been fraudulently given the debate questions ahead of time, and Bernie had not.

This is false. It was not a debate. The pearl clutching over the vague substance of an audience question is beyond absurd.

Edit to add: Clinton had nothing to do with the decision whether to send troops. That was Sec Defense. Feasibility of sending troops in a few hours is absurd. The idea they were selling guns to Syria from Libya was investigated and is fallacious.

It most certainly was labeled and billed as a "debate".
And Bernie Sanders was never told it was anything but a "debate".
Certainly is it fraudulently unfair to give the questions to one candidate and not another.
And that was the case.
Hillary got them and Bernie did not.
There is no possible excuse for that.

Nor was troops relevant.
Since it was a foreign country, that would have been illegal.
No one cares about that.

But you are lying and trying to cover up or make stuff up.
No one said anyone was selling guns to Syria.
They openly and admittedly were giving weapons to rebels in Benghazi, with the intent they be used against Assad.
It has been investigated and verified.
The CIA annex in Benghazi was full of weapons. with no other purpose than for Syria.

Baloney. It was a town hall. Calling it a debate makes it sound far more important given debates are structured and managed by the DNC with agreed upon rules.

But it wasn’t. Just another lie.

Post this investigation and verification that the weapons were going to Syria from the CIA annex. Let’s see it.

 

[Mac-7]

Wow, that's one miserable guy right there. I'd imagine many Trumpsters here are just like that.

That's what happens when you choose to only see and believe one side of everything.

Beck has his facts in order

Only libs could be happy with business as usual

 

[colfax_m]

Beck has his facts in order

No, he really doesn’t. I spent several hours watching his little specials on Biden and Ukraine which were so riddled with factual errors, leaps in logic and lies by omission, that he should be considered propaganda.

 

[Mac-7]

Beck has his facts in order

No, he really doesn’t. I spent several hours watching his little specials on Biden and Ukraine which were so riddled with factual errors, leaps in logic and lies by omission, that he should be considered propaganda.

We will never agree on this

 

[Rigby5]

The point is the emails revealed Hillary had been fraudulently given the debate questions ahead of time, and Bernie had not.

This is false. It was not a debate. The pearl clutching over the vague substance of an audience question is beyond absurd.

Edit to add: Clinton had nothing to do with the decision whether to send troops. That was Sec Defense. Feasibility of sending troops in a few hours is absurd. The idea they were selling guns to Syria from Libya was investigated and is fallacious.

It most certainly was labeled and billed as a "debate".
And Bernie Sanders was never told it was anything but a "debate".
Certainly is it fraudulently unfair to give the questions to one candidate and not another.
And that was the case.
Hillary got them and Bernie did not.
There is no possible excuse for that.

Nor was troops relevant.
Since it was a foreign country, that would have been illegal.
No one cares about that.

But you are lying and trying to cover up or make stuff up.
No one said anyone was selling guns to Syria.
They openly and admittedly were giving weapons to rebels in Benghazi, with the intent they be used against Assad.
It has been investigated and verified.
The CIA annex in Benghazi was full of weapons. with no other purpose than for Syria.

Baloney. It was a town hall. Calling it a debate makes it sound far more important given debates are structured and managed by the DNC with agreed upon rules.

But it wasn’t. Just another lie.

Post this investigation and verification that the weapons were going to Syria from the CIA annex. Let’s see it.

So it was a "town hall" instead of an official debate?
You still can't ethically reveal a question to one candidate and not another even in a Town Hall.

And it has been proven we were shipping weapons illegal to Syrian rebels.

{...
Last October, Business Insider reported a connection between Ambassador Stevens and a reported September shipment of SA-7 surface-to-air anti-craft missiles (MANPADS) and rocket-propelled grenades from Benghazi to Syria through southern Turkey.
...}

Was Benghazi CIA Annex Running Guns To Syrian Rebels?

The Libyan Lie: Dozens more CIA operatives were on the ground in Benghazi than previously acknowledged. Were they running guns to Syrian rebels? And why are they and their families... Read More

www.investors.com

Why else have anything in Benghazi, much less an ambassador and a CIA annex?

 

[Kondor3]

Hell, I haven't even heard OF Beck in recent years, never mind actually having heard HIM... I figured he was dead or retired or sumfin'.

Is he still even remotely relevant?

 

[colfax_m]

Beck has his facts in order

No, he really doesn’t. I spent several hours watching his little specials on Biden and Ukraine which were so riddled with factual errors, leaps in logic and lies by omission, that he should be considered propaganda.

We will never agree on this

We should. It’s reality. In the first few minutes Beck misidentified the owner of Burisma and then crafted a vast money laundering conspiracy on that lie.

 

[pknopp]

Same thing Democrats did with Hillary and Russia in 2016. We have a country full of poor losers.

No, not the same thing. Republican accusations of fraud are fabricated. There really was Russian involvement in 2016. That is factual.

No it isn't. Someone supposedly posting meme's from Russia had nothing to do with the outcome. The Democrats lost for one reason. Hillary.

The Russians did a whole lot more than post meme's from Russia. They hacked the DNC and fed DNC emails to WikiLeaks for strategic leaks throughout the election season. The promoted false and misleading propaganda and lies about Hillary's health, and corruption in the Clinton Foundation.

You really need to read Part I of the Mueller Report.

The release was an internal release and that aside, I support anyone exposing cheating and corruption.

 

[colfax_m]

Why else have anything in Benghazi, much less an ambassador and a CIA annex?

I guess you don’t understand the importance to the provisional government of Libya.

I thought you said it was investigated and confirmed? This is a new article that makes suggestions, no confirmations.

Back in reality, it was investigated by Congress and found to be false.

House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories

Investigation of 2012 attack in Libya determined there was no intelligence failure.

www.usatoday.com

 

[lennypartiv]

Beck’s crazy. Why would you listen to him?

If it's a choice between listing to him or Rachel Maddow, the decision is easy.

 

[Flash]

Beck’s crazy. Why would you listen to him?

Just think of all the crazy people that the Moon Bats listen to. Maxine Waters???

Why would anybody listen to anything that idiot crazy Joe Dufs had to say? How about the Ho?

 

[surada]

His anger and frustration is palpable, and it's shared by tens of millions of Americans.

Glen Beck is a lush who bursts into tears at the drop of a hat.