I thought the peanut farmer said that.
My man Bill gets journalists pardoned
- Thread starter letzrockexpress
- Start date
I thought the peanut farmer said that.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
The Soviets had to have proof that the Kennedys and LBJ were screwing around. Makes me wonder what we paid. In that time, no one would've gotten elected/reelected if it were common knowledge of them having committed adultery.
If concrete proof of Clinton's infidelity came to light, and/or the trial leading to the perjury, leading to his impeachment, happened before his reelection, he probably wouldn't have won. In the end, people want politicians to "appear" upstanding. If they show their garbage, they aren't likely to stay politicians.
I see where Layout is going with this. If someone is known to play the field, whether they be a president, or a Marine embassy guard, they are a threat to whom they're sworn to protect. They are supposed to be held to the highest standard BECAUSE they carry information that could be turned against us. Having an adulterer as president shows those who would harm us that they are bargaining with a man who has no scruples. The perfect example of that would be Clinton trading satellite secrets with the Chinese, and soliciting them for campaign donations... no conscience... only immediate satisfaction and personal gain.
If concrete proof of Clinton's infidelity came to light, and/or the trial leading to the perjury, leading to his impeachment, happened before his reelection, he probably wouldn't have won. In the end, people want politicians to "appear" upstanding. If they show their garbage, they aren't likely to stay politicians.
I see where Layout is going with this. If someone is known to play the field, whether they be a president, or a Marine embassy guard, they are a threat to whom they're sworn to protect. They are supposed to be held to the highest standard BECAUSE they carry information that could be turned against us. Having an adulterer as president shows those who would harm us that they are bargaining with a man who has no scruples. The perfect example of that would be Clinton trading satellite secrets with the Chinese, and soliciting them for campaign donations... no conscience... only immediate satisfaction and personal gain.
You really need to read up on the subject more, as your understanding of what's going on in Mexico is obviously hindered by your total lack of knowledge.
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
He did but he borrowed it...
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Wow your back, now go away again.
mjolnir131
Veteran Expediter
It's really naive to think that if somebody cheats in one area they will not cheat in another.I would think that is the epitome of naive. Kinda like it takes years for a dog to catch on to the fake throw type naive,the way,way to trusting type of naive.
Last edited:
I see a former pres. STANDING SIDE BY SIDE legitimizing one of the WORLD'S MASS MURDERER'S!! DURING HIS presidental regime- clinton ARMED, WEAPONIZED NUCLEAR TECH. and paid RANSOM'S to feed the DICTATOR'S REGIME, while the COMMON FOLK STILL to DATE are STARVED. while--- ALL of madame HALFBRITE'S trip's said positive remarks of the NK pres. kim jaundice ILL. REMEMBER?.. AL GORK should had paid RANSOM as the girls EMPLOYER, with HIS frozen make believe iceburg movie cash.. BUT NO- KIM JAUNDICE ILL PLAYED and beat clinton again!! click-click--What an embarrassing PHOTO!! IS CLINTON SMILING??
Last edited:
Sorry Rocket, the kind of blackmail I was speaking of is VERY real. The Soviets used too, and most likely STILL, try to set up agents for blackmail. Hookers, drugs, whatever, the weakness did NOT matter. The idea was to FORCE the person to devulge classified documents. It is a VERY dirty business. It was a BIT easier with young military agents but only just a bit. A weak character is just that.
Clinton is NOT a man of character. He should NOT be trusted. He cannot be trusted. He has a long backround in the PIGISH lifestyle.
As to this subject, in the long run this will have serious effects on the US and NOT good ones. Once you start buying off these people you have headed down a road that is VERY hard to turn back from.
We are a very weak nation now and it shows. Carter and Clinton were weak men and weakend the Nation. Obama is weak, VERY, weak. There are ONLY two choices in life when it comes to defense, STAND STRONG or stay home and get whipped. This move is a PRIME example of what not having a clue is.
Time will only tell what we GAVE AWAY to do this. The NEXT time, like maybe 3 hikers that Iran might have, we will have to give up even more. It will NOT end unless we say NO to this and be prepared to kick a little tail. THEN it will stop, after the tail kicking.
Clinton is NOT a man of character. He should NOT be trusted. He cannot be trusted. He has a long backround in the PIGISH lifestyle.
As to this subject, in the long run this will have serious effects on the US and NOT good ones. Once you start buying off these people you have headed down a road that is VERY hard to turn back from.
We are a very weak nation now and it shows. Carter and Clinton were weak men and weakend the Nation. Obama is weak, VERY, weak. There are ONLY two choices in life when it comes to defense, STAND STRONG or stay home and get whipped. This move is a PRIME example of what not having a clue is.
Time will only tell what we GAVE AWAY to do this. The NEXT time, like maybe 3 hikers that Iran might have, we will have to give up even more. It will NOT end unless we say NO to this and be prepared to kick a little tail. THEN it will stop, after the tail kicking.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
I just read the details of this "unannounced"visit by this "private citizen".
He had Obama's support, which means this was a sanctioned by the WH using the same standards that have been used in the past.
an Excerpt from the AP's Obama propaganda section;
The White House has taken pains since Clinton's arrival in Pyongyang to play the mission as a private one designed only to win the release of Laura Ling, 32, and Euna Lee, 36, both with former Vice President Al Gore's Current TV media venture. They were captured while on assignment to collect material for a report about trafficking of North Korean women into China.
Bill Clinton undertook the mission, a senior administration official said, only after the North assured the White House that the reporters would be freed and allowed to return home with the former president.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to detail the back-channel negotiations, also said the north rejected Gore as a suitable emissary. The journalists' families, Gore and the White House then turned to Clinton. The official said President Barack Obama did not speak with Clinton about the mission.
Daniel Sneider, associate director of research at Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, said the journalists' release followed weeks of quiet negotiations between the State Department and the North Korean mission to the United Nations.
Clinton "didn't go to negotiate this, he went to reap the fruits of the negotiation," Sneider said.
Too bad that the artical did not go into just what this has cost us as a country. Watch for more "kidnappings" or US citizens being "caught" where they should not be. Be on the look out for higher and higher demands.
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
I'm not really sure what you were trying to say at the beginning of this post, but somewhere along the line you must have lost your train of thought because it ended up making no sense at all...
I have that problem a lot, old age is setting in. It does not matter, we will never agree on any of this anyway.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Letzrock,
He is referring to a problem that is talked about in executive training, especially in the banking industry. There is a need to keep people out of trouble because of blackmail and the threat of exposure.
Just humor me with this explanation
If Monica was an operative for the Soviets, and her mission was to put President Clinton in a compromising position to disclose some secret or do some action, then using the actual things that she did, she could have threaten him to disclose the information or do something action.
The bank security people have people in their department just to handle this single issue. As a CEO of say BoA, you actually are watched carefully, it is not your money so they take steps to ensure that you don't hand over billions to someone like Monica (who is now working for Gietner).
Does this make any sense?
To put this in perspective of what Layout is saying, both the CIA and the KGB practiced this a lot. Even with some of the recent spy cases here in the US, there was some sort of blackmail involved.
He is referring to a problem that is talked about in executive training, especially in the banking industry. There is a need to keep people out of trouble because of blackmail and the threat of exposure.
Just humor me with this explanation
If Monica was an operative for the Soviets, and her mission was to put President Clinton in a compromising position to disclose some secret or do some action, then using the actual things that she did, she could have threaten him to disclose the information or do something action.
The bank security people have people in their department just to handle this single issue. As a CEO of say BoA, you actually are watched carefully, it is not your money so they take steps to ensure that you don't hand over billions to someone like Monica (who is now working for Gietner).
Does this make any sense?
To put this in perspective of what Layout is saying, both the CIA and the KGB practiced this a lot. Even with some of the recent spy cases here in the US, there was some sort of blackmail involved.
That is correct Greg. That IS why it is important that we elect people who have good old fashionded morals and live the high ground. Loose people ARE trouble and cost LIVES!!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
What amazes me is how people think. Many don't get the difference between a law maker and a executive in a leadership position. If Harry Reid was to have an affair and the person or persons threaten to take it public, it wouldn't hurt one person in this country because all he does is vote on the bills.
I watch the Detroit thing carefully and like Kawmee, he did a lot of damage that they are just letting out in the sunlight. If this was Obama, it would make a big difference to all of us. Seeing Obama came from Chicago and the Daly political machine, there has to be a lot of things hanging over his head that he had to get to get even to the state senate.
I watch the Detroit thing carefully and like Kawmee, he did a lot of damage that they are just letting out in the sunlight. If this was Obama, it would make a big difference to all of us. Seeing Obama came from Chicago and the Daly political machine, there has to be a lot of things hanging over his head that he had to get to get even to the state senate.
The American people, the little guy that they claim they are looking out for, are going to pay a VERY high price for electing these low lifes. When you give up morals just to elect someone who is a member of a party you like we are in VERY deep trouble. Character counts. Morals count. Experience counts. This mess is going to cost us dearly.
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
Yeah, it makes sense. I'm sure Marilyn Monroe would have a lot to say about such things....What I am refering to is the individuals here who act all offended that Bill Clinton is some sort of evil being simply because he got his rocks off and then lied about it. I don't give a fat rat's a** if he or any other President got his noodle wet with some sleaze ball every day of the week! It's got nothing to do with being a leader or manager. Who provides the sleaze ball under what circumstances is an entirely different matter. That is my point. To say morality counts is a farce. If morality were that important, Jimmy Carter would have been a great President. Morality has nothing to do with it. You can look back throughout history and find that from the very beginning, immoral acts were commited at the most defining moments in american history, time after time after time.
Last edited:
So what Your saying is that what they are doing is "Justified?" Because they are Elected Officials???? Just a Question!
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
So what Your saying is that what they are doing is "Justified?" Because they are Elected Officials???? Just a Question!
I'm not sure what you mean by justified. What I am saying is that good morals have nothing to do with being President.I have no doubt whatsoever that George W. Bush is of very good moral character, just as Jimmy Carter is. For whatever reason it did not translate into either of them being great leaders...
Rocket the problem with electing liars is that they are liars and therefore cannot be trusted. Cheating on your wife IS lying. It is also breaking an oath. IF a person is willing to break one oath he is likely to break another. They are also a security risk if they are in a position like President. The willingness to accept low morals as normal is a very disturbing trend in this country. Anytime standards are lowered the result is lower returns.
Morals and character ARE very important. They are NOT the ONLY things that are important. A persons background and experience are very important. A president needs MORE than the ability to talk or stir a crowd. They need to have DONE things, background in running large budgets, military and security affairs and experience in overseeing a large work force, for a start. Obama has NO background OR experience in anything of value. His lack of understanding of military and security is really beginning to show. This move with North Korea is a prime example it will weaken us and lead to more incidents like this. His associations with people like William Ayres make him a HIGH security risk.
That is why I was interested in Jerry Curry this last election. He had all the background and then some. When I read his bio and heard him talk it was obvious that he was a MAN. The way he handled racial discrimination is a fine example of how a MAN would handle it. He did NOT fight, become a victim, file a lawsuit or quit. He decided to OUT DO his hecklers. He outperformed them and in the end HE finished OCS, (officer candidate school) he was commissioned and his hecklers went back to being enlisted men. HE WON!! THAT is how a person of character handles a problem. To be able to go from PVT E1 to two star general in that era was an amazing performance. It also gave him the insight that you can only get from working your way up from the bottom.
Now, I realize that he might have been too old for the job. I would have voted for him anyway because he was so much better than the rest of the swill that ran this time. You should read his bio, not because I want to you vote for him someday, but to give you an idea of what I look for in a candidate so you can better understand where I come from.
Morals and character ARE very important. They are NOT the ONLY things that are important. A persons background and experience are very important. A president needs MORE than the ability to talk or stir a crowd. They need to have DONE things, background in running large budgets, military and security affairs and experience in overseeing a large work force, for a start. Obama has NO background OR experience in anything of value. His lack of understanding of military and security is really beginning to show. This move with North Korea is a prime example it will weaken us and lead to more incidents like this. His associations with people like William Ayres make him a HIGH security risk.
That is why I was interested in Jerry Curry this last election. He had all the background and then some. When I read his bio and heard him talk it was obvious that he was a MAN. The way he handled racial discrimination is a fine example of how a MAN would handle it. He did NOT fight, become a victim, file a lawsuit or quit. He decided to OUT DO his hecklers. He outperformed them and in the end HE finished OCS, (officer candidate school) he was commissioned and his hecklers went back to being enlisted men. HE WON!! THAT is how a person of character handles a problem. To be able to go from PVT E1 to two star general in that era was an amazing performance. It also gave him the insight that you can only get from working your way up from the bottom.
Now, I realize that he might have been too old for the job. I would have voted for him anyway because he was so much better than the rest of the swill that ran this time. You should read his bio, not because I want to you vote for him someday, but to give you an idea of what I look for in a candidate so you can better understand where I come from.