What does truthwarrior desh say about Obama being a HUGE CONFIRMED LIAR?

I can't believe that anyone is still trying to convince lying desh that Obama lied. Even Obama admits he lied. His administration admits he lied.

Desh will go to her dying grave defending this corrupt administration. Why? Because he "says" he wants to help the poor. That is all embiciles like Desh need to here. Despite evidence that is right in front of her wrinkled nose that the people he claims to want to help are being harmed, she doesn't care.

She is either woefully ignorant about the results of left wing policies or she is complicit. In either case her and her ideology need to be defeated soundly before more people are hurt.
 
evince said:
then why are there so many court cases that determined the right has to be policed for JUST THAT???????


how do you get around those cold hard facts you fucking liar?
Click to expand...

the "so many court cases" didn't determine any "cold hard facts" of cheating......they were based on mindless liberal claims that trying to keep dead people, unregistered voters, and felons from voting was an unfair attack that discriminated against the Democrat base.......
 
how many people cant keep their policy and cant get a better one for less or the same money?


I gave you court cases right there dudes.

Now can you get me that one fucking number I have been asking for ?


go get the number of people who OBAMA lied to.


because what the corporate media claims is a lie is not always a lie.


was Howard Dean Crazy when they all told us he was?

fucking a NO.

that was a corporate media lie.
 
Your party has kept people from voting so they can win elections.


there are many court cases to prove it.

they have been held under a consent decree for three decades because of it.


even you right wing SCOTUS refused to take their case.


yet when this cold hard court documentation is presented to you fucks you RUN AWAY or flat out deny the overwhelming evidence that your party doesn't deserve power
 
evince said:
how many people cant keep their policy and cant get a better one for less or the same money?


I gave you court cases right there dudes.

Now can you get me that one fucking number I have been asking for ?


go get the number of people who OBAMA lied to.


because what the corporate media claims is a lie is not always a lie.


was Howard Dean Crazy when they all told us he was?

fucking a NO.

that was a corporate media lie.
Click to expand...

that would be 250k in Colorado, Desh.....and compared to you, Dean is slightly less crazy.......
 
evince said:
Your party has kept people from voting so they can win elections.


there are many court cases to prove it.

they have been held under a consent decree for three decades because of it.


even you right wing SCOTUS refused to take their case.


yet when this cold hard court documentation is presented to you fucks you RUN AWAY or flat out deny the overwhelming evidence that your party doesn't deserve power
Click to expand...

the only documented instance I am aware of in which voter fraud actually changed an election was when Kennedy beat Nixon in Chicago, putting Kennedy in the White House......how are those cold hard facts for you.....
 
The leftards appear willing to allow this Obamacare lie remain at the top of the headlines. Why? Because there's a bigger, more insidious lie out there.

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the story on the My Lai Massacre, reports that the Obama Administration cherry-picked intelligence regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria, and omitted key contradictory evidence, such as that the missiles fired resembled nothing in the Syrian arsenal and were improvised locally-made weapons.

Unlike the allegations against the Bush Administration's case against Iraq, with which essentially every major international intelligence agency in the world agreed with, Obama's case against Syria had virtually *ZERO* supporting intelligence behind it. It was a weak lie and no other power in the world would align behind it.

And it was a lie that was designed to cover another lie; one about a "red line," which it turned out didn't exist.

http://www.salon.com/2013/12/09/sey...tion_nearly_lied_the_u_s_into_war_with_syria/

Seymour Hersh, the legendary investigative journalist who broke the My Lai massacre and the abuses at Abu Ghraib, says in a new report for the London Review of Books (the New Yorker and the Washington Post both reportedly passed) that the Obama administration did not tell the whole truth while arguing for a military strike against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for using chemical weapons.

Hersh accuses the Obama administration of cherry-picking its evidence and omitting key, contradictory facts. But the administration’s greatest sin, according to Hersh, was its failure to reveal its knowledge that an al Qaida-aligned group of Syrian rebels — the al-Nusra Front — had mastered the creation of sarin gas, the substance used in the chemical attack the administration cited as a cause for war. “When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect,” Hersh writes, “but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad.”
Click to expand...

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/12/9/seymour_hersh_obama_cherry_picked_intelligence

the fact of the matter is that this president was going to go to a war because he felt he had to protect what he said about a red line. That’s what it was about, in the military’s point of view. And that’s not acceptable. You don’t go to war, you don’t throw missiles at a country, when there’s no immediate national security to the United States. And you don’t even talk about it in public. That’s wrong, and that was a terrible thing to do.

And that’s what this story is really about. It’s about a president choosing to make political use of a war crime and not do the right thing. And I think that’s—to me, Amy, that’s a lot more important than where it was published and who told me no and who told me yes. I know the press likes to focus on that stuff, but that’s not the story. The story is what he was going to do, and what it says maybe about him, what it says about that office, what it says about the power, that you can simply—you can create a narrative, which he did, and you know the mainstream press is going to carry out that narrative.

I mean, it’s almost impossible for some of the mainstream newspapers, who have consistently supported the administration. This is after we had the WMD scandal, when everybody wanted to be on the team. It turns out our job, as newspaper people, is not to be on the team. You know, we’ve got a world run by a lot of yahoos and wackos, and it’s our job as reporters to do the kind of work and make it hard for the nincompoops that run the world to get away with some of the stuff we’re doing. That’s what we should be doing more and more of. And that’s just—you know, I don’t think there’s any virtue in it; it’s just the job we have. And there’s heroism—you know, there’s nothing heroic about what we do. It’s heroic for some of the people, reporters in Africa, to do some of that work when they’re at personal risk. We’re not at personal risk. It’s just not so hard to hold the people in office to the highest standard. And the press should be doing it more and more.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top