• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Is anyone in Congress even half way honest?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Six lawmakers recuse themselves from Rep. Waters ethics case
By Jordy Yager - 02/17/12 12:08 PM ET

Six lawmakers on the House Ethics Committee have recused themselves from the ethics case against Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).

The voluntary and unprecedented recusals come as an outside counsel probes whether the secretive ethics committee acted inappropriately in the Waters case
.


The letter of recusal was submitted and approved for the senior lawmakers on the panel, Chairman Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) and ranking member Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), along with the rest of the panel’s Republicans, Reps. Michael McCaul (Texas), Michael Conaway (Texas), Charlie Dent (Pa.) and Gregg Harper (Miss.).

In their place, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) appointed Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) to serve as the panel’s acting chairman and Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) to serve as the committee’s ranking member. Additionally, Reps. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Tim Griffin (R-Ark.) and John Sarbanes (D-Md.) were chosen to preside over the Waters case.

The recusals were not an indication of guilt of any member included in the recusal, according to the letter sent from Bonner to Boehner.

“They believe that out of an abundance of caution and to avoid even an appearance of unfairness their voluntary recusal will eliminate the possibility of questions being raised as to the partiality or compliance of committee members considering this matter,” stated the letter.

“They want to ensure the public, the House, and Representative Waters that this investigation is continuing in a fair and unbiased manner.”

For more than two years, the committee has investigated whether Waters violated House rules after allegations surfaced that she secured funding for a bank in which her husband own stock. Waters has maintained her innocence.

As the committee moved towards holding a trial for Waters late in 2010, the panel halted abruptly and placed two of its lead attorneys on administrative leave. Shortly afterwards, the committee’s chief counsel stepped down.

The first half of 2011 was spent in a flurry of firing and reorganizing among the panel’s investigative and legal staff, which included the hiring of a new chief counsel.

In July, the committee announced it was hiring outside attorney Billy Martin to investigate whether members and staff on the panel acted inappropriately in the Waters case.

Since then, Martin has spent at least $300,000 in his investigation and has been approved for up to $500,000 more in funding through the end of his contract, which expires on July 31, 2012.

Only one witness has refused to comply with Martin as he’s interviewed dozens of current and former members and staff involved in the Waters case, according to Bonner’s letter on Friday.

The refusal has raised questions about whether Martin will be able to complete his review of the committee’s handling of the Waters case.

“Mr. Martin has advised that one necessary witness has refused to appear voluntarily and, when subpoenaed to testify, communicated to the Committee that the witness would refuse to answer questions on the basis of the witness’s Fifth Amendment privilege,” the letter stated.

“The witness’s refusal to answer questions prevents the completion of the due process review.”


The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has been at the forefront of calls for the committee to move forward with the Waters case. Executive director Melanie Sloan lauded the recusals on Friday.

“I don’t see how they all could have stayed on the case and decided anything about it, given that it involves potential misconduct by some of them,” said Sloan. “It sounds like they’re trying to move it to completion.”

“It’s great that they recognized this is time for them to recuse themselves and I think members of the Ethics committee need to recognize those concerns.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
another CREW initiative to silence those that would question Democrats, guess it worked. Definitely a step in the right direction when it comes to transparency in Government, the voters are much better off, not knowing what CREW does not want you to know.




CREW’s ultimate purpose is to use “the rule of law to bring about constructive social change” in a manner the organization likens to the 1960s civil rights movement. The "social change" sought by CREW is the transformation of America into a nation that more fully embraces leftist values and policies. Toward this end, CREW strives to discredit conservatives and Republicans it deems vulnerable to attack, with the objective of decreasing their numbers in political offices nationwide. Thus the overwhelming majority of the public officials targeted by CREW are Republicans. In September 2006, the organization issued a 241-page report -- titled "Beyond [Tom] Delay: The 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress” -- which named 17 Republicans and 3 Democrats. The report further listed 5 “Dishonorable Mentions” -- 4 Republicans and 1 Democrat. A similar disproportion has marked the political contributions made by CREW's Board members and staffers in recent years. Between 1995 and 2004, those individuals contributed $125,245 to Democrats and $16,013 to Republicans.

Citing the existence of conservative legal advocacy groups like Judicial Watch, the Rutherford Institute, and the National Legal and Policy Center, CREW says: “Conservative groups such as these have no real parallel in the progressive arena.” While acknowledging that there are numerous leftist groups that focus on research and legislation, CREW states that such organizations “do not use litigation to target outrageous conduct.” This is the niche that CREW has carved out for itself.

CREW was founded by Democrat activists Norm Eisen (an attorney) and Louis Mayberg (a prominent Democrat donor, and co-founder of the Maryland-based mutual fund management firm ProFund Advisors LLC). CREW’s "Form 990" IRS filing for 2001 lists Mayberg as one of its three Founding Directors; the other two are Daniel Berger (a high-profile Democrat donor who in 2004 made a $100,000 contribution to America Coming Together) and Mark Penn (a fellow at the New Politics Institute, and a top Democrat strategist and pollster who not only played a key role in Bill Clinton's 1996 presidential campaign, but also served as head of "message and strategy" for Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign).

CREW has received financial backing from George Soros's Open Society Institute, Democracy Alliance, the Tides Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, the Arca Foundation, the David Geffen Foundation, the Wallace Global Fund, the Mayberg Family Charitable Foundation, the Woodbury Fund, and the Sheller Family Foundation -- all institutions distinguished by their support for far-left causes.

CREW’s Executive Director is Melanie Sloan, a longtime Democrat operative who previously served as Nominations Counsel for Joe Biden’s Senate Judiciary Committee (1993); Counsel for the Crime Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee for Charles Schumer (1994); Minority Counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee under John Conyers (1995-1998); and Assistant U.S. District Attorney for the District of Columbia (1998-2003).

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7309
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has been at the forefront of calls for the committee to move forward with the Waters case. Executive director Melanie Sloan lauded the recusals on Friday.

Sounds more to me like they wanted to get it to trial or a ruling rather than helping her...Especially when they have included her on their most crooked list in the past.....

The Tom Delay conviction was a victory for CREW. But CREW has failed to convict another “Most Corrupt” elected official, Rep. Maxine Waters. CREW says Maxine Waters is corrupt because she arranged a meeting between a minority owned Bank and Treasury officials. The Waters family owned shares of that bank, which makes her corrupt.

But you spin it whatever way your biased hypocritical mind wants to ... :roll:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
You spin it anyway you want to oldtimer,,,,,,no one has much respect for anything you say any more anyway,,,,
Notice how that is happening in other forums as well?????
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has been at the forefront of calls for the committee to move forward with the Waters case. Executive director Melanie Sloan lauded the recusals on Friday.

Sounds more to me like they wanted to get it to trial or a ruling rather than helping her...Especially when they have included her on their most crooked list in the past.....

The Tom Delay conviction was a victory for CREW. But CREW has failed to convict another “Most Corrupt” elected official, Rep. Maxine Waters. CREW says Maxine Waters is corrupt because she arranged a meeting between a minority owned Bank and Treasury officials. The Waters family owned shares of that bank, which makes her corrupt.

But you spin it whatever way your biased hypocritical mind wants to ... :roll:


spin :???: :lol:


It wasn't me that posted an article that conjectures that those that recused themselves did so because they could in any way be implicated to being party to Waters actions or being dishonest.

It could be just as true that they are recusing themselves because they are not willing to deal with the demonization and personal destruction political tactics that you, and your progressive cohorts employ.


You would not have posted this article, if it had been 5 Democrats that recused themselves.

Do you actually think the people on Ranchers.net are too stupid to see through you and your misrepresentations?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has been at the forefront of calls for the committee to move forward with the Waters case. Executive director Melanie Sloan lauded the recusals on Friday.

Sounds more to me like they wanted to get it to trial or a ruling rather than helping her...Especially when they have included her on their most crooked list in the past.....

The Tom Delay conviction was a victory for CREW. But CREW has failed to convict another “Most Corrupt” elected official, Rep. Maxine Waters. CREW says Maxine Waters is corrupt because she arranged a meeting between a minority owned Bank and Treasury officials. The Waters family owned shares of that bank, which makes her corrupt.

But you spin it whatever way your biased hypocritical mind wants to ... :roll:


spin :???: :lol:


It wasn't me that posted an article that conjectures that those that recused themselves did so because they could in any way be implicated to being party to Waters actions or being dishonest.

It could be just as true that they are recusing themselves because they are not willing to deal with the demonization and personal destruction political tactics that you, and your progressive cohorts employ.

You would not have posted this article, if it had been 5 Democrats that recused themselves.

Do you actually think the people on Ranchers.net are too stupid to see through you and your misrepresentations?

In other words they are not up to following their oath of office and the committment given to them by the voters that elected them :???:

Sometimes in public office you have to make tough decisions and do actions that are neither popular or easy personally to do... But thats what they were elected for and appointed by the Speaker to do...

Or have some did the same thing and funneled tax money to entities that their family members work for :???:

Congressmen Used Earmarks for Personal Gain and to Help Relatives

Written by R. Cort Kirkwood
Wednesday, 15 February 2012 10:14
Congressmen are not only sending millions of tax dollars back home in earmarks that affect the value of their own property but also funding projects in which family members are involved.

That’s the latest revelation describing high-level graft and corruption on Capitol Hill, courtesy of the Washington Post. In an investigative project titled “Capitol Assets,” the newspaper shows that “public projects meet private interests,” and that what some Americans believe — that almost all politicians are crooks — might have some merit.

Capitol Improvements

According to the main website, the Post “compared the annual financial disclosure reports filed by every member of Congress over the past decade to a wide range of public records.”

The resulting snapshot was then matched to earmarks and other spending provisions members sought for pet projects. The process uncovered nearly 50 members who helped direct millions of dollars in earmarks to projects that either held the potential to enhance the surroundings of a lawmaker's own property, or aided entities connected to their immediate family. Lawmakers said their earmarks and spending provisions were done to benefit the public, not their private interests.

I saw where Todd Akin (R-Mo.), Darrell Issa (R-Calif.),Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) and Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) topped the list- but have never seen the full list of 47 Congressman that were just in the last few days named as grabbing into the taxpayer cookie jar for their own gain.. Are any of the recused Congressmen on it :???:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
I blame Obama as it happened under his watch.
You better include in GW- as a lot of these alledged misappropriations took place between 2005 and 2008.. :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Looks to me like these were bi-partisan crooks...

Heres a few more I found that were named : Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.),Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas).
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
The letter of recusal was submitted and approved for the senior lawmakers on the panel, Chairman Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) and ranking member Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), along with the rest of the panel’s Republicans, Reps. Michael McCaul (Texas), Michael Conaway (Texas), Charlie Dent (Pa.) and Gregg Harper (Miss.).

The resulting snapshot was then matched to earmarks and other spending provisions members sought for pet projects. The process uncovered nearly 50 members who helped direct millions of dollars in earmarks to projects that either held the potential to enhance the surroundings of a lawmaker's own property, or aided entities connected to their immediate family. Lawmakers said their earmarks and spending provisions were done to benefit the public, not their private interests.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/capitol-assets/mapping-the-earmarks/

Looks to me like the of those the recused themselves, California Democrat Sanchez is the only one that is on that list Oldtimer. :wink:

Rep. Linda T. Sánchez (D-Calif.)
Street light improvements

In 2009, Sanchez secured $475,000 to improve seven traffic signals. One was about a mile from her Lakewood home. Two were within three miles. "The city of Lakewood requested these earmarks. They were the city of Lakewood's priorities because the signals were old and deteriorating," a Sanchez spokesman said. "The requests were made to go toward safety improvements that the city asked her to pursue."
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
Heres a few more I found that were named : Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.),Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas).


so let us know how these, and the ones your previously named, do not meet your standards, when it comes to honesty.

"bearing false witness" and all that :roll: :lol:


God knows that you would never throw up an accusation without evidence :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
1
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
and Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) topped the list-

yep, she drained the swamp,.. looked around and saw all he friends sitting in the mud with her..

pelosi-cleans-the-swamp.jpg


DraintheSwamp.jpg



if it takes a few republicans stepping aside to convict Waters.. then so be it...
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Across the nation, 33 members of Congress have helped direct more than $300 million in earmarks to dozens of public projects for work in close proximity to commercial and residential real estate owned by the lawmakers or their family members.


Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.)
Bullhead City bridge

In 2004 and 2005, the Senate majority leader secured $21.5 million to build a bridge over the Colorado River, linking the gambling resort town of Laughlin, Nev., with Bullhead City, Ariz. Reid owns 160 acres of undeveloped land in Bullhead City. The earmarks were previously reported by the Los Angeles Times. "As has been stated before, Senator Reid's support for the bridge has absolutely nothing to do with the property he owns and is based on the fact that the project is good for southern Nevada, and nothing else," a Reid spokeswoman said.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
Central Subway Project

Over the past decade, the House minority leader helped secure $50 million in earmarks toward a light-rail project that provides direct access to San Francisco's Union Square and Chinatown for neighborhoods south of Market Street. Pelosi's husband owns a four-story commercial building blocks from Union Square. These earmarks were reported in the book "Throw Them All Out." A Pelosi spokesman said the project was requested by community leaders and that the new stations on the line will be farther away from the building than those on the existing line.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)
Road improvement
and since you mentioned Issa
Issa secured $815,000 in earmarks between 2007 and 2009 to widen a road less than a mile from a medical building in Vista, Calif., that Issa purchased for $16.6 million in 2008. Issa sold the property on Jan. 19 for $15 million. These earmarks were first reported in March by the Center for American Progress and in August by the New York Times. "Rep. Issa's request for the widening project was made on behalf of local leaders and predated his purchase of the medical center building," a spokesman said."

Out of the 33 and $300 million in earmarks Reid had 21 million, Pelosi had 50 million AND Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, Ryan or any of REPUBLICANS on the Waters ethics committee are not on the list Oldtimer so WHO is really the problem if you are using the earmark list to judge?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
One of the report’s two main articles deals with congressmen shoveling money at projects which are near property they own.

Between 2005 and 2009, according to the Post, Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) “helped secure $3.3 million to upgrade part of Route 141 in his district west of St. Louis." The paper explained:

Less than a half-mile east of Route 141, Akin and his family own nine acres. Akin's family has applied to construct six homes on the land. His spokesman said Akin's land had no bearing on his support for the earmarks. “It is going to be helpful as a connector but not helpful for residential property values whatsoever,” he said.

Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). the Post reported, channelled $815,000 to his district to “widen a road less than a mile from a medical building in Vista, California, that Issa purchased for $16.6 million in 2008. Issa sold the property on Jan. 19 for $15 million.”

A third beneficiary of public swag is Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), who locked down “a $900,000 earmark that was used to resurface about two dozen roads in Mississippi in 2010,” said the Post. “One of those was LC Turner Circle, a quarter-mile residential loop in the small town of Bolton, where Thompson and his daughter own two homes. Johnson, of course, says he didn’t order the roads department to use the earmarks to his benefit.

The newspaper also revealed that in 2008, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) sent more than $6 million back home to “replenish the beach on Tybee Island, where he owns a cottage about 900 feet from the beach.” Kingston’s reply to the charge of corruption: “It’s absurd.”

Last but certainly not least on the list is former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.):

Over the past decade, the House minority leader helped secure $50 million in earmarks toward a light-rail project that provides direct access to San Francisco's Union Square and Chinatown for neighborhoods south of Market Street. Pelosi's husband owns a four-story commercial building blocks from Union Square.

That material came from Peter Schweizer’s book, Throw Them All Out, which also documented another of Pelosi’s alleged scams on the taxpayers: insider trading of stock based on legislation over which she exerted some control. As The Daily Beast reported of Schweizer’s findings, “Pelosi and her husband, Paul, are reportedly worth $40 million, with a significant stock portfolio.” It continued,

In the spring of 2008, when Pelosi was speaker of the House, Paul made a big play — between $1 million and $5 million — on Visa, the credit-card company. What was striking about the investment, apart from its size, was the price the Pelosis paid for it. The Visa initial public stock offering was one of the hottest of the decade, its price-per-share jumping from $44 to $65 just 48 hours after public trading began. But the initial public offering, at the $44 price, was reserved for institutional investors and mutual funds, plus a select group of individual investors. The Pelosis bought their Visa shares in three transactions, the first of which — 5,000 shares — came at the lower IPO price. This may have been just a piece of investment luck or an instance of Visa extending a friendly gesture to an important political figure.

Schweizer is happy to posit another possibility. The Pelosis acquired their IPO shares shortly after the introduction into the House of legislation that, if passed, would adversely affect Visa’s business. Visa makes money by licensing its name to banks (which in turn issue the cards and charge customers interest) and by charging “swipe fees” to merchants who accept the card as payment. These fees paid by retailers range from 1 percent to 3 percent of the purchase amount every time a Visa card is used. The proposed 2008 law would have allowed retailers to negotiate lower fees with the major credit-card companies, who, gaining billions from those fees, predictably opposed the measure.

The bill passed through committee but never made it to the floor of the House. It eventually died, and two similar efforts also failed to reach the House floor. Congress did finally act on the issue two years later, as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. By that time, the value of Pelosi’s IPO shares had more than doubled, while the market as a whole had shown a double-digit decline.

Like all the other politicians, Pelosi denies anything is wrong. When CBS correspondent Steve Kroft nailed her at a press conference, she claimed she was innocent. Schweizer, she charged, is a “right-wing hack.”

Family Affairs
Beyond helping boost the value of their own properties, congressmen also channeled money for the benefit of relatives.

The Post investigation revealed that Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) “has supported a Pentagon program called Starbase that teaches science, math and engineering skills to children in dozens of locations around the country.” In 2008, he and his colleagues boosted the program’s budget by $4 million. But Johnson’s wife benefited:

At the time, Johnson’s wife, Barbara, was paid an annual salary of $80,000 as a contract employee to evaluate the program. From 2005 to September, she worked for the Spectrum Group, a lobbying and consulting firm in Alexandria, that has a $1 million Pentagon contract to monitor Starbase. A social worker and educator, Barbara Johnson was also assigned to manage its Web site.

Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) has pumped nearly $75 million into companies that employ his sons. Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash.) has sent millions to an environmental agency in his home state, and his son just happened to work there. Rep. Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., (D-Ga.) sent money to a program back home that employs his stepdaughter and her husband.

And for years, said the Post, Rep. Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.) “has directed [the Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration] to send millions to fund the scholarship program for at-risk high school students headed by his daughter in Arizona. She earns $75,774 a year.”

Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) has done both: boosted the fortunes of her property and helped a family member with the same pot of cash, noted the paper:

Over the past decade, Granger has helped obtain $51.9 million in earmarks toward a project to make over downtown Fort Worth and reroute the Trinity River.

Until 2010, Granger co-owned a condominium building with her son about a half-mile south of the project. Her son is director of the group in charge of the project.

“The congresswoman has always given her support to qualified programs in full compliance with the House Ethics Committee and the rules of the House of Representatives,” her spokesman said.

Another of the ethically-challenged legislators on the list is Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas). According to the Post, this guardian of the public weal “helped secure” more than $5 million for the University of Houston. Her husband “was vice president of student affairs and vice chancellor of student affairs for the university system.”
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). the Post reported, channelled $815,000 to his district to “widen a road less than a mile from a medical building in Vista, California, that Issa purchased for $16.6 million in 2008. Issa sold the property on Jan. 19 for $15 million.”


Nice going Issa, your supposed corruption cost you money :lol:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Looks to me like these were bi-partisan crooks...

Heres a few more I found that were named : Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.),Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas).

Of these Ms Granger should be booted for the sake of the tax payers

Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth:
Granger was listed for helping "obtain $51.9 million in earmarks toward a project to make over downtown Fort Worth and reroute the Trinity River. Until 2010, Granger co-owned a condominium building with her son about a half-mile south of the project. Her son is director of the group in charge of the project."
The building is at East Seventh and Jones streets.
"As a Member of Congress who fully supports infrastructure projects, the congresswoman has always given her support to qualified programs in full compliance with the House Ethics Committee and the rules of the House of Representatives," her office said in a statement to the Star-Telegram. "All of her private investments fully comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law."
Granger has said that a judicious use of earmarks makes sure that elected officials, rather than bureaucrats, direct federal spending.
"If we stop earmarks from Congress, all that happens is the administration makes the decisions," she has said. "In the past, when we didn't have earmarks in the House bill and the administration made the decisions, the majority of funding went to the five largest cities in the U.S."

Seems she thinks the Tax payer coffers are her own little piggy bank. :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
hypocritexposer said:
anybody notice that the "crooks' are bi-partisan


:lol:

Yes they are Bi Partisan BUT What I also noticed was that there was only one of those in Oldtimer's original article that was on the list of earmarkers that he tried to discredit the Congressmen with and that one was the Democrat. :roll: [/b]
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Tam said:
hypocritexposer said:
anybody notice that the "crooks' are bi-partisan


:lol:

Yes they are Bi Partisan BUT What I also noticed was that there was only one of those in Oldtimer's original article that was on the list of earmarkers that he tried to discredit the Congressmen with and that one was the Democrat. :roll: [/b]


Yes, but Conservatives are radical extremists, so they cannot be bi-partisan, thus, they are not the corrupt ones :lol: :lol:
 

Latest posts

Top