So anyway since you claim to know that George H. W. Bush was having an affair with Fitzgerald despite admitting you couldn’t even initially remember her name please produce the evidence for this or is this merely going to be another case of “my post is my cite”?
Thanks in advance.
Actually, it’s unsurprising to me that you would make yet another factually incorrect statement in this thread, or in this forum. What is one more added to so many?
You are the one who accused Hillary Clinton of killing Vince Foster in this thread. It is not an accurate statement at all. You have made so many inaccurate statements in this thread alone, so many changed definitions, so much turning a blind eye to history, so many shifted burdens of proof on your part. That is a lot of carrying water and sweeping away political shenanigans. Yet always for one side. At least I will actually criticize liberals, my own people. Never seen you do that to conservatives. Even when Nixon is finally nailed dead to rights on treason, just silence from you with respect to Nixon and the claim that not only was Gary Hart not honey trapped, but it never happened in American politics. And when I give you half a dozen examples, just silence. Crickets. Ignoring it hoping it will go away.
Your examples were bullshit.
Once again, you claim to know for a fact that George H. W. Bush had an affair with Jennifer Fitzgerald, despite admitting that you knew so little about the case you couldn’t even remember her name.
I think that is an utterly moronic claim.
Prove me wrong and provide compelling evidence to support your ludicrous assertion.
Once again, thanks in advance.
So much bullshit, I’m going to let it just rot where it sits.
Knock it off.
This utterly twists what was posted in the context that it was posted and the only reasonable conclusion one may draw from this claim is that either you do not have the intellectual competence to post in this forum or you are trolling. The rest of your paragraph follows along the same lines.
EVERYONE needs to dial back on the hostility in this thread,
but you need to post in a way that I can be sure is not trolling.
[ /Moderating ]
NM
Updating this thread it turns out that this was all a setup orchestrated by Lee Atwater (a Republican political consultant famous for race baiting–remember the Willie Horton ad):
Wow. Atwater really was a piece of work.
That’s an interesting theory. Of course, it is based on a five minute conversation with a man dying of a brain tumor, in 1991, with no corroboration, and accusing another person (Broadhurst) also conveniently dead of bribery, also with no corroboration. But there is a movie coming out about it, so who needs proof?
Regards,
Shodan
Bribery is a cause of death?
Well, gee, Atwater was going to provide the detailed plans, graphs, charts and a scale model of The Monkey Business Conspiracy to provide absolute proof to silence the doubters, but that darn brain tumor was just too quick.
:rolleyes:
It does bear repeating that the press wasn’t following Hart, they were following Rice. I haven’t read the Atlantic article, but I did see Rachel Maddow’s piece on the story. I first heard this story over 25 years ago from a friend of my wife and discounted it then. But Maddow says that the guy who Atwater apologized to had shared the story with “some of his journalist friends”. My wife’s friend is the sister of the person referenced in the following link.
I also note that an attempt by the Republicans to “stack the deck” for the opposition party was the very essence of Watergate, take out the strongest candidate early and run against the weaker one (Canuck letter, anybody?).
Nothing proves anything, of course. But it does make one wonder and you don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that, hey yeah, this might just be the way it went down.
The Maddow story, if you’re interested: Was The Gary Hart Scandal Just A Set-Up By The George Bush Campaign? | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC - YouTube
From Maddow hunh? Well, at least we know she’s an honest broker who doesn’t have an ax to grind. :rolleyes:
The fact that one might have an axe (or is it ax) to grind doesn’t make what they’re saying false. Especially when all she’s doing basically is giving someone else’s story wider exposure.
Huh, that’s a coincidence, I’m currently reading ‘The Strategies of Zeus’, a 1987 novel written by him.
Message ends, please carry on (his name in the title of this thread caught my eye as I was browsing the SD)
Sure it does. She’s giving the story “wider exposure” by putting her spin on it, ignoring what she wants to embellishing what comes closest to proving her point.
There’s a vast difference between being a journalist and being a shill - and that counts for both sides.
And there is a vast difference between saying something and providing evidence for what you say. In what way did she embellish this story?
In what ways didn’t she?
She notes from 5 or 6 newspapers that Gary Hart is the front runner for the nomination, as proof that he was the de facto nominee. What she doesn’t discuss is that these articles are from May of 1986, two and a half years before the election. Not two and a half weeks or months. That is a life time in politics.
Did you know that Trump was the guy four years ago? No way. The Republican nominee four years ago was Bush. You would have bet the house on it. Do you know who the Democratic nominee was in 2006? You would have bet the house it was Hillary Clinton. No way you would be thought it was Obama.
Do you know who the Democratic nominee is today (only two years out)? It is a huge stretch to know the nominee that far out but she’s acting as it it’s without question.
Hart had woman issues before and after this one incident. She doesn’t mention that. He came back in later and tried to re-start his campaign but had issues with his 1984 campaign and the huge debt that he left and was forced out. She doesn’t discuss that.
Storther has no proof that this conversation with Atwater ever took place. But we are to believe that he’s told of this in 1991, a major issue to him and Hart at least if true. What does he do in 1991 with this bombshell? He waits 26 years until he is sick to tell Gary Hart about that? He just hangs on to this information and decided to tell no one? Does that seem likely at all?
She makes Hart into a much less flawed candidate than he really was.
She focuses on all of the points that she thinks proves this, and ignores all of the significant issues. Embellishment from where I’m sitting, and I kinda liked the guy way back when.