Reply to I think Christie is finished

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "I think Christie is finished"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: 
Anonymous wrote: 
Anonymous wrote: 
Anonymous wrote: 
I don't see that this is too bad for him. He retains plausible deniability...

He isn't going to have plausible deniability for long. There are already four different members of his staff involved.

And how many of Obama's staff were involved with the Benghazi cover up using the fake story of a video causing the attack?

zzzzzzzzzzz...... coverup of what. Has everyone agreed that the administration did not provide adequate security, and that it cost the lives of four of our own? Yes.

Assume Christie caused a traffic jam, and then did some other political dirty tricks in Hoboken. Assume he did what MSNBC says.

The premise of this thread is that those scandals sink him as a candidate in 2016.

Are those scandals worse than Benghazi, where you just said "everyone agree(s) the administration did not provide adequate security..."? Is Hillary responsible for what you just said everyone agrees about? If so, is she "finished" by those four deaths, just as the OP of this thread suggests Christie is finished by a traffic jam and some back room political chicanery?

Which is worse?

Benghazi is not a scandal. It is a made up thing by republicans. The Christie thing will be going on well in to the primaries. So yes it will sink him. He will have to answer questions about and money will walk away.

I am the poster you quoted.

Lets use your terms. Benghazi is not a scandal. Lets assume I agree that it isn't a "scandal". My questions still stand. A bi-partisan senate committee (chaired by a democat) says the deaths there were preventable. Is the non-scandalized preventable death of four state department employees more damaging to Mrs. Clinton than a traffic jam and back-room political games in Hoboken are to Christie?

I think you are saying the Christie stuff is more damaging. Those on the right think that it seems sorta unbalanced when the claim of this thread is that Christie's problems kill his chances, but Hillary's do not. In fact, a lot of conservatives probably think it is laughably one sided to think this.[/quote]
It is laughably to think Benghazi, a right wing funding exercise, will have any impact on Clinton. The report did not blame Clinton. The Benghazi thing is so worn out it is only seen as a Fox/conservative grifter thing. Clinton will be able to raise money and run with no drag from Benghazi. The Christie thing is not a "traffic jam". It is a misuse of government power that will put people in jail. The us da just got involved interviewing witnesses this weekend. This will be an active investigation well in to primary season. The money people will stay away until it is done. Did you see Christie's change of attitude on Sunday? He was at fund raisers over the weekend and got a lot of "we will wait and see how things turn out, talk to us next year". [b]He needs money and commitments now, not next year.[/b]

[/quote]

You do realize he was in FL as Chairman of the RGA, don't you.  Ask Rudy what good so-called commitments do three years out. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics