It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: eManym
The Bush family made a very big payday in the Savings and Loan scandal in the 1980's involving Jeb Bush, George Bush, Sr and Niel Bush.
Jeb Bush received a loan from Broward Federal Savings in the amount of $4.56 million for an office building that was appraised by regulators at $500,000 during the bailout which in all cost the taxpayers $1.4 trillion. This gave Jeb Bush a cool return of $4 million on his investment.
Niel Bush is another story. As director of Siverado Savings and Loan his company JNB defaulted on $3 million and Niel Bush also provided another $138 million in loans to a couple of his buddies Good and Walters, which they also defaulted on. I speculate this ended up in an offshore bank and was divided up later.
Bush, Sr. involvement superficialized the investigation and kept it all quite until his reelection in 1988.
Putting GW Bush's blank check to federal contractors during the Iraq reconstruction, which was clearly a conflict of interest involving members of his administration, why do people still support the Bush family and Jeb in particular?
originally posted by: muse7
I guess that when the other choices are Rand Paul or Ted Cruz then Jeb Bush would seem like a pretty damn good candidate
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Bush brings contacts with experience to the table. Presidents are only as good as the crowd they pick to be in their Administration.
originally posted by: eManym
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Bush brings contacts with experience to the table. Presidents are only as good as the crowd they pick to be in their Administration.
He would these people be, incumbents that know how to pull the correct strings for making money off the taxpayers?
originally posted by: schuyler
Why would they consider Hillary Clinton?
Why would they consider Bernie Sanders?
They've all got some sort of baggage that you or someone else disagrees with because, you know, you are so incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable about the state of the world. There isn't anyone out there that some group doesn't hate and that someone can dredge up some scandal, real or imagined, about them. The real question is why anyone thinks they are better at judging candidates than anyone else. The amount of ignorance amongst the populace exceeds the ignorance amongst the candidates. With an average IQ of 100, and by definition half below that, it's just a matter of who can concoct the most attractive fake imagery to get themselves elected.
Democracy sucks; you've got idiots for voters.
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
You want the simple answer?
Because Obama was so bad for the country.
It will take someone to face the arduous task of reversing the destruction.
Bush brings contacts with experience to the table. Presidents are only as good as the crowd they pick to be in their Administration. Instead of Muslim Brotherhood people, radicals as czars, failed presidential candidates running our Foreign affairs at the State Department, Bush will make a cabinet that will face world problems from experience, even though a lot of people won't agree with them ideologically.
originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Yet you don't question hillary who's only credential was being bills wife...
originally posted by: amazing
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
You want the simple answer?
Because Obama was so bad for the country.
It will take someone to face the arduous task of reversing the destruction.
Bush brings contacts with experience to the table. Presidents are only as good as the crowd they pick to be in their Administration. Instead of Muslim Brotherhood people, radicals as czars, failed presidential candidates running our Foreign affairs at the State Department, Bush will make a cabinet that will face world problems from experience, even though a lot of people won't agree with them ideologically.
Yeah, but.. how was Obama bad for the country? All economic indicators are up. All of them from unemployment to wall street, to everything.
He was also better globally as a president than either of the Bushes.
If you brush off the propganda Machine, your argument falls flat.