Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ron Paul One Of The Most Corrupt Members Of Congress, Report Finds

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
ROFL.

They managed to block his nomination and they're still scared spitless of the man and his supporters.




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Ron Paul is an American who stands for the Constitution and the rights and liberties of people. If you can not see that you need to take a look at what you stand for.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Please tell me this title is satirical... the OP is just as ridiculous for acting as if the article is valid. If you atually thought this would be the piece of "exposing" that discredited Ron Paul, I feel sorry for you.

Apart from the fact that this 'double-billing' thing was already talked about months ago, it was revealed that Paul used no tax dollars in the reimbursements -- totaling to a few thousand dollars over the course of the decade?? Yet most other politicians are taking huge "donations" in the million-dollar range, insider trading; completely bought out by the corporate elite & suspending this delusional two-party sham of a system.

And she/you has the gall to say Paul is one of the most corrupt?.... This has to either be satire, reverse psychology, or something beyond the bound of idiocy. Just posting something like this does the opposite of its intent.

edit on 13-9-2012 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Americans should count themselves lucky to have a man such as Ron Paul in US politics, he is his own man. He stands by the values he was brought up with, and doesn't want them ALL thrown away, just because a bunch of useless, self gratifying yuppies think those values are old hat. He doesn't even take a salary for congressman, he's not been accused of womanising in the office of the president, or any break-ins, or criminal associations/participations as some former occupants of the white house have been. That's why the rest are so afraid of him, he can't be bought or entrapped. He may not ever be a president, but he is a watch dog for all the citizens. I don't even see him as party political in todays politics, which more and more is about making money, one way or the other, and afterward, when the stint is over. I don't see any reason either, to not see Ron Paul as iconic, he's been doing the same routine for all his political life, he doesn't spend time machinating in Washington circles, he's there in the real world. All boring stuff, but that's what making a difference is all about.

I see no humour, or anything else of value in this thread.
edit on 13-9-2012 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


Thats not even a flash in the pan here brother. Though I am a bit sad Ron did something like this.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by Crakeur
He's a politician, what do you expect?


Wait for the excuse - clerical error.


Why come up for an excuse when you could just wait for the administration to respond to this

Or.....

Let's do some research
Oh here we go


optimiskeptic.com...


This should prove to be a message for everyone jumping on the political or partisan bandwagon

Don't knee-jerk a response
I'm not talking about you Crackeur, I only quoted you for what you posted to begin my reply

Research first everyone, then respond

Nobody should have posted pro-comments or anti-comments
Everyone should have said... Let's wait for more information!


Guys, did you see this post

Go to the link
optimiskeptic.com...

Can't just comment until more information comes out



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Does this mean that, "taking bribes from lobbiests", doesn't count as corruption?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


did you read the source?

this is about $1700 since October 2000.

$230 in October 2000

and then

$1480 in February 2005


That's all they got on him? weak...

That's really corrupt to cheat on two flights in the last 10 years... He must not be that corrupt or he would know to cheat more than $1700...
edit on 9/13/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



$1700 in 12 years ??

Nancy Pelosi spends more than that on booze she drinks in the WalMart parking lot before a long hard day of shopping.

This is weak, if it's even true at all.
edit on 13-9-2012 by HIWATT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
He's a politician, what do you expect?


Wait for the excuse - clerical error.


Gimme a break. All you have to do is follow this guys voting history and look at all the good things he has done over the years to KNOW this would be totally out of character for him.

This story is not believable at all in any way shape or form.

Really Crakeur. I'm surprised at you. Guess that just shows even the upper echelon of The Above Network isn't immune to the fallacies of us little people.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
well he has to pay for that private jet somehow

lolololol



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


CREW, the originator of this report, is a left-wing hack organization funded by George Soros.


George Soros’ Open Society Institute gave $250,000 to CREW in 2008, which reported revenue of $3 million and a staff of 13 employees that year. Soros is a well-known funder of left-wing nonprofit groups. Other beneficiaries of Soros' money include: the Center for American Progress, Media Matters for America, America Coming Together, and MoveOn.org.


CREW Exposed

Next



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Jeez dude, calling into question any failings in Saint Paul on this site is like telling LOLz Cat people you like Korean food. Good luck.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   
It appears there is more scandal and corruption in the source of the article than the subject.

But that still doesn't explain what the point was.

What does it serve to malign someone who is not a contender in the race?

And why do it so poorly and with so much incompetence as to render yourself (the author,) your single source (Johnathan Strong) and your cited politically connected organization (CREW) damaged beyond any further usefulness.

This lady (Elizabeth Flock) is a disgrace... and was one before publishing this article... so why is it "news"?

Because the editors of US News and World Report wanted to?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
It appears there is more scandal and corruption in the source of the article than the subject.

But that still doesn't explain what the point was.

What does it serve to malign someone who is not a contender in the race?

And why do it so poorly and with so much incompetence as to render yourself (the author,) your single source (Johnathan Strong) and your cited politically connected organization (CREW) damaged beyond any further usefulness.

This lady (Elizabeth Flock) is a disgrace... and was one before publishing this article... so why is it "news"?

Because the editors of US News and World Report wanted to?


Frankly I think it's because the establishment is scared sh*tless of Ron Paul and the libertarian message.
We gained A LOT of ground during this election cycle, our numbers have swelled. We are not just a message, but an entire grass roots movement with hundreds of thousands of supporters nation wide.

People are opening up to Ron Pauls ideas. They see that the same old system and way of doing things isn't changing anything. Democrate / Liberal / Republican / Conservative it doesn't matter - nothing changes or gets better. People want something radical and fresh. Ron Paul embodies that.

Those who are in power - those who make billions off the debt slavery, corruption and abuse of the American people are so scared of Paul and the movement that they will say and do anything to quell us.

That's why.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars


What does it serve to malign someone who is not a contender in the race?


Easy. Thousands of people have vowed to write in Ron Paul on the ballot. The Powers That Be would rather have those peoples votes for one of their two chosen candidates, Obama and Romney.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
As others have already said:

This, from the guy that returns portions of his paycheck back to the treasury, every year?

LOL!

YEAH, real corrupt.


I smell a RAT.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
The first lie was debunked. Doubt that this latest allegation has any merit.



edit on 13-9-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Thunderheart
 


I mirror your comment....THAT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS!!!! Especially the way you see the media treating him....


But more importantly....the OP acts as if he's guilty already!! That's like saying I have investigated the OP and found that they're terribly fat and still live at home...and you'll never guess where they sleep...that's right..the basement!!

Do you want to know why it's true...cuz I said so!!!

lol



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I think this is all bs.

The establishment hates him. And the media constantly lie.

Besides it's likely an accountants fault and not Ron Paul's



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Damn!

I'd like to think that it was a frame-those that would be doing it would be in a position to make the incriminating info look real. Could it be? Of course, but it could equally be true, as he is a politician. Makes me kind of sad, but it is within the realm of possibility.

One of the most corrupt though? Depends on how you define corruption, but I have a hard time believing that. I'd say there are a lot worse in Congress (not to mention the Senate.)






top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join