Senate GOP stalls Hagel nomination by waging filibuster

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


Ouch! You got me. Let's live in a world controlled by the UN. Just one big happy "Open Society" You're so right.. Why would I ever think surrendering our sovereignty and our Constitution would be a bad thing.. You Rock! Classic Alinsky Move..




posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
You said the lie started in this forum... IT DID NOT.


Oh...it's not a lie if some other forum said it first? That's how you manage your facts?

As far as this forum...please show me what news outlet this lie originated with?


Originally posted by NOTurTypical
During his confirmation hearing when he was being questioned about it [friends of hamas] Democrats stopped the session.




Originally posted by jibeho

So, how do you feel about Hagel? Maybe you can be the mouthpiece for those who can't answer the question.


Hagel?? During the "cleansing" of all moderate voices from the GOP...some moderate GOP cowered and started mumbling about how President Obama was born in Kenya and was a socialist...cuz they feared the Tea Party...others called the "new" GOP what it was....



May 2011
The Republican Party has drifted so far to the right and become so partisan in recent years that President Ronald Reagan wouldn't even want to be a part of it, former Nebraska GOP senator Chuck Hagel told The Cable.

"Reagan wouldn't identify with this party. There's a streak of intolerance in the Republican Party today that scares people. Intolerance is a very dangerous thing in a society because it always leads to a tragic ending," he said. "Ronald Reagan was never driven by ideology. He was a conservative but he was a practical conservative. He wanted limited government but he used government and he used it many times. And he would work with the other party."

thecable.foreignpolicy.com...

And for that honesty he was hunted as a RINO...so I give him points for both accuracy and honesty...and putting truth before his political prospects.

edit on 15-2-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-2-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by buster2010
 


There is nothing honest about government the founders knew this they would not have welcomed a "NWO".


You do know that quite a few of them were Freemasons right?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by BritofTexas

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Just how behind the times are you? It's like you're stuck in 2011 somewhere.

Or do just get your "news" from the MSM?

edit on 15-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Ok. Third time may be the charm.

Do you have any EVIDENCE to back up your claim.


So I was right,.. this is new news to you!

Why are you even participating in this thread without knowing the biggest reason for the filibuster?

Did you just see a thread about the mean ol Republicans and decided to post?

Here ya go, at least now you're kinda sorta informed.
edit on 15-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


When it comes to power and control the US government does not nor will ever allow competition.

That is a fact that can be taken in to any fiat currency bank.
edit on 15-2-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Again... maybe I'll word it a little differently for you .... Do you support Hagel and if so Why? Are you opposed to Hagel? Why?

You still can't answer the question in your own words... No surprise...



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Like how you took the focus off the Contributions from Friends of Hamas and shifted to the Dems. walking out of the hearing .. you should go back to your original post on this particular topic. You love to move those goal posts ... Keep Trying...



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Briebart has already been debunked...there is no "Friends of Hamas"...and can you point me to where Dems. closed the hearing after questions about this? Cuz that seemed just a bald-faced lie? Ya know they have reporters at those hearings? cameras etc?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Like how you took the focus off the Contributions from Friends of Hamas and shifted to the Dems. walking out of the hearing .. you should go back to your original post on this particular topic. You love to move those goal posts ... Keep Trying...


Nope...My post was direct...and apparently you seem to be the one refusing to answer? When did Dems shut down the hearing after a question about "Friends of Hamas"? That was the post I responded to...that is the post you defended...and all of it was BS...



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


BAck to Friends of Hamas....and the disputed Breitbart article that the Slate claims to have busted

REad


Chuck Hagel, has not turned over requested documents on his sources of foreign funding is that one of the names listed is a group purportedly called “Friends of Hamas.”


Purportedly...Allegedly ONE of the names listed


Yesterday, 25 senators sent a letter to Hagel demanding information on his foreign funding. Hagel has refused all such requests, prompting the senators to state, “in the judgment of the undersigned, a Committee vote on your nomination should not occur unless and until you provide the requested information.”


So clearly there is reason to doubt Hagel's sources of foreign funding Eh?

www.breitbart.com...



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
edit on 15-2-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


So I suppose this letter sent by 25 Senators to Chuck Hagel on February 6th is a lie as well?

"Dear Senator Hagel,

On January 29, two days before your confirmation hearing, you received a request, via email, from several Senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee for additional information necessary to fairly assess your nomination to be Secretary of Defense. The written copy of the letter (delivered the next day) was signed by six Senators, including the Ranking Member of the Committee. The letter requested that you respond to the request before the hearing, so that you could then answer questions concerning your responses.

You declined to respond to the request for additional financial disclosure.

At the hearing, you were told by Members of the Committee that a response to our request for information would be necessary before the Committee could vote on your nomination. The Chairman of the Committee expressly asked you to submit your response by Monday, February 4.

Monday came and went, and you still did not respond.

At the end of the day on Tuesday, February 5, you submitted a short “response” to our request. In that response, you explicitly declined to answer many of the questions asked of you.

You were asked to disclose all compensation over $5,000 that you have received over the past five years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – the Atlantic Council has received foreign funding in the past five years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – McCarthy Capital has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – Corsair Capital has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – Wolfensohn and Company has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – M.I.C. Industries has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – the National Interest Security Company has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – Elite Training and Security, LLC has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

You were asked to disclose if – and to what specific extent – Kaseman, LLC has received foreign funding in the past ten years. You declined to do so.

Your own financial records are entirely within your own control, and you have flatly refused to comply with the Committee Members’ request for supplemental information.

The records from the other firms – more than one of which, you have disclosed, paid you $100,000 or more – are highly relevant to the proper consideration of your nomination. Your letter discloses no affirmative efforts on your part to obtain the needed disclosure, and your lack of effort to provide a substantive response on this issue is deeply troubling.

If it is the case that you personally have received substantial financial remuneration – either directly or indirectly – from foreign governments, sovereign wealth funds, lobbyists, corporations, or individuals, that information is at the very minimum relevant to this Committee’s assessment of your nomination. Such remuneration may be entirely appropriate, but that determination cannot be made without disclosure.

If you have not received remuneration – directly or indirectly – from foreign sources, then proper disclosure will easily demonstrate that fact.

Your refusal to respond to this reasonable request suggests either a lack of respect for the Senate’s responsibility to advise and consent or that you are for some reason unwilling to allow this financial disclosure to come to light.

This Committee, and the American people, have a right to know if a nominee for Secretary of Defense has received compensation, directly or indirectly, from foreign sources. Until the Committee receives full and complete answers, it cannot in good faith determine wither you should be confirmed as Secretary of Defense.

Therefore, in the judgment of the undersigned, a Committee vote on your nomination should not occur unless and until you provide the requested information."
edit on 15-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Briebart has already been debunked...there is no "Friends of Hamas"...and can you point me to where Dems. closed the hearing after questions about this? Cuz that seemed just a bald-faced lie? Ya know they have reporters at those hearings? cameras etc?


See above letter to Senator Hagel dated February 6.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I don't give a crap about some letter the GOP sent him with demands....YOU claimed that Democrats shut down the hearing after he was questioned about "Friends of Hamas"

IT NEVER HAPPENED and that bit of BS wasn't on Briebart...you made it up...and Briebart made up the Friends of Hamas bit...that has been proven bunk.

You are hilarious... pretending that we are discussing some letter about his finances....



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Briebart has already been debunked...there is no "Friends of Hamas"...and can you point me to where Dems. closed the hearing after questions about this? Cuz that seemed just a bald-faced lie? Ya know they have reporters at those hearings? cameras etc?


Carl Levin led the push to abruptly end and postpone the confirmation vote.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I don't give a crap about some letter the GOP sent him with demands....YOU claimed that Democrats shut down the hearing after he was questioned about "Friends of Hamas"

IT NEVER HAPPENED and that bit of BS wasn't on Briebart...you made it up...and Briebart made up the Friends of Hamas bit...that has been proven bunk.

You are hilarious... pretending that we are discussing some letter about his finances....



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate Armed Services Committee delayed a vote on Chuck Hagel's confirmation as secretary of defense, the panel's chairman said on Wednesday, amid Republican demands for more information from President Barack Obama's nominee.

"The committee's vote on Senator Hagel's nomination has not been scheduled," Senator Carl Levin said in a statement. "I had hoped to hold a vote on the nomination this week, but the committee's review of the nomination is not yet complete."



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


The things you are excerpting in your posts are not relevant to your specific claims...I can't tell if it is some disfunction or dishonesty...but honestly stopped caring in 3...2..1...later.



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Who do you think controls the Senate Armed Services Committee? Republicans or Democrats?



posted on Feb, 15 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   


obama and bibi LOL



posted on Feb, 16 2013 @ 12:44 AM
link   
If TPTB want him there he'll get there. This is probably just political theater.





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join