Merged Project Veritas strikes again / More evidence...

[Garrison]

A shifty, deceitful, convicted felon who is willing to use whatever tactics necessary to elect Democrats, no matter how repugnant, visiting the Obama White House is not weird it all, it's business as usual for the Democratic Party.

A bunch of pejoratives, a claim based on the evidence of a man known for doctoring videos. But hey if that's going to make you feel better on November 9th when Clinton wins you go with it.

 

[Donal]

That is funny considering the evidence you are banking on is a James O'Keefe video

 

[Tony Stark]

Turns out that Donald's "charity" gave $10k to known Project Veritas.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-funded-james-okeefe-53015c2f44b6#.inp27e600

 

[BobTheCoward]

A shifty, deceitful, convicted felon who is willing to use whatever tactics necessary to elect Democrats, no matter how repugnant, visiting the Obama White House is not weird it all, it's business as usual for the Democratic Party.

What are you implying? Until you make a connection, it is just someone visiting the white house.

 

[xjx388]

Thanks. Makes perfect sense.

Actually I'm a little embarrassed not to have done any research myself to answer the question. I guess I'm just as susceptible to wanting a juicy story as anyone else. The world, on the other hand, continues to be pretty banal.

That bio left out his conviction for tax evasion and bank fraud. It think it's a bit sketchy that a convicted felon is so involved in Democratic circles that he needs to visit the White House and meet with Obama so many times. And given what Creamer actually says on video and that he has now "stepped back" from the campaign, I think there's enough dots to connect to make this something a little more than banal.

 

[xjx388]

Turns out that Donald's "charity" gave $10k to known Project Veritas.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-funded-james-okeefe-53015c2f44b6#.inp27e600

If it's so bad for Trump to be funding a convicted criminal, as the ThinkProgress piece tells us, then isn't equally bad for the Dems to be working so closely with one?

 

[Garrison]

That bio left out his conviction for tax evasion and bank fraud. It think it's a bit sketchy that a convicted felon is so involved in Democratic circles that he needs to visit the White House and meet with Obama so many times. And given what Creamer actually says on video and that he has now "stepped back" from the campaign, I think there's enough dots to connect to make this something a little more than banal.

Again, if thinking that is going to keep you going on all those long, long, days of Hilary Clinton's first term, you go right ahead. The truth is subject either party to the same scrutiny and you will find characters far worse than Mister Creamer. Scooter Libby ring a bell? How about Jack Abramoff? Compared to them Creamer is a saint.

If it's so bad for Trump to be funding a convicted criminal, as the ThinkProgress piece tells us, then isn't equally bad for the Dems to be working so closely with one?

you keep mentioning his conviction but avoid the details. Here's the Wiki entry on it:

On March 11, 2004, Creamer, the executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund, was indicted in federal court on 16 counts of bank fraud involving three alleged check-kiting schemes in the mid-1990s, leading several banks to experience shortfalls of at least $2.3*million. In August 2005, Creamer pleaded guilty to one count of failure to collect withholding tax and one count of bank fraud, for writing checks with insufficient funds. All of the money was repaid. Schakowsky was not accused of any wrongdoing, although she served on the organization's board during the time the crimes occurred, and signed the IRS filings along with her husband. The U.S. district judge noted no one suffered "out of pocket losses," and Creamer acted not out of greed but in an effort to keep his community action group going without cutting programs, though Creamer paid his own $100,000 salary with fraudulently obtained funds.
On April 5, 2006, Creamer was sentenced to five months in prison and 11 months of house arrest. Creamer served his five-month incarceration at the Federal Correction Institute in Terre Haute, Indiana and was released on November 3, 2006.

Criminal? Yes. Scumbag like O'Keefe? I'm going with no. it is tiresome that you want to attack Creamer but are willing to give O'Keefe a free pass when his crime is directly relevant to his purported evidence, but I guess if Trump is anything to go by Republicans don't have a lot of use for facts or truth these days. Face the truth, the Republican party picked a candidate that Satan could probably beat, this guilt by association crap isn't going to make a blind bit of difference.

 

[Tony Stark]

If it's so bad for Trump to be funding a convicted criminal, as the ThinkProgress piece tells us, then isn't equally bad for the Dems to be working so closely with one?

I don't speak for them but I think the reason that O'Keefe being a convicted criminal is relevant is because he committed the crime trying to do one of his sting videos.

 

[marplots]

That bio left out his conviction for tax evasion and bank fraud. It think it's a bit sketchy that a convicted felon is so involved in Democratic circles that he needs to visit the White House and meet with Obama so many times. And given what Creamer actually says on video and that he has now "stepped back" from the campaign, I think there's enough dots to connect to make this something a little more than banal.

I'm a convicted felon, so I'm not as impressed with that as others might be. And he was wearing enough hats to make the visits plausible. In fact, thinking about it, I'd be surprised if the "black ops" people weren't held at arm's length.

Still, if there are dots to be connected, I'm willing to see the connections. Perhaps WikiLeaks or Veritas will add some information.

 

[logger]

Sounds like "damned if you do, damned if you don't", to me. If the FBI had recommended charges, she'd be a criminal. If they don't, she's still a criminal and they're covering up for her.

So basically, whatever the evidence says, you call her a criminal. Does that seem reasonable to you?

I certainly don't know what else to say. If you can't see she got let off because of who she is, nothing will convince you.

Even at these Trump rallies where these goons put these agitators to work, this is where the dem party is and always has been. Republicans and conservatives don't do these kinds of things. The left is made up of immoral corrupt people who get a kick out of being ********.

 

[logger]

What are you implying? Until you make a connection, it is just someone visiting the white house.

Only people willing to go along with the deception and agitation need the connection made, intelligence guided by experience tells you what's going on here, its interesting to watch you go out of your way to not get it.

 

[Tony Stark]

I certainly don't know what else to say. If you can't see she got let off because of who she is, nothing will convince you.

Even at these Trump rallies where these goons put these agitators to work, this is where the dem party is and always has been. Republicans and conservatives don't do these kinds of things. The left is made up of immoral corrupt people who get a kick out of being ********.

No, you just nominate someone who openly incites violence at his rallies.

 

[logger]

I don't speak for them but I think the reason that O'Keefe being a convicted criminal is relevant is because he committed the crime trying to do one of his sting videos.

He is a great patriot, once things start we'll all be criminals to the left.

 

[logger]

No, you just nominate someone who openly incites violence at his rallies.

Just blatant dishonesty, proof that hillary started this violence with her goon squad and you don't even have the honesty to admit it, not surprising.

 

[Tony Stark]

This is how dishonest you are, proof that hillary started this violence with her goon squad and you don't even have the honesty to admit it, not surprising.

If all it takes to provoke people at Trump rally is wearing a Planned Parenthood shirt, all that proves is what low life trash they are.

And we know for a fact that your Fuhrer has personally suggested that his followers assault protesters. Not that you care.

 

[Tony Stark]

He is a great patriot, once things start we'll all be criminals to the left.

He is a known fraudster who makes highly doctored videos and was busted trying to wire tap a US Senator's office.

Simply facts.

 

[logger]

If all it takes to provoke people at Trump rally is wearing a Planned Parenthood shirt, all that proves is what low life trash they are.

Of course you weren't paying attention, if you were you'd know the low life trash that supports hillary was doing more than wearing shirts, which is even a high bar for them.

And we know for a fact that your Fuhrer has personally suggested that his followers assault protesters. Not that you care.

Yes I don't, they deserve what they get.

 

[logger]

He is a known fraudster who makes highly doctored videos and was busted trying to wire tap a US Senator's office.

Simply facts.

Your facts, as usual on the side of the losers who should be investigated. Too bad he got caught, would have made a great video.

 

[tyr_13]

If it's so bad for Trump to be funding a convicted criminal, as the ThinkProgress piece tells us, then isn't equally bad for the Dems to be working so closely with one?

Trump's charity isn't supposed to be giving any money to political organizations. Project Veritas isn't a charity.

 

[Tony Stark]

Of course you weren't paying attention, if you were you'd know the low life trash that supports hillary was doing more than wearing shirts, which is even a high bar for them.

What, said things they don't like. Ooh, their poor feels.

Yes I don't, they deserve what they get.

Here logger admits that he is perfectly fine with his Fuhrer having protesters assaulted. And he says Democrats are bad people.