Originally Posted by BeAChooser
But is anything I posted above untrue, DR?
Yes.
What? Be specific. Don't hide behind vagueness. If you want to debate, then debate with actually specifics.
Quote:
Surely you will agree this is a serious matter
No, I don't. It was a serious matter when it happened, and nobody looked past the dollar signe. What is it now is water under the bridge.
Were that only true, DR. Highly accurate nuclear weapons are now targeted on American cities because of Chinagate. China recently destroyed a satellite in space thanks to the technology they acquired in Chinagate. China is even going to the moon because of what the Clinton administration allowed them access to during Chinagate. They've made similar progress in a dozen other weapon system categories thanks to the actions of the Clinton administration. Air defense. Military communications. Stealth technology. Submarines. And they've shared that technology with countries that are right now causing problems. And by the way, remember ... there is no statute of limitation on treason either.
The sell out to the Chinese is a fait accompli,
That may be but the subject is whether the persons who had the most to do with that sellout ... the Clintons ... should be put in charge of the State Department where they would again have ample opportunity to sell us out to foreign governments. You seem to want to run from that issue, DR.
which began with Bush 41 loosening access to tech information to China
Go ahead, DR. Provide whatever evidence you think you have that Bush or Republicans received millions in campaign contributions from the Chinese military ... like Clinton and the DNC actually did ... in exchange for access to secrets and what was restricted technology. Show your proof that Bush changed the rules in order to make that transfer possible ... like Clinton did in making Ron Brown's signature the only one needed. Show us your proof that the Departments of Defense and State were against whatever actions you claim Bush took to weaken our national security. Show us your proof that aides of Bush and other members of his administration have been as cavalier about handling secret documents as Clinton's were. And show us your proof that the Bush administration has tried to cover up security leaks and not prosecuted cases that were found ... like Clinton and Janet Reno did over and over. Can't you see that you are doing just what I pointed out the Clinton friendly media's approach to Chinagate was ... pointing vague figures at Republicans in an dishonest attempt to make it seem like they all did it. Well they didn't. What Clinton actually did is far worse than anything Bush Sr or Bush Jr are claimed to have done by people like you.
Quote:
Your desperation is showing.
No, it isn't. You use that phrase when you don't agree with someone else's point of view, or someone disagrees with you. Assumes facts without evidence, I think it is called.
You know it would be nice if when you quote me, DR, you quote me in context. First, that statement wasn't made to you. Second, it had nothing to do with Chinagate. Third, it was entirely accurate where ANTPogo was concerned and where his spin about the Foster medications, sleeping problems and the rest of that case was concerned. And fourth, SOME of the facts are that ANTPogo ignored the words start and effective and therapeutic, Foster's prescription did indeed call for the entire dose to be taken at bedtime, no one mentioned depression until many days after Foster's death (and after the bogus suicide note appeared), the doctor stated he gave Foster the medicine to help him sleep (his wife said to avoid addictive sleeping pills), and Hillary obstructed the investigation by having her people remove materials from what could well have been a crime scene ... materials that were at the time being sought by a special prosecutor.
Quote:
And I could go on and on and on
And you do.
And you continue to ignore it all and defend the Clintons as if you were a Clinton sycophant.
