Rahm-Bo Caught on Tape 21 Times-Obama Lied

With every false accusation, the right sinks deeper into incredulity. If they keep it up, they are going to be joining the tin-foil hat club.

Don't they realize the damage they are doing to their reputations?

Ringo84 said:

If tapes exist that supposedly prove that Obama had contact about the Senate seat, let's hear them. James' unwillingness (or inability) to produce such tapes seems to suggest that they don't exist.

For the record, I still don't believe that Obama had anything to do with this Blago scandal. The news has said repeatedly that the justice department (?) or some other agency dealing with the scandal has investigated Obama's dealings with Blago and found no evidence that he did anything illegal.

I would rather wait until there's more solid evidence before I assume that Obama is corrupt.
Ringo

Click to expand...

Red quote: We all know the tapes won't be revealed in full as long as the case is pending.
Blue quote: Do you have the source, I only heard the original annouoncement that the indictment does not mention Obama, or something similar.

blueapplepaste said:

Wow. Another completely fabricated and false Obama scandal. Label me surprised.

[/sarcasm]

Click to expand...

ah, not completely fabricated, but still premature to jump to contusions.

I also, do not believe Obama would be stupid enough to play games,
but he is making off the cuff statements covering him and his staff that are very dangerous.
When corrupt people are involved, people tend to give one chance to explain, if you overspeak, then try to correct it, people loose confidence.

I hope Obama learns this quick.

Blue quote: Do you have the source, I only heard the original annouoncement that the indictment does not mention Obama, or something similar.

Click to expand...

Fox News said:

Patrick Fitzgerald, the chief federal prosecutor in Chicago, said repeatedly Tuesday that there are no allegations Obama knew the seat he relinquished on Nov. 16 was up for sale.

Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/12/10/blagojevich-arrest-puts-obama-ties-spotlight/

Yahoo News headline said:

Obama: Review shows no inappropriate contact

Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081215/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama
Ringo

Jester4kicks said:

It's not just a matter of a finding of wrongdoing... it's a matter of how complete the report is.

If they release the report, and it details every single communication Obama's staff had with Blago, and the content of those communications, it will not only demonstrate they are willing to show their hand... it will give the skeptics a chance to see if they can find inconsistencies.

Obama couldn't possibly want to start his term with misinformation in a document such as that... so either we find no inconsistencies, and it demonstrates Obama really does stand for open government... or we find inconsistencies, and we get to see how Obama decides to handle it.

Either way, it should give us an excellent preview of what is to come in Obama's first term.

Click to expand...

My point is that an internal report is not necessarily a terribly reliable source. How would we know that a report detailing "all" relevant conversations did actually include all the conversations.

jamesrwright3 said:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/11/obama-says-contact-blagojevich-senate-seat/

"Obama said no one from his camp had any contact with Blago..obviously a lie.
Obama will lie when it's convenient..Obama..change we need.

Click to expand...

you obviously didn't read the articles you decided were great evidence of obama's "lies". you read the headline, which misrepresented the body of the article, as is the habit of the fine journalistic source you cite. here is a quote from your damning evidence.

"I have never spoken with the governor on this subject. I am confident that no representative of mine would have any part in any deals related to this seat," Obama said.
He said he has asked his team to compile any information they might have about any contact with the Illinois governor's office regarding his Senate seat, so that he can share that information with the public. But he said he is "absolutely certain" his aides were not involved in any alleged dealmaking. "

He never says there was no contact, just no dealmaking. in fact, he is compiling all the evidence of any contact regarding his senate seat with his staff and the illinois governor.
another pathetic attempt by james to smear pulling evidence from his rear. the one that winds up sullied is, of course, the op.

chaz345 said:

My point is that an internal report is not necessarily a terribly reliable source. How would we know that a report detailing "all" relevant conversations did actually include all the conversations.

Click to expand...

In this day and age? Any evidence to the contrary would definitely come out... and it would only take ONE piece of contradicting information to call the entire report into question.

reverend C said:

you obviously didn't read the articles you decided were great evidence of obama's "lies". you read the headline, which misrepresented the body of the article, as is the habit of the fine journalistic source you cite. here is a quote from your damning evidence.

"I have never spoken with the governor on this subject. I am confident that no representative of mine would have any part in any deals related to this seat," Obama said.
He said he has asked his team to compile any information they might have about any contact with the Illinois governor's office regarding his Senate seat, so that he can share that information with the public. But he said he is "absolutely certain" his aides were not involved in any alleged dealmaking. "

He never says there was no contact, just no dealmaking. in fact, he is compiling all the evidence of any contact regarding his senate seat with his staff and the illinois governor.
another pathetic attempt by james to smear pulling evidence from his rear. the one that winds up sullied is, of course, the op.

Click to expand...

LOL sorry proves my case. Obama was implying, at least to the brain dead public which can't follow a story for more than five minutes, that he OR no one else from his contact with the Governor regarding his vacated Senate seat. You are basically letting him off on a technicality. Sure, Obama may not have personally contacted Blago, but he was aware of Rahmbo's contacts and Rahmbo was pushing for one of Obama's closest advisors.
So Obama did have contacts with Blago, even if it was through an intermediary..Rahmbo.

Reading Is Fundamental....still

jamesrwright3 said:

LOL sorry proves my case. Obama was implying, at least to the brain dead public which can't follow a story for more than five minutes, that he OR no one else from his contact with the Governor regarding his vacated Senate seat. You are basically letting him off on a technicality. Sure, Obama may not have personally contacted Blago, but he was aware of Rahmbo's contacts and Rahmbo was pushing for one of Obama's closest advisors.
So Obama did have contacts with Blago, even if it was through an intermediary..Rahmbo.

Click to expand...

If by "letting him off on a technicality" you mean "what he said appears to be completely correct" then yes, he is let off on a technicality.

It's really weird the way you are trying to intimate that he said or meant something other than what he said and then claim a "technicality." The key points of what he said:

1) He personally never contacted Blago
2) Nobody on his team was trying to cut a deal

Both of these appear to be absolutely correct.

jamesrwright3 said:

LOL sorry proves my case.

Click to expand...

Let's see your case.

Let A=have contact with Blago
Let B=engage in dealmaking.

Obama: I did not A. My team did not B.
Jamesrwright: Obama lied. There is evidence that the Obama team did A! It proves my point!
The rest of CF: Huh? Obama said he didn't do A and his team didn't do B. Obama said nothing about his team doing A.

BTW, did you ever return Newt's call? He's really hoping to get a hold of you.

JBJoe said:

If by "letting him off on a technicality" you mean "what he said appears to be completely correct" then yes, he is let off on a technicality.

It's really weird the way you are trying to intimate that he said or meant something other than what he said and then claim a "technicality." The key points of what he said:

1) He personally never contacted Blago
2) Nobody on his team was trying to cut a deal

Both of these appear to be absolutely correct.

Click to expand...

No, he said no one from his camp had any contact regarding his replacement.
He should have said Rahmbo had pushed for Valerie Jarret, but Blago wanted something.

jamesrwright3 said:

LOL sorry proves my case. Obama was implying, at least to the brain dead public which can't follow a story for more than five minutes, that he OR no one else from his contact with the Governor regarding his vacated Senate seat. You are basically letting him off on a technicality. Sure, Obama may not have personally contacted Blago, but he was aware of Rahmbo's contacts and Rahmbo was pushing for one of Obama's closest advisors.
So Obama did have contacts with Blago, even if it was through an intermediary..Rahmbo.

Click to expand...

your post here confirms that not only could you not read the article, you are unable to understand my post. he openly acknowledges the contact. there is no question about that, even in your precious article. he denounces any implication of dealmaking. why are you having such a hard time with this? hatred? partisanship? what is your problem with obama acknowledging the contact but refuting the dealmaking? why can't you read the same sentences the rest of us are reading and not follow them? he isn't lying or being the least dishonest. you are.

jamesrwright3 said:

No, he said no one from his camp had any contact regarding his replacement.
He should have said Rahmbo had pushed for Valerie Jarret, but Blago wanted something.

Click to expand...

please cite the quote by obama that no one from his camp had any contact regarding his replacement.
cite the quote.
cite it.

reverend C said:

your post here confirms that not only could you not read the article, you are unable to understand my post. he openly acknowledges the contact. there is no question about that, even in your precious article. he denounces any implication of dealmaking. why are you having such a hard time with this? hatred? partisanship? what is your problem with obama acknowledging the contact but refuting the dealmaking? why can't you read the same sentences the rest of us are reading and not follow them? he isn't lying or being the least dishonest. you are.

Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/11/obama-says-contact-blagojevich-senate-seat/

Obama said neither he nor his representatives had any contact regarding the seat. Obviously a lie. Checkmate.You lose.

jamesrwright3 said:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/11/obama-says-contact-blagojevich-senate-seat/

Obama said neither he nor his representatives had any contact regarding the seat. Obviously a lie. Checkmate.You lose.

Click to expand...

What Obama really says from your own link:

"I have never spoken with the governor on this subject. I am confident that no representative of mine would have any part in any deals related to this seat," Obama said."

He said he has asked his team to compile any information they might have about any contact with the Illinois governor's office regarding his Senate seat, so that he can share that information with the public. But he said he is "absolutely certain" his aides were not involved in any alleged dealmaking.

"This Senate seat does not belong to any politician to trade," Obama said, calling on Blagojevich to resign. He assured the public that he believes his Senate seat will be filled in an "appropriate way."

....it is really hard to take you serious James

LOL

Sorry you are wrong..as always

“I had no coaware of what was happening,” Mr. Obama said. “And as I said, it’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”ntact with the governor or his office, and so we were not — I was not

Click to expand...

He should have said I personally have had no contact..but I have been working through Rahmbo..and he spoke with Blago 21 times.

jamesrwright3 said:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/11/obama-says-contact-blagojevich-senate-seat/

Obama said neither he nor his representatives had any contact regarding the seat. Obviously a lie. Checkmate.You lose.

Click to expand...

please quote this line you are claiming. it does not appear in the article you are citing. anywhere.
quote the line.
quote it.
please.

jamesrwright3 said:

I had no coaware of what was happening,” Mr. Obama said. “And as I said, it’s a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don’t think it’s appropriate to comment.”ntact with the governor or his office, and so we were not — I was not

Click to expand...

Are you even aware that you posted a string of words that don't make sense as your proof that we "are wrong as usual"?

jamesrwright3 said:

LOL

Sorry you are wrong..as always



He should have said I personally have had no contact..but I have been working through Rahmbo..and he spoke with Blago 21 times.

Click to expand...

how can he be wrong. he is quoting your citation.
completely unhinged.

jamesrwright3 said:

LOL

Sorry you are wrong..as always



He should have said I personally have had no contact..but I have been working through Rahmbo..and he spoke with Blago 21 times.

Click to expand...

I am kind of curious if you use and therefore have access to that quote, why you chose to hack it?


"I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening. And as I said, it's a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that, I don't think it's appropriate to comment."

Have you no decency?