Report: Obama Films Campaign Ad In White House, Possibly Violating FEC Laws?

Again with the personal attacks.
Shall we assume then that you concede you were wrong, since you cannot substantiate your point?

 

"I'll repeat this point one more time. All this wild slanders and uncorroborated accusations will make people like you and Bluesguy all warm and happy inside, but to independents like me, it increasingly forces us to disregard critics against Obama."

I understand that obama incompetent idiot clown fool that he is needs all the help he can find. But you have just revealed yourself to be a imitation independent and a dedicated, mindless, obamalamaloopa. Here for one purpose and that is to promote obama and liberal propaganda.
Just like everything else in this administration, only your intent is transparent. Your performance of subtly promoting obama is pitifully and clumsily done.

You asked how he is lawless, I answered. Your disputing my answers does not make me wrong and you right. You claim, "wild slanders and uncorroborated accusations," well your claim as such does not make it so. All you attempted to do was mindlessly defend obama. A totally 'out of character,' thing for a real independent to do. I made no claim that other presidents had not done likewise. That others did engage in lawless activities has no bearing on the lawlessness of this incompetent clown. They were wrong TOO!
And I'm going to cause you to disregard obama critics? What a silly joke. You are here for the purpose of disputing obama critics. Unlike you I'm not here to SELL anything to anyone. I come here to vent my total disgust with this clown fool useless president. And I have nearly as much disregard for the Republican Party as well. I can only hope they will not be AS BAD as the Democrats this time. If Republicans gain power and KEEP power, then they will certainly become, AGAIN, as bad as the Democrats are right now.
But sadly, for the moment, Republicans are a better choice than Democrats.
We desperately need term limits on Congress to stop the cronyism. Term limits may bring its own problems. But we might do better at solving new problems because we suck at solving old problems.

 

Hey fella.

All I see above is more insults, but nothing to substantiate your allegations.
You made an outrageous allegation. I said list them down, and provide the substantiation. We're not kids here. If you're gonna say something, back it up. Doesn't matter what creed, political affiliation, hair color, number of toes or type of Chinese dish you like. The same principles apply.

You list down a serious of rumors. I question its validity and I debunked the most serious one. Yet instead of corroborating it, you throw insults at me. And you have the cheek to say

.
You said he broke the law, but all you have are allegations, exaggerations, made up stories and outright lies.

BUt who cares right? That's a trend with you. If you can't substantiate your point, you throw insults and divert the issue. Think what you may, I could not be bothered. Insult all you want, if it makes you feel big. The fact is, you lied. Simples. And how ironic is that, coming from someone who looooves to question the character and morality of 'liberals'. lol.

 

Shall we start with the violation of bankruptcy laws in the ONGOING GM fiasco? Did GM creditors in the GM bankruptcy? NO they did not. Did the UAW buy a sizable stake in GM? No they did not. Do they now own a sizable stake in GM? Yes they do. Did the Bonded creditors get any stake in GM? No they did not. Did the Canadian govt. purchase billions in GM stock? Yes they did, Did the US govt purchase billions in GM stock? Yes they did. Does the US Govt. [taxpayer] still own a large stake in GM? Yes they do. Will the taxpayers ever see their money paid out by selling GM stock? If the taxpayers hold on to GM stock long enough for the stock to more than double? How long will that take? Hard to predict since the stock has never approached that level.

All the above is findable by reading any number of financial publications. Not biased opinions just normal financial publications.

That's just one.

The bribes and coercion to pass obamacare are a matter of public record. as well.

However I am well aware that even if I had obama's confession in hand, you would dispute it as that is what your purpose is.

You demand I prove my statements. I demand you prove your statements. show me legal documentation that GM creditors were paid from GM's assets.

I await your response, and it will be the obvious response of a paid shill.

 

Which part of this is the lawless part please?

And yet, no one from either the Republican Party, or any regulatory bodies have initiated any form of civil or criminal proceedings, despite it being a matter of public record. I guess once again, we'll just have to rely on your accusations, right?

No, an Obama confession would see me fully convinced. But all you do is make wild allegations - allegations that you can't even substantiate in the slightest. Tell me something, do you honestly think anyone would believe that the Republicans would have stayed silent if there was anything substantive in any of these allegations?

No, you said he was
"the most lawless president we've ever had, ignoring yet another law?"

"A completely lawless president is a PETTY detail? "

I responded with:
"Care to list them down then, with corroborating facts, indictments, censures and civil suits as substantiation?"

You make such an outrageous accusation, one that any right thinking American would know as false, and instead of calling it for the idiocy it was, I asked you nicely to corroborate it. But what did you do? You listed down a serious of wild rumors with nothing to back them up. When I questioned it, you insulted me, started calling me names, redefined my political affiliations, called me a Soros stooge. Pathetic attempts at diverting the issue.

And now you top it all up, by asking me to disprove your wild allegations. It's like talking to a child.

Stop throwing a hissy fit and stomping your feet.
Your lies caught up with you. Man up.

 

They are legal opinions of the facts as known.............what are you disputing?


Are you claiming there was not solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

What are you disputing?

 

I am an independent, so much for your strawman.

 

For the fifth time, I am disputing your contention of the existence of 'facts' showing he violated the FEC campaign laws. Write down the facts that you said exists. This is not difficult since there are facts, right?

 

What strawman, so-called independent?

 

Yes legal opinions which you obviously can't refute and since you will not address the facts in hand I have no idea what you are doing here.



One last time?

Are you claiming there was not solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

What are you disputing?

 

Yes legal opinions which you obviously can't refute and since you will not address the facts in hand I have no idea what you are doing here.



One last time.

Are you claiming there was not solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

What are you disputing?

 

So you finally admit, in your own words, that you have no facts other than 'legal opinions'.
Which means, you misrepresented yourself repeatedly throughout this thread, as most of the posters in the thread already know.

I have been consistent since my first post. So if you have to ask why I am in this thread, then that really brings into question either your evasiveness or comprehension skills, doesn't it?

This is such a dishonest thread, masquerading in self-righteousness. But hey, since we have established, through your own admission, that there are NO FACTS, only 'LEGAL OPINIONS', by persons of questionable impartiality at that, there really isn't anything else to say, isn't it?

Future tip: All of us can have an opinion, because an opinion is:A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.". That's the beauty of opinions, and its inherent limitations.

It amuses me sometimes when we demand things from our leaders that we ourselves are not capable of.

 

Yes legal opinions as to the facts.


Are you claiming there was not solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

When you can dispute the let me know.

 

Why? So you can lie about something else?

I could easily tear down your 'points', but I have no interest in defending Obama. Never once had I defended him in this forum. I am as much interested in the truth as any right thinking person, and I read your initial post with an open mind - until you misrepresented the facts. Do you understand this lad?

Had you conceded that this was merely an opinion of yours, influenced by a couple of Republican-linked lawyers who also offered their carefully worded opinions, as have been stated over and over again to you, no one would've given you such a hard time. But noooo, you had to remain obstinate and started being aggressive with me, before finally ending up looking like a fool in the end.

So there you have it. I am done with you. Unless you have something new to add?

Edit: I love the way how you carefully choose portions of my posts, selected ones, to quote.

 

So instead of discussing the issue you just want to be argumentative and insulting.

When you care to discuss the issue let me know.

Here are the questions posed to you.

Are you claiming there was no solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

 

No, I just repeated the fact that you lied, since you clearly have no intention of apologizing and you continue to be evasive.

Go back and read my initial few post. All your questions have been answered. Others have also done the same. Stop this silly antics.

 

Here are the questions posed to you.

Are you claiming there was no solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

If you want to dicuss the matter then continue by answering the questions posed. If you just want to engage in your petty inane arguments and insults don't bother.

The allegations as that Obama solicited funds in a Federal Office. I have posted legal opinions which support the allegations.

If you can refute then have at it, else go play in your sandbox by yourself.

 

I already refuted it by proving that you lied about the existence of the facts.
I have also explained much, much earlier how these are just assumption based on assumptions.
And yet you continue to evade that, picking and choosing arguments to respond to, trying very hard to divert the argument away from your lies. How sad is that?

You continue to post the same text over and over again like a parrot. Hilarious. And as inane as my argument is, as you claim, you aren't capable of responding to it. lol. Priceless.

You must really regret your arrogance earlier in the thread right? Oh well, we all learn from mistakes.

I'll leave you to your dishonest thread then. Enjoy yourself.

 

You have refuted nothing, when you do want to have a civil discussion on the matter let me know.

Here are the questions posed to you.

Are you claiming there was no solicitation?
Are you claiming there was no direct tie to the DNC?
Who are you asserting is getting the money from the raffle tickets?
Are you claiming it was not filmed in the Map Room?

 

Obama is a also a lawyer I believe! He should know the law! And if it's only a technicality...and the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES...doesn't have to follow a LAW...then why should any AMERICAN CITIZENS? Isn't HE supposed to be an EXAMPLE for US?

He is an American Citizen and should follow the LAW no matter how small that law is! If HE doesn't have to follow the laws than neither should we have to!

 

Yep, it was a solicitation and it was filmed in an official federal office not the residency.

That is against the law as the legal experts stated.

 

He is not only a lawyer. His title at the Chicago U Law School was "senior lecturer" But obama often said on the campaign trail that he was a "Constitutional Law PROFESSOR." That of course, is a lie.

 

False. It was filmed in the "Map Room" and that's part of the residence.

Executive Residence

The original residence is in the center. Two colonnades—one on the east and one on the west—designed by Jefferson, now serve to connect the East and West Wings, added later. The Executive Residence houses the president's dwelling, as well as rooms for ceremonies and official entertaining. The State Floor of the residence building includes the East Room, Green Room, Blue Room, Red Room, State Dining Room, Family Dining Room, Cross Hall, Entrance Hall, and Grand Staircase. The Ground Floor is made up of the Diplomatic Reception Room, Map Room, China Room, Vermeil Room, Library, the main kitchen, and other offices. The second floor family residence includes the Yellow Oval Room, East and West Sitting Halls, the White House Master Bedroom, President's Dining Room, the Treaty Room, Lincoln Bedroom and Queens' Bedroom, as well as two additional bedrooms, a smaller kitchen, and a private dressing room. The third floor consists of the White House Solarium, Game Room, Linen Room, a Diet Kitchen, and another sitting room (previously used as President George W. Bush's workout room).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House

You have been duped by a conservative news outlet who used dubious tactics and innuendo to convince people that wrongdoing occurred where it did not. A political smear piece, nothing more.

It took me two minutes on Wikipedia to find out the "Map Room" is part of the President's official residence. Why do you suppose the writers of the article in the OP didn't bother to check the "facts" before they ran their hit-piece? Another example of deliberate misinformation by CNS and a willing reader believing what he wanted to believe without bothering to check even the most basic facts.

 

This Obama has always felt he is above the law.​

 

In this case he was acting within the law, not above it.