Ian Brodie has RESIGNED! Well ahead of the release of the report investigating NAFTA-gate!
Recall, that Ian Brodie is Canada's PM top advisor, who many have said was the one who started NAFTA-gate when he told reporters that it was Clinton's campaign that reassured them first.
Now that Hillary has no chance of winning and Obama is looking more like he has what it takes to beat McCain, the Canadian gov't is looking to do some damage control and mending fences.
Mr. Obama's chief economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, was quoted as saying that Mr. Obama's NAFTA stand was about "political positioning," rather than an articulation of policy." - nuff said.
There WAS a call but it was about trade in general, and the 'just campaign rhetoric' was not said. What they DID say was that Obama cares about trade with Canada. The distortion of those words into 'just campaign rhetoric', and the fact that they pertained specifically to NAFTA are what is untrue.
Just a reminder for those who think this isn't true. The Canadian government initially said they had spoken to nobody in Obama's campaign. It has now been confirmed that Goolsbee did in fact talk to the Canadians - the Canadians are trying to stay out of our election-process by protecting Obama.
What a dirty lying rat! He was caught lying about his position, like most politicians, but instead of facing it like a man, he went the Larry Craig's way. "I am not and have never been a homosexual." Well, Larry can at least use the excuse that since he didn't use the future tense, if he ever gets caught in fraganti with someone's dick in his mouth, he never said that he could become a homosexual after his declaration. What could Obama say?
He wasn't caught lying. A right-wing smear job out of Canada based on nothing but hearsay does not constitute getting caught lying. I'm sorry to burst your bubble...
This is not a trial. hearsay is perfectly admissible in news. He can deny, but the charges is already sticking to him. This is how the news media in democratic countries work.
I'm sorry to burst that bubble again, but I don't see any 'charges' sticking anywhere except from a few diehard Hillbots desperately trying to make something out of nothing in the last hours of their campaign. Have fun on Tuesday!
Keep dreaming. It's free. Do you think I care who wins on Tuesday? Hillary and Obama are thing. Either one of the will lose the election in November. This is a field day for Democrats to eat pizza and enjoy beer. Are you going to tell me that you know who will win in November? Be my guest.
Are you equating the two? Predicting the future is impossible. Verifying what someone said is possible. I don't necessarily trust the news, but I'm not so blinded as to think that what has been said is not possible. If this issue spread to other channels and stay for another news cycle, we will surely get a clearer picture of what really happened. I choose to believe what they say, you don't. It's a matter of opinions. Isn't that what a democratic society predicates or are we beyond that?
It's not spreading to other channels for a very good reason. These allegations are BASELESS. Just like how the 'scandal' about McCain made up by the NYT has gone exactly nowhere because it's baseless. You see, baseless stories from suspectful sources really don't count in the real world no matter how much you wish they did. Of course, you yourself can believe what you like, but I'm also free to urge you to come back to reality.
Sure, from someone that claimed to have a grip of reality while blindly supporting a candidate you presented the most mature of all arguments. I guess for you Obama is the Immaculate Conception and nothing anyone says about him is going to be true. I don't have time to waste with people that have no grip of reality or their reality are based on blindly fanaticism.
How can you assume that I am blindly supporting anyone based on the very few arguments I've put in this thread? Please, don't pretend like you know me. Anyways, it seems like you yourself are starting to spew more BASELESS rhetoric against me. Heh, you seem to be weak in the knees for that kind of stuff.
As for not having time for people like me while actually taking the time to talk me, let me just say, actions speak louder than words... But of course, I hope you will reconsider. :)
It's not possible to argue, or even talk, to delusional people like you that claim to own reality. Your insanity is obvious. Get a shrink.
Read my arguments, compare them to yours, and verify that you are the won spreading baseless arguments, just because you can't believe that immaculate Obama could do something like that.
Luckily you insanity is not of the violent kind, not yet.
And, anyway, who the hell are you to dare to say that you bring people back to reality. What reality? Your reality? Are you omnipresent? I guess, you believe so. Get a grip of reality.
After all, many Germans back in 1942 thought that everything the British and American radio station aired about Hitler and the Nazis was a lie.
I'm guessing your next comment will be a regular mediocre attack. Bring it on.
I never said that I was bringing anyone back to reality. Reading comprehension is something you obviously need to work on. Anyways, all I said was that I was free to urge you back to reality. A reality where mere hearsay doesn't constitute TRUTH. You are the one who seems to be blindly taking this story as truth without raising a single question about its accuracy.
There's good reason why hearsay isn't admissible in Court, and that's because it has this caustic ability to turn out to be false.
Some pills for memory is something you need to get.
You wrote: "I'm also free to urge you to come back to reality."
Since you have started lying about things that are easy to verify, it obvious you reached the maximum level of desperation.
You are the owner of reality, omnipresent, omniscient, the one that brings people to your own version of reality. Congratulations! You can be the next pope. Keep watching for a vacancy.
Again, reading comprehension is something you seriously need to work on. I already verified saying exactly that in the post you are replying to. ??? Read it again, carefully this time.
And please point out exactly where I have LIED. Now I think you're making stuff up, or do you really believe that I have been intentionally dishonest somewhere? Please point it out.
Last time I check news report were not trials. Reporters don't have to use Rules of Evidence. If that were the case, Nixon would have been president until 1976. After all, those reporters were getting the information from Deep Throat. Wasn't that hearsay? I guess for you those news reports against Nixon would have been invalid, against your delusional reality.
Now you've brought up an intelligent point. Bravo. However, the issue I'll raise with this is that we now have hindsight with regards to Watergate, after questions were asked, it became absolutely clear that this source was correct. I'm not claiming that hearsay is ALWAYS false, just that it can be false. You just need to ask questions before declaring it gospel.
Not to get involved in your argument, but doesn't seem to you a bit pretentious and arrogant to present yourself as the one who owns reality? As a Canadian, I don't care much about American politics, except from the economic perspective, but it worries me the mix of pseudo religion, truth, and politics that get so mixed up in America these days.
I didn't bother to watch your video. I hate cutting and pasting links, but knowing your line of attack, I guess what are you talking about. A lot has happened since we became engaged in this silly argument. Rev. Wright is a good example. I still stand by what I said about the whole issue not being a trial. In politics any form of smear is good enough. However, my first comment was purely a joke, as my reference to Larry Craig must have sent anybody the sarcasm signal.
I wasn't a Hillary supporter either. I don't plan on voting on the US election because I won't be in the US in November, or October or December... In fact, after watching Wright's video I developed a liking for Obama. I like people who hold radical views, the kind that can bring actual change. I'm hoping Hillary withdraws from the race after PA. Otherwise, if she waits until Puerto Rico or Denver, the party will be divided and at this point the Democrats hold to key to save the American economy.
I forgot to mention how obsessive and revengeful looks when someone reply to online conversation posted three weeks ago. I guess we could have been great friends if we weren't in different countries. I could invite you to a beer, if that doesn't offend your religious beliefs.
Whoa hey, it's cool. Just saw the stonewalling thing in my accounts View Comments, remembered our little skirmish, and thought I'd throw it out there. Anyways, it's funny how things turn out over time though eh?
But yeah, you're absolutely right, that's just me. I am an obsessive and revengeful person, a bit spiteful too, so look out! lol j/k
Ian Brodie has RESIGNED! Well ahead of the release of the report investigating NAFTA-gate!
Recall, that Ian Brodie is Canada's PM top advisor, who many have said was the one who started NAFTA-gate when he told reporters that it was Clinton's campaign that reassured them first.
Now that Hillary has no chance of winning and Obama is looking more like he has what it takes to beat McCain, the Canadian gov't is looking to do some damage control and mending fences.
Looks like Brodie's the fall guy!
prezobama4 3 years ago
Mr. Obama's chief economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, was quoted as saying that Mr. Obama's NAFTA stand was about "political positioning," rather than an articulation of policy." - nuff said.
Myaucat 4 years ago
This sounds like a set up.
Think about it:
1. If NAFTA is beneficial to the Canadian government, why would they expose secret assurances that NAFTA would be protected?
It would NOT be in their self-interest to expose a candidate who was actually pro-NAFTA.
2. If they want NAFTA, they would only try to undermine candidates that they think WON'T keep it in place as it currently stands.
midjunenight 4 years ago
It's about Obama getting caught in another lie...no matter how you cut it...Obama lied about the NAFTA incident...It's the same "ole okey doke."
cyates357 4 years ago
First...deny the meeting took place.
Next...deny that my (Obama's) economic advisor gave the 'wink wink' on NAFTA to the Canadians.
Finally...admit that my (Obama's) economic advisor talked to the Canadians as a college professor...but not as my (Obama's) economic advisor.
cyates357 4 years ago
Obama just tried a 5th story on NAFTAgate today. How many lies before he tells the truth?
lizben08 4 years ago
The Clintons set this up people.. This is what they're good at...
Yelloworld 4 years ago
Oh please. It was obvious that Obama was lying all along. He was pro Nafta when he was running in Chicago for the senate.
OBAMA LIES PEOPLE!! WAKE UP!!
This is one more proof - add that to his being a funcking plagiarist.
fjstratford 4 years ago
There WAS a call but it was about trade in general, and the 'just campaign rhetoric' was not said. What they DID say was that Obama cares about trade with Canada. The distortion of those words into 'just campaign rhetoric', and the fact that they pertained specifically to NAFTA are what is untrue.
dtstrain 4 years ago
Just a reminder for those who think this isn't true. The Canadian government initially said they had spoken to nobody in Obama's campaign. It has now been confirmed that Goolsbee did in fact talk to the Canadians - the Canadians are trying to stay out of our election-process by protecting Obama.
This happened - Obama is a liar.
thegoodlocust 4 years ago
CLINTON 08
tvfilm 4 years ago 2
Hillery won't end NAFTA either :o( we need to all stop the NAU
N1GHTsky1 4 years ago
What a dirty lying rat! He was caught lying about his position, like most politicians, but instead of facing it like a man, he went the Larry Craig's way. "I am not and have never been a homosexual." Well, Larry can at least use the excuse that since he didn't use the future tense, if he ever gets caught in fraganti with someone's dick in his mouth, he never said that he could become a homosexual after his declaration. What could Obama say?
flyingbird0214 4 years ago 3
He wasn't caught lying. A right-wing smear job out of Canada based on nothing but hearsay does not constitute getting caught lying. I'm sorry to burst your bubble...
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
This is not a trial. hearsay is perfectly admissible in news. He can deny, but the charges is already sticking to him. This is how the news media in democratic countries work.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, Mr. Botswana.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
I'm sorry to burst that bubble again, but I don't see any 'charges' sticking anywhere except from a few diehard Hillbots desperately trying to make something out of nothing in the last hours of their campaign. Have fun on Tuesday!
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Keep dreaming. It's free. Do you think I care who wins on Tuesday? Hillary and Obama are thing. Either one of the will lose the election in November. This is a field day for Democrats to eat pizza and enjoy beer. Are you going to tell me that you know who will win in November? Be my guest.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
If I can't tell the future, how can you be so sure that this hearsay is accurate?
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Are you equating the two? Predicting the future is impossible. Verifying what someone said is possible. I don't necessarily trust the news, but I'm not so blinded as to think that what has been said is not possible. If this issue spread to other channels and stay for another news cycle, we will surely get a clearer picture of what really happened. I choose to believe what they say, you don't. It's a matter of opinions. Isn't that what a democratic society predicates or are we beyond that?
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
It's not spreading to other channels for a very good reason. These allegations are BASELESS. Just like how the 'scandal' about McCain made up by the NYT has gone exactly nowhere because it's baseless. You see, baseless stories from suspectful sources really don't count in the real world no matter how much you wish they did. Of course, you yourself can believe what you like, but I'm also free to urge you to come back to reality.
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Or free to shut up.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
Straight out of 8th grade. Nice one!
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Sure, from someone that claimed to have a grip of reality while blindly supporting a candidate you presented the most mature of all arguments. I guess for you Obama is the Immaculate Conception and nothing anyone says about him is going to be true. I don't have time to waste with people that have no grip of reality or their reality are based on blindly fanaticism.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
How can you assume that I am blindly supporting anyone based on the very few arguments I've put in this thread? Please, don't pretend like you know me. Anyways, it seems like you yourself are starting to spew more BASELESS rhetoric against me. Heh, you seem to be weak in the knees for that kind of stuff.
As for not having time for people like me while actually taking the time to talk me, let me just say, actions speak louder than words... But of course, I hope you will reconsider. :)
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
It's not possible to argue, or even talk, to delusional people like you that claim to own reality. Your insanity is obvious. Get a shrink.
Read my arguments, compare them to yours, and verify that you are the won spreading baseless arguments, just because you can't believe that immaculate Obama could do something like that.
Luckily you insanity is not of the violent kind, not yet.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
So now I must be suffering a severe mental disorder because we disagree on something? Wow, this is good stuff! The irony kills me! lol
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
People that have lost sense of reality tend to deny it. Your case is too typical.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
Thank you Dr. Phil for that most insightful diagnosis.
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
And, anyway, who the hell are you to dare to say that you bring people back to reality. What reality? Your reality? Are you omnipresent? I guess, you believe so. Get a grip of reality.
After all, many Germans back in 1942 thought that everything the British and American radio station aired about Hitler and the Nazis was a lie.
I'm guessing your next comment will be a regular mediocre attack. Bring it on.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
I never said that I was bringing anyone back to reality. Reading comprehension is something you obviously need to work on. Anyways, all I said was that I was free to urge you back to reality. A reality where mere hearsay doesn't constitute TRUTH. You are the one who seems to be blindly taking this story as truth without raising a single question about its accuracy.
There's good reason why hearsay isn't admissible in Court, and that's because it has this caustic ability to turn out to be false.
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Some pills for memory is something you need to get.
You wrote: "I'm also free to urge you to come back to reality."
Since you have started lying about things that are easy to verify, it obvious you reached the maximum level of desperation.
You are the owner of reality, omnipresent, omniscient, the one that brings people to your own version of reality. Congratulations! You can be the next pope. Keep watching for a vacancy.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
Again, reading comprehension is something you seriously need to work on. I already verified saying exactly that in the post you are replying to. ??? Read it again, carefully this time.
And please point out exactly where I have LIED. Now I think you're making stuff up, or do you really believe that I have been intentionally dishonest somewhere? Please point it out.
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Last time I check news report were not trials. Reporters don't have to use Rules of Evidence. If that were the case, Nixon would have been president until 1976. After all, those reporters were getting the information from Deep Throat. Wasn't that hearsay? I guess for you those news reports against Nixon would have been invalid, against your delusional reality.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
Now you've brought up an intelligent point. Bravo. However, the issue I'll raise with this is that we now have hindsight with regards to Watergate, after questions were asked, it became absolutely clear that this source was correct. I'm not claiming that hearsay is ALWAYS false, just that it can be false. You just need to ask questions before declaring it gospel.
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
Not to get involved in your argument, but doesn't seem to you a bit pretentious and arrogant to present yourself as the one who owns reality? As a Canadian, I don't care much about American politics, except from the economic perspective, but it worries me the mix of pseudo religion, truth, and politics that get so mixed up in America these days.
vititom 4 years ago
Now this my dear is what it looks like to get CAUGHT in a lie. lol
watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4
Arrowhead2k1 4 years ago
I didn't bother to watch your video. I hate cutting and pasting links, but knowing your line of attack, I guess what are you talking about. A lot has happened since we became engaged in this silly argument. Rev. Wright is a good example. I still stand by what I said about the whole issue not being a trial. In politics any form of smear is good enough. However, my first comment was purely a joke, as my reference to Larry Craig must have sent anybody the sarcasm signal.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
I wasn't a Hillary supporter either. I don't plan on voting on the US election because I won't be in the US in November, or October or December... In fact, after watching Wright's video I developed a liking for Obama. I like people who hold radical views, the kind that can bring actual change. I'm hoping Hillary withdraws from the race after PA. Otherwise, if she waits until Puerto Rico or Denver, the party will be divided and at this point the Democrats hold to key to save the American economy.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
I forgot to mention how obsessive and revengeful looks when someone reply to online conversation posted three weeks ago. I guess we could have been great friends if we weren't in different countries. I could invite you to a beer, if that doesn't offend your religious beliefs.
flyingbird0214 4 years ago
Whoa hey, it's cool. Just saw the stonewalling thing in my accounts View Comments, remembered our little skirmish, and thought I'd throw it out there. Anyways, it's funny how things turn out over time though eh?
But yeah, you're absolutely right, that's just me. I am an obsessive and revengeful person, a bit spiteful too, so look out! lol j/k
Arrowhead2k1 3 years ago