Results 1 to 3 of 3
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: After Jeb Accuses Trump Of Saying ‘Not True’ Things About Him, Bush Campaign Can’t Fi

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Administrator Jean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    65,443

    After Jeb Accuses Trump Of Saying ‘Not True’ Things About Him, Bush Campaign Can’t Fi

    After Jeb Accuses Trump Of Saying ‘Not True’ Things About Him, Bush Campaign Can’t Find a Single Example

    by Matthew Boyle
    3 Sep 2015Washington, DC

    The senior presidential campaign staff of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush—including his campaign manager—can’t manage to point to a single thing billionaire and GOP frontrunner Donald Trump has said about Bush that is untrue.

    This development comes after Bush attacked Trump in Spanish in Miami. According to an English translation, Bush accused Trump of daily saying “not true” things about him—thing he called “barbarities.”

    “He attacks me every day. He attacks me every day with barbarities. They’re not true,” Bush said in Spanish, according to the Washington Post, while in Miami.

    What we did today was to put out in his words to show that he’s not conservative. He supports people like Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). He’s given money to Hillary Clinton. He was a Democrat longer than Republican. He’s said that he’s more comfortable being a Democrat. He doesn’t have a record, because he hasn’t been a person who has served like me, who served for eight years as governor. He’s not a conservative. That’s my point.

    Asked Wednesday afternoon for a specific example—even just one—of Trump saying something untrue about Bush during the entire presidential campaign, Bush’s campaign manager Danny Diaz and communications director Tim Miller couldn’t provide one to Breitbart News.

    That’s not to say that there isn’t such an example out there—there could be, and the staff may not have been able to find it. But over the course of several hours and multiple email conversations, the best Diaz and Miller could come up with were two right-of-center commentators arguing that Trump’s latest video ripping Bush’s “act of love” illegal immigration comments was misleading.

    “This is disgusting and misleading. It makes the Willie Horton ad look like child’s play,” Matt Lewis, a blogger for The Daily Caller website, wrote via Twitter about Trump’s video.

    “Pretty brutal but honest,” the Weekly Standard’s Fred Barnes said of Bush’s response video, which compiled various Trump comments in the past in support of liberal beliefs he had years ago.

    “So far, and I went to the Frank Luntz focus group last week, and nearly all of the people in it—there were 29—supported Trump in one manner or another, didn’t care about what Trump had said before,” Barnes continued.

    But they really hadn’t seen a package like that, particularly about the Clintons. They just heard he had once said ‘I was for single payer and so on.’ I think that’s a pretty strong ad and an honest ad unlike the one Trump had done I think yesterday that had these criminals likening them to what Jeb Bush had said it was an ‘act of love’ to come to the United States as an immigrant. He was talking about somebody bringing his family there so they could have a decent life and prosper. He wasn’t talking about these criminals, obviously. But this ad—look, I think you got to give credit to Bush. All the rest of them, all the other candidates are hiding in the knee holes of their desks and he is out with a tough ad.

    Obviously, those are not factual examples of Trump saying something provably untrue about Bush. Those are two commentators’ opinions about Trump’s Instagram video which spliced Bush’s “act of love” comments about illegal aliens breaking into the United States against images of convicted killers who were illegal aliens.

    Diaz also provided Breitbart News with a link to a video of Bush, appearing on Fox News, responding to Trump’s immigration video.

    “We need to secure our border and I have a comprehensive plan to do just that,” Bush says in the video.

    I’ve talked to the governors on the border—I was a border governor because we have a lot of immigration coming from the south. I’ve talked to a lot of local law enforcement officers and people—and I have a plan to be able to secure the border. That’s the thing we ought to be focusing on, not grandiose language, not mischaracterizing people’s views. That little ad was a complete mischaracterization of my thinking. It’s almost as though Donald Trump is acting as a Washington politician. That’s what they do. Look, and the simple fact is, our ad simply uses his own language—his own words—to say that he is more Democrat than a Republican. That he’s for higher taxes rather than cutting taxes, that he’s for a single payer healthcare system, that he’s not only pro choice but he believes in partial birth abortion. Those are his words not mine.

    Again, this video from Bush is interesting commentary from the Florida governor and certainly a newsworthy section of an interview he gave to Fox News. But it does not represent any evidence that Trump has something that is “not true” about Bush. It is just Bush’s belief that Trump mischaracterized his viewpoint.

    For Bush to claim that Trump is saying things about him that are “not true” is a serious allegation. It’s normal for candidates to joust, sometimes fairly roughly, but accusing your opponent of lying—or at the very least saying things that are not accurate with the intent to harm your opponent—is a new level in this race. For now, Bush’s team can’t back up the candidate’s allegation with any concrete evidence whatsoever. That may come out in the future, but nonetheless, Bush’s decision to sink to this level with demonstrable evidence to support his allegations against Trump could end up backfiring even more.

    Trump has already battled several other candidates in the 2016 race, and each time he has those opponents—everyone from former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker to even Bush in the past—have seen a drop off in polling. The candidates who aren’t fighting with Trump—Dr. Ben Carson and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), chief among them—have performed relatively well in polling and are now instead considered among the top tier in polling.

    It remains to be seen what happens next, but the latest saga in the Trump-Bush feud was Trump’s Wednesday interview with Breitbart News in which he hammered Bush for speaking Spanish instead of English during that press conference.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ingle-example/
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,185
    For heaven's sake, another Bush makes claims that isn't true. Flashbacks to WMD's and a 30 day war. Must be something in the genes. I surely hope that it is not something in the republican indoctrination and welcome package.

  3. #3
    MW
    MW is offline
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,717
    Quote Originally Posted by kevinssdad View Post
    For heaven's sake, another Bush makes claims that isn't true. Flashbacks to WMD's and a 30 day war. Must be something in the genes. I surely hope that it is not something in the republican indoctrination and welcome package.
    By no means am I defending Jeb Bush. However, I do believe former President Bush was correct on the weapons of mass destruction.

    IRAQ HAD WMDS AFTER ALL

    Until now, I have been willing to go along with the conventional wisdom that Iraq did not possess significant stockpiles of WMDs prior to the 2003 war. Leftover chemical munitions were discovered here and there during and after the invasion, but it was plausible to think that they were odds and ends, not part of a usable stockpile subject to the regime’s control.
    Today, however, the New York Times dropped a bombshell: in the aftermath of the Iraq war, the CIA purchased from an unidentified intermediary no fewer than 400 Borak warheads filled with sarin, a deadly nerve gas:
    The analysis of sarin samples from 2005 found that the purity level reached 13 percent — higher than expected given the relatively low quality and instability of Iraq’s sarin production in the 1980s, officials said. Samples from Boraks recovered in 2004 had contained concentrations no higher than 4 percent.
    The new data became grounds for concern. “Borak rockets will be more hazardous than previously assessed,” one internal report noted. It added a warning: the use of a Borak in an improvised bomb “could effectively disperse the sarin nerve agent.”
    An internal record from 2006 referred to “agent purity of up to 25 percent for recovered unitary sarin weapons.”
    Borak rocket warheads
    Sarin is one of the deadliest of nerve agents; just 1 to 10 milliliters on the skin can be fatal. So a concentration in a rocket of up to 25% purity would seem to be lethal.
    Information about the 400+ Borak warheads has been around for a while, although not in the public domain. This heavily redacted 2006 U.S. Army report, recently obtained via a FOIA request, notes as its first “key point”:
    Since May 2004, Coalition forces (CF) have recovered at least 501 pre-1991 Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons-including 448 122-mm al Borak rocket warheads, many of which contain the nerve agent sarin (GB).
    The comprehensive post-war study of Iraq’s WMD programs and capabilities was the Duelfer report, which concluded that Saddam’s regime did not possess major stockpiles of WMD as of 2003, but intended to re-start its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs once sanctions were removed. Duelfer, writing in 2004, evidently was unaware of the Borak rocket warheads that have now become public knowledge. The Duelfer report does note the important discovery of one similar (although slightly larger and of a different type) warhead containing sarin:
    The most interesting discovery has been a 152mm binary Sarin artillery projectile—containing a 40 percent concentration of Sarin—which insurgents attempted to use as an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). The existence of this binary weapon not only raises questions about the number of viable chemical weapons remaining in Iraq and raises the possibility that a larger number of binary, long-lasting chemical weapons still exist.
    Some have tried to disparage the importance of munitions like the Borak warheads on the ground that they are “old” WMDs, manufactured before 1991. But this is wrong. One of the chief concerns about Iraq’s WMDs always was whether it had actually destroyed its vast stocks of chemical and biological weapons, as it claimed. One of the principal tasks of the UNMOVIC inspections that were carried out until 2002 was to try to verify that these “old,” but still lethal, weapons had actually been destroyed. Thus, UNMOVIC wrote in its January 27, 2003 briefing to the U.N. Security Council:
    One of three important questions before us today is how much might remain undeclared and intact from before 1991; and, possibly, thereafter; the second question is what, if anything, was illegally produced or procured after 1998, when the inspectors left; and the third question is how it can be prevented that any weapons of mass destruction be produced or procured in the future.
    In my opinion, the revelation that more than 400 Borak rocket warheads armed with sarin were still extant after the 2003 war is of a different quality than prior reports of old stocks that were encountered here and there by American troops. These rockets were not, it appears, dispersed randomly in dumps and forgotten storage depots. One individual was able to produce more than 400 of them, suggesting that they most likely were stored and inventoried by the Baathist regime. If that is the case, the conventional belief that the world’s intelligence agencies were wrong, and Iraq did not possess significant stockpiles of WMDs prior to the 2003 war, is incorrect. One shudders to think what a terrorist group could accomplish with 400 sarin-equipped rockets.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...-after-all.php

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-19-2015, 01:01 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-09-2014, 10:48 PM
  3. 11 shocking things you now realize to be true (but you never
    By kathyet in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11-14-2011, 02:39 PM
  4. Are these things true about cell phones?
    By ALIPAC in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-11-2008, 02:18 PM
  5. Mexico accuses U.S. of new 'anti-immigration campaign'
    By jp_48504 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-23-2005, 02:23 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •