DIYbanter - View Single Post - OT - Senate Republicans vote to kill Obama's jobs bill..Why DoRepublicans Hate America?

Hawke[_3_]

On 10/26/2011 5:03 AM, wrote:
On Oct 25, 9:08 pm, wrote:

The accusation was that the White House was trashed by the Clintons. I'm
telling you that is completely false, a lie. It was not trashed. What
the report said was there was some damage. It did not say the place was
trashed. So Dan, was it trashed or not? And what does trashed mean? A
little bit of minor damage or it was wrecked? In my book trashed means
it was left like it was trash. Did the report say it was in that kind of
condition? No. So it was a lie that the place was trashed.

Hawke

This is the original accusation.

How about all the damage done to the White House by Billy Blowjob's
underlings before George W moved in ($15,000 worth of damage: ripping
phone cords from the walls, defacing bathrooms, leaving obscene
voicemail messages, and removing the "W" keys from the keyboards);
proud of that, too, Dave?

Note carefully the word trashed is not in this statement. Note the
original statement said $15,000 in damages. That is less than what
the official report said. You claimed the original statement was
false, but the official report says it was true. In face of this
overwhelming evidence why don't you admit you were wrong. Continuing
to claim you are right just shows you are extremely biased.

Dan

Well, all I can tell you is that I was a real estate agent for a number
of years. I've seen all kinds of property damage during that time. The
way I interpreted the accusation against the Clinton's to be was one
where they "trashed" the place. That is the term I heard when I first
heard the story. But from what I have been able to find out since then
is that story was bullcrap.

The White House is a multimillion dollar property. Fifteen thousand in
damage is very little to that size property that isn't really a house
but is a commercial building as well. When you have one administration
leave the other comes in and does wholesale changes, so if some damage
is done when in the process it's not a big deal. In fact from my
perspective the entire thing is not a big deal.

You seem to be wanting it to be so you can prove something negative
about the Clintons. So either they did something really, really, bad
when they left or they didn't. I don't think they did anything even
worth mentioning. But you're making a mountain out of a molehill. The
question is why? You have a an agenda of trying to make the Clinton's
out to be villains or you can't accept that I'm right? Whatever it is
you're really grasping at straws and look desperate. If I were you I
would give up while you can.

Hawke