Comments on: #2123B

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:46:44 +0000

I am not going put Beck’s case for him. I looks pretty clear to me what he is proposing. It is incumbent on him and his sympathizers to make their case.
Anyway, here are GB’s tweetings: https://twitter.com/glennbeck (I suspect that the ‘direction of travel’ – in order to avoid embarrassment at some point in the future? – is to ‘decouple’ the issues of the Boston bombings and Alharbi’s immigration status … but his initial utterances looked very much like suggestions that the Federal Government was effectively complicit in the murder of those three people and the injury of many many more – an extremely serious accusation.)

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:46:43 +0000

I don’t think that Tom is a troll, Boo, but I do think that he is hoping that, by saying the same thing over and over again, he will convince those who disagree with him.
Given things like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkSFW1ZQKCk&feature=youtu.be), I think it is very difficult to claim that Beck’s agenda was merely to highlight the possibility of some kind of administrative error with regard to Alharbi’s admission to the USA. Tom’s apparent (at least towards the end of his string of comments) contention is this is really all Beck is now saying, and, if he (Tom) is to be taken seriously, he needs to provide some kind of evidence to back his position.
A wider point: it is absolutely proper for the likes of President Obama to be ‘held to account’; such is essential in a democracy. I find it ironic that the methods used by some of Obama’s more extreme opponents are actually counter-productive. We all know that the political scene in the US is probably more divided than it has been for some decades; ‘the Right’ were stunned by the decisive defeat they suffered in last November’s presidential election (of the last four elections, the ‘margin of victory’ was second only to that in 2008), and some are ‘out for Obama’s blood’. In the kind of atmosphere there is at the moment, it is very difficult to assess clearly what is ‘true’. If they are to do so successfully, those who wish to hold the President to account need to eschew anything that has a dubious basis in fact. Otherwise it is really only their own credibility that will suffer.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:44:56 +0000

The reality is that all media are corrupt to some extent – people are involved!
As for the latest news on those event s in Benghazi: it was ABC who broke it. Are you, Tom, suggesting that they knew all along, but kept it to themselves for political reasons?
As for Kerry-Edwards apparent ‘support’ for the Iraq war: I suspect that was partly for electoral reasons.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:39:24 +0000

(I don’t want to harp on about Iraq, but do feel that, of three examples in these last few comments, this is by far the most serious – and bloody. And I don’t recall the right-wing press making much of the flawed assessments [or worse] that led to the aggression in Iraq … but by all means correct me if I’m wrong about that, Tom.)

By: Tom Van Dyke

Tom Van Dyke — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:36:27 +0000

No.