Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Nervous Tick
That may be proof of you're being irrationally against Huckabee, but it is not proof that it is not true that (once again):

Huckabee and his staff communicated with Bolton and Bolton agreed to have further communications (presumably to offer advise, which would be something Bolton would hardly avoid).

If I had to guess which of them is being less candid, I would have to say it is Ambassador Bolton.

41 posted on 01/04/2008 6:16:33 PM PST by unspun (God save us from egos -- especially our own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: unspun

(sigh)

Let’s take it point by point.

>> Huckabee and his staff communicated with Bolton

True, according to Huckabee and his staff. Unsubstantiated by Bolton! But so what? I and my co-workers just “communicated” with Bill Gates — sent him an email asking him to be on our board of directors. But if I claim he is on my board, I’m a liar. Just like Huck was at the time he made his lying statement!

>> Bolton agreed to have further communications

Technically true... only because Bolton “agreed” to have further communications IN GENERAL with ANY UNNAMED candidate. But the implication that Bolton agreed to have further communications SPECIFICIALLY WITH HUCKSTER is false.

>> presumably to offer advise...
>> If I had to guess which of them is being less candid

Your presumptions and “guesses” are totally irrelevant.

You have yet to provide ANY substantiation of ANY of your claims WHATSOEVER. That makes you an ignorant shill only too eager to lie for your boy.


42 posted on 01/04/2008 6:26:33 PM PST by Nervous Tick (Retire Ron Paul! Support Chris Peden (www.chrispeden.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson