Brace for impact, the "stuff" has hit the westinghouse
- Thread starter TheFederalistWeasel
- Start date
TheFederalistWeasel
New member
Well, it may back fire by itself. It's Larry Flynt who is blabbing. Seems all he'll say is "we have evidence" but he won't say what that evidence is.
I saw this somewhere on the net around June or July of this year, he was offering some "lady" $1 million to say she had an abortion and GW paid for it....
Go figure,
TFW
I saw this somewhere on the net around June or July of this year, he was offering some "lady" $1 million to say she had an abortion and GW paid for it....
Go figure,
TFW
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
In the interest of the education of our members and fair use:
Source
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX FRI OCT 20, 2000 21:42:04 ET XXXXX
CNN AIRS ALLEGATION: BUSH PAID FOR ABORTION
All-news channel CNN on Friday aired allegations that Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush was involved in an abortion in the 1970's.
"We've found out in the early 1970s Bush was involved in an abortion in Texas," HUSTLER publisher Larry Flynt reported on CNN.
Flynt did not offer specifics.
CNN stunned the journalistic community by airing the claims without evidence.
The Bush campaign immediately blasted the network.
"CNN's standards have hit a new low, if that is even possible!" slammed one senior Bush source from Austin. "It appears the liberal media is becoming desperate as Election Day nears."[/quote]
I donÕt think that this will have much of an impact on the election. Obviously a desperate attempt to influence the election from a less-than credible source. Communist News Network must really be hurting for ratings to air this garbage. Drudge isnÕt much better.
Source
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX FRI OCT 20, 2000 21:42:04 ET XXXXX
CNN AIRS ALLEGATION: BUSH PAID FOR ABORTION
All-news channel CNN on Friday aired allegations that Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush was involved in an abortion in the 1970's.
"We've found out in the early 1970s Bush was involved in an abortion in Texas," HUSTLER publisher Larry Flynt reported on CNN.
Flynt did not offer specifics.
CNN stunned the journalistic community by airing the claims without evidence.
The Bush campaign immediately blasted the network.
"CNN's standards have hit a new low, if that is even possible!" slammed one senior Bush source from Austin. "It appears the liberal media is becoming desperate as Election Day nears."[/quote]
I donÕt think that this will have much of an impact on the election. Obviously a desperate attempt to influence the election from a less-than credible source. Communist News Network must really be hurting for ratings to air this garbage. Drudge isnÕt much better.
I don't see that story anywhere else. Larry Flynt is not what the dems need on their side. Bush should tell them to fly a kite and slam CNN just as they have done. When prono-guy provides the 'evidence' he paid 1 mil for, then I will worry. After that, I will attack the dems for more illegal type politics...just turn it around on them.
The Dems pulled this stunt on AL Lt. Gov and they were convicted.
madison46
The Dems pulled this stunt on AL Lt. Gov and they were convicted.
madison46
Ed Brunner
New member
Even if this could be true it would be difficult to evaluate on the "Good vs. Bad Scale".
------------------
You have to be there when it's all over. Otherwise you can't say "I told you so."
Better days to be,
Ed
------------------
You have to be there when it's all over. Otherwise you can't say "I told you so."
Better days to be,
Ed
Everybody remember that Flint had "dirt" on Bob Barr about a year or so ago ... at Clinton's request. That was as big a flop as Riveria opening Al Capone's 'vault' on live TV. 
You think they'd learn by now.
If it's true than Bush can counter with ... "At least I didn't drive her off a bridge!"
------------------
Remember: First you pillage ... then you burn!
You think they'd learn by now.If it's true than Bush can counter with ... "At least I didn't drive her off a bridge!"
------------------
Remember: First you pillage ... then you burn!
Yeah, Larry Flint, I'm shaking in my shoes. What a slime bag! On a related topic, heard on the radio the other day that there are porn sites that are saying "if you like viewing pornography online, you'd better vote Gore." Can't confirm, but wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Sub
Sub
Blueyedog:
Yeah. Larry Flynt was looking for anything on anybody. Did he ever find anything?? I don't think so. Gore must really be behind in the polls, internal and external for this to be attempted AND for them to toy with Clinton coming to their aid.
madison
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blueyedog:
Everybody remember that Flint had "dirt" on Bob Barr about a year or so ago ... at Clinton's request. That was as big a flop as Riveria opening Al Capone's 'vault' on live TV. You think they'd learn by now.
If it's true than Bush can counter with ... "At least I didn't drive her off a bridge!"
[/quote]
Yeah. Larry Flynt was looking for anything on anybody. Did he ever find anything?? I don't think so. Gore must really be behind in the polls, internal and external for this to be attempted AND for them to toy with Clinton coming to their aid.
madison
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blueyedog:
Everybody remember that Flint had "dirt" on Bob Barr about a year or so ago ... at Clinton's request. That was as big a flop as Riveria opening Al Capone's 'vault' on live TV.
You think they'd learn by now.If it's true than Bush can counter with ... "At least I didn't drive her off a bridge!"
[/quote]
Jeff Thomas
New member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>... Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush was involved in an abortion in the 1970's ... [/quote]
Hmmm ... maybe I'm dense, but what the he!! does this mean? Am I supposed to wait until after the commercial break to hear the rest of the story?
Oh, ... in case it comes up ... I only read Hustler for the articles.
Regards from AZ
Hmmm ... maybe I'm dense, but what the he!! does this mean? Am I supposed to wait until after the commercial break to hear the rest of the story?
Oh, ... in case it comes up ... I only read Hustler for the articles.
Regards from AZ
MrBigglesworth
New member
They are desperate aren't they! If this was known and true why not bring it out at the earliest possible moment...oh..thats right..they want Gore to win!!!
And to air WITHOUT evidence and to take the tip from porn meister Flynt! I mean come on!!!
------------------
Try to take away my gun...and you will see my 2nd Amendment Right in ACTION!!! -Me
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crime. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson
And to air WITHOUT evidence and to take the tip from porn meister Flynt! I mean come on!!!
------------------
Try to take away my gun...and you will see my 2nd Amendment Right in ACTION!!! -Me
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crime. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson
Dennis Olson
New member
Who in their right mind would take a peddler of filth as a valid source?
Well, the Dems tried to hold a fund raiser at the Playboy mansion, and only backed out when public outrage became too hot. They also had that comedian at a Klinton thing making disgusting sexual jokes in front of a child. And they paraded Elian (post-armed-grab) at one of their events as well. None of these events were thought to be "outrageous" or in bad taste by the liberals.
So I guess the answer to the question would be.... most liberals.
Well, the Dems tried to hold a fund raiser at the Playboy mansion, and only backed out when public outrage became too hot. They also had that comedian at a Klinton thing making disgusting sexual jokes in front of a child. And they paraded Elian (post-armed-grab) at one of their events as well. None of these events were thought to be "outrageous" or in bad taste by the liberals.
So I guess the answer to the question would be.... most liberals.
walangkatapat
New member
This sh!t is old news:
http://www.drudgereport.com/cnn1.htm
------------------
"Gun Control is Only to Protect Those in Power"
[This message has been edited by walangkatapat (edited October 21, 2000).]
http://www.drudgereport.com/cnn1.htm
------------------
"Gun Control is Only to Protect Those in Power"
[This message has been edited by walangkatapat (edited October 21, 2000).]
Brett Bellmore
New member
Perhaps more to the point, what person who would actually CARE whether Bush was involved with an abortion, would regard Flint as a trustworthy source of information?
Impact essentially zero, but it does show that they've pulled out all the stops, and NOTHING is off limits between now and the election.
------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
Impact essentially zero, but it does show that they've pulled out all the stops, and NOTHING is off limits between now and the election.
------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tecolote:
Who in their right mind would take a peddler of filth as a valid source?
[/quote]
The Prosecuting Attorneys, and thus, the Courts do it every day. They're called confidential informants. Or some 3-time loooozer decides to make the only deal (s)he has left, becuz they think they're going to do some real time (6-9 months) for this crime or that. So they start telling stories about how this guy sold them this, or that.
Pretty soon you have a no-knock in process, and well.... you know the story.
All for the sake of believing that deep down, even the lowest scum, really is a decent person.
But it doesn't matter if there's legitimacy in this story. It's on the noose broadcasts, so it must be true, right??
I mean how can those grocery store tabloids still be in business, if all they tell is lies, and crap?
Maybe donations from the DNC to keep them going, might explain it.
Kind of like an attorney asking, or telling something to a witness, or the Jury.
Then the remark is ordered to be striken from the records, and the Jury instructed to disregard the idea planted in their heads, good luck.
Who in their right mind would take a peddler of filth as a valid source?
[/quote]
The Prosecuting Attorneys, and thus, the Courts do it every day. They're called confidential informants. Or some 3-time loooozer decides to make the only deal (s)he has left, becuz they think they're going to do some real time (6-9 months) for this crime or that. So they start telling stories about how this guy sold them this, or that.
Pretty soon you have a no-knock in process, and well.... you know the story.
All for the sake of believing that deep down, even the lowest scum, really is a decent person.
But it doesn't matter if there's legitimacy in this story. It's on the noose broadcasts, so it must be true, right??
I mean how can those grocery store tabloids still be in business, if all they tell is lies, and crap?
Maybe donations from the DNC to keep them going, might explain it.
Kind of like an attorney asking, or telling something to a witness, or the Jury.
Then the remark is ordered to be striken from the records, and the Jury instructed to disregard the idea planted in their heads, good luck.