Replies

Why don't you defend FioRINO instead of attacking the messenger?

The former HP CEO claimed that a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation “proved that neither I nor anyone else in management knew about” a Hewlett-Packard subsidiary doing business in Iran. We have found no such ruling from the SEC, nor could Fiorina’s campaign provide one.

She also claimed that the company that actually sold HP products in Iran was “not honest” with HP about its dealings. But that company said in a 2003 press release that its relationship with HP had begun in 1997 to focus on “one market — Iran.”

Fiorina said “it’s impossible to ensure that nothing wrong ever happens” in such a large company, which she said had “a larger budget than any one of our 50 states.” That’s incorrect. California and New York had larger budgets in fiscal year 2005, which was Fiorina’s last with HP.

Why attack the “messenger”?

BECAUSE the “messenger” is attempting to use its own “credibility” to DISCREDIT Fiorina.

Did the “messenger” report the fine levied against HP for violating the Iran Trade ban? No? Why not? Could it be because there was no fine? Because there was NO WRONGDOING?

But THAT would spoil the “messenger’s” pro-Hillary “narrative”, wouldn’t it?

Let’s not wear ourselves out by jumping at every piece of red-meat tossed our way by Hillary’s friends...

"Why don't you defend FioRINO instead of attacking the messenger?"

Read your own statement. You are not a "messenger". You are the attacker.