Posted on 04/08/2014 9:46:10 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sen. Rand Paul claimed in 2009 that former Vice President Dick Cheney exploited the 9/11 attacks in order to lead the United States into war in Iraq to benefit military contractor Halliburton, where Cheney had been CEO before heading to Washington, a video unveiled by blog Mother Jones' writer David Corn shows.
In the video unearthed of a speech given at Western Kentucky University, Paul argues that Cheney opposed the first Bush administration's plans but changed his mind over Halliburton, Corn reports.
"He's being interviewed (in 1995), I think, by the American Enterprise Institute, and he says it would be a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it would be civil war, we'd have no exit strategy. He goes on and on for five minutes — Dick Cheney saying it would be a bad idea," Paul says in the video.
"And that's why the first Bush didn’t go into Baghdad. Dick Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton. Makes hundreds of millions of dollars — their CEO. Next thing you know, he's back in government, it's a good idea to go into Iraq."(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
For ALL the SPENDING GWB did there is NO WAY IN HELL he would have EVER, EVER, put troops in danger for Cheny’s Halliburton!! Say what you will about GW he REALLY cared about the troops!!! This statement by Rand really sucks!!!!
Halliburton? This is the first time I've heard this company mentioned since the day before Obama got elected in 2008.........
Before that, it was daily for eight years......
Homeless is another word you never hear during a Democrat’s time in office.
Yes he did, at a loss by the way, when he resigned as CEO when he accepted the offer of running for VP........
Paul is full of crap, the reason we didn't go into Baghdad is because we were working under UN orders......and those orders were to rid Kuwait of Hussein only.
Cheney’s only real mistake is realizing you can’t keep up combat on two fronts forever.
Paul speech WILL resonate with moderate Dems who he will need in 2016.
Not trying to pick a fight, just trying to look at it objectively.
At least the Bush 43 administration had some adults in it. I have yet to see one in the present regime.
Words repeated straight from HuffPo, Michael Moore and the spittle-flecked Keith Olbermann.
Well, he made all that back, and more, when he stole the gold from the World Trade Center, had the goat concession at Gitmo and made that deal with the extraterrestrials... [guffaw]
Rand is a liberal like his father. People are so desperate for another Reagan they blind themselves to the evidence in front of their eyes.
People supporting Rand are no better than he is.
That didn’t stop a lot of people here from voting for McCain and Romney both of whom make Paul look like staunch constructionist.
I have to admit to McCain (to get Palin) but it was a mistake I regret and will never repeat. After 2012, no one in their right mind should ever empower another GOP liberal.
But yea...they will.
“Yes he did, at a loss by the way”
A quick search led me to this:
A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney’s denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday.
The report says a public official’s unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of “retained ties” to his former company.
Cheney said Sunday on NBC that since becoming vice president, “I’ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had, now, for over three years.”
Democrats pointed out that Cheney receives deferred compensation from Halliburton under an arrangement he made in 1998, and also retains stock options. He has pledged to give after-tax proceeds of the stock options to charity.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cheneys-halliburton-ties-remain/
So, did Cheney donate the proceeds from the ties he said he didn’t have, to charity? Which one? This is typical left wing BS. He lied, got caught and probably lied again.
I agree 100%
I’m just trying to point out that the GOP candidate in 2016 will have to draw votes from moderate Dems to win.
Rand is talking too much like his nutty dad though for my liking.
I really don't fathom why there are so many otherwise sane conservatives who continue to defend Bush and Cheney. If a Democrat did or said half of what they got away with, their defenders would be screaming bloody murder, and rightly so. I think it just boils down to kneejerk party loyalty.
Paul would be in many ways a vast improvement over our last two candidates, so I don’t get the acrimony.
His comments are those of a liberal. Look at his ‘slips’ in the last couple months. Self explanitory.
You are correct. They are not called bushbots for their conservative positions. These are the people who will line up to vote for Jeb even if he calls for open borders and intervenes in dozens of other Schiavo cases.
The last two candidates had a proven track record of voting like liberals, speaking like liberals, and only pretended to be conservative when it suited them and saved their most critical comments for other Republicans. Rand Paul is head and shoulders above both of them, and while he’s far from what I consider a perfect candidate (and not my choice at this point), I would vote for him...unlike a lot of the prospective field such as Bush, Christie, Huckabee, Rubio, Santorum, and Ryan.
Effin lunatic....
The Fact is that Halliburton has been an outsourced Logistics supplier since the Civil War and was, at that time, the largest and most capable of delivering supplies to our troops.
What do you want to make of that fact?
Who would you have given that contract to?
Don’t answer, because you won’t have a legitimate answer.
There was no one else...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.