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 ...
Doesn’t matter what the rationalization is. People willing to vote for him get what they deserve. There are plenty of other and better options than cutting ones own throat by voting in a guy like him.
He’s off the table. There are enough of us that will not vote for him period to guarantee a loss. So you can back him eventually if you like and lose or join us in finding a better candidate. And if he is the candidate whether we find one or not, he loses. We have had it with psuedocons.
No Rand, No Jeb, No Rick, no way. If people want to win, lets get to work behind someone worth our time.
LOL!!!
That’s funny, right there...
Isn’t it a little early to be settling on this rino?
This isn’t about Cheney, it is about a conspiracy nut, a Paul.
If you want to switch it to Cheney, then convince us that Paul is correct, and that it isn’t a nutty theory.
The problem is that Cheney retained Haliburton stock options while giving them no bid contracts, and lied about it. See #32.
Says it all about Paul, or at least his backers. Instead of defending his [Rand Paul's] own words, his backers choose to attack Dick Cheney.
You are an idiot but, fortunately you won’t be back for a few days...
Ran out of arguments so soon? Typical bushbot..
lol. no, you keep changing 'the problem', and ignoring the fact that Halliburton has been an outsourced Logistics supplier since the Civil War and 0bama himself gave Halliburton a 'no-bid' contract.
p.s. a Director or former executive of a corporation has no control over the 'awards' of stock options or deferred compensation previously earned. Dick Cheney eliminated the Halliburton connections that he could, and pledged to contribute any future proceeds from deferred compensation (including any vested or unvested stock options) whenever they materialized. Nothing more he could do.
Yet, Democrats and liberaltarians desperately defending Rand Paul call that a lie.
I don’t have a problem with Halliburton. It’s a respectable company as far as I’m concerned.
I have a problem with Cheney. He is a big government, gay marriage promoter who said that he had no financial interest in Halliburton when in fact he did. I guess the stock options and deferred salary just slipped his mind.
Does that clear it up for you?
Cheney donated almost his entire fortune to finding a cure for the cardiac disease that killed his father. I believe a breakthrough to a cure has been attained.
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet, earlier on FR:
Rand Paul in ’09: Cheney pushed Iraq war to benefit Halliburton
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3141883/posts
Who has settled on him?
I had to call a spade a spade.
You are uninformed except for your passion, which is also unconscious.
Not worries.
Many people make it through life that way...
Paul has already signaled his liberalism on some issues, and his nuttiness.
It isn't much of a sales pitch anyway, saying that someone is better than some loser from the past, that is more of a hail Mary pass for the late stages of a losing campaign.
I don’t disagree with your statement that he has displayed some liberalism, and I’m not making a sales pitch. If Rand Paul becomes the nominee, and I’m not planning on voting for him in the primaries, then I will have far less of a problem than I did voting for Bush senior, Dole, Bush jr., McCain, and Romney.
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.