Sun
Jul 9 2006
10:11 pm

From Captain's Quarters.

The timeline seems especially damning in this case. Bill Clinton issues a pardon for the Gregorys in March 2000. Two months later, Anthony Rodham begins collecting checks from the company owned by the Gregorys. Over the next 20 months, Rodham gets 16 checks, all marked as loans as cover for the disbursements on United Show's books, until it totals $107,000. Rodham never makes a payment on these loans, and six months later, United Shows files for bankruptcy, leaving its creditors high and dry -- but not Rodham.

By any definition, that is a quid pro quo payoff. Clinton had no pressing reason to issue the pardon except to make it easier for the Gregorys to win government contracts. The DoJ did not want them pardoned, and the pair were already out of prison. One can ask for no clearer indication that the Clinton administration had a fire sale on presidential pardons, and made sure that the money stayed in the family.

If Hillary runs in 2008 her Democratic opponents will have this to use against her in the primaries.

Topics:
Factchecker's picture

This is such BS

This is such BS, Les.  How could this have plausibly been arranged?  Do you also  believe the moon landing was faked?  If your fantasy were true, it wouldn't even hold a candle to the millions of dollars that Enron pumped into the 2000 Florida recount shutdown.  To name one tiny crime of the B.F.E.E.

P.S. Very few of us want Hillary to run, and in fact place her as our least favored candidate, not counting that senator from Connecticut who's one of yours.  Take 'em both.

Is this the best you guys can do?  Sheesh.

_________________________________

Never has the left been so right.

Les Jones's picture

Shorter Fact Checker:

"Oh, Les, this isn't plausible because Enron!  Florida was stolen! We don't like Hillary anyway! Joe Lieberman's a traitor! Look, a monkey!"


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

Metulj1's picture

Impotence

A conservative's impotence can be determined as being in direct proportion to his or her hatred of Hillary Clinton. Why undermine her with stuff like this? Totally Mickey Mouse. Don't you want her to run so you guys can troll out the lesbianism and Vince Foster's "murder?"

In other news, George Bush's friend Ken Lay died recently.

Les Jones's picture

This will shock you...

But I don't hate Hillary Clinton. I actually can't work up any emotion over her. I have said she can't win unless the Repubs run an acharismatic dud like Bill Frist.

"Why undermine her with stuff like this? Totally Mickey Mouse."

It's not exactly Mickey Mouse if her husband used the power of presidential pardon to pardon people who were convicted of a crime so that her brother could get a hundred and seven thousand smackers. 

 "troll out the lesbianism"

Yeah, because Democrats would never make an issue of someone's sexual orientation.

 

 

Or speculate about the sexual orientation of people in the other party:

(link...)


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

Eleanor A's picture

Firstly

Mary Cheney is an out lesbian. Methinks the hysteria stirred up over Kerry mentioning it is that people aren't supposed to, you know, realize that Cheney manages to gay-bash his own daughter at every opportunity. Makes him look, well, hypocritical, and makes it harder for people not to see gays as people or to notice the fact that Cheney is in fact possessed of a little black cinder where most people's hearts are.

(Does it utterly fail to surprise anyone else that he keeps having quadruple bypasses? Guess they're still in there plumbing around trying to see if he actually has a heart, or if it's just some plastoid tin replacement like in Wizard of Oz.)

Wonder what his disapproval rating is these days....can numbers get so negative they reset if he gets to some magic number? Like, if he gets to -1,000,000% or somefin'?

Secondly, we're supposed to take on faith some bullshit from a weblog that's boasting of winning conservative blog awards on the front page? I suppose you'd just love it if we were to start cutting 'n posting random stuff off Daily Kos on here and calling it the gospel truth.

Frankly, this is a waste of time.

Les Jones's picture

"Cheney manages to

 "Cheney manages to gay-bash his own daughter at every opportunity"

Better ask Bubba to check the site. It's apparently filtering out the link you posted to back up that assertion.

 "Secondly, we're supposed to take on faith some bullshit from a weblog"

That got its information from the Washington Times (yeah, I know - you won't believe them much more than Captain's Quarters), but tell you what, there are plenty of court records referenced in that WashTimes article you're free to fact check.

 Anthony D. Rodham, one of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's two brothers, got the loans from United Shows of America Inc. after its owners obtained the presidential pardon in March 2000 over the objections of the Justice Department.

Michael E. Collins, trustee for United Shows, filed papers in Alexandria bankruptcy court seeking the return of $107,000 plus $46,034 in interest from Mr. Rodham, 51, for the loans he received from the carnival company, which went bankrupt in 2002.

Mr. Rodham "received the benefit of the loans without making any repayment," reads a related document filed last year in bankruptcy court in Nashville, Tenn. ...

According to bankruptcy court records, Tony Rodham began to receive the loan checks on May 10, 2000. The final loan of $2,500 was made on Feb. 12, 2002, about six months before United Shows filed for bankruptcy protection.

The rest of your argument is "Les, the reason you're wrong about Clinton is Cheney's got a bad heart! And his approval ratings suck! Look, a monkey!"


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

R. Neal's picture

Funny how hatred of the

Wow, this has to be a first. A link to Captain's Quarters from this blog. For our next trick, we'll endorse Ann Coulter for U.S. Senator from New York.

Funny how hatred of the Clintons runs so deep. Let's go back six years to find something to impeach Hillary before she might possibly run two years from now.

Why not focus on the present?

One of those pardoned, Wendy St. Charles, is a lawyer for a Denver homebuilder, MDC Holdings, parent of Richmond American Homes, The Denver Post reported. St. Charles was convicted on drug charges in 1984 and sentenced to four years in prison.

MDC's chairman, Larry Mizel, has contributed more than half a million dollars to Republican campaigns along with his wife, Carol, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. A company spokeswoman did not immediately return a phone call from The Associated Press.

Or better yet, let's talk about how the Republican run Congress gives Bush a pardon every day for billions and billions of taxpayer dollars flowing into private companies such as KBR and Halliburton and then disappear into thin air in Iraq, without any accountability or even receipts.

Talk about your quid pro quo. And if we're going back in history, how about Bush Sr.'s pardon of the Iran-Contra figures?

Of course, all of this pales in comparison to the Clinton's chump change and tawdry relationships.

Whatever.

P.S. Offensive fake campaign signs aside, Kerry only mentioned Mary Cheney after Cheney brought her up first in a debate. Cheney opened the door.

Andy Axel's picture

Rehires

And if we're going back in history, how about Bush Sr.'s pardon of the Iran-Contra figures?

And Bush Jr's subsequent hiring of them:

Adm. John Poindexter and Elliott Abrams, to name a couple.

____________________________

"The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco." -- G.K.

Les Jones's picture

Why not focus on the

 Why not focus on the present?

That does sound a bit shady. Somewhat less than having cold hard cash given out, but still possibly a quid pro quo.

P.S. Offensive fake campaign signs aside, Kerry only mentioned Mary Cheney after Cheney brought her up first in a debate. Cheney opened the door.

Kerry didn't debate Cheney, so I guess you're talking out the Veep debate. Here's a transcript. Edwards was the one who brought it up, somewhat jarringly. 

EDWARDS: Now, as to this question, let me say first that I think the vice president and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very much. And you can't have anything but respect for the fact that they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her. It's a wonderful thing. And there are millions of parents like that who love their children, who want their children to be happy.

And I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, and so does John Kerry.

I also believe that there should be partnership benefits for gay and lesbian couples in long-term, committed relationships.

But we should not use the Constitution to divide this country.

No state for the last 200 years has ever had to recognize another state's marriage.

This is using the Constitution as a political tool, and it's wrong.

IFILL: New question, but same subject.

As the vice president mentioned, John Kerry comes from the state of Massachusetts, which has taken as big a step as any state in the union to legalize gay marriage. Yet both you and Senator Kerry say you oppose it.

Are you trying to have it both ways?

EDWARDS: No. I think we've both said the same thing all along.

We both believe that -- and this goes onto the end of what I just talked about -- we both believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

But we also believe that gay and lesbians and gay and lesbian couples, those who have been in long-term relationships, deserve to be treated respectfully, they deserve to have benefits.

For example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting the other when they're in the hospital, or, for example, if, heaven forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging the funeral.

I mean, those are not the kind of things that John Kerry and I believe in. I suspect the vice president himself does not believe in that.

But we don't -- we do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

And I want to go back, if I can, to the question you just asked, which is this constitutional amendment.

I want to make sure people understand that the president is proposing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage that is completely unnecessary.

Under the law of this country for the last 200 years, no state has been required to recognize another state's marriage.

Let me just be simple about this. My state of North Carolina would not be required to recognize a marriage from Massachusetts, which you just asked about.

There is absolutely no purpose in the law and in reality for this amendment. It's nothing but a political tool. And it's being used in an effort to divide this country on an issue that we should not be dividing America on.

We ought to be talking about issues like health care and jobs and what's happening in Iraq, not using an issue to divide this country in a way that's solely for political purposes. It's wrong.

IFILL: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds.

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, let me simply thank the senator for the kind words he said about my family and our daughter. I appreciate that very much.

IFILL: That's it?

CHENEY: That's it.

IFILL: OK, then we'll move on to the next question.

In the third presidential debate between Bush and Kerry, Kerry brought it up on his own.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

KERRY: We're all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

Factchecker's picture

So some freepers faked

So some freepers faked the images above.  Why?  What's wrong with being a lesbian anyway, Les?

P.S.  Now can you show us the faked image that says, "Kerry shows unfitness as President by getting Lambeau Field name wrong"?

Eleanor A's picture

You have got to be kidding me

We're still seriously debating this?

What a joke. I guess I'm going to have to bring back my tired Dixie cup vs. Atlantic Ocean comparison: they're not the same just because they both hold water.

Sure, the Clintons are no saints. But the Bush Administration has got graft and corruption down to such a fine art that another comparison I used to use often has gotten completely stale: Bush is such a criminal he makes Richard Nixon look like Abraham Lincoln.

I guess we're not supposed to notice the 1 billion dollars in taxpayer funds Halliburton and other contractors have lost in Iraq. (And I mean "lost," like you do your car keys, not the trillions officially being poured down the crapper over there.) Sure would like to have some of that back to, say, improve Tennessee schools so they're not the worst in the nation, or re-establish the bin Laden unit, or hey! Now we're really getting crazy: stop the budget cuts that went into place this year, removing aid from New York, Washington, and other terrorist targets. Not only is BushCo not doing squat out there, but he's removing the paltry dollars that had been allocated, because nobody in New York or Washington votes Republican. Maybe we've also found the reason why nobody will denounce Coulter's attacks on the Jersey widows.

Since Bub and Axel have already done the heavy lifting here, I see no need to reiterate. However, the fact that Nixon's management team is still in place and running the Defense Department and White House speaks for itself. Little wonder that Rove and company are doing everything they can to disembowel the standards set up limiting the power of the Executive Branch after Nixon used the Constitution as toilet paper.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter a bit who brought up Mary Cheney when. She was the Vice President of Coors for gay and lesbian outreach for years and years. What, people are supposed to not use Google? At least nobody called her a 'dog,' which is more courtesy than Rush Limbaugh extended to the Clintons' then 12-year-old daughter.

SayUncle's picture

Both parties try play on the

Both parties try to play on the fear of gay cooties. Quite sad, really.

---
SayUncle
Can't we all just get a long gun?

15:3:2's picture

Not as cut a dried

... as that intellectually pure position you hold on guns.

SayUncle's picture

Not as cut a dried... as

Not as cut a dried... as that intellectually pure position you hold on guns.

With that, I hereby induct you into the Non Sequitur Society, where “we may not make sense, but we do like pizza.”

---
SayUncle
Can't we all just get a long gun?

Andy Axel's picture

"Somewhat Jarringly"

The only thing jarring here, Les, is how you've excerpted to frame the context of the debate.

Edwards was responding to a question about gay marriage posed by the moderator, and Cheney was the first to respond:

IFILL: The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting: "Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.

Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional ban on same-sex unions?

CHENEY: Gwen, you're right, four years ago in this debate, the subject came up. And I said then and I believe today that freedom does mean freedom for everybody. People ought to be free to choose any arrangement they want. It's really no one else's business.

That's a separate question from the issue of whether or not government should sanction or approve or give some sort of authorization, if you will, to these relationships.

Traditionally, that's been an issue for the states. States have regulated marriage, if you will. That would be my preference.

In effect, what's happened is that in recent months, especially in Massachusetts, but also in California, but in Massachusetts we had the Massachusetts Supreme Court direct the state of -- the legislature of Massachusetts to modify their constitution to allow gay marriage.

And the fact is that the president felt that it was important to make it clear that that's the wrong way to go, as far as he's concerned.

Now, he sets the policy for this administration, and I support the president.

IFILL: Senator Edwards, 90 seconds.

So he's hiding behind his "boss" Bush's skirts to support the institutionalization of homophobia. Tres charmant.

And we see here that Gwen Ifill (bolded above) actually brought up the subject of comments Cheney had previously made about his own lesbian daughter. {G*dd*mned liberal media!!!}

____________________________

"The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco." -- G.K.

Les Jones's picture

And you used your family's

And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.

Cheney said something about gay marriage previous to the debate (not in the debate, as Bubba recalled), the moderator, above, mentioned it in the abstract during the debate, Cheney didn't mention his daughter, then when it was Edwards turn he kept it alive and expanded on it to make sure everyone knew "Hey, Cheney's kid's a lesbian." Then Kerry brought it up in the next presidential debate to make sure that everyone knew that "Hey, Cheney's daughter's a lesbian." If you don't think that was part of a deliberate Kerry-Edwards strategy to remind people of Cheney's gay cooties as Uncle called it, you're kidding yourself.


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

Andy Axel's picture

If you don't think that was

If you don't think that was part of a deliberate Kerry-Edwards strategy to remind people of Cheney's gay cooties as Uncle called it, you're kidding yourself.

I know you harbor this unflagging delusion that intellectual consistency is the hallmark of GOP politics, but in fact, this was a reminder of rank hypocrisy on the part of Dick Cheney, Les.

The fact that he excuses his support for the anti-gay marriage jihad by stating, "I support the president"? Vile.

____________________________

"The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco." -- G.K.

Eleanor A's picture

Yep

Which is more vile, even if we grant you your point: Kerry trying to smear Cheney with gay cooties (which is a joke, because Kerry didn't run on gay marriage as a wedge issue, Bush did), or Cheney gay-bashing his child? His own flesh and blood?

Geez, Les. I hope your ilk chooses not to breed. Wonder just which ethical lines you'd be willing to cross to exploit your own genetic legacy.

gttim's picture

Hmmm....

Geez, Les. I hope your ilk chooses not to breed.

Sadly, these are the folks who tend to breed a lot.

jgh59's picture

More Hmmm...

Geez, Les. I hope your ilk chooses not to breed.

Sadly, these are the folks who tend to breed a lot.

And then beat the snot out their kids on a regular basis so as not to "spoil the child".

Les Jones's picture

Andy Axel:"The fact that he

Andy Axel:

"The fact that he excuses his support for the anti-gay marriage jihad"

If Bush-Cheney were on an anti-gay marriage jihad, then so were Kerry-Edwards, since they supported the same policies. Kerry said so. Kerry-Edwards said repeatedly that marriage is between a man and a woman. From the Veep debate quoted above:

We both believe that -- and this goes onto the end of what I just talked about -- we both believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

But we also believe that gay and lesbians and gay and lesbian couples, those who have been in long-term relationships, deserve to be treated respectfully, they deserve to have benefits.

For example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting the other when they're in the hospital, or, for example, if, heaven forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging the funeral.

I mean, those are not the kind of things that John Kerry and I believe in. I suspect the vice president himself does not believe in that.

But we don't -- we do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Elanor A: 

"Cheney gay-bashing his child"

Like I said, you'll need to talk to Bubba. Everytime you make that statement  the software is stripping out the link (that I'm sure you're posting) that demonstrates just what the hell you're talking about.


Hey, Les, why don't we just call each other assholes and get it over with. - Somebody on the old Southknoxbubba.net (if that was you, claim your quote and win net.fame!)

Andy Axel's picture

Homophobic Demagogery

If Bush-Cheney were on an anti-gay marriage jihad, then so were Kerry-Edwards, since they supported the same policies. Kerry said so. Kerry-Edwards said repeatedly that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Would you please point to that place where I said I agreed with the official Democratic position taken by Kerry-Edwards on gay marriage?

Oh, gee, I guess Bubba's software must be stripping out that link, too.

So stop trying to pigeonhole me on this issue. I don't buy your "tu quoque" nonsense. Just because I condemn the Republicans on this issue doesn't (a) make it right that the Democrats are out bashing gays to score political points, and (b) it doesn't stop me from condemning Democrats for promoting institutionalized homophobia. Democrats are wrong on this issue a lot. I challenge you to show me where I said otherwise. Not John Kerry. Not Ted Kennedy. Not Jane Fonda, or whatever other poster-child strawman is the flavor of the week.

Feel free, also, to stop pretending that the GOP isn't out there actively demagoging on this issue -- such as spinning the common party line that the primary reason that they won in 2004 was because of the movement to ban gay marriage in x number of states.

____________________________

"The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco." -- G.K.

WhitesCreek's picture

Now people... Why do we

Now people...

 Why do we always try to throw facts at Les's classicly irrational arguments? The facts, as everyone can plainly see, have a strong Liberal bias!

Don't bite on this stuff. Instead, why not get Les to copy us the letter he wrote asking George Bush to pledge not to pardon any members of his own admnistration? Most of them are involved in at least one investigation involving war profiteering or treason, and the American people deserve retribution for high crimes and misdemeanors, right?

You have written that letter, Les?

Steve

Steve Plonk's picture

Les

Les appears to have gotten himself in with a pickle. The facts are distorted on both sides. Business is going on as usual. Why should any of the kind folks and gentle people who blog this site be suprised? "Politiking" is full of strange bedfellows and backscratching and this is standard operating procedure. However, when folks, allegedly, like Tom Delay, get out of line, there is a
impeachment proceeding which kicks in. Unless, of course, like Tom Delay, they resign and run for offic again! The mendacity of "the pardoning" is known on both sides of the aisle. Let's not beat a "dead horse" to death, as the saying goes. Dubya also pardoned folks while he has been in office. Everyone does...There are always a few ringers in the bunch of apples...if you get my drift. Pardoning serves a noble purpose and is a time-worn procedure worthy of respect in all circles. I am glad pardoning still is in practice.

Eleanor A's picture

Yeah, I know

I just get tired of reading the same old bullshit about how Democrats are weak-kneed and soft on terrorism, as the Republicans actively run this country into the ground. Furthermore, I think it's a matter of principle not to let trollish right wingers dominate debate on lefty message boards through letting their absurd claims go unchallenged.

I don't really need to post a link on Cheney and the lesbianism thing, Les. Unless you want me to start linking about how the sky is blue and gas is 2.89 a gallon. Some stuff is just pretty obvious, and Cheney's incestuously close association with folks who've turned gay-bashing into a fine art form is proof enough.

Factchecker's picture

Same here

I just get tired of reading the same old bullshit about how Democrats are weak-kneed and soft on terrorism, as the Republicans actively run this country into the ground. Furthermore, I think it's a matter of principle not to let trollish right wingers dominate debate on lefty message boards through letting their absurd claims go unchallenged.

Same reason I reply to these posts.  Stop 'em in their tracks now and let 'em see how a fight feels like, for a change.  They can't win when they're objectively wrong.  And you're right that you have to draw the line when they try to distract and tie you up with constant goofball arguments.  They can't otherwise win a logical debate. 

_________________________________

Never has the left been so right.

Eleanor A's picture

For the record

I think it's a moral imperative to post exactly these things on message boards, for the plain 'n simple fact that I really believe we're right, and that they're wrong. Which is why it's so frustrating to sit back and watch Democratic candidates lose election after election by running so far to the right.

Folks get so focused on the salesmanship that they overlook the product. Of course nobody's going to vote Democratic if we can't convince them the party actually is selling something they'd want to buy. I sure can understand folks criticizing the way the '04 campaign was run, and the '00 for that matter. I'm hard-pressed to think how we'll crawl out of this hole until we quit listening to Beltway insiders and corporate lobbyists. Because there's plenty of life left in the old body yet if we'd go back to issues like living wage, job growth, education and whatnot, and quit letting Republicans distract us with wedge issues like gay marriage.

I think Dean's onto something with this authoritarianism concept he's trying to explain, though. I said something similar on another weblog lately: the national Democratic Party doesn't understand how many rural people are used to taking things on faith because their pastor said so. Many others will fall in line behind leaders, elected or otherwise, because those folks are assumed to be speaking with the voice of authority. It's solely an emotional thing, and you can't get through to these people using logic. I firmly believe the *only* thing that will do it - short of the implosion of the national Republican ideology that may already be happening - is appealing to people through issues that affect them personally, like tying fat-cat corporate Republicans to the net loss of jobs fleeing the U.S.

Only thing is, the GOP isn't above using tactics like race-baiting and gay-bashing when it serves their purposes, and I just don't know how you counter that without getting down into the gutter alongside these people. The only solution might be what's happening now: letting people see what happens when you go along with those kinds of things, and how it's just not true that they'll lead to more jobs, or a safer America, or even the satiation of what seems to be the radical right's thirst for ever-more-draconian social regulations. It's like...it's like it didn't ever occur to a lot of rank and file Republicans that bank record invasions and phone call recordings could happen to them. It was always the other: Jews, blacks, and now Mexicans, who should be subject to such things.

Problem is, with great power comes great responsibility, as someone smarter than I am once said. The GOP just doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to taking responsibility for the legitimate extensions of their campaign promises.

Factchecker's picture

Dean's piece

I thought it would take forever to get through John Dean's piece, but it was well worth it.  It made me feel so much better, I think because it put the whole modern "conservative" movement in perspective from one of the most, well, authoritative and real conservatives left in the world.  I feel, at least temporarily, like a huge burden has been lifted.  We've been exonerated by someone whose credentials and message cannot be swiftboated, as that asshole G. Gordon Liddy found out.

It's now a little easier, at least for today, to laugh at these bozos, like The Small-Minded Bully's bragging today about the deficit being ONLY $293 billion, instead of $325b.  A whopping 9% under their estimate from this bunch of incompetents!  Of course this doesn't, as I understand it, include the $200 million per day we're spending in Iraq, and ignores that pReznint Doofus inherited a surplus.  And this is the best economic performance that they can hope for; by W's own words, the economy is humming along great!  So this deficit is as good as they can do.  Inflation is slowing things down and the boomers are already starting to retire, so I hope they enjoy this stunning achievement (ha, ha) for the moment.  Moments are fleeting.  Idiots and "morans" ;>) hang around a little longer.

Anyway, if there ever was anything that I'd want all my slack-jawed GOP relatives (and friends) to read, it is Dean's piece.  Hell, I might have to buy a box of his books for Christmas presents. 

"Mega-dittos" to Dean!!!!!!!!!! 

_________________________________

Never has the left been so right.

bizgrrl's picture

Getting desperate again.

Getting desperate again.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

style="display:block"
data-ad-format="autorelaxed"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3296520478850753"
data-ad-slot="5999968558">

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

Wire Reports

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Search and Archives