HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » FACT CHECK: The Stretched...

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 07:27 PM

FACT CHECK: The Stretched Case Against Chuck Hagel

WASHINGTON Republican-leaning groups opposing President Barack Obama's choice of Chuck Hagel to head the Defense Department have let loose a barrage of claims about the former GOP senator.

They say he endorses automatic cuts to the defense budget, that he wants to decimate the nation's nuclear arsenal, that his membership on the board of a major company that had a Pentagon contract is a conflict of interest that he's ignoring.

A look at Hagel's record suggests many of the contentions are overblown.

In statements and attack ads, the groups have sought to undermine Hagel's nomination in the weeks leading up to his confirmation hearing on Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. His opponents face a tough challenge as Democrats have begun to rally around the president's choice, and the party has the majority votes to confirm the former two-term Nebraska senator, barring surprises.



3 replies, 1005 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply FACT CHECK: The Stretched Case Against Chuck Hagel (Original post)
Purveyor Jan 2013 OP
okaawhatever Jan 2013 #1
mojowork_n Jan 2013 #2
okaawhatever Jan 2013 #3

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:27 AM

1. I'm so tired of the pro-war mic trying to derail this confirmation. If the past 4 or 5 ambassadors

to Israel support him isn't that good enough? If a Jewish Rabbi in Nebraska who knows him very well trusts him, why don't we? I'm sick of money influencing opinion for the detriment of this country. I hope whoever has paid for the attack ads and other negative press will be revealed. Then we can vote against every candidate they support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to okaawhatever (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:32 AM

2. Rachel Maddow made some announcements about "use your mandate" tonight.

From her blog:


it's hard to know for sure who, exactly, is behind the ads. Sure, the folks behind the Use Your Mandate campaign claim to be lefty allies of President Obama, but they refuse to identify themselves. And under current campaign-finance law, there's nothing stopping anonymous donors from investing millions in a secretive smear campaign, making claims about their ideology that are nearly impossible to substantiate.

In this case, Rachel isn't buying Use Your Mandate's claims, and Jim Rutenberg, to his credit, uncovered some details that bolster Rachel's suspicions.

[F]ederal records show that Use Your Mandate uses Del Cielo Media, an arm of one of the most prominent Republican ad-buying firms in the country, Smart Media, with clients that have included the presidential campaigns of former Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. of Utah and Senator John McCain of Arizona; the 2010 Senate campaign of Christine O'Donnell, who was known for positions against homosexuality, in Delaware; and, as it happens, the Emergency Committee for Israel.

Andrew Kaczynski added that Use Your Mandate has "close ties to the Republican Party." Kaczynski's report also noted, "FCC paperwork lists the president of Use Your Mandate as a woman named 'Virginie Stujenske.' On other forms she is listed as the group's treasurer. Stujenske is an employee for Tusk Strategies where her name is listed as Virginie Raphael.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to mojowork_n (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:59 AM

3. thanks for the info. If Virginie used a different name on the corporate filing I hope there's a law

against it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread