This is long....
does taking hunting classes stop the other hundreds to thousands of hunting accidents each year or does this only relate to Chenny?
true there was no BAC on either of them. Which can lead one to believe they were drunk. They did say they had wine with lunch 3 hours prior. they said one glass I believe, whether thats true or not no one knows.
is Chenny ultimately responsible, yes and he said so. Could harry whitingdon have been away from the party and walked into a gun shot, sure. many speculative things go through my mind here some involving being drunk and others just neglect from one or the other. So whos really at fault Chenny, Whitingdon, or both we will probably never know.
I liked your theory of fucking the amabssador but I dont think Chenny has that much pull....
There was probably no one at the scene. Chenny had his medical staff with him, they responded within a few minutes of it happening and probably rushed him straight to the hospital. Should Chenny hav eleft the scene before the police arrived, probalby not, but he could have been concerned aobut his friend or yes he could have been concerned about himself or both.
Be honest here. whether you had pull or not even more so if you had pull and you were in a situation like this or any fucked up situation wouldnt you try to cover your ass as best as possible??? I know I would. I would try to stay within the confines of the law here but in my book Im numero uno and everything else comes second. Yes Chenny has moral and public responsibilites to be ethical etc, but he might have been scared shitless or even been advised by people with him to follow those courses of action. (again we will probably never know). And Chenny probably did try covering his ass if indeed he thought he needed to. I would think alcohol would be the main reason here. ( no facts just speculation).
interview yes he picked that reporter because he felt comfortable being interviewed by him from past experiences etc. Could that have been a mistake maybe. But then again he did the interview with a reporter that is affiliated with a Repulican media source. So Who does he want to apeal to more repulicans or democrats? My guess is Republicans since Democrats will and did use this to their advantage. So I think he did this to put a more personal spin on it that showed his side of it in a more positive light while apealing to the people that matter most to him and his party. Is this right? If the above were the case probably not, but again its his decision to choose whoever he wants to do the interview, if he wanted to do one in the first place. Yes it could of been and probably was reheared and the whole thing written by someone else who was given facts by chenny and then decied along with other what should be included and what not to be included. Again His goal here might have been to apeal to Republicans so in that sence he probably chose the right action even though it could border on unethical behavior.
the bottom line is you dont know and I dont know what really happened. All we have are minimal facts which lead us to speculate that certain events may have occured. Like I said before for all we know harry whitingdon is the dumbass that walked through some trees looking like a deer and got his face blasted off.
So given the premise that no one has any complete or conclusive facts I think its safe to say that any opinion could be right and that no opinion is in fact correct until further evidence is gathered. Which might never happen given his political power i.e. connections which helps him alot if indeed he fucked up, but would be morally wrong and possibly criminally wrong depending on what events actually occured. But again we dont know.
The whole reason I got irritated about this is because you stated your opinions and thats what they are "OPINIONS" as if they are fact. I personally hate being accused of things that I didnt do (not saying thats the case here but given the lack of evidence it could be an atempt by the democrats to gain some points and probably not without some merit thats what the parties are there for to keep eachother in check) Maybe thats why I am so defensive in this. I hate 3 things most in life: liers, thieves, and being falsy accused. Just ask Deathgrip about the guy that almost shit his pants on the ship for #1 lying and #2 saying I didnt do something when I did. It took 5 people to keep me from murdering that fuck. That shit still pisses me off to this day and it happened over 3 years ago. So being involved in many a situations like that you learn to view things fairly objectively before forming a conclusive opinion. And I think I held true to that here. I tried to think of all possible scenarios and you thought of a few that I didnt, but I kept an open mind to the possibility that he MAY not have done anything wrong where you have not. and I think that is short sited of you and others given that there is no conclusive evidence to suggest otherwise. Yes you are free to give you opion but that doesnt make it right ethically or otherwise.
summary: Yes I personnaly think its very likely they covered up drinking to a degree, (but again theres no proof except what they said). If so, That being the main reason for the media delay and police report etc. other than that no one knows. Or it could be because of the multitude of other theories listed all throughout this thread.
Have a happy day,
-DC
