independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 17th Nov 2019 9:02am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Hillary Clinton: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 10/20/19 11:31am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Hillary Clinton: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset?

Fucking unhinged. Hillary the loser Red Baits Tulsi Gabbard, a Vet and Congressperson--a woman, who is running for President. Hillary said she and Jill Stein are being groomed by Russia?? This is some unAmerican shit here. Hillary needs to go away or Trump wins again.

Stand with Tulsi. Sick twisted nuttery,

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 10/20/19 1:00pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

wow you got supper triggered! haha all about love? Not!

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 10/25/19 6:53am

RodeoSchro

avatar

Well, it's going to be harder for Gabbard to be a Russian asset now that she's announced she's not running for Congress in 2020. So it's either President Gabbard or
ничего, so to speak.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 10/25/19 8:26am

13cjk13

On Tuesday, The New York Times changed its reporting to reflect the fact that Hillary Clinton never suggested Tulsi Gabbard is being groomed to be a Russian agent. Rather, in an interview with former Barack Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, Clinton said Gabbard is being groomed by Republicans as a third-party candidate and used by the Russians as an asset.

"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 10/25/19 8:42am

poppys

[Edited 10/25/19 16:45pm]

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 10/25/19 1:40pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

She should shoot herself and do us, and the US political system, a favor. lol

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 10/25/19 2:17pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

She should shoot herself and do us, and the US political system, a favor. lol



Why do you dislike her so?
Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 10/25/19 3:03pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:

She should shoot herself and do us, and the US political system, a favor. lol

Why do you dislike her so?


I guess the question is, why DON'T you? Especially since she's pretty much a female version of Trump without the penchant for excess he has.

She's amoral, has no real code of beliefs beyond what will get her elected, and has shown she doesn't care about anything that doesn't benefit her. She has a history of being willing to say and do any terrible thing that will get her where she wants to be. Remember that the whole birther thing that Trump is known for perpetuating was given a lot of the steam that took it mainstream by Hillary and her supporters as the primary was slipping away from her.

She was also basically against gay marriage equality until about 2013 when polls showed a majority of Americans supported it, so she changed her public stance on it (
https://www.politifact.co...-marriage/ ) Remember too that Bill Clinton signed into law the Defense Of Marriage Act.

She's an awful human being. To say I hate her would be going too far, but I dislike her and what she's about, and this scenario with Tulsi Gabbard here is just another example of Hillary being the piece of shit she's always been.

[Edited 10/25/19 15:13pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 10/25/19 3:32pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:

She should shoot herself and do us, and the US political system, a favor. lol

Why do you dislike her so?

why do you deafened her? her disgusting behavior of attacking sexual assault victims and her laughter when talking about a child rapist? He likely tampering with and likely destruction of evidence in that and other cases.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 10/25/19 4:52pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

13cjk13 said:

On Tuesday, The New York Times changed its reporting to reflect the fact that Hillary Clinton never suggested Tulsi Gabbard is being groomed to be a Russian agent. Rather, in an interview with former Barack Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, Clinton said Gabbard is being groomed by Republicans as a third-party candidate and used by the Russians as an asset.


That's just the NYT running damage control for Clinton's monumentally stupid gaffe. It'll work on people that only get their news in snippets from their own social media bubble, but people who actually listen to what Hillary said themselves know she said what was originally reported... everywhere. When even Van Jones is on CNN calling out her BS and straight up shaming her, you gotta expect some backpeddling from Clinton, but the NYT is blatantly being deceptive on her behalf.




[Edited 10/25/19 16:52pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 10/26/19 12:42pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said: Why do you dislike her so?


I guess the question is, why DON'T you? Especially since she's pretty much a female version of Trump without the penchant for excess he has.

She's amoral, has no real code of beliefs beyond what will get her elected, and has shown she doesn't care about anything that doesn't benefit her. She has a history of being willing to say and do any terrible thing that will get her where she wants to be. Remember that the whole birther thing that Trump is known for perpetuating was given a lot of the steam that took it mainstream by Hillary and her supporters as the primary was slipping away from her.

She was also basically against gay marriage equality until about 2013 when polls showed a majority of Americans supported it, so she changed her public stance on it (
https://www.politifact.co...-marriage/ ) Remember too that Bill Clinton signed into law the Defense Of Marriage Act.

She's an awful human being. To say I hate her would be going too far, but I dislike her and what she's about, and this scenario with Tulsi Gabbard here is just another example of Hillary being the piece of shit she's always been.

[Edited 10/25/19 15:13pm]


I can respect if you dislike her because of policies but why would you dislike her for things like the birther deal? You said stuff like that was "just business" when we were talking about unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. I think you also said "everyone does it", so you didn't get worked up by that kind of stuff. It seems hypocritical that you'd hold Hillary Clinton to a different standard that you apparently hold other politicians to.

You disagreed with her stance on gay marriage equality but now she has a stance you agree with - and you still hold the old view against her? That doesn't make sense. If you're willing to hold old views against her, then the truth is that you hate her/dislike her/whatever you want to call it, and there isn't anything she could do to change your view of her. And yet...I still haven't seen you list any logical reason for this strong feeling you have.

Whatever her husband did is irrelevant.

So you now say you dislike what she's about but you didn't list anything that she's "about" that you disagreed with now. The stuff you listed sound like radical right-wing Republican talking points. At least you didn't mention Vince Foster, LOL.

I'll take this opportunity to address the trolling done by OnlyNDaUsa in the reply right after yours. It's weak-sauce trolling featuring weak-sauce spelling, done by a weak-sauce troll, and it's stuff that has been completely and totally debunked multiple times. But even that weak-sauce troll cannot list a single actual thing about Hillary Clinton that he disagrees with.

Now, you ask - why don't I dislike her? I guess because she hasn't done anything worth disliking her over.

Look - the radical right-wing Republicans have been after Hillary for decades. They have thrown everything in the WORLD at her, and none of it has ever stuck. Take Vince Foster's suicide - it was investigated six or seven times, including by Kenneth Starr, and every single investigation ruled it a suicide. No investigation ever produced a single shred of evidence that Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Foster's death, much less that she had an affair with him. Does that stop the radical right-wing Republicans from bringing Vince Foster up even today?

Of course not.

Take Benghazi. It too was investigated more than a half-dozen times. The last investigation was done by radical right-wing Republicans for the admitted reason that they wanted to smear her during the 2016 election cycle. The radical right-wing Republicans trotted out that peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy and gave him explicit instructions to "get her".

He tried.

He couldn't.

That peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy ranted, raved, yelled, screamed and probably shit his pants during his summation press conference but at the very end he said, "Oh yeah - as bad a person as I just spit all over myself telling you she is, it turns out Hillary Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in the Benghazi situation".

The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is the most investigated woman in the world, and probably in all of history.

Every single investigation has cleared her - including the ones done by the opposition for the express purpose of getting her. Every. single. one. has cleared her.

So one of two things must be true:

1. The radical right-wing Republicans are, and have been for more than 25 years, the absolute worst, most stupid investigators in the history of investigating; or

2. Hillary Clinton is not dishonest.

Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them. But simply regurgitating Fox News talking points is a woefully inadequated debating technique that is sure to fail miserably.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 10/28/19 5:40pm

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:


I guess the question is, why DON'T you? Especially since she's pretty much a female version of Trump without the penchant for excess he has.

She's amoral, has no real code of beliefs beyond what will get her elected, and has shown she doesn't care about anything that doesn't benefit her. She has a history of being willing to say and do any terrible thing that will get her where she wants to be. Remember that the whole birther thing that Trump is known for perpetuating was given a lot of the steam that took it mainstream by Hillary and her supporters as the primary was slipping away from her.

She was also basically against gay marriage equality until about 2013 when polls showed a majority of Americans supported it, so she changed her public stance on it (
https://www.politifact.co...-marriage/ ) Remember too that Bill Clinton signed into law the Defense Of Marriage Act.

She's an awful human being. To say I hate her would be going too far, but I dislike her and what she's about, and this scenario with Tulsi Gabbard here is just another example of Hillary being the piece of shit she's always been.

[Edited 10/25/19 15:13pm]


I can respect if you dislike her because of policies but why would you dislike her for things like the birther deal? You said stuff like that was "just business" when we were talking about unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. I think you also said "everyone does it", so you didn't get worked up by that kind of stuff. It seems hypocritical that you'd hold Hillary Clinton to a different standard that you apparently hold other politicians to.

You disagreed with her stance on gay marriage equality but now she has a stance you agree with - and you still hold the old view against her? That doesn't make sense. If you're willing to hold old views against her, then the truth is that you hate her/dislike her/whatever you want to call it, and there isn't anything she could do to change your view of her. And yet...I still haven't seen you list any logical reason for this strong feeling you have.

Whatever her husband did is irrelevant.

So you now say you dislike what she's about but you didn't list anything that she's "about" that you disagreed with now. The stuff you listed sound like radical right-wing Republican talking points. At least you didn't mention Vince Foster, LOL.

I'll take this opportunity to address the trolling done by OnlyNDaUsa in the reply right after yours. It's weak-sauce trolling featuring weak-sauce spelling, done by a weak-sauce troll, and it's stuff that has been completely and totally debunked multiple times. But even that weak-sauce troll cannot list a single actual thing about Hillary Clinton that he disagrees with.

Now, you ask - why don't I dislike her? I guess because she hasn't done anything worth disliking her over.

Look - the radical right-wing Republicans have been after Hillary for decades. They have thrown everything in the WORLD at her, and none of it has ever stuck. Take Vince Foster's suicide - it was investigated six or seven times, including by Kenneth Starr, and every single investigation ruled it a suicide. No investigation ever produced a single shred of evidence that Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Foster's death, much less that she had an affair with him. Does that stop the radical right-wing Republicans from bringing Vince Foster up even today?

Of course not.

Take Benghazi. It too was investigated more than a half-dozen times. The last investigation was done by radical right-wing Republicans for the admitted reason that they wanted to smear her during the 2016 election cycle. The radical right-wing Republicans trotted out that peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy and gave him explicit instructions to "get her".

He tried.

He couldn't.

That peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy ranted, raved, yelled, screamed and probably shit his pants during his summation press conference but at the very end he said, "Oh yeah - as bad a person as I just spit all over myself telling you she is, it turns out Hillary Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in the Benghazi situation".

The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is the most investigated woman in the world, and probably in all of history.

Every single investigation has cleared her - including the ones done by the opposition for the express purpose of getting her. Every. single. one. has cleared her.

So one of two things must be true:

1. The radical right-wing Republicans are, and have been for more than 25 years, the absolute worst, most stupid investigators in the history of investigating; or

2. Hillary Clinton is not dishonest.

Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them. But simply regurgitating Fox News talking points is a woefully inadequated debating technique that is sure to fail miserably.


nod

"Families are torn apart, men women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find their parents have gone missing." - Anne Frank
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 10/28/19 6:30pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

When you do not like someone's opnion so you mock it for being from a news source you do not like... you really should never ask for a link...

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 10/28/19 6:32pm

poppys

DiminutiveRocker said:

RodeoSchro said:


I can respect if you dislike her because of policies but why would you dislike her for things like the birther deal? You said stuff like that was "just business" when we were talking about unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. I think you also said "everyone does it", so you didn't get worked up by that kind of stuff. It seems hypocritical that you'd hold Hillary Clinton to a different standard that you apparently hold other politicians to.

You disagreed with her stance on gay marriage equality but now she has a stance you agree with - and you still hold the old view against her? That doesn't make sense. If you're willing to hold old views against her, then the truth is that you hate her/dislike her/whatever you want to call it, and there isn't anything she could do to change your view of her. And yet...I still haven't seen you list any logical reason for this strong feeling you have.

Whatever her husband did is irrelevant.

So you now say you dislike what she's about but you didn't list anything that she's "about" that you disagreed with now. The stuff you listed sound like radical right-wing Republican talking points. At least you didn't mention Vince Foster, LOL.

I'll take this opportunity to address the trolling done by OnlyNDaUsa in the reply right after yours. It's weak-sauce trolling featuring weak-sauce spelling, done by a weak-sauce troll, and it's stuff that has been completely and totally debunked multiple times. But even that weak-sauce troll cannot list a single actual thing about Hillary Clinton that he disagrees with.

Now, you ask - why don't I dislike her? I guess because she hasn't done anything worth disliking her over.

Look - the radical right-wing Republicans have been after Hillary for decades. They have thrown everything in the WORLD at her, and none of it has ever stuck. Take Vince Foster's suicide - it was investigated six or seven times, including by Kenneth Starr, and every single investigation ruled it a suicide. No investigation ever produced a single shred of evidence that Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Foster's death, much less that she had an affair with him. Does that stop the radical right-wing Republicans from bringing Vince Foster up even today?

Of course not.

Take Benghazi. It too was investigated more than a half-dozen times. The last investigation was done by radical right-wing Republicans for the admitted reason that they wanted to smear her during the 2016 election cycle. The radical right-wing Republicans trotted out that peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy and gave him explicit instructions to "get her".

He tried.

He couldn't.

That peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy ranted, raved, yelled, screamed and probably shit his pants during his summation press conference but at the very end he said, "Oh yeah - as bad a person as I just spit all over myself telling you she is, it turns out Hillary Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in the Benghazi situation".

The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is the most investigated woman in the world, and probably in all of history.

Every single investigation has cleared her - including the ones done by the opposition for the express purpose of getting her. Every. single. one. has cleared her.

So one of two things must be true:

1. The radical right-wing Republicans are, and have been for more than 25 years, the absolute worst, most stupid investigators in the history of investigating; or

2. Hillary Clinton is not dishonest.

Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them. But simply regurgitating Fox News talking points is a woefully inadequated debating technique that is sure to fail miserably.


nod


Preach!

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 10/29/19 8:18am

RodeoSchro

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

When you do not like someone's opnion so you mock it for being from a news source you do not like... you really should never ask for a link...



If you ever provided links yourself, maybe your posts would have some gravity. But like the story I saw on TV today about Balloon Boy, your unsubstantiated opinions just float away into nothingness.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 10/29/19 1:31pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:


I guess the question is, why DON'T you? Especially since she's pretty much a female version of Trump without the penchant for excess he has.

She's amoral, has no real code of beliefs beyond what will get her elected, and has shown she doesn't care about anything that doesn't benefit her. She has a history of being willing to say and do any terrible thing that will get her where she wants to be. Remember that the whole birther thing that Trump is known for perpetuating was given a lot of the steam that took it mainstream by Hillary and her supporters as the primary was slipping away from her.

She was also basically against gay marriage equality until about 2013 when polls showed a majority of Americans supported it, so she changed her public stance on it (
https://www.politifact.co...-marriage/ ) Remember too that Bill Clinton signed into law the Defense Of Marriage Act.

She's an awful human being. To say I hate her would be going too far, but I dislike her and what she's about, and this scenario with Tulsi Gabbard here is just another example of Hillary being the piece of shit she's always been.

[Edited 10/25/19 15:13pm]


I can respect if you dislike her because of policies but why would you dislike her for things like the birther deal? You said stuff like that was "just business" when we were talking about unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. I think you also said "everyone does it", so you didn't get worked up by that kind of stuff. It seems hypocritical that you'd hold Hillary Clinton to a different standard that you apparently hold other politicians to.

You disagreed with her stance on gay marriage equality but now she has a stance you agree with - and you still hold the old view against her? That doesn't make sense. If you're willing to hold old views against her, then the truth is that you hate her/dislike her/whatever you want to call it, and there isn't anything she could do to change your view of her. And yet...I still haven't seen you list any logical reason for this strong feeling you have.

Whatever her husband did is irrelevant.

So you now say you dislike what she's about but you didn't list anything that she's "about" that you disagreed with now. The stuff you listed sound like radical right-wing Republican talking points. At least you didn't mention Vince Foster, LOL.

I'll take this opportunity to address the trolling done by OnlyNDaUsa in the reply right after yours. It's weak-sauce trolling featuring weak-sauce spelling, done by a weak-sauce troll, and it's stuff that has been completely and totally debunked multiple times. But even that weak-sauce troll cannot list a single actual thing about Hillary Clinton that he disagrees with.

Now, you ask - why don't I dislike her? I guess because she hasn't done anything worth disliking her over.

Look - the radical right-wing Republicans have been after Hillary for decades. They have thrown everything in the WORLD at her, and none of it has ever stuck. Take Vince Foster's suicide - it was investigated six or seven times, including by Kenneth Starr, and every single investigation ruled it a suicide. No investigation ever produced a single shred of evidence that Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Foster's death, much less that she had an affair with him. Does that stop the radical right-wing Republicans from bringing Vince Foster up even today?

Of course not.

Take Benghazi. It too was investigated more than a half-dozen times. The last investigation was done by radical right-wing Republicans for the admitted reason that they wanted to smear her during the 2016 election cycle. The radical right-wing Republicans trotted out that peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy and gave him explicit instructions to "get her".

He tried.

He couldn't.

That peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy ranted, raved, yelled, screamed and probably shit his pants during his summation press conference but at the very end he said, "Oh yeah - as bad a person as I just spit all over myself telling you she is, it turns out Hillary Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in the Benghazi situation".

The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is the most investigated woman in the world, and probably in all of history.

Every single investigation has cleared her - including the ones done by the opposition for the express purpose of getting her. Every. single. one. has cleared her.

So one of two things must be true:

1. The radical right-wing Republicans are, and have been for more than 25 years, the absolute worst, most stupid investigators in the history of investigating; or

2. Hillary Clinton is not dishonest.

Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them. But simply regurgitating Fox News talking points is a woefully inadequated debating technique that is sure to fail miserably.


You asked me why I dislike her and I gave you some reasons, but you can fuck right off simply dismissing them as "Fox news talking points." More and more, I find talking to you to be a waste of time because you don't even address what I said, you just dismiss it without really responding to any of it.

I didn't even bring up Benghazi, republicans, or all the stupid ass conspiracy theory shit, YOU DID, and it's telling that you did because instead of addressing the fact that she's a terrible person, and terrible people don't make good leaders and never have, you just defend some of the worst the Democratic party has had to offer since Dixie Democrats. Your inability to stay on topic says a lot about your willingness to go to any length to defend a really terrible person.

I used birtherism to illutrate what kind of a person she is, and it's hilariously ironic that both she, and Trump, who you never miss an opportunity to talk shit about, are two of the most well known names associated with this "movement." Sure, it is just business, but it illustrates the kind of person who would resort to such business.



Why don't you explain why it's bad that Trump is a birther, but it's ok for Hillary to be?


And for that matter why don't you defend the fact that she only defended gay marriage when it was politically expedient to do so, especialy after she publicly opposed it during the 2008 primaries?



I could go on and on giving examples of how much like Trump she actually is, but it wouldn't matter because you're the worst kind of hypocrite Rodeo, someone who's presumably smart enough to see the inconsistencies, but chooses not to. You don't care about anything bad that happens, as long as it's someone on "your team" that does it, you'll find some sort of mental jiu jitsu to explain it away and act like it's somehow different than someone on the opposite team doing the exact same shit.

Fuck off.

[Edited 10/29/19 13:31pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 10/29/19 3:03pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

RodeoSchro said:


I can respect if you dislike her because of policies but why would you dislike her for things like the birther deal? You said stuff like that was "just business" when we were talking about unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. I think you also said "everyone does it", so you didn't get worked up by that kind of stuff. It seems hypocritical that you'd hold Hillary Clinton to a different standard that you apparently hold other politicians to.

You disagreed with her stance on gay marriage equality but now she has a stance you agree with - and you still hold the old view against her? That doesn't make sense. If you're willing to hold old views against her, then the truth is that you hate her/dislike her/whatever you want to call it, and there isn't anything she could do to change your view of her. And yet...I still haven't seen you list any logical reason for this strong feeling you have.

Whatever her husband did is irrelevant.

So you now say you dislike what she's about but you didn't list anything that she's "about" that you disagreed with now. The stuff you listed sound like radical right-wing Republican talking points. At least you didn't mention Vince Foster, LOL.

I'll take this opportunity to address the trolling done by OnlyNDaUsa in the reply right after yours. It's weak-sauce trolling featuring weak-sauce spelling, done by a weak-sauce troll, and it's stuff that has been completely and totally debunked multiple times. But even that weak-sauce troll cannot list a single actual thing about Hillary Clinton that he disagrees with.

Now, you ask - why don't I dislike her? I guess because she hasn't done anything worth disliking her over.

Look - the radical right-wing Republicans have been after Hillary for decades. They have thrown everything in the WORLD at her, and none of it has ever stuck. Take Vince Foster's suicide - it was investigated six or seven times, including by Kenneth Starr, and every single investigation ruled it a suicide. No investigation ever produced a single shred of evidence that Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Foster's death, much less that she had an affair with him. Does that stop the radical right-wing Republicans from bringing Vince Foster up even today?

Of course not.

Take Benghazi. It too was investigated more than a half-dozen times. The last investigation was done by radical right-wing Republicans for the admitted reason that they wanted to smear her during the 2016 election cycle. The radical right-wing Republicans trotted out that peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy and gave him explicit instructions to "get her".

He tried.

He couldn't.

That peacock MF'er Trey Gowdy ranted, raved, yelled, screamed and probably shit his pants during his summation press conference but at the very end he said, "Oh yeah - as bad a person as I just spit all over myself telling you she is, it turns out Hillary Clinton did absolutely nothing wrong in the Benghazi situation".

The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is the most investigated woman in the world, and probably in all of history.

Every single investigation has cleared her - including the ones done by the opposition for the express purpose of getting her. Every. single. one. has cleared her.

So one of two things must be true:

1. The radical right-wing Republicans are, and have been for more than 25 years, the absolute worst, most stupid investigators in the history of investigating; or

2. Hillary Clinton is not dishonest.

Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them. But simply regurgitating Fox News talking points is a woefully inadequated debating technique that is sure to fail miserably.


You asked me why I dislike her and I gave you some reasons, but you can fuck right off simply dismissing them as "Fox news talking points." More and more, I find talking to you to be a waste of time because you don't even address what I said, you just dismiss it without really responding to any of it.

I didn't even bring up Benghazi, republicans, or all the stupid ass conspiracy theory shit, YOU DID, and it's telling that you did because instead of addressing the fact that she's a terrible person, and terrible people don't make good leaders and never have, you just defend some of the worst the Democratic party has had to offer since Dixie Democrats. Your inability to stay on topic says a lot about your willingness to go to any length to defend a really terrible person.

I used birtherism to illutrate what kind of a person she is, and it's hilariously ironic that both she, and Trump, who you never miss an opportunity to talk shit about, are two of the most well known names associated with this "movement." Sure, it is just business, but it illustrates the kind of person who would resort to such business.



Why don't you explain why it's bad that Trump is a birther, but it's ok for Hillary to be?


And for that matter why don't you defend the fact that she only defended gay marriage when it was politically expedient to do so, especialy after she publicly opposed it during the 2008 primaries?



I could go on and on giving examples of how much like Trump she actually is, but it wouldn't matter because you're the worst kind of hypocrite Rodeo, someone who's presumably smart enough to see the inconsistencies, but chooses not to. You don't care about anything bad that happens, as long as it's someone on "your team" that does it, you'll find some sort of mental jiu jitsu to explain it away and act like it's somehow different than someone on the opposite team doing the exact same shit.

Fuck off.

[Edited 10/29/19 13:31pm]



I love you too! hug

The fact is that I addressed two of your specifically-stated reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton: (1) gay marriage equality; and (2) what her husband did. I guess I didn't specifically address your displeasure with what Hillary said about Tulsi Gabbard in my response, so here you go - I agree with Hillary on that; at least, all outward appearances seem to back up Hillary's statements. Time will tell who is right, which makes this a pending issue.

I didn't address the birther issue because I guess I just didn't want to embarrass you. But since you asked for it, I underlined some of your comments above in red, and...well - here you go:

You are completely wrong about Hillary Clinton and the birther issue. Neither she NOR her campaign EVER circulated any rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. Rather than waste the bandwidth re-creating all the de-bunking of this Fox News talking point, I suggest you take three minutes and read this story from Politico:

https://www.politico.com/...ton-228304

If, after reading the facts contained in that article you still think Hillary Clinton ever had anything to do with the spread of the birtherism BS - much less ever actually saying it - then that will tell me all I ever need to know about where you get your information.

Because there is one and only one side that has EVER spread the birther nonsense, and it rhymes with "Sabbatical night-ding unhusbandman".

Then you asked me why I didn't dislike Hillary Clinton and I spent 11 paragraphs addressing your question, using specifics like Vince Foster and Benghazi to illustrate and explain my reasoning. I am very sorry that all went over your head.

Again - I love you, too! hug

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 10/29/19 3:10pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

Here is a Politifact listing of most (all?) the claims by unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump's statements about Hillary Clinton/birtherism. You get three guesses as to what Politifact rates them.

The first two guesses don't count.

https://www.politifact.co...tatements/


Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 10/29/19 4:22pm

DiminutiveRock
er

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:


You asked me why I dislike her and I gave you some reasons, but you can fuck right off simply dismissing them as "Fox news talking points." More and more, I find talking to you to be a waste of time because you don't even address what I said, you just dismiss it without really responding to any of it.

I didn't even bring up Benghazi, republicans, or all the stupid ass conspiracy theory shit, YOU DID, and it's telling that you did because instead of addressing the fact that she's a terrible person, and terrible people don't make good leaders and never have, you just defend some of the worst the Democratic party has had to offer since Dixie Democrats. Your inability to stay on topic says a lot about your willingness to go to any length to defend a really terrible person.

I used birtherism to illutrate what kind of a person she is, and it's hilariously ironic that both she, and Trump, who you never miss an opportunity to talk shit about, are two of the most well known names associated with this "movement." Sure, it is just business, but it illustrates the kind of person who would resort to such business.



Why don't you explain why it's bad that Trump is a birther, but it's ok for Hillary to be?


And for that matter why don't you defend the fact that she only defended gay marriage when it was politically expedient to do so, especialy after she publicly opposed it during the 2008 primaries?



I could go on and on giving examples of how much like Trump she actually is, but it wouldn't matter because you're the worst kind of hypocrite Rodeo, someone who's presumably smart enough to see the inconsistencies, but chooses not to. You don't care about anything bad that happens, as long as it's someone on "your team" that does it, you'll find some sort of mental jiu jitsu to explain it away and act like it's somehow different than someone on the opposite team doing the exact same shit.

Fuck off.

[Edited 10/29/19 13:31pm]



I love you too! hug

The fact is that I addressed two of your specifically-stated reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton: (1) gay marriage equality; and (2) what her husband did. I guess I didn't specifically address your displeasure with what Hillary said about Tulsi Gabbard in my response, so here you go - I agree with Hillary on that; at least, all outward appearances seem to back up Hillary's statements. Time will tell who is right, which makes this a pending issue.

I didn't address the birther issue because I guess I just didn't want to embarrass you. But since you asked for it, I underlined some of your comments above in red, and...well - here you go:

You are completely wrong about Hillary Clinton and the birther issue. Neither she NOR her campaign EVER circulated any rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. Rather than waste the bandwidth re-creating all the de-bunking of this Fox News talking point, I suggest you take three minutes and read this story from Politico:

https://www.politico.com/...ton-228304

If, after reading the facts contained in that article you still think Hillary Clinton ever had anything to do with the spread of the birtherism BS - much less ever actually saying it - then that will tell me all I ever need to know about where you get your information.

Because there is one and only one side that has EVER spread the birther nonsense, and it rhymes with "Sabbatical night-ding unhusbandman".

Then you asked me why I didn't dislike Hillary Clinton and I spent 11 paragraphs addressing your question, using specifics like Vince Foster and Benghazi to illustrate and explain my reasoning. I am very sorry that all went over your head.

Again - I love you, too! hug

Rodeo, breaking it down headbang

"Families are torn apart, men women and children are separated. Children come home from school to find their parents have gone missing." - Anne Frank
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 10/29/19 4:59pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

guitarslinger44 said:


You asked me why I dislike her and I gave you some reasons, but you can fuck right off simply dismissing them as "Fox news talking points." More and more, I find talking to you to be a waste of time because you don't even address what I said, you just dismiss it without really responding to any of it.

I didn't even bring up Benghazi, republicans, or all the stupid ass conspiracy theory shit, YOU DID, and it's telling that you did because instead of addressing the fact that she's a terrible person, and terrible people don't make good leaders and never have, you just defend some of the worst the Democratic party has had to offer since Dixie Democrats. Your inability to stay on topic says a lot about your willingness to go to any length to defend a really terrible person.

I used birtherism to illutrate what kind of a person she is, and it's hilariously ironic that both she, and Trump, who you never miss an opportunity to talk shit about, are two of the most well known names associated with this "movement." Sure, it is just business, but it illustrates the kind of person who would resort to such business.



Why don't you explain why it's bad that Trump is a birther, but it's ok for Hillary to be?


And for that matter why don't you defend the fact that she only defended gay marriage when it was politically expedient to do so, especialy after she publicly opposed it during the 2008 primaries?



I could go on and on giving examples of how much like Trump she actually is, but it wouldn't matter because you're the worst kind of hypocrite Rodeo, someone who's presumably smart enough to see the inconsistencies, but chooses not to. You don't care about anything bad that happens, as long as it's someone on "your team" that does it, you'll find some sort of mental jiu jitsu to explain it away and act like it's somehow different than someone on the opposite team doing the exact same shit.

Fuck off.

[Edited 10/29/19 13:31pm]



I love you too! hug

The fact is that I addressed two of your specifically-stated reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton: (1) gay marriage equality; and (2) what her husband did. I guess I didn't specifically address your displeasure with what Hillary said about Tulsi Gabbard in my response, so here you go - I agree with Hillary on that; at least, all outward appearances seem to back up Hillary's statements. Time will tell who is right, which makes this a pending issue.

I didn't address the birther issue because I guess I just didn't want to embarrass you. But since you asked for it, I underlined some of your comments above in red, and...well - here you go:

You are completely wrong about Hillary Clinton and the birther issue. Neither she NOR her campaign EVER circulated any rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. Rather than waste the bandwidth re-creating all the de-bunking of this Fox News talking point, I suggest you take three minutes and read this story from Politico:

https://www.politico.com/...ton-228304

If, after reading the facts contained in that article you still think Hillary Clinton ever had anything to do with the spread of the birtherism BS - much less ever actually saying it - then that will tell me all I ever need to know about where you get your information.

Because there is one and only one side that has EVER spread the birther nonsense, and it rhymes with "Sabbatical night-ding unhusbandman".

Then you asked me why I didn't dislike Hillary Clinton and I spent 11 paragraphs addressing your question, using specifics like Vince Foster and Benghazi to illustrate and explain my reasoning. I am very sorry that all went over your head.

Again - I love you, too! hug


lol So in addition to being a shill, you're a conspiracy throrist now too? You REALLY think Tulsi Gabbard, who was THE VICE CHAIR OF THE DNC ITSELF and a member of the US military is a Russian asset? Really? You're a funny dude Rodeo, but I guess we'll see how it all shakes out. lol If it turns out you're right, I'll send you a pack of your favorite guitar strings.

I never said I didn't like Hillary because of what Bill did, I don't Bill either, but I get why people like him. I really think you didn't read my original post all too closely. I never said that Bill had anything to do with her views on gay marriage, only that he signed a piece of anti-gay legislation in the DOM ACt, and that, when questioned as to why she changed her mind RE gay marriage, she was dodgy and gave a non-answer rather than saying, "I learned." or something to that effect. Easy answer, but she couldn't bring herself to say it, and even if she had, anyone who remembers the 2008 primary remembers she came out against it. ( https://www.snopes.com/fa...d-a-woman/ ) ( https://www.theatlantic.c...em/372717/ )


AS for the birther stuff, I never said she started it, but her campaign was sending out emails claiming Obama was a muslim ( https://www.washingtonpos...omination/ ) and they never denounced the birtherism movement that I'm aware of. Her strategist Mark Penn sent out a memo talking about capitalizing on Obama's "lack of American roots" ( https://www.theatlantic.c...008/37952/ ) so we dont' really know I guess, but the evidence doesn't look good.

At least she doesn't make racist jokes like your buddy Trump. Oh wait... ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id...bjQhql7lTY )

And your whole reason for liking her had nothing to do with policy either, it was basically, "because Republicans DON'T like her." It's hilarious to me that you can rail so hard against Trump, but shill for someone who's just like him, but on your chosen team. disbelief

[Edited 10/29/19 17:04pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 10/29/19 5:35pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

RodeoSchro said:



I love you too! hug

The fact is that I addressed two of your specifically-stated reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton: (1) gay marriage equality; and (2) what her husband did. I guess I didn't specifically address your displeasure with what Hillary said about Tulsi Gabbard in my response, so here you go - I agree with Hillary on that; at least, all outward appearances seem to back up Hillary's statements. Time will tell who is right, which makes this a pending issue.

I didn't address the birther issue because I guess I just didn't want to embarrass you. But since you asked for it, I underlined some of your comments above in red, and...well - here you go:

You are completely wrong about Hillary Clinton and the birther issue. Neither she NOR her campaign EVER circulated any rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. Rather than waste the bandwidth re-creating all the de-bunking of this Fox News talking point, I suggest you take three minutes and read this story from Politico:

https://www.politico.com/...ton-228304

If, after reading the facts contained in that article you still think Hillary Clinton ever had anything to do with the spread of the birtherism BS - much less ever actually saying it - then that will tell me all I ever need to know about where you get your information.

Because there is one and only one side that has EVER spread the birther nonsense, and it rhymes with "Sabbatical night-ding unhusbandman".

Then you asked me why I didn't dislike Hillary Clinton and I spent 11 paragraphs addressing your question, using specifics like Vince Foster and Benghazi to illustrate and explain my reasoning. I am very sorry that all went over your head.

Again - I love you, too! hug


lol So in addition to being a shill, you're a conspiracy throrist now too? You REALLY think Tulsi Gabbard, who was THE VICE CHAIR OF THE DNC ITSELF and a member of the US military is a Russian asset? Really? You're a funny dude Rodeo, but I guess we'll see how it all shakes out. lol If it turns out you're right, I'll send you a pack of your favorite guitar strings.

I never said I didn't like Hillary because of what Bill did, I don't Bill either, but I get why people like him. I really think you didn't read my original post all too closely. I never said that Bill had anything to do with her views on gay marriage, only that he signed a piece of anti-gay legislation in the DOM ACt, and that, when questioned as to why she changed her mind RE gay marriage, she was dodgy and gave a non-answer rather than saying, "I learned." or something to that effect. Easy answer, but she couldn't bring herself to say it, and even if she had, anyone who remembers the 2008 primary remembers she came out against it. ( https://www.snopes.com/fa...d-a-woman/ ) ( https://www.theatlantic.c...em/372717/ )


AS for the birther stuff, I never said she started it, but her campaign was sending out emails claiming Obama was a muslim ( https://www.washingtonpos...omination/ ) and they never denounced the birtherism movement that I'm aware of. Her strategist Mark Penn sent out a memo talking about capitalizing on Obama's "lack of American roots" ( https://www.theatlantic.c...008/37952/ ) so we dont' really know I guess, but the evidence doesn't look good.

At least she doesn't make racist jokes like your buddy Trump. Oh wait... ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id...bjQhql7lTY )

And your whole reason for liking her had nothing to do with policy either, it was basically, "because Republicans DON'T like her." It's hilarious to me that you can rail so hard against Trump, but shill for someone who's just like him, but on your chosen team. disbelief

[Edited 10/29/19 17:04pm]


nod

Preach!
guitarslinger, breaking it down!! headbang





lol evillol lol




[Edited 10/29/19 17:36pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 10/29/19 6:47pm

nd33

It looks like people only continue to like and defend Hillz out of some kind of embarrassment that she lost to Trump. This childish unsubstantiated slandering by her is representative of her big ego and lust for control. This is the real her. Jeez guys open yer eyes lol
Music, sweet music, I wish I could caress and...kiss, kiss...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 10/30/19 10:29am

RodeoSchro

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

RodeoSchro said:



I love you too! hug

The fact is that I addressed two of your specifically-stated reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton: (1) gay marriage equality; and (2) what her husband did. I guess I didn't specifically address your displeasure with what Hillary said about Tulsi Gabbard in my response, so here you go - I agree with Hillary on that; at least, all outward appearances seem to back up Hillary's statements. Time will tell who is right, which makes this a pending issue.

I didn't address the birther issue because I guess I just didn't want to embarrass you. But since you asked for it, I underlined some of your comments above in red, and...well - here you go:

You are completely wrong about Hillary Clinton and the birther issue. Neither she NOR her campaign EVER circulated any rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. Rather than waste the bandwidth re-creating all the de-bunking of this Fox News talking point, I suggest you take three minutes and read this story from Politico:

https://www.politico.com/...ton-228304

If, after reading the facts contained in that article you still think Hillary Clinton ever had anything to do with the spread of the birtherism BS - much less ever actually saying it - then that will tell me all I ever need to know about where you get your information.

Because there is one and only one side that has EVER spread the birther nonsense, and it rhymes with "Sabbatical night-ding unhusbandman".

Then you asked me why I didn't dislike Hillary Clinton and I spent 11 paragraphs addressing your question, using specifics like Vince Foster and Benghazi to illustrate and explain my reasoning. I am very sorry that all went over your head.

Again - I love you, too! hug


lol So in addition to being a shill, you're a conspiracy throrist now too? You REALLY think Tulsi Gabbard, who was THE VICE CHAIR OF THE DNC ITSELF and a member of the US military is a Russian asset? Really? You're a funny dude Rodeo, but I guess we'll see how it all shakes out. lol If it turns out you're right, I'll send you a pack of your favorite guitar strings.

I never said I didn't like Hillary because of what Bill did, I don't Bill either, but I get why people like him. I really think you didn't read my original post all too closely. I never said that Bill had anything to do with her views on gay marriage, only that he signed a piece of anti-gay legislation in the DOM ACt, and that, when questioned as to why she changed her mind RE gay marriage, she was dodgy and gave a non-answer rather than saying, "I learned." or something to that effect. Easy answer, but she couldn't bring herself to say it, and even if she had, anyone who remembers the 2008 primary remembers she came out against it. ( https://www.snopes.com/fa...d-a-woman/ ) ( https://www.theatlantic.c...em/372717/ )


AS for the birther stuff, I never said she started it, but her campaign was sending out emails claiming Obama was a muslim ( https://www.washingtonpos...omination/ ) and they never denounced the birtherism movement that I'm aware of. Her strategist Mark Penn sent out a memo talking about capitalizing on Obama's "lack of American roots" ( https://www.theatlantic.c...008/37952/ ) so we dont' really know I guess, but the evidence doesn't look good.

At least she doesn't make racist jokes like your buddy Trump. Oh wait... ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id...bjQhql7lTY )

And your whole reason for liking her had nothing to do with policy either, it was basically, "because Republicans DON'T like her." It's hilarious to me that you can rail so hard against Trump, but shill for someone who's just like him, but on your chosen team. disbelief

[Edited 10/29/19 17:04pm]



As they say on talk radio, let's take these in reverse order!

You didn't ask me why - or even IF - I liked her. In response to my statement of "Give me some REAL reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton and I'm happy to talk about them" you replied, "I guess the question is, why DON'T you?" Clearly we were talking about reasons to dislike her; NOT reasons to like her. If it matters, she wasn't my first choice for the Democratic nomination but in my view she was a far better option in the general election than unrepentant serial adulterer Donald J. Trump. If you want to talk about why as it relates to her policies, that's cool but also irrelevant as that election is over and Hillary Clinton isn't running again.

Next we have the Ghandi joke. No one in the article you posted said it was racist. It was, however, clearly a mistake and she apologized for it. Your article does end with this bit of information:

Michelle Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, a Memphis, Tenn.-based organization founded in 1991 by a Gandhi grandson, credited Clinton and her husband, former President Clinton, with long having “supported the Gandhi message.” But she said Saturday’s remarks “could be incredibly harmful.”

I don’t think she was, in any way, trying to demean Mahatma Gandhi,” Naef said. “To be generous to her, I would say it was a poor attempt at humor. Perhaps I’m overly sensitive, but I find it offensive when people use stereotypes in that way.”

I don't mean to be snarky, but did you even read that article before you posted it? What kind of search phrase would even led to that article? You were trying to portray her as saying something racist, but the word "racist" does not appear in that article. So - how did you find it? If I were a pessimist, I'd say you got it not from NBC News itself, but from somewhere that commonly mischaracterizes news, like Breitbart or Drudge. Am I correct?

Then you said, "AS for the birther stuff, I never said she started it, but her campaign was sending out emails claiming Obama was a muslim". Hang on - being a Muslim has absolutely nothing to do with where anyone was born. You do know that there are a few million Muslims here in America who were actually born here, right? Why would you conflate these two points?

And clearly you did not go to the Politico link I posted because if you had, you would have read this:

Much of the insinuation that Clinton had a hand in birtherism traces to the role of her then-senior strategist Mark Penn, who issued a memo in 2007 suggesting that Clinton emphasize Obama’s upbringing in Hawaii and Indonesia and paint him as fundamentally un-American. The memo never questioned Obama’s citizenship but did suggest highlighting his “lack of American roots.”

And this:

Clinton’s former senior aide Patti Solis Doyle acknowledged that a volunteer coordinator in Iowa forwarded a birther-related email. “Hillary made the decision immediately let that person go,” she said. “We let that person go. It was so beyond the pale of the campaign Hillary wanted to run and that we as a staff wanted to run that I called David Plouffe who was managing Barack Obama to apologize to say this is not coming from us, that this was rogue volunteer.”

Had you taken the time to read the back-up I provided, you would have saved yourself a lot of embarassment. You say, "we dont' really know I guess" but we dang sure DO know. And what we DO know is that your position on Hillary Clinton/birtherism is 100%, verifiably wrong.

OK, number next. Getting close to the end, or the beginning if you look at it that way. You try to backpeddle on Bill Clinton but it was YOU who, in your dissertation about why you dislike Hillary Clinton, that - and I quote - said, "Remember too that Bill Clinton signed into law the Defense Of Marriage Act."

Now you're trying to say Bill Clinton has nothing to do with anything. Well - why in the name of Sam Hill did you bring him up? I can't think of any valid reason why - given what you are now posting - that you would do that.

You can criticize Hillary Clinton all you want for her prior position, but she's on the record as now supporting marriage equality for all. It's right there in black and white. If she says anything otherwise, she's going to get her well-documented support of it thrown right back at her. Politicians as experienced as her don't paint themselves into corners like that. If she's on the record with a position, then it is her position.

And finally! Tulsi Gabbard! Is she or is she not a Russian asset? I think that if she is a Russian asset, she's an unknowing one. I would absolutely not be surprised to find out that Russian trolls are doing all they can to convince her online that she should run as a third-party candidate. This would be just one of many Russian strategies to split the Democratic vote.

Again - just like Carter Page, she could be used by the Russians and never know it. That's not a knock on her patriotism, but it is a condemnation of her ability to know when she's being used. I would like to think she's smarter than that, but maybe she isn't.

I like D'Adarrio 10s for my acoustic guitar, and Dean Markley 9's for the Telecaster.

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's Palladin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 10/30/19 12:58pm

13cjk13

nd33 said:

It looks like people only continue to like and defend Hillz out of some kind of embarrassment that she lost to Trump. This childish unsubstantiated slandering by her is representative of her big ego and lust for control. This is the real her. Jeez guys open yer eyes lol

She got 3 million more votes than Trump. There's that.

"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 10/30/19 1:12pm

poppys

13cjk13 said:

nd33 said:

It looks like people only continue to like and defend Hillz out of some kind of embarrassment that she lost to Trump. This childish unsubstantiated slandering by her is representative of her big ego and lust for control. This is the real her. Jeez guys open yer eyes lol


She got 3 million more votes than Trump. There's that.


Lust for control lol . Jeez, no politician has that. Gabbard probably hates having control. We know Trump abhors and rejects control any chance he gets. rolleyes

Continuing to draw the fake equivalency line between Clinton and Trump is laughable. Whether I loved Clinton or not, there is no comparing them as public servants.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 10/31/19 5:13am

jjhunsecker

avatar

poppys said:



13cjk13 said:




nd33 said:


It looks like people only continue to like and defend Hillz out of some kind of embarrassment that she lost to Trump. This childish unsubstantiated slandering by her is representative of her big ego and lust for control. This is the real her. Jeez guys open yer eyes lol


She got 3 million more votes than Trump. There's that.




Lust for control lol . Jeez, no politician has that. Gabbard probably hates having control. We know Trump abhors and rejects control any chance he gets. rolleyes

Continuing to draw the fake equivalency line between Clinton and Trump is laughable. Whether I loved Clinton or not, there is no comparing them as public servants.



Or comparing them as human beings
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 10/31/19 6:02am

nd33

13cjk13 said:



nd33 said:


It looks like people only continue to like and defend Hillz out of some kind of embarrassment that she lost to Trump. This childish unsubstantiated slandering by her is representative of her big ego and lust for control. This is the real her. Jeez guys open yer eyes lol

She got 3 million more votes than Trump. There's that.



That’s not saying much, look who she was running against lol
I feel for you and those choices that you feel forced to stay in the two party system to vote for, I really do!
Music, sweet music, I wish I could caress and...kiss, kiss...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 10/31/19 6:10am

13cjk13

nd33 said:

13cjk13 said:

She got 3 million more votes than Trump. There's that.

That’s not saying much, look who she was running against lol I feel for you and those choices that you feel forced to stay in the two party system to vote for, I really do!

Awwww, thanks innocent

"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 10/31/19 6:34am

poppys

13cjk13 said:

nd33 said:

13cjk13 said: That’s not saying much, look who she was running against lol I feel for you and those choices that you feel forced to stay in the two party system to vote for, I really do!


Awwww, thanks innocent


Can't say I feel for people's opinions who can't even vote here, and always think it's better to throw your vote away than participate in the system we have, flawed as it is. What's that JJ says? The perfect is the enemy of the good.

politics: the art or science of government.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 10/31/19 7:36am

nd33

poppys said:



13cjk13 said:




nd33 said:


13cjk13 said: That’s not saying much, look who she was running against lol I feel for you and those choices that you feel forced to stay in the two party system to vote for, I really do!


Awwww, thanks innocent




Can't say I feel for people's opinions who can't even vote here, and always think it's better to throw your vote away than participate in the system we have, flawed as it is. What's that JJ says? The perfect is the enemy of the good.



Wrong, I advocate voting whenever you have the opportunity.
Music, sweet music, I wish I could caress and...kiss, kiss...
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Hillary Clinton: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset?