sturg33
I
I mean, hey... 2 career politicians are worth is over $120M... and remember they were flat out broke (per Hilary) in 2000...
guess the senate pays better these days
HRC
- Thread starter 57Brave
- Start date
I mean, hey... 2 career politicians are worth is over $120M... and remember they were flat out broke (per Hilary) in 2000...
guess the senate pays better these days
sturg33
I
I didn't know the senate paid that much
sturg33
I
I mean that the Clintons are crooks.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Hillary is part of the crooks in congress who work in the gray area of the law that allows them to use inside knowledge to make money, because congress is almost entirely full of crooks.
AerchAngel
<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! You sound like a baby, sheesh.
She is a crook plain and simple and I will keep saying it and saying it and saying it and there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
Anytime you bring up an article, I will say bad things because she is full of schit and bought or murdered everyone in association with her crooked deeds.
DirkPiggler
Well-known member
$12 is better than $15, but either would cripple our economy.
Increasing the single greatest factor in cost of goods sold/ services provided by 50% is not a good idea. The middle class will bear the brunt, as usual.
Hillary is correct that the minimum wage doesn't need to be the same for all regions. If only there were a governmental mechanism for individual parts of the country to decide the proper minimum wage for their respective areas...
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Better a truly progressive, ideals-driven, fickle smugness than a blindly loyal, status-quo-humping, technocratic smugness. Better, indeed, to actually espouse activist politics, rather than embrace a neoliberal smugness that, when faced with any criticism or dissent from the actual left, hides behind the tenuous guise of "pragmatism"; while, likewise, side-stepping pressure from the right with smarmier-than-thou gaslighting.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
Don't get me mixed up in this. I'm a progressive pragmatist. There are parts of what Sanders was espousing that I do support. I just think he needed a bit of a date with reality and I thought the moral superiority displayed by some of his posse was insufferable. There are no magic wands in politics, but a lot of folks on both the left and right seem to think that there are. Politics is a gritty, messy business and I think Hillary--for all of her warts--is best equipped to fight the necessary battles to get something done.
AerchAngel
<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
While having a felon in office and that is un-American. Yes people can say prove it, but how, when you have stacks of money and ready to hire goons to get rid of "issues" or "loose ends"? Even the FBI can be bought and if you don't think they can, I have beach front property in the Sahara to sell you.
57Brave
Well-known member
Nicholas Thompson @nxthompson 11h11 hours ago
WaPo: How will history judge America if it elects a madman bc his opponent used work email at home?
What I find equally frustrating is the reaction to Gov Johnson's gaffe the day after the debacle on NBC where Trump...
Trump was granted a "bless his heart" moment.
......
The Post's View
The Hillary Clinton email story is out of control
by Editorial Board September 8 at 9:26 PM
JUDGING BY the amount of time NBC’s Matt Lauer spent pressing Hillary Clinton on her emails during Wednesday’s national security presidential forum, one would think that her homebrew server was one of the most important issues facing the country this election. It is not. There are a thousand other substantive issues — from China’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea to National Security Agency intelligence-gathering to military spending — that would have revealed more about what the candidates know and how they would govern. Instead, these did not even get mentioned in the first of 5½ precious prime-time hours the two candidates will share before Election Day, while emails took up a third of Ms. Clinton’s time.
Sadly, Mr. Lauer’s widely panned handling of the candidate forum was not an aberration. Judging by polls showing that voters trust Mr. Trump more than Ms. Clinton, as well as other evidence, it reflects a common shorthand for this election articulated by NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick last week: “You have Donald Trump, who’s openly racist,” he said. Then, of Ms. Clinton: “I mean, we have a presidential candidate who’s deleted emails and done things illegally and is a presidential candidate. That doesn’t make sense to me, because if that was any other person, you’d be in prison.”
In fact, Ms. Clinton’s emails have endured much more scrutiny than an ordinary person’s would have, and the criminal case against her was so thin that charging her would have been to treat her very differently. Ironically, even as the email issue consumed so much precious airtime, several pieces of news reported Wednesday should have taken some steam out of the story. First is a memo FBI Director James B. Comey sent to his staff explaining that the decision not to recommend charging Ms. Clinton was “not a cliff-hanger” and that people “chest-beating” and second-guessing the FBI do not know what they are talking about. Anyone who claims that Ms. Clinton should be in prison accuses, without evidence, the FBI of corruption or flagrant incompetence.
Second is the emergence of an email exchange between Ms. Clinton and former secretary of state Colin Powell in which he explained that he used a private computer and bypassed State Department servers while he ran the agency, even when communicating with foreign leaders and top officials. Mr. Powell attempted last month to distance himself from Ms. Clinton’s practices, which is one of the many factors that made the email story look worse. Now, it seems, Mr. Powell engaged in similar behavior.
Last is a finding that 30 Benghazi-related emails that were recovered during the FBI email investigation and recently attracted big headlines had nothing significant in them. Only one, in fact, was previously undisclosed, and it contained nothing but a compliment from a diplomat. But the damage of the “30 deleted Benghazi emails” story has already been done.
At a rally in Greenville, N.C., Sept. 6, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump blamed his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for her email practices while she was secretary of state, adding that “people who have nothing to hide don’t smash phones with hammers.” (The Washington Post)
Ms. Clinton is hardly blameless. She treated the public’s interest in sound record-keeping cavalierly. A small amount of classified material also moved across her private server. But it was not obviously marked as such, and there is still no evidence that national security was harmed. Ms. Clinton has also admitted that using the personal server was a mistake. The story has vastly exceeded the boundaries of the facts.
Imagine how history would judge today’s Americans if, looking back at this election, the record showed that voters empowered a dangerous man because of . . . a minor email scandal. There is no equivalence between Ms. Clinton’s wrongs and Mr. Trump’s manifest unfitness for office.
WaPo: How will history judge America if it elects a madman bc his opponent used work email at home?
What I find equally frustrating is the reaction to Gov Johnson's gaffe the day after the debacle on NBC where Trump...
Trump was granted a "bless his heart" moment.
......
The Post's View
The Hillary Clinton email story is out of control
by Editorial Board September 8 at 9:26 PM
JUDGING BY the amount of time NBC’s Matt Lauer spent pressing Hillary Clinton on her emails during Wednesday’s national security presidential forum, one would think that her homebrew server was one of the most important issues facing the country this election. It is not. There are a thousand other substantive issues — from China’s aggressive moves in the South China Sea to National Security Agency intelligence-gathering to military spending — that would have revealed more about what the candidates know and how they would govern. Instead, these did not even get mentioned in the first of 5½ precious prime-time hours the two candidates will share before Election Day, while emails took up a third of Ms. Clinton’s time.
Sadly, Mr. Lauer’s widely panned handling of the candidate forum was not an aberration. Judging by polls showing that voters trust Mr. Trump more than Ms. Clinton, as well as other evidence, it reflects a common shorthand for this election articulated by NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick last week: “You have Donald Trump, who’s openly racist,” he said. Then, of Ms. Clinton: “I mean, we have a presidential candidate who’s deleted emails and done things illegally and is a presidential candidate. That doesn’t make sense to me, because if that was any other person, you’d be in prison.”
In fact, Ms. Clinton’s emails have endured much more scrutiny than an ordinary person’s would have, and the criminal case against her was so thin that charging her would have been to treat her very differently. Ironically, even as the email issue consumed so much precious airtime, several pieces of news reported Wednesday should have taken some steam out of the story. First is a memo FBI Director James B. Comey sent to his staff explaining that the decision not to recommend charging Ms. Clinton was “not a cliff-hanger” and that people “chest-beating” and second-guessing the FBI do not know what they are talking about. Anyone who claims that Ms. Clinton should be in prison accuses, without evidence, the FBI of corruption or flagrant incompetence.
Second is the emergence of an email exchange between Ms. Clinton and former secretary of state Colin Powell in which he explained that he used a private computer and bypassed State Department servers while he ran the agency, even when communicating with foreign leaders and top officials. Mr. Powell attempted last month to distance himself from Ms. Clinton’s practices, which is one of the many factors that made the email story look worse. Now, it seems, Mr. Powell engaged in similar behavior.
Last is a finding that 30 Benghazi-related emails that were recovered during the FBI email investigation and recently attracted big headlines had nothing significant in them. Only one, in fact, was previously undisclosed, and it contained nothing but a compliment from a diplomat. But the damage of the “30 deleted Benghazi emails” story has already been done.
At a rally in Greenville, N.C., Sept. 6, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump blamed his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for her email practices while she was secretary of state, adding that “people who have nothing to hide don’t smash phones with hammers.” (The Washington Post)
Ms. Clinton is hardly blameless. She treated the public’s interest in sound record-keeping cavalierly. A small amount of classified material also moved across her private server. But it was not obviously marked as such, and there is still no evidence that national security was harmed. Ms. Clinton has also admitted that using the personal server was a mistake. The story has vastly exceeded the boundaries of the facts.
Imagine how history would judge today’s Americans if, looking back at this election, the record showed that voters empowered a dangerous man because of . . . a minor email scandal. There is no equivalence between Ms. Clinton’s wrongs and Mr. Trump’s manifest unfitness for office.
AerchAngel
<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
Actually, who the fvck cares except Democrats. The ones who aren't going to vote for her will not be turned. Media can be bought, FBI can be bought, anything and everything can be bought. Murders can be bought.
AerchAngel
<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
Ummm nope. Not voting for a certified idiot either. He is just as worse as sHillary, so why should I vote for an idiot or a felon. Either one would make our country look like crap. A Con Artist or a Felon, our country leaders. Disgusting.
57Brave
Well-known member
Will you please cite the felonious charges against HRC ?
or is it just your un educated opinion of what is and isn't a felony ?
or, are you repeating Trumps line because , you know, you are "his" African American ?
...
If I were you would be embarrassed to call Trump an idiot after parroting his talking points for months
Kinda like Palin- no one liked her but they repeated her talking points verbatim
or is it just your un educated opinion of what is and isn't a felony ?
or, are you repeating Trumps line because , you know, you are "his" African American ?
...
If I were you would be embarrassed to call Trump an idiot after parroting his talking points for months
Kinda like Palin- no one liked her but they repeated her talking points verbatim
AerchAngel
<B>Secretary of Statistics</B>
I could give two schits what Trump says and who he is. I don't care. So why even bring up that clown? This thread is about HRC, not Drumpf the Trump. We are talking about the felon, who hired goons to off people, allowed classified material to be leaked, laundered money to foundation.
Before you say prove it. Tough to prove when you have people silenced and you buy people off. This is America, you can do things like that and the more powerful you are, the easier you can try to keep it quiet.
57Brave
Well-known member
At this point how could any one not care what Trump says ?
He is in position to nominate up to 4 Supreme Court justices which will set the course for the next 40 years.
Secondly, you have absolutely no basis to say the things about Clinton you say.
You can't / won't or even try to support your contentions with fact
Unless of course you too believe Sandy Hook was staged .
Which is what I am beginning to believe
On the other hand, if you have disagreements with HRC that is different than just spouting conspiracy theories
Which , proved over and over and over have been debunked.
You have no proof or even so much as a realistic allegation that anyone was paid off except the Atty Generals of Florida,NY and Texas
http://www.infowars.com/
He is in position to nominate up to 4 Supreme Court justices which will set the course for the next 40 years.
Secondly, you have absolutely no basis to say the things about Clinton you say.
You can't / won't or even try to support your contentions with fact
Unless of course you too believe Sandy Hook was staged .
Which is what I am beginning to believe
On the other hand, if you have disagreements with HRC that is different than just spouting conspiracy theories
Which , proved over and over and over have been debunked.
You have no proof or even so much as a realistic allegation that anyone was paid off except the Atty Generals of Florida,NY and Texas
http://www.infowars.com/