2016 Election Thread Part Deux

#4,376
#4,376
lawgator1 said:
I'm confused. Your post, and the headline, says she will be indicted, but then you read it and it doesn't say that, at all.

The "article" is not sourced or its author identified. The website has no information on it that I can find as to who maintains it, or what its about.

You guys need to realize that anyone can create a blog and a website, and anonymously post something phrased as fact, when it really isn't. Its the ultimate in trolling. And you keep falling for it.
Click to expand...

My post doesn't say she will be indicted. I was simply guessing how you would respond. Based on your post it doesn't look like I was too far off. You seem to have the opinion that until she is convicted, there's nothing to see here. We should ignore the mountain of evidence that she is a crook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#4,377
#4,377
Grand Vol said:
Right. Of course.

Let me guess, you're going to tell us all about how the policies of Trump and Sanders are the same just like you did with Hillary and Rubio.
Click to expand...

They both support trade protectionist policies like tariffs and they are both cozy with labor unions.

They both want the US to move to a single payer healthcare system.

Both support increasing taxes. In the past, Trump has even advocated a "wealth" tax. Sure, he's changed that tune on the stump, but any good capitalist tries to figure out ways to minimize the competition and hammering people with a tax on their wealth is a good way to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,379
#4,379
lawgator1 said:
I'm confused. Your post, and the headline, says she will be indicted, but then you read it and it doesn't say that, at all.

The "article" is not sourced or its author identified. The website has no information on it that I can find as to who maintains it, or what its about.

You guys need to realize that anyone can create a blog and a website, and anonymously post something phrased as fact, when it really isn't. Its the ultimate in trolling. And you keep falling for it.
Click to expand...

She's done LG. The fairy tale is over.

You can try all the flipping in and *****ing over this and that. But there is too much smoke. They are in cover up mode.

The huff post released the article last night thinking they were going to get scooped. Pulled it...

Just wait....

Trump maybe debating sanders after all. Maybe that was the plan the whole time...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,380
#4,380
red butler said:
My post doesn't say she will be indicted. I was simply guessing how you would respond. Based on your post it doesn't look like I was too far off. You seem to have the opinion that until she is convicted, there's nothing to see here. We should ignore the mountain of evidence that she is a crook.
Click to expand...


You are yet again dodging and changing the subject. The subject of my post is objecting to your posting of that article as worthless drivel.

You reposted a headline that she will be indicted, phrased as news. But it is a headline that does not match the substance of the "article." And in fact the article is nothing new, at all. There is zero information in there which is not already well known.

If I shout ten times that I am the greatest chess player of all time, that does not make it so. And, if I shout it once into a canyon where the echo repeats it ten times, that does not make it so, either.

That is exactly what the shriekers are banking on. An echo chamber of morons and idiots, of which you are both, reposting what they say so often, some other idiots and morons will believe it to be true. Congratulations on keeping that chain going.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,381
#4,381
Oh Hillary...

A Deep Dive into How the Clinton Foundation Operates Illegally and in Haiti - Charles Ortel


Understanding illegal activities of the Clinton Foundation requires grasping state, federal, and foreign laws that bar public charities from being run for private gain, and that govern solicitations using the mail, telephones, and digital media.

Remember, as you evaluate the available public record that Clinton Foundation trustees have never submitted the financial records of this web of public charities to an independent, properly certified audit, performed by fully informed and empowered accounting firms.

In addition to providing new overview perspectives on the Clinton Foundation charity fraud network, this update offers extensive background information concerning ways in which the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton family, and affiliates have operated in Haiti--a nation that lies on the epicenter of natural and manmade disasters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,383
#4,383
lawgator1 said:
You are yet again dodging and changing the subject. The subject of my post is objecting to your posting of that article as worthless drivel.

You reposted a headline that she will be indicted, phrased as news. But it is a headline that does not match the substance of the "article." And in fact the article is nothing new, at all. There is zero information in there which is not already well known.

If I shout ten times that I am the greatest chess player of all time, that does not make it so. And, if I shout it once into a canyon where the echo repeats it ten times, that does not make it so, either.

That is exactly what the shriekers are banking on. An echo chamber of morons and idiots, of which you are both, reposting what they say so often, some other idiots and morons will believe it to be true. Congratulations on keeping that chain going.
Click to expand...

:crazy: I just can't believe the blindness on the left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,384
#4,384
Wasnt it just last week her numbers were dropping like flies?

DNC saw the writing on the wall??

Look for Biden a last minute jump it to the race.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,385
#4,385
lawgator1 said:
You are yet again dodging and changing the subject. The subject of my post is objecting to your posting of that article as worthless drivel.

You reposted a headline that she will be indicted, phrased as news. But it is a headline that does not match the substance of the "article." And in fact the article is nothing new, at all. There is zero information in there which is not already well known.

If I shout ten times that I am the greatest chess player of all time, that does not make it so. And, if I shout it once into a canyon where the echo repeats it ten times, that does not make it so, either.

That is exactly what the shriekers are banking on. An echo chamber of morons and idiots, of which you are both, reposting what they say so often, some other idiots and morons will believe it to be true. Congratulations on keeping that chain going.
Click to expand...

Will you still be in denial if the FBI recommends bringing charges against her?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,386
#4,386
Obsessed said:
Wasnt it just last week her numbers were dropping like flies?

DNC saw the writing on the wall??

Look for Biden a last minute jump it to the race.
Click to expand...

1190pa.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,387
#4,387
Grand Vol said:
Will you still be in denial if the FBI recommends bringing charges against her?
Click to expand...



You must understand what I am specifically taking issue with here.

If either of the following happen, I do agree she is out: 1) she is indicted; 2) the FBI or the DOJ recommends that she be charged.

Now, what I am SPECIFICALLY annoyed by is the posting and reposting of blogs or "articles" by political partisans or operatives suggesting either that it HAS occurred, or that, if it does not, that MUST be part of a cover-up.

The former is just not true. The latter is an obvious poly to keep it alive should nothing come out of this, i.e. a claim by the Clinton haters and the far right in particular that she would have been but for some conspiracy.

So please keep in mind, I am 100 % with you that if indicted or if it is recommended by FBI or DOJ that she be charged. What is irritating to my sense of intellectual honesty is these posts if blogs, articles, etc., that engage in unsupported speculation just to try to imprint some notion of truth to this, that is not yet there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,389
#4,389
lawgator1 said:
You must understand what I am specifically taking issue with here.

If either of the following happen, I do agree she is out: 1) she is indicted; 2) the FBI or the DOJ recommends that she be charged.

Now, what I am SPECIFICALLY annoyed by is the posting and reposting of blogs or "articles" by political partisans or operatives suggesting either that it HAS occurred, or that, if it does not, that MUST be part of a cover-up.

The former is just not true. The latter is an obvious poly to keep it alive should nothing come out of this, i.e. a claim by the Clinton haters and the far right in particular that she would have been but for some conspiracy.

So please keep in mind, I am 100 % with you that if indicted or if it is recommended by FBI or DOJ that she be charged. What is irritating to my sense of intellectual honesty is these posts if blogs, articles, etc., that engage in unsupported speculation just to try to imprint some notion of truth to this, that is not yet there.
Click to expand...

If she gets indicted will you start fantasizing to her in her tight fitting orange jumpsuit?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,396
#4,396
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,397
#4,397
Don't get your hopes up about seeing HRC drop out. We've been down this road before with hubby. They refer to them as being made of "Teflon" for a reason.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top