If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Oh and to play your game, if you've got questions I'll answer them. But I'm not going to defend myself from a vitriolic post because I haven't shown enough rage or shame while playing the hand our system dealt me.
Will you stick to this argument if Hillary wins by 7 or so points like is being predicted now, or will this morph into some argument about the election being rigged? I'm glad we have your objectivity around here to enlighten all of us.
What makes you think the left won't be stuffing the ballot boxes as they have admitted to in the past? Oversampling democrats to make the numbers not match reality to discourage people from going to the polls won't work. People are way to pissed off.
What makes you think the left won't be stuffing the ballot boxes as they have admitted to in the past? Oversampling democrats to make the numbers not match reality to discourage people from going to the polls won't work. People are way to pissed off.
What is it like to have to live a life embracing conspiracy theories?
Do you have a source for this allegation in Politifact or the like?
Its my understanding that people who work in US law enforcement are like 90% Republican. So obviously they are all at the beckoned call of Obama, the most popular Democrat of all time (amongst Republicans). Makes total sense.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
You think the state dept are 90% Repubs? The people assigned by the people who were hired by Obama?
You do understand that the Sate Department is not 'Law Enforcement', right?
(
Last edited by Paco500; Oct 21, 2016 at 03:15 PM.
Reason: Clarity)
You do understand that the Sate Department is not 'Law Enforcement', right?
Or that most State Department workers are career employees over whom the top-level political appointees made by a POTUS have very limited leverage since they are protected by the federal bureaucracy.
This is what I'm talking about. You project all these emotions and actions on me because 'm not going to act depressed that I've gotten a reprieve on an all GOP government. As for Hillary, I'll have four years to be miserable when she shows her hand. Til then, I'm riding the high on the US rejecting that orange asshole. If you think they're the same, that's on you because their faults are not equal in the eyes of many Americans.
She's already shown her hand. The (D) next to her name makes you unwilling to acknowledge it, let alone demand better. This is what I am opining about and why I am naming you partisan.
My point is, you shouldn't be "riding high" on voting for a corrupt 1%er who through actions has shown to be counter to the causes you claim to be fighting for. The only thing I am projecting here is my distaste for your willingness to arrogantly strike down others for supporting a shitty candidate - something you are unabashedly doing yourself with an aura of smugness that is revolting to any true intellectual. Divisiveness is what got us here in the first place, and you're piling on as if you're somehow superior to all those "anti-intellectual GOP nut jobs". You're not. You're one of them, just rooting for the other team.
Again, you're being partisan to a fault and beyond. I stand by my accusation.
Oh and to play your game, if you've got questions I'll answer them. But I'm not going to defend myself from a vitriolic post because I haven't shown enough rage or shame while playing the hand our system dealt me.
It's not your lack of rage or shame, Dakar. It's your striking down of others who are doing the exact same thing you are. It's your smug arrogance that drives you to insult others for supporting a pile of shit, because you're on the "right side" of the election. You're also supporting a pile of shit. You're simply voting for the candidate with a (D) next to their name because, in your words, the GOP base is a bunch of "racist anti-intellectual nutjobs". Again, I name you partisan.
If you can't stomach vitriolic posts directed at you, maybe you should quit dishing them out.
My point is, you shouldn't be "riding high" on voting for a corrupt 1%er who through actions has shown to be counter to the causes you claim to be fighting for.
When did the very rich become 1%ers as opposed to job creators?
When did the very rich become 1%ers as opposed to job creators?
Damn, besson. Your last couple posts were such a nice change from your usual bullshit. I knew it wouldn't last, though I was hoping for a bit more. Nope, back to the straw-man argument. Show me where I've ever said that. Ever.
Damn, besson. Your last couple posts were such a nice change from your usual bullshit. I knew it wouldn't last, though I was hoping for a bit more. Nope, back to the straw-man argument. Show me where I've ever said that. Ever.
"right-wing propaganda"? Well, I'm glad that your ideological goals don't get in the way of your principles. You're so trusting of those in the gov't that it's scary. Again, it's nigh statistically impossible that she's personally known that many suicides, especially looking at the suspicious nature of those deaths, and how these people were connected to her. She's either had powers that induce suicidal levels of depression (all hail the ancient ones!), or she's a murdering, power-hungry psychopath. While the former would be more exciting, I'm thinking the latter is more likely.
I've said it before but the right has thrown so much shit at Hillary that they've made her immune to anything she might actually have done wrong. The left would happily throw her to the wolves if she really was a murderer (and lets not pretend the right would do the same to Trump for a single second) as the would any politician, but the accusations have been so thick and fast for so long, and have gotten so preposterous in their scope, that you can't even get her prosecuted when she gets caught lying about deleting classified emails. The Republicans have no-one to blame but themselves for this. Its all part of the bed they made.
Anyway, you better hope I'm right because I sent a link to this forum page to her campaign staff and I even used all those totally legit gmail addresses on Podesta's leaked messages from Wikileaks so if she really is a killer, you're next buddy.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
Knowing she's going to win is really eating you up inside, isn't it? It's not my fault that GOP base devolved into a bunch of anti-intellectual racist nut jobs.
So you're just going to join in the Left's troll parade too? You're not even close. I said, unequivocally, that she'd win 9 months ago. My prediction hasn't changed. Also, I've not voted for a Repub for president since 1988, the year I turned 18. Are you forgetting that I supported Sanders?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
When ALL the MSM outlets are repeating the same phrases(Scripted propaganda), and those in the MSM have openly admitted to being IN THE TANK FOR HILLARY, why would you trust them? When you see the actual words by DEMOCRAT operatives bragging about stuffing ballot boxes for decades and who later got fired (WHY if it wasn't true?) and you still are blind to what the conspiring MSM and DEMOCRATS have been doing, you just don't seem to be paying attention.
It's not that they aren't paying attention, they simply don't care.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
You do understand that the Sate Department is not 'Law Enforcement', right?
You realize that the State dept handles the issues we were talking about, right?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I've said it before but the right has thrown so much shit at Hillary that they've made her immune to anything she might actually have done wrong. The left would happily throw her to the wolves if she really was a murderer (and lets not pretend the right would do the same to Trump for a single second) as the would any politician, but the accusations have been so thick and fast for so long, and have gotten so preposterous in their scope, that you can't even get her prosecuted when she gets caught lying about deleting classified emails. The Republicans have no-one to blame but themselves for this. Its all part of the bed they made.
Anyway, you better hope I'm right because I sent a link to this forum page to her campaign staff and I even used all those totally legit gmail addresses on Podesta's leaked messages from Wikileaks so if she really is a killer, you're next buddy.
So you're ignoring the smoke because there's too much of it? That's not how fires work. By your logic, Cosby never sexually assaulted anyone, and is in fact a saint, because there are too many allegations and attacks from his detractors.
I have no doubt that you, OAW, paco, and several others would have me killed over some disagreements, or at least would love to see it happen. It's the type of people you are. The real question is, how did you get to this state?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
You realize that the State dept handles the issues we were talking about, right?
You realise your post was a direct response, with quotes, to a post about law enforcement?
Here's the thing. In high-school, I really wanted to play lacrosse. Went out for the team two years running, but just ended up warming the bench. After a bit of soul searching, I finally admitted to myself I just did have the innate skill to play competitively. I ended up joining the track team and found my place- I was good at and I enjoyed it.
I know you want to be good at arguing about politics, but you just don't have what it takes to do it successfully. You lack the critical thinking skills, the rhetorical flourish, and, dare I say, the intellengence.
Maybe it's time for you to find a hobby you are better suited to. Just because you really want to do something doesn't mean you are equipped to do it.
You realise your post was a direct response, with quotes, to a post about law enforcement?
A post that was entirely incorrect from the start? Yeah, I know that, which is why I directed him to look at the State dept.
The rest of your post was nothing more than than a pathetic personal attack so I filtered it out. Can you do better?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I have no doubt that you, OAW, paco, and several others would have me killed over some disagreements, or at least would love to see it happen. It's the type of people you are. The real question is, how did you get to this state?
I'm afraid you are projecting there. I will admit that your nonsense has cause me to lose my temper once- exactly once.
While you appear to be in a state of almost continual rage, I find you a source of amusement. You are comically ill informed and misguided. Your absurd lies about yourself make me amused, not angry.
I'm not 100% convinced you are not a brilliant troll.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I have no doubt that you, OAW, paco, and several others would have me killed over some disagreements, or at least would love to see it happen. It's the type of people you are. The real question is, how did you get to this state?
Oh FFS you truly have gone completely off the deep end! The real question is how did you get to the state where you are convinced that you are even remotely important enough for anyone around here to even wish bodily harm upon you let alone actually carry it out? And why are you sitting around the forum talking this nonsense anyway? It's Saturday morning and there's not a cloud in the sky in all of America. With such great weather one would think you would be taking one of those luxury sports cars of yours out for a spin.
Oh FFS you truly have gone completely off the deep end! The real question is how did you get to the state where you are convinced that you are even remotely important enough for anyone around here to even wish bodily harm upon you let alone actually carry it out? And why are you sitting around the forum talking this nonsense anyway? It's Saturday morning and there's not a cloud in the sky in all of America. With such great weather one would think you would be taking one of those luxury sports cars of yours out for a spin.
First, I guess you don't realize that enthusiasts have already garaged their "fun" cars until spring (complete w/ climate control and trickle chargers), that's not something I'd expect you to know. While I do sometimes "break the seal" and take one out anyway, when it's an exceptional day (despite the annoyance of getting them winter-prepped again), this isn't one of them. It rained all night there, professor.
Neither am I just "sitting around the forum talking this nonsense" (as if talking online is somehow beneath me), I'm currently on a flight and posting while watching a movie (The Infiltrator, which is better than I expected.)
Serious question: Have MH professionals ever figured out what's wrong with you?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
First, I guess you don't realize that enthusiasts have already garaged their "fun" cars until spring (complete w/ climate control and trickle chargers), that's not something I'd expect you to know. While I do sometimes "break the seal" and take one out anyway, when it's an exceptional day (despite the annoyance of getting them winter-prepped again), this isn't one of them. It rained all night there, professor.
Neither am I just "sitting around the forum talking this nonsense" (as if talking online is somehow beneath me), I'm currently on a flight and posting while watching a movie (The Infiltrator, which is better than I expected.)
Serious question: Have MH professionals ever figured out what's wrong with you?
Serious question: Have MH professionals ever figured out what's wrong with you?
I guess not.
Originally Posted by OAW
Yeah. Sure buddy.
Your usual pathetic rejoinder... That's when I know you're in over your head.
Why are you "wasting" a Saturday posting and not out in "such great weather"?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Your usual pathetic rejoinder... That's when I know you're in over your head.
Why are you "wasting" a Saturday posting and not out in "such great weather"?
Because unlike you I'm not a poser. I don't make so many outlandish claims on Internet forums that I can't keep them all straight. And then accuse people of "manipulations and distortions" when they remind me of them. I just don't feel the need to front like that and pretend to be something I'm not. I'm just a guy binge watching Season 3 of "Black Mirror" on Netflix this fine Saturday morning.
Because unlike you I'm not a poser. I don't make so many outlandish claims on Internet forums that I can't keep them all straight.
Sure thing, professor. Maybe my claims are only "outlandish" compared to your own weak aspirations? All you've ever spewed is resentment. Admit it and move on, it'll make you feel better. But no, wealthy people definitely don't veg out and watch TV or movies in sweatpants, they have more "glorified" things to do. That's some stupid shit, right there.
And then accuse people of "manipulations and distortions" when they remind me of them. I just don't feel the need to front like that and pretend to be something I'm not. I'm just a guy binge watching Season 3 of "Black Mirror" on Netflix this fine Saturday morning.
Man, you lie all the time on this very forum, someone who manipulates what people say and every scrap of info you cross, so you think because of that I must be lying too. You're one of the worst, a person who believes that the ends always justify the means, a true Alinsky disciple. That's definitely not me.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Sure thing, professor. Maybe my claims are only "outlandish" compared to your own weak aspirations?
One of two things is true. Either you are completely full of shit as I and many others around here have concluded a long time ago. Or you are actually being somewhat truthful but somehow you manage to present yourself as if you are completely full of shit. Take your pick.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Man, you lie all the time on this very forum, someone who manipulates what people say and every scrap of info you cross, so you think because of that I must be lying too. You're one of the worst, a person who believes that the ends always justify the means, a true Alinsky disciple. That's definitely not me.
But you see this right here is the fundamental difference between you and me. You are always long on TALKING this type of shit. But always come up short PROVING it. Quite unlike yourself I unequivocally demonstrated how you were lying through your teeth in the other thread. With photographic evidence and all that jazz. To the point where you were so backed into a corner that you had to roll with the "I was on Oxy after surgery" back in MARCH excuse for why you were steady lying in OCTOBER. Meanwhile you are always quick to claim I'm lying about something but NEVER post anything to back it up. Seems to me that if I "lie all the time" then that's something that wouldn't take much effort to do. But somehow you think your mere pronouncements equate to facts.
One of two things is true. Either you are completely full of shit as I and many others around here have concluded a long time ago. Or you are actually being somewhat truthful but somehow you manage to present yourself as if you are completely full of shit. Take your pick.
Neither. You're a troll who lives his MacNN life personally attacking other members who disagree with you, because you feel sad and pathetic and tearing down others makes you feel better about it. No matter your opinions regarding my social status or lifestyle, your reaction to them (the frequent tantrums you throw littered with insults) reveal you are a very emotionally damaged individual who doesn't know how to practice the diversity and respect he preaches. You say I'm full of "shit", but your actions directed towards your virtual neighbors reveal that's what you are; the type that too easily gets smeared and tracked around, fouling everything it makes contact with, stinking up the place with its very presence.
But you see this right here is the fundamental difference between you and me. You are always long on TALKING this type of shit. But always come up short PROVING it. Quite unlike yourself I unequivocally demonstrated how you were lying through your teeth in the other thread. With photographic evidence and all that jazz.
You proved I mislabeled one of your fallacious arguments (there are so many) some time ago, that's it. You've lied about me on numerous occassions trying to simply smear me, misrepresenting my family, my life, and anything else you can latch on to to try and force me into leaving out of frustration or anger. That's not happening.
Comically enough, if you weren't so antagonistic I might have already moved on when things slowed down on MacNN, but your spiteful personal attacks make me keep coming back, perhaps out of some morbid curiosity over what you' and your kin (like paco) will come up with next.
Meanwhile you are always quick to claim I'm lying about something but NEVER post anything to back it up.
We both know I've already done that several times already and your sealioning isn't going to provoke me into rehashing it for the 4th (or maybe even 5th) time.
I have a gift for you. Maynard Keenan wrote a song that fits my feelings perfectly, it's almost like he knew you personally. Enjoy, I hope some day you find The Remedy for what's wrong with you.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
So you're ignoring the smoke because there's too much of it? That's not how fires work. By your logic, Cosby never sexually assaulted anyone, and is in fact a saint, because there are too many allegations and attacks from his detractors.
I have no doubt that you, OAW, paco, and several others would have me killed over some disagreements, or at least would love to see it happen. It's the type of people you are. The real question is, how did you get to this state?
With Cosby there was no smoke.....no smoke.....no smoke......no smoke..... suddenly massive blazing inferno amount of smoke.
With Hillary it was smoke...no fire....more smoke....still no fire....repeat.....
We are ignoring the smoke because its coming from the crowd of idiots and assholes who are trying to hide industrial smoke machines behind their backs.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
With Cosby there was no smoke.....no smoke.....no smoke......no smoke..... suddenly massive blazing inferno amount of smoke.
BS, there was smoke back in the 80s and 90s, what are you talking about? He's been paying off his victims for >30 years.
With Hillary it was smoke...no fire....more smoke....still no fire....repeat.....
Same with the Clintons paying them off and Hillary attacking them and tearing down their credibility with the press, while claiming she's an advocate for women's rights. That's fine with you?
We are ignoring the smoke because its coming from the crowd of idiots and assholes who are trying to hide industrial smoke machines behind their backs.
Bullshit. You're ignoring the smoke and fire because it's not part of your own BBQ. They're part of your club, you'll do anything to cover for them, including looking the other way while they rape and kill, all for what you think they can do to help bring about some "Great Society". It fits hand-in-glove with you wanting those whom you believe are your enemies dead, and the end you want being worth whatever means is necessary.
Again, look at what this narrative has done to you and the compromises within yourself that you've willfully made to advance it.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
We both know I've already done that several times already and your sealioning isn't going to provoke me into rehashing it for the 4th (or maybe even 5th) time.
No. You haven't. You claim you have. Repeatedly. Like you claim a lot of other BS around here. But you always come up short. And now you try to inoculate yourself against producing actual evidence. Do you really think no one sees that for the transparent dodge that it is? Later for a full-blown rehash. You couldn't even produce a simple link to one of these mythical posts of yours ... because they don't exist.
BS, there was smoke back in the 80s and 90s, what are you talking about? He's been paying off his victims for >30 years.
So says the guy who was defending Cosby throughout the thread devoted to that topic. But now you take the complete opposite position because you just have to be contentious for the sake of being contentious.
I spent some time on Politifact, and have chosen to put stock into its findings. It has found some definite gray area in her integrity (partial truths, etc.) but it seems to find gray area with most politicians (including Obama, who many thought was naive and harmless before he was elected). My gut feeling is that many of you guys are really overblowing these scandals to seem more beyond the pale than what we are used to.
Would I prefer a pristine record? Of course, but here's the other thing... I'm tired of the Republican party, I really want it to reinvent itself. I want to stick it to the party for all of its obstructionism (e.g. supreme court nominees, and basically saying no to anything associated with a D even before they know what they are saying no to), so I would like a Clinton landslide, and what seemed like a rather far fetched possibility now seems like it might happen. I want a solid Republican party, but this one is just lame.
Finally, it looks like Bernie Sanders is committed to keeping his movement going, which I hope will grow with a Clinton landslide. For example, I want to get the corporate money out of politics. I've heard some Republicans go on about Clinton and pay to play, but I'm not buying it, because months ago they would have put this in the rah rah rah free market category if this exposure was associated with a Republican. So, I don't think the Republicans will continue this rhetoric, and therefore it is best fought with that electoral landslide.
I just have to figure out whether I'm going to straight ticket, because since I'm living in Canada I haven't really been keeping track of the politics in the last state I lived in.
DNC operatives shown in Project Veritas videos found in videos disrupting Trump rallies. There is also payments shown to the woman who blocked the highway at a Trump event here in AZ.
No. You haven't. You claim you have. Repeatedly. Like you claim a lot of other BS around here. But you always come up short. And now you try to inoculate yourself against producing actual evidence. Do you really think no one sees that for the transparent dodge that it is? Later for a full-blown rehash. You couldn't even produce a simple link to one of these mythical posts of yours ... because they don't exist.
Talk about dodges! The rest of my post hit too close to home for you, I see. Get some help, professionally..
Originally Posted by OAW
So says the guy who was defending Cosby throughout the thread devoted to that topic. But now you take the complete opposite position because you just have to be contentious for the sake of being contentious.
You were the one defending, I said many of the claims were likely false (but not all).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
BS, there was smoke back in the 80s and 90s, what are you talking about? He's been paying off his victims for >30 years.
I never heard about it at the time. Maybe you did or maybe neither of us did because he paid them off. If he paid them off then we never saw the smoke, and most other folks didn't either. Hence no-one became accustomed to him being "falsely" accused and when all the smoke suddenly became visible to everyone it was a convincing sign.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Same with the Clintons paying them off and Hillary attacking them and tearing down their credibility with the press, while claiming she's an advocate for women's rights. That's fine with you?
You're mixing up threads. The smoke around Hillary in this discussion is not about Bill or rape claims. Its everything alleged against her by the GOP and right wing press for decades. All the Benghazi stuff, the emails, the thing about getting child rapists off and laughing about it, everything they've said about her over the last 25+ years since one of them first thought she might one day run for POTUS. So its that stuff about the foundation and the email that we don't get excited about because every other complaint against her has turned out to be partisan propaganda. Which has done its job very well with some voters, you included. And the murder/suicide claims I've only heard from you and one or two others on these forums who despite repeated denials seem very likely to get their news from Alex Jones & co.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Bullshit. You're ignoring the smoke and fire because it's not part of your own BBQ. They're part of your club, you'll do anything to cover for them, including looking the other way while they rape and kill, all for what you think they can do to help bring about some "Great Society". It fits hand-in-glove with you wanting those whom you believe are your enemies dead, and the end you want being worth whatever means is necessary.
Quite the opposite. You will believe any allegation at all against Hillary Clinton because your politics have shifted way to the right. You've been utterly brainwashed along the way to believe she is evil incarnate so anything piled on top is an automatic pass with you because you're already strongly against her.
It doesn't help that she's a woman. If you really cared about Bill's questionable sexual behaviour, you wouldn't give Trump the time of day because its obvious to everyone with eyeballs let alone ears that he is far worse.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Again, look at what this narrative has done to you and the compromises within yourself that you've willfully made to advance it.
I took one look at Trump 30 years ago as a child and I could tell he was an awful human being. He's been piling on the evidence himself ever since. Not press accusations, not partisan opinions, the things he says and does and now the things he has been accused of. You say the allegations are about the election, I say they are about the tape. Either version could be right but I choose to go with the latter because rich, white, entitled scumbag egomaniac who treats women like possessions also fits that narrative very tidily.
I don't have to make many compromises to pick Hillary over Trump. No sane person does. He is an awful human being, even if he has never technically committed a crime, he still sucks as a member of our species. She is a politician. I don't see her as any worse than that until I see credible evidence. If she had a worthy opponent I might actually give some stock to the email fiasco but its clear nothing bad has really come of this misstep so to keep out the unqualified lunatic, I'll let it slide in a heartbeat.
Trump for President was a joke decades ago, long before we realised the self-confirmed extent of what a total asshole he is. Its you and his supporters who are overlooking the unforgivable, just as the right has for the last twenty years.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
I never heard about it at the time. Maybe you did or maybe neither of us did because he paid them off. If he paid them off then we never saw the smoke, and most other folks didn't either. Hence no-one became accustomed to him being "falsely" accused and when all the smoke suddenly became visible to everyone it was a convincing sign.
Just because you weren't paying attention, doesn't mean it didn't happen, you know.
You're mixing up threads. The smoke around Hillary in this discussion is not about Bill or rape claims. Its everything alleged against her by the GOP and right wing press for decades. All the Benghazi stuff, the emails, the thing about getting child rapists off and laughing about it, everything they've said about her over the last 25+ years since one of them first thought she might one day run for POTUS. So its that stuff about the foundation and the email that we don't get excited about because every other complaint against her has turned out to be partisan propaganda. Which has done its job very well with some voters, you included. And the murder/suicide claims I've only heard from you and one or two others on these forums who despite repeated denials seem very likely to get their news from Alex Jones & co.
Yes, all that's been made up by Alex Jones. You give that fat idiot way too much credit, he's the scapegoat you like to apply to anything that's been attached to the Clintons. Ignoring that the smoke is actually coming from the fires the two of them have been starting since his days in Arkansas. The fact you believe it's all "partisan propaganda" is retarded. Let me guess, you think all her damning emails are manufactured too, right?
Quite the opposite. You will believe any allegation at all against Hillary Clinton because your politics have shifted way to the right. You've been utterly brainwashed along the way to believe she is evil incarnate so anything piled on top is an automatic pass with you because you're already strongly against her.
I believe what's been shown as evidence from numerous sources for the last 20+ years. Hell, you'd probably still believe Bill is a devoted, faithful, family man, if he hadn't come out and admitted that he'd lied to everyone. Where was Hillary's outrage over his indiscretions? Oh, that's right, she was already accustomed to his shenanigans by then and had already taken the lead in covering them up.
It doesn't help that she's a woman. If you really cared about Bill's questionable sexual behaviour, you wouldn't give Trump the time of day because its obvious to everyone with eyeballs let alone ears that he is far worse.
"MISOGYNY!!" I was wondering when that would come back up. Sad man, really sad.
I took one look at Trump 30 years ago as a child and I could tell he was an awful human being.
I'm sure you did, Ms Cleo. We can now add clairvoyance to your powers, along with telepathy.
He's been piling on the evidence himself ever since. Not press accusations, not partisan opinions, the things he says and does and now the things he has been accused of. You say the allegations are about the election, I say they are about the tape. Either version could be right but I choose to go with the latter because rich, white, entitled scumbag egomaniac who treats women like possessions also fits that narrative very tidily.
Occam's Razor would dictate that he's just talking shit, because he's an old dumb jock, but that really does fit your Narrative "very tidily".
I don't have to make many compromises to pick Hillary over Trump. No sane person does. He is an awful human being, even if he has never technically committed a crime, he still sucks as a member of our species. She is a politician.
I don't see her as any worse than that until I see credible evidence. If she had a worthy opponent I might actually give some stock to the email fiasco but its clear nothing bad has really come of this misstep so to keep out the unqualified lunatic, I'll let it slide in a heartbeat.
Yep, you'll take an admitted criminal, who should be in jail for her breaches in handling classified documents alone, over someone who isn't (except in your own visions), passing her off as merely being "a politician". Hell, what she did to Bernie was enough for me to never give her my support, let alone the dozens of other legitimate reasons. He was the only decent person in the race, and she (along with the wholly unscrupulous DNC) used every dirty trick in the book to keep him from winning. I didn't agree with his economic policies, but I believed in who we is and his integrity, something the Clintons have never had.
Trump for President was a joke decades ago, long before we realised the self-confirmed extent of what a total asshole he is. Its you and his supporters who are overlooking the unforgivable, just as the right has for the last twenty years.
Oh please. I know that he's a dumb jock, a rabble-rousing shittalker with few morals and fewer brain cells. He's still better than the catastrophic shitshow that is Hillary. Not enough for me to vote for him, unless I lived in a swing state (which I don't), but I'd choose a D- over an F any day.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
[QUOTE=Cap'n Tightpants;4368844]
Yes, all that's been made up by Alex Jones. You give that fat idiot way too much credit, he's the scapegoat you like to apply to anything that's been attached to the Clintons. Ignoring that the smoke is actually coming from the fires the two of them have been starting since his days in Arkansas. The fact you believe it's all "partisan propaganda" is retarded. Let me guess, you think all her damning emails are manufactured too, right?
Hes an easy poster boy for the sort of "news" sources that post the sort of garbage you are relaying as gospel. I actually don't think her emails were all garbage (except maybe some coming via Wikileaks) and that was my point. If it weren't for the preceding 20 years of completely made up garbage and clutching at out of context straws, it might have been really easy to get rid of her over the email thing. The constant barrage from the GOP and right wing "press" has totally eroded any credibility they might have had with undecided or impartial voters. Given my previous assertion that most cops and FBI agents would like to see her gotten rid of, it speaks volumes that the FBI have come out and said "Lets just not bother charging her."
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
I believe what's been shown as evidence from numerous sources for the last 20+ years. Hell, you'd probably still believe Bill is a devoted, faithful, family man, if he hadn't come out and admitted that he'd lied to everyone. Where was Hillary's outrage over his indiscretions? Oh, that's right, she was already accustomed to his shenanigans by then and had already taken the lead in covering them up.
If he hadn't admitted it, maybe I'd owe him the benefit of the doubt. But as you know from the other thread where your "logic" is biting you repeatedly in the ass, his admission was just words. Banter even.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
"MISOGYNY!!" I was wondering when that would come back up. Sad man, really sad.
You have a problem with women. You have made that abundantly obvious.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Occam's Razor would dictate that he's just talking shit, because he's an old dumb jock, but that really does fit your Narrative "very tidily".
I already admitted its in keeping with opinions I already held about him. It was a private conversation and as insecure as he is, I don't see that he would be that desperate to impress Billy Bush. Whoever the hell he is. (I never heard of Billy Bush before the tape came out)
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Yep, you'll take an admitted criminal, who should be in jail for her breaches in handling classified documents alone, over someone who isn't
He's been proven to have broken laws regarding the conduct of the Trump foundation. Given he doesn't admit to things he said on camera five minutes prior, we can hardly expect him to admit to a crime.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
passing her off as merely being "a politician". Hell, what she did to Bernie was enough for me to never give her my support, let alone the dozens of other legitimate reasons. He was the only decent person in the race, and she (along with the wholly unscrupulous DNC) used every dirty trick in the book to keep him from winning. I didn't agree with his economic policies, but I believed in who we is and his integrity, something the Clintons have never had.
Some people would say thats just politics. But this is probably the most legitimate reason you have for disliking her. I won't fault that one, or your opinion on their relative integrity.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Oh please. I know that he's a dumb jock, a rabble-rousing shittalker with few morals and fewer brain cells. He's still better than the catastrophic shitshow that is Hillary. Not enough for me to vote for him, unless I lived in a swing state (which I don't), but I'd choose a D- over an F any day.
I find it so hard to fathom that you as a businessman would give him the credit of being more trustworthy than her. I'm not even saying she's that trustworthy, but has a number of dodgy deals to his name, and has run on a platform of division, bigotry and negativity. She will at least make the effort to look like she is treating minorities, women LGBT etc fairly and at least look she is paying some measure of respect to the other side.
Trump has dictator written all over him. I just doubt he could find enough people smart enough to make it happen for him but dumb enough to want it to.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
I find it so hard to fathom that you as a businessman would give him the credit of being more trustworthy than her. I'm not even saying she's that trustworthy, but has a number of dodgy deals to his name, and has run on a platform of division, bigotry and negativity.
In a 2012 email to Podesta—with the subject line of “opening for a Catholic Spring?”—a progressive activist named Sanford Newman, President of Voices for Progress, conspired with Podesta to create a “Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic Church.” Podesta responded to the suggestion by claiming that he had already created Catholic groups ready to act when needed: “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this.”
No division, bigotry, or negativity here.
She will at least make the effort to look like she is treating minorities, women LGBT etc fairly and at least look she is paying some measure of respect to the other side.
Trump has dictator written all over him. I just doubt he could find enough people smart enough to make it happen for him but dumb enough to want it to.
yep, The Clintons pay lip service while taking hundreds of millions of dollars from sharia enforcing counties.
In the beforetime, in the long, long ago of 2015, a woman named Hillary Clinton was about to launch her campaign for president. She was also trying really hard to secure $12 million for her family’s charitable foundation from King Mohammed VI of Morocco. And her campaign was freaking out about it.
Campaign manager Robby Mook and longtime Clinton confidant John Podesta thought the deal ― in which Clinton had committed to speak at an event for the king on the condition of his $12 million donation ― would look bad. Clinton aide Huma Abedin tried to explain that it was simply too late to back out.
“This was HRC’s idea,” Abedin wrote in an email to Podesta. “Our office approached the Moroccans and they 100 percent believe they are doing this at her request. The King has personally committed approx $12 million both for the endowment and to support the meeting. It will break a lot of china to back out now when we had so many opportunities to do it in the past few months.”
The team eventually reached a compromise. Hillary Clinton didn’t show up, but Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton did, and the money came through.
It is generally frowned upon for presidential candidates to be pumping foreign leaders for money, and her staff recognized it. And so they exchanged a series of contentious emails. On “Fox News Sunday,” host Chris Wallace pressed Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on the controversy.
“Why wasn’t that classic pay-to-play?” Wallace asked.
“There’s nothing new here,” Mook replied, deflecting to Donald Trump’s sagging poll numbers.
“But, Robby, there is some new stuff,” Wallace responded. “Emails show ― and I’m going to go through some of them ― you were not happy at all the idea of this meeting and her going there.”
Mook maintained that it was all just a scheduling issue that had nothing to do with corruption or public perceptions of corruption.
“We didn’t want her going overseas,” Mook said. “I didn’t want her going overseas before the campaign was kicking off. Again, these are stolen documents.”
The federal government has indeed supported the Clinton campaign’s claims that the Russian government intercepted Podesta’s emails and passed them on to WikiLeaks.
But the revelations about the Clinton Foundation and the paid speeches both Hillary and Bill Clinton negotiated as she navigated her presidential bid have nevertheless been newsworthy. Wallace noted that while the hack of Podesta’s email was almost certainly illegal, the transmission to The New York Times of excerpts of Donald Trump’s tax returns indicating he had taken a loss of almost $1 billion was also likely a breach of law.
“They were clearly stolen,” Wallace said.
“We don’t know that,” Mook replied.
“Do you think Trump had given them [over]?” Wallace shot back.
Veteran journalist Bob Woodward didn’t leave any ambiguity about his own views regarding the Clinton Foundation.
“It’s corrupt,” Woodward said on Fox. “It’s a scandal.”
“The mixing of speech fees, the Clinton Foundation and actions by the State Department which she ran are all intertwined,” he said. “And it’s corrupt. You can’t just say it’s unsavory.”
Allegations of corruption and conflicts of interest involving both the Clinton Foundation and the paid speeches that have earned the Clintons millions of dollars have dogged the campaign since its outset. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly argued that there is nothing wrong with her family’s arrangements, because no explicit quid pro quo ― that is, exchange of cash for specific political favors ― has surfaced. This argument has troubled many Democrats, who note that the campaign’s defense relies on the weak definition of corruption outlined in the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision.
In another case previously reported by HuffPost, staffers had to repeatedly appeal to Hillary Clinton to cancel a paid speech by her husband to Morgan Stanley that had been scheduled to take place just three days after her campaign’s official launch. She initially resisted the entreaties from her aides before finally submitting to political sanity.
It may be the case that the King of Morocco wanted to host the Clintons and pay their foundation millions of dollars because he recognized a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to alleviate global poverty.
That, or maybe it had something to do with politics.
Hes an easy poster boy for the sort of "news" sources that post the sort of garbage you are relaying as gospel. I actually don't think her emails were all garbage (except maybe some coming via Wikileaks) and that was my point. If it weren't for the preceding 20 years of completely made up garbage and clutching at out of context straws, it might have been really easy to get rid of her over the email thing. The constant barrage from the GOP and right wing "press" has totally eroded any credibility they might have had with undecided or impartial voters. Given my previous assertion that most cops and FBI agents would like to see her gotten rid of, it speaks volumes that the FBI have come out and said "Lets just not bother charging her."
Yeah, the people appointed by Obama, right...
If he hadn't admitted it, maybe I'd owe him the benefit of the doubt. But as you know from the other thread where your "logic" is biting you repeatedly in the ass, his admission was just words. Banter even.
and an incriminating dress with his own baby-batter on it. You are terrible at assessing facts, I understand why you love Hillary.
You have a problem with women. You have made that abundantly obvious.
Nope, I have a problem with feminists. Do you know the difference? I'm betting you don't.
I already admitted its in keeping with opinions I already held about him. It was a private conversation and as insecure as he is, I don't see that he would be that desperate to impress Billy Bush. Whoever the hell he is. (I never heard of Billy Bush before the tape came out)
I don't think you've ever actually spent time around jocks, have you?
He's been proven to have broken laws regarding the conduct of the Trump foundation. Given he doesn't admit to things he said on camera five minutes prior, we can hardly expect him to admit to a crime.
What laws did he break? What time did he do and what fines did he pay? I must have missed the hearings.
Some people would say thats just politics. But this is probably the most legitimate reason you have for disliking her. I won't fault that one, or your opinion on their relative integrity.
Do you understand the function of the DNC? Do you think it's an organization that simply exists to get Hillary elected? Shouldn't have Sanders been treated equally? That level of collusion should have been the death of the party.
I find it so hard to fathom that you as a businessman would give him the credit of being more trustworthy than her. I'm not even saying she's that trustworthy, but has a number of dodgy deals to his name, and has run on a platform of division, bigotry and negativity. She will at least make the effort to look like she is treating minorities, women LGBT etc fairly and at least look she is paying some measure of respect to the other side.
You mean the way she treated the LGBT community just a few years ago when she was against them? How about the black community when she called them "super predators" and referred to her black servants in the White House as n***ers? Hillary is human garbage and worse than Trump by far.
Trump has dictator written all over him. I just doubt he could find enough people smart enough to make it happen for him but dumb enough to want it to.
Ms Cleo strikes again! Now with prognostication powa! Tell me, if the USA is at war with Syria in Russia next year, will you admit you were wrong?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
You're so trusting of those in the gov't that it's scary. Again, it's nigh statistically impossible that she's personally known that many suicides, especially looking at the suspicious nature of those deaths, and how these people were connected to her. She's either had powers that induce suicidal levels of depression (all hail the ancient ones!), or she's a murdering, power-hungry psychopath. While the former would be more exciting, I'm thinking the latter is more likely. 
You're not even close. I said, unequivocally, that she'd win 9 months ago. My prediction hasn't changed. Also, I've not voted for a Repub for president since 1988, the year I turned 18. Are you forgetting that I supported Sanders? 
The real question is, how did you get to this state?
Top