DrAlphaeus wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Vmart wrote:I listened to Trump and Hillary today and noticed Trump was on talking points. Immigration, economy, he was hittin all the topics that mattered to the public. Hillary in the other hand brought nothing no economic, no immigration, absolutely nothing. Just an observation.

Thats a big reason why this thread started and some have missed the point. She president in hiding. She has no ideas she has shown no energy for the job she goes in hiding as much as possible. She can tell you very loudly that Trump is a misogynist=--because thats her whole campaign plan.

She does have ideas, she has plenty of energy — that energy line is super lame... but I agree she is focusing too much on attacking Trump and not laying out her own vision, and hides from press scrutiny too much.

Can you please stop repeating those dumb "no idea, no energy" parts of your thesis?

Dr --just repeat after me---President Donald J Trump President Donald J Trump--its going to happen--its going to be all over real soon watch wait and learn. Jeff Bezos better keeping dumping his stock

DrAlphaeus wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Vmart wrote:I listened to Trump and Hillary today and noticed Trump was on talking points. Immigration, economy, he was hittin all the topics that mattered to the public. Hillary in the other hand brought nothing no economic, no immigration, absolutely nothing. Just an observation.

Thats a big reason why this thread started and some have missed the point. She president in hiding. She has no ideas she has shown no energy for the job she goes in hiding as much as possible. She can tell you very loudly that Trump is a misogynist=--because thats her whole campaign plan.

She does have ideas, she has plenty of energy — that energy line is super lame... but I agree she is focusing too much on attacking Trump and not laying out her own vision, and hides from press scrutiny too much.

Can you please stop repeating those dumb "no ideas, no energy" parts of your thesis?

Vmart wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

holfresh wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:New emails found after she said that was it? OMG people she is a fcking "traitor" let alone criminally corrupt. So voting for what could amount to a very serious felon(maybe worse) or a guy who bragged he got some pssy 13 years ago?

He didn't brag that he got some, he bragged that he sexually assaulted women. If he had just gone up to your wife (or mom or sister or daughter) and grabbed her by the p**** would you have still voted for him?

I'm not down with opp but He's a bragadacious fella so I wouldn't take it to seriously

That's the thing Briggs, no one should take this scumbag seriously, question is why do you?

Because on the other hand, we have much much worse.

Yeah I agree. No worse than stroke victim Guiliani. The guy is Trumps right hand flunky who would not win a high school presidential race. BTW. Did you know he saved NY in 2001? He only says it every other sentence.

Because he Midtown west was not as pleasant as it is today.

Hillary coining the term Super-predators is worse than anything Giuliani did or has been misguidedly accused of doing.

Hillary did not coin the term Super-predator...John Dulio, professor at Princeton University wrote a paper about the spike in crime rate in the 1990s and coined the phrase in his paper...Hillary is just one of many politicians who sited the paper as a study on crime and repeated the term..Republicans were successful in attributing term to Hillary like most other ills in the world..

+1... nice one holfresh.

Nice research done, but that is semantics at best she used the term did she not?

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

holfresh wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:New emails found after she said that was it? OMG people she is a fcking "traitor" let alone criminally corrupt. So voting for what could amount to a very serious felon(maybe worse) or a guy who bragged he got some pssy 13 years ago?

He didn't brag that he got some, he bragged that he sexually assaulted women. If he had just gone up to your wife (or mom or sister or daughter) and grabbed her by the p**** would you have still voted for him?

I'm not down with opp but He's a bragadacious fella so I wouldn't take it to seriously

That's the thing Briggs, no one should take this scumbag seriously, question is why do you?

Because on the other hand, we have much much worse.

Yeah I agree. No worse than stroke victim Guiliani. The guy is Trumps right hand flunky who would not win a high school presidential race. BTW. Did you know he saved NY in 2001? He only says it every other sentence.

Because he Midtown west was not as pleasant as it is today.

Hillary coining the term Super-predators is worse than anything Giuliani did or has been misguidedly accused of doing.

Hillary did not coin the term Super-predator...John Dulio, professor at Princeton University wrote a paper about the spike in crime rate in the 1990s and coined the phrase in his paper...Hillary is just one of many politicians who sited the paper as a study on crime and repeated the term..Republicans were successful in attributing term to Hillary like most other ills in the world..

+1... nice one holfresh.

Nice research done, but that is semantics at best she used the term did she not?

If you want to go back over the past 25 years, Trump has said many more outrageous things than Hillary has

I wouldn't put "saying outrageous" things in the same category as mass murder. Clinton has pushed for war (Iraq, Libya, etc.) again and again.

Trump may have a big mouth (which might be needed once he becomes president, to clean house) but Clinton(s) have taken the word Corruption to another level.

And BTW - FBI is investigating Clinton Foundation (and have been). I think this is where the Shizz hits the fan...

Scripps News found that the Clinton Foundation accepted $225 million in government donations between 2010 and 2014 — a significant discrepancy between what Clinton’s Health Access Initiative (CHAI) told New York state and what it told the IRS.
According to Scripps, “That year, CHAI reported only $242,099 in ‘Total Government Contributions’ to New York regulators, and that number included only domestic grants. But for the same time period in 2010 it told the IRS it received $26,740,319 in foreign and domestic government grants.”
Schneiderman is also a Democrat who serves on Clinton’s leadership council in New York state. He hosted a fundraiser for her in June, and in 2015, Schneiderman gave the Clinton campaign $2,700, the maximum personal contribution allowed under federal law.

http://www.newsnet5.com/longform/exclusive-clinton-charities-ignore-law-requiring-them-to-disclose-millions-from-foreign-donors

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

holfresh wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:New emails found after she said that was it? OMG people she is a fcking "traitor" let alone criminally corrupt. So voting for what could amount to a very serious felon(maybe worse) or a guy who bragged he got some pssy 13 years ago?

He didn't brag that he got some, he bragged that he sexually assaulted women. If he had just gone up to your wife (or mom or sister or daughter) and grabbed her by the p**** would you have still voted for him?

I'm not down with opp but He's a bragadacious fella so I wouldn't take it to seriously

That's the thing Briggs, no one should take this scumbag seriously, question is why do you?

Because on the other hand, we have much much worse.

Yeah I agree. No worse than stroke victim Guiliani. The guy is Trumps right hand flunky who would not win a high school presidential race. BTW. Did you know he saved NY in 2001? He only says it every other sentence.

Because he Midtown west was not as pleasant as it is today.

Hillary coining the term Super-predators is worse than anything Giuliani did or has been misguidedly accused of doing.

Hillary did not coin the term Super-predator...John Dulio, professor at Princeton University wrote a paper about the spike in crime rate in the 1990s and coined the phrase in his paper...Hillary is just one of many politicians who sited the paper as a study on crime and repeated the term..Republicans were successful in attributing term to Hillary like most other ills in the world..

+1... nice one holfresh.

Nice research done, but that is semantics at best she used the term did she not?

If you want to go back over the past 25 years, Trump has said many more outrageous things than Hillary has

I wouldn't put "saying outrageous" things in the same category as mass murder. Clinton has pushed for war (Iraq, Libya, etc.) again and again.

Trump may have a big mouth (which might be needed once he becomes president, to clean house) but Clinton(s) have taken the word Corruption to another level.

And BTW - FBI is investigating Clinton Foundation (and have been). I think this is where the Shizz hits the fan...

Scripps News found that the Clinton Foundation accepted $225 million in government donations between 2010 and 2014 — a significant discrepancy between what Clinton’s Health Access Initiative (CHAI) told New York state and what it told the IRS.
According to Scripps, “That year, CHAI reported only $242,099 in ‘Total Government Contributions’ to New York regulators, and that number included only domestic grants. But for the same time period in 2010 it told the IRS it received $26,740,319 in foreign and domestic government grants.”
Schneiderman is also a Democrat who serves on Clinton’s leadership council in New York state. He hosted a fundraiser for her in June, and in 2015, Schneiderman gave the Clinton campaign $2,700, the maximum personal contribution allowed under federal law.

http://www.newsnet5.com/longform/exclusive-clinton-charities-ignore-law-requiring-them-to-disclose-millions-from-foreign-donors

You're switching the topic - we were talking about outrageous statements not corruption. Your topic has been discussed so many times in this thread that I see no reason to even go back to it.

It sounds so outrageous to say "Your topic has been discussed so many times in this thread that I see no reason to even go back to it." Really, we are talking about a new president coming into office and you would like to switch to most outrageous statements? I'll stick with her lying, wars, Quid Pro Quo, etc. because the country and world is on the line.

I'll leave you with this outrageous statement, gotta love Chuck.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/792528967353769984

And this sounds outrageous but is probably true.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/MorganBrittany4/status/792452710243020800

Bonn1997 wrote:Well 2 of the 6 days of the IBD tracking poll (which seems to lean Republican) included this e-mail story, and it has Clinton at +2.5%. It was +4 at one point. No idea what's going to actually happen. I think Hillary is handling this now as well as she could by demanding more information.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/29/clinton-47-trump-45-in-post-abc-tracking-poll/

Looks like Hillaries lead is turning hard, but who really believes these polls, outside of Hillary supporters?
It is pretty clear, all the lies and corruption are taking its toll on Hillary's chances.

NEW PODESTA EMAIL REVEALS STRATEGY FOR RIGGING POLLS BY ‘OVERSAMPLING’
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/10/27/new-podesta-email-reveals-strategy-for-rigging-polls-by-oversampling/
There are many more articles written, questioning the validity of the polls.

It is really starting to look like Hillary is not going to win this. Not sure she is even going to stick around for the vote the way things have gone lately.
Best thing for the country might be for her to step down.

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

holfresh wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:New emails found after she said that was it? OMG people she is a fcking "traitor" let alone criminally corrupt. So voting for what could amount to a very serious felon(maybe worse) or a guy who bragged he got some pssy 13 years ago?

He didn't brag that he got some, he bragged that he sexually assaulted women. If he had just gone up to your wife (or mom or sister or daughter) and grabbed her by the p**** would you have still voted for him?

I'm not down with opp but He's a bragadacious fella so I wouldn't take it to seriously

That's the thing Briggs, no one should take this scumbag seriously, question is why do you?

Because on the other hand, we have much much worse.

Yeah I agree. No worse than stroke victim Guiliani. The guy is Trumps right hand flunky who would not win a high school presidential race. BTW. Did you know he saved NY in 2001? He only says it every other sentence.

Because he Midtown west was not as pleasant as it is today.

Hillary coining the term Super-predators is worse than anything Giuliani did or has been misguidedly accused of doing.

Hillary did not coin the term Super-predator...John Dulio, professor at Princeton University wrote a paper about the spike in crime rate in the 1990s and coined the phrase in his paper...Hillary is just one of many politicians who sited the paper as a study on crime and repeated the term..Republicans were successful in attributing term to Hillary like most other ills in the world..

+1... nice one holfresh.

Nice research done, but that is semantics at best she used the term did she not?

If you want to go back over the past 25 years, Trump has said many more outrageous things than Hillary has

I wouldn't put "saying outrageous" things in the same category as mass murder. Clinton has pushed for war (Iraq, Libya, etc.) again and again.

Trump may have a big mouth (which might be needed once he becomes president, to clean house) but Clinton(s) have taken the word Corruption to another level.

And BTW - FBI is investigating Clinton Foundation (and have been). I think this is where the Shizz hits the fan...

Scripps News found that the Clinton Foundation accepted $225 million in government donations between 2010 and 2014 — a significant discrepancy between what Clinton’s Health Access Initiative (CHAI) told New York state and what it told the IRS.
According to Scripps, “That year, CHAI reported only $242,099 in ‘Total Government Contributions’ to New York regulators, and that number included only domestic grants. But for the same time period in 2010 it told the IRS it received $26,740,319 in foreign and domestic government grants.”
Schneiderman is also a Democrat who serves on Clinton’s leadership council in New York state. He hosted a fundraiser for her in June, and in 2015, Schneiderman gave the Clinton campaign $2,700, the maximum personal contribution allowed under federal law.

http://www.newsnet5.com/longform/exclusive-clinton-charities-ignore-law-requiring-them-to-disclose-millions-from-foreign-donors

You're switching the topic - we were talking about outrageous statements not corruption. Your topic has been discussed so many times in this thread that I see no reason to even go back to it.

It sounds so outrageous to say "Your topic has been discussed so many times in this thread that I see no reason to even go back to it." Really, we are talking about a new president coming into office and you would like to switch to most outrageous statements? I'll stick with her lying, wars, Quid Pro Quo, etc. because the country and world is on the line.

I'll leave you with this outrageous statement, gotta love Chuck.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/chuckwoolery/status/792528967353769984

And this sounds outrageous but is probably true.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/MorganBrittany4/status/792452710243020800

From my view, your claims have been debunked enough times that I see no reason to go through them again. I did NOT switch the topic to outrageous statements, though. I was replying to a previous comment.

She is responsible for the deaths of 10's of thousands of Libyans. She voted for failed wars.
Which debunked claims are you talking about?

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Well 2 of the 6 days of the IBD tracking poll (which seems to lean Republican) included this e-mail story, and it has Clinton at +2.5%. It was +4 at one point. No idea what's going to actually happen. I think Hillary is handling this now as well as she could by demanding more information.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/29/clinton-47-trump-45-in-post-abc-tracking-poll/

Looks like Hillaries lead is turning hard, but who really believes these polls, outside of Hillary supporters?
It is pretty clear, all the lies and corruption are taking its toll on Hillary's chances.

NEW PODESTA EMAIL REVEALS STRATEGY FOR RIGGING POLLS BY ‘OVERSAMPLING’
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/10/27/new-podesta-email-reveals-strategy-for-rigging-polls-by-oversampling/
There are many more articles written, questioning the validity of the polls.

It is really starting to look like Hillary is not going to win this. Not sure she is even going to stick around for the vote the way things have gone lately.
Best thing for the country might be for her to step down.

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:Its kind of ironic that HRC wants "ALL" the information released now. Had she not deleted 33000 emails and held back information, she may never had been in the position she is now.

Of course she knows they cant release the info as they are involved in an investigation. Everything we have heard is speculation.

IF there is a connection to Weiner, well then that is just too funny.

Besides the emails are only a small part of it. The CF is the real story here, with all the money laundering and pay for play.

Comey went from most favored son, to most hated for the Dems.

It seems like he is just trying to follow the Rule of law. More evidence surfaced he must look at it.

Well said, and a HUGE part of those deletions from Hillary Clinton, is that the deletes occurred AFTER the request for the emails by the State Department!
Anyone else would be in prison right now. A few having done, much much much less, actually are.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/28/hillary-deleted-e-mails-after-request-by-state-department/