user1111 wrote:
House Republicans wanted the FBI?s notes from their interview with former secretary of state about her handling of emails. The Republicans got their wish and in the process destroyed their own scandal.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Another bombshell released today. Hillary claims she did not know that "C" stood for classified emails. Every day more stunning revelations are revieled but voters are more concerned with a bridge closure. What a brainwashing.

It's because the media buries negative news about Hillary, like this latest whopper she told to the FBI under oath with no qualms at all.

She claimed she thought the big "C" on her emails only was for alphabetizing paragraphs.

I'd bet you anything that if the roles were reversed, and Trump made such an obvious lie to the FBI, the media would ensure that every American in the country would have heard about this several times. They'd go on and on with their indignation. Who does he think he is? Does such an obvious liar deserve to be our next President?

But instead, it gets relegated to the Friday night news dump before a big holiday weekend, and the regularly scheduled 24/7 anti-Trump blitz will resume on Tuesday.

135jc wrote:
Another bombshell released today. Hillary claims she did not know that "C" stood for classified emails. Every day more stunning revelations are revieled but voters are more concerned with a bridge closure. What a brainwashing.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

It's supposed to be "Drumpf," even though the theory behind it was discredited.

Hee hee. Who. Fucking. Cares? Would it make you happier had I called him tRump? Or Duh Donald? The only point of my possibly misspelled name (which of course show I don't really give a shit) is that his "people" were immigrants once too, same as most of us.

It's supposed to be "Drumpf," even though the theory behind it was discredited.

135jc wrote:
I am not desperate. Nor am I championing for Trump. Making false claims about his family name is just silly

135jc wrote:
What is your point? Do you feel she is an ideal candidate? You believe she will be a good leader? The debates will show who she is. That was my point.

135jc wrote:
http://nypost.com/2016/09/01/you-paid ... cant-stop-blurring-lines/

Does anyone think this fleecing will end if she's elected?

135jc wrote:
Great she is ahead. How many times will you post it? As I've said before wait for the debates. She will founder.

fat-ass-bike wrote:
If Trump is following Hitler's fear-mongering and propaganda to rise to power he has forgotten one thing, and that is you can't have 'brown shirts' or 'storm troopers' to eradicate your opponents, lobby groups and trouble makers that might appose you in the US!

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Harry Reid just helped Trump Big Time.... Dope

http://ntknetwork.com/sen-harry-reid-calls-benghazi-mother-crazy/

Harry Reid is correct IMO. How the hell is hillary responsible.

drifterx wrote:
And Congress pretty much agrees with Reid since none of their investigations on Benghazi can prove Clinton killed that woman's son... If that was even the point of the investigations, it kind of lost all meaning when it got political.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Harry Reid just helped Trump Big Time.... Dope

http://ntknetwork.com/sen-harry-reid-calls-benghazi-mother-crazy/

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Hillary can't be having a good week... maybe she will have a press conference and talk about it?

Here is a NY Times piece on Hillary's book... the irony is the story give them a roadmap to setting up The Clinton Foundation.

"There were two ways that the Clintons could have given all the royalties to charity in 1996 and 1997. One would have been to create a private foundation, which they could control and which would have to file an annual report disclosing its income, expenses and charitable grants, said Lee A. Sheppard, a New York tax lawyer who writes critiques of tax policy for the magazine Tax Notes."

That is exactly what they did to launder cash like the $500K speaker fee that Bill got from the Russian company while HRC SoS let them buy Uranium.

I wonder if leaving $187k on the table for Uncle Sam spurred them to move quickly and setup the foundation scam. They still have not filed the required annual statements to IRS.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/14/us/ ... ere-given-to-charity.html

michelle bachman just helped trump big time.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Hillary can't be having a good week... maybe she will have a press conference and talk about it?

Here is a NY Times piece on Hillary's book... the irony is the story give them a roadmap to setting up The Clinton Foundation.

"There were two ways that the Clintons could have given all the royalties to charity in 1996 and 1997. One would have been to create a private foundation, which they could control and which would have to file an annual report disclosing its income, expenses and charitable grants, said Lee A. Sheppard, a New York tax lawyer who writes critiques of tax policy for the magazine Tax Notes."

That is exactly what they did to launder cash like the $500K speaker fee that Bill got from the Russian company while HRC SoS let them buy Uranium.

I wonder if leaving $187k on the table for Uncle Sam spurred them to move quickly and setup the foundation scam. They still have not filed the required annual statements to IRS.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/14/us/ ... ere-given-to-charity.html

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
So if you vote for Hillary... can you be indicted as a co-conspirator to RiCO Charges for Clinton Foundation?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/ ... CTIME=2016-08-23-14-35-04

lol. the clintons did not benefit from the clinton foundation....the money raised by the clinton foundation went to help people in poor countries! get real!

i'd be more concerned she rented property she owned to her campaign and then raised the rent on the space 5X once the donations started rolling in. talk about self-dealing

LOL... funny, the Clinton's have lived in Public Housing most of their professional lives... They ran a B&B their first go round in the White House renting out Lincoln Bedroom.

For Bill tagging Denise Rich, Streisand or Sarandon who stayed over was just a plus, if they also paid.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_an ... clinton_many_of_bill.html

Hillary and Bill made money off your property! Chump change today... Concerned yet???

ae you saying that political patronage started with the clintons? if so, not true

You need to lookup the definitions of political patronage and quid pro quo. Ambassador appointments have been going on for years right or wrong. The apparent conflict of interest between the Clinton State, her Staff and the donations from NGOs (Goldman Sachs) and countries to the Clinton Foundation leaves them open minimally to corruption charges..

maybe they will be charged with treason.
J
Lol. Corruption, really! Doesn't trump think e'll be able to walk on water if elected

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
So if you vote for Hillary... can you be indicted as a co-conspirator to RiCO Charges for Clinton Foundation?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/ ... CTIME=2016-08-23-14-35-04

lol. the clintons did not benefit from the clinton foundation....the money raised by the clinton foundation went to help people in poor countries! get real!

i'd be more concerned she rented property she owned to her campaign and then raised the rent on the space 5X once the donations started rolling in. talk about self-dealing

LOL... funny, the Clinton's have lived in Public Housing most of their professional lives... They ran a B&B their first go round in the White House renting out Lincoln Bedroom.

For Bill tagging Denise Rich, Streisand or Sarandon who stayed over was just a plus, if they also paid.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_an ... clinton_many_of_bill.html

Hillary and Bill made money off your property! Chump change today... Concerned yet???

ae you saying that political patronage started with the clintons? if so, not true

You need to lookup the definitions of political patronage and quid pro quo. Ambassador appointments have been going on for years right or wrong. The apparent conflict of interest between the Clinton State, her Staff and the donations from NGOs (Goldman Sachs) and countries to the Clinton Foundation leaves them open minimally to corruption charges..

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
So if you vote for Hillary... can you be indicted as a co-conspirator to RiCO Charges for Clinton Foundation?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/ ... CTIME=2016-08-23-14-35-04

lol. the clintons did not benefit from the clinton foundation....the money raised by the clinton foundation went to help people in poor countries! get real!

i'd be more concerned she rented property she owned to her campaign and then raised the rent on the space 5X once the donations started rolling in. talk about self-dealing

LOL... funny, the Clinton's have lived in Public Housing most of their professional lives... They ran a B&B their first go round in the White House renting out Lincoln Bedroom.

For Bill tagging Denise Rich, Streisand or Sarandon who stayed over was just a plus, if they also paid.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_an ... clinton_many_of_bill.html

Hillary and Bill made money off your property! Chump change today... Concerned yet???

ae you saying that political patronage started with the clintons? if so, not true