Hillary Clinton wins Worst Ethics Violator of 2015. Allan Grayson 2nd

  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
 
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
 
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
Regardless of where it comes from, you can hardly argue that Hillary is not a sleaze of monumental proportions. You just can't.
 
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
Regardless of where it comes from, you can hardly argue that Hillary is not a sleaze of monumental proportions. You just can't.
lol. and here's the proof in this thread, right?
 
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/hillary-clinton-named-worst-ethics-violator-2015/

Anyone not surprised? Democrats win the top two spots followed up by Republican Marc Meadows
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
 
a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
 
Looks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
Answer my question.
 
it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative group
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
Answer my question.
your question is without meaning. of course party affiliation doesn't matter on a criminal prosecution. but let's not pretend that a conservative group's list is in any way analogous.

so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
 
This isn't the only thread on this.

The Breitbart pissdrinkers certainly are reliable parrots.

What is it with you leftie's fascination with urine drinking? You guys manage to mention it in damn near every thread. It's rather vile.
 
So what? If I were to rob a bank but the prosecutor was a Democrat does that mean I get a pass?
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
Answer my question.
your question is without meaning. of course party affiliation doesn't matter on a criminal prosecution. but let's not pretend that a conservative group's list is in any way analogous.

so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?
 
you understand that the point of the list is simply to put clinton at the top, right?

who was on the list in 2014?
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
Answer my question.
your question is without meaning. of course party affiliation doesn't matter on a criminal prosecution. but let's not pretend that a conservative group's list is in any way analogous.

so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?
what topic? you want us to take this list seriously, right? if i'm going to i need to know more about the group publishing it.

who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
 
Answer my question
you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
Answer my question.
your question is without meaning. of course party affiliation doesn't matter on a criminal prosecution. but let's not pretend that a conservative group's list is in any way analogous.

so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?
what topic? you want us to take this list seriously, right? if i'm going to i need to know more about the group publishing it.

who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.
You've failed
 

Forum List

Back
Top