Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hillary Clinton wins Worst Ethics Violator of 2015. Allan Grayson 2nd
- Thread starter Remodeling Maidiac
- Start date
Not really. All journalists are liberals regardless who they work for.it can look like whatever it wants, it's still a list put out by a conservative groupLooks like a bipartisan list to me. It also has LEGITIMATE issues that Hillary should explain.a conservative 'watchdog' group called hillary names. how is that news?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
- Thread starter
- #23
For some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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.Answer my question.you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
Some serious deflection going on
lol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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.Answer my question.you want to pretend they are non-partisan. you might be right. who won in 2014?
so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
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've failed
no, what i think is the list was developed solely to be used as an attack on clinton. if that's not the case, there should be a 2014 list. is there?For some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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.Answer my question.
so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
Some serious deflection going on
- Thread starter
- #26
2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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.Answer my question.
so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
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've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #27
For some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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.Answer my question.
so let me ask, as a way to judge their impartiality, who won in 2014?
who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
Some serious deflection going on
That's because he doesn't agree with the choice for the 2015 winner.
so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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?
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've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
it's because there is no 2014 list. the whole thing is just a way to attack hillaryFor some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?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?
who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
Some serious deflection going on
That's because he doesn't agree with the choice for the 2015 winner.
- Thread starter
- #30
Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?
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've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
it's a list. if you want to talk about the accusations, make a thread about the accusations.Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
this thread was made about a list calling clinton the most unethical.a list i believe exists solely so that clinton can take the top spo
Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #32
it's because there is no 2014 list. the whole thing is just a way to attack hillaryFor some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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.Why are you so desperate to avoid the topic?
who won in 2014? i've answered your question, why do you avoid mine like the plague? are you having trouble locating the answer?
Some serious deflection going on
That's because he doesn't agree with the choice for the 2015 winner.
Are you claiming that any list that exists for the first time is invalid because there wasn't a previous list? You claim it's wrong not based on anything but it's the first time the list was put out.
The Heisman trophy, although known as the Downtown Athletic Club Trophy the first year it was given, started in 1935. Does that mean the first winner, Jay Berwanger, wasn't legitimate because it was the first year it was given? That's the premise of your argument.
- Thread starter
- #33
Deflect deflect deflectit's a list. if you want to talk about the accusations, make a thread about the accusations.Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.
You've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
this thread was made about a list calling clinton the most unethical.a list i believe exists solely so that clinton can take the top spo
We're done here. It's clear you can't be honest
Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #34
Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.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've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
Wonder if he thinks any first time award is invalid because no one received it the year before? That's the premise of his argument.
Donald Trump wins PolitiFact’s ‘Lie of the Year,’ doesn’t take it lying downwww.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
Trump lies all the time and his popularity keeps going up and up and up.
no, my premise is that a list put out by a conservative group for the first time in the runup to an election exists solely to push a narrative.it's because there is no 2014 list. the whole thing is just a way to attack hillaryFor some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.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?
Some serious deflection going on
That's because he doesn't agree with the choice for the 2015 winner.
Are you claiming that any list that exists for the first time is invalid because there wasn't a previous list? You claim it's wrong not based on anything but it's the first time the list was put out.
The Heisman trophy, although known as the Downtown Athletic Club Trophy the first year it was given, started in 1935. Does that mean the first winner, Jay Berwanger, wasn't legitimate because it was the first year it was given? That's the premise of your argument.
you are purposefully misunderstanding my point.Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?You don't need to know anything about the source unless the allegations are false. These allegation are not false.
You've failed
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
Wonder if he thinks any first time award is invalid because no one received it the year before? That's the premise of his argument.
Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #38
no, my premise is that a list put out by a conservative group for the first time in the runup to an election exists solely to push a narrative.it's because there is no 2014 list. the whole thing is just a way to attack hillaryFor some reason he thinks 2014 is relevant to the winner of a 2015 contest.Hillary's sleaze, or lack of ethics if you prefer, is the topic. Just so you know, this is not a "safe space" forum.
Some serious deflection going on
That's because he doesn't agree with the choice for the 2015 winner.
Are you claiming that any list that exists for the first time is invalid because there wasn't a previous list? You claim it's wrong not based on anything but it's the first time the list was put out.
The Heisman trophy, although known as the Downtown Athletic Club Trophy the first year it was given, started in 1935. Does that mean the first winner, Jay Berwanger, wasn't legitimate because it was the first year it was given? That's the premise of your argument.
Then surely you have proof of your claim and proof isn't "because I said so".
That would be a neat trick for Hillary, but she just keeps going down and down.Donald Trump wins PolitiFact’s ‘Lie of the Year,’ doesn’t take it lying downwww.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
Trump lies all the time and his popularity keeps going up and up and up.
it's clear the manipulation has worked well on you.Deflect deflect deflectit's a list. if you want to talk about the accusations, make a thread about the accusations.Accuracy is based on the allegations not the accuser. 2014 has NOTHING to do with Clinton's ethical problems.so for you the list has done it's job. you don't really care if it's accurate or if the people are fair, all you care about is hillary being at the top2 reasonslol. so why can't you tell me who won in 2014?
I don't know & nor do I care
You have spent an ENTIRE hour talking about everything but the ethics violations.
Deflect much
this thread was made about a list calling clinton the most unethical.a list i believe exists solely so that clinton can take the top spo
We're done here. It's clear you can't be honest
what i actually think is going on is you're starting to realize you swallowed the story without thinking about it at all and are starting to regret that decision.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 625
- Views
- 23K
- Replies
- 782
- Views
- 33K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 23
- Views
- 96
- Replies
- 89
- Views
- 559
- Replies
- 35
- Views
- 72
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8292
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 476
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-