Lol...Oh Man!

[Windship]

 

[gipper]

Nothing funny about the Hillary knowing the Saudis are funding ISIL. No doubt Big Ears knew as well.

When did the average D, prog, and liberal become one with the corrupt 1% Establishment?

 

[OldLady]

Wow. The Russians are really rooting for Donald!
Clinton should address this succinctly and clearly. If the Saudi's were writing checks directly to ISIS, they should be declared a terrorist state. It is not the case for good reason, but where is the government/Clinton camp on this, explaining what is actually the case?
We as the American people are smart enough to understand the explanation.
And I'm not fond of watching Russian propaganda television.

 

[Windship]

Ok, you blind, deaf and dumb fool. Go ahead. Wanna know whats wrong with the country? Look in the mirror.

 

[OldLady]

Ok, you blind, deaf and dumb fool. Go ahead. Wanna know whats wrong with the country? Look in the mirror.

I'd more likely find the answer in the mirror than on Putin TV.

 

[owebo]

Wow. The Russians are really rooting for Donald!
Clinton should address this succinctly and clearly. If the Saudi's were writing checks directly to ISIS, they should be declared a terrorist state. It is not the case for good reason, but where is the government/Clinton camp on this, explaining what is actually the case?
We as the American people are smart enough to understand the explanation.
And I'm not fond of watching Russian propaganda television.

 

[Windship]

Ok, you blind, deaf and dumb fool. Go ahead. Wanna know whats wrong with the country? Look in the mirror.

I'd more likely find the answer in the mirror than on Putin TV.

You wouldnt know the truth if it stripped you and raped you and you dont know how it feels to be stripped and raped by lies. What does that say about you?

 

[gipper]

Wow. The Russians are really rooting for Donald!
Clinton should address this succinctly and clearly. If the Saudi's were writing checks directly to ISIS, they should be declared a terrorist state. It is not the case for good reason, but where is the government/Clinton camp on this, explaining what is actually the case?
We as the American people are smart enough to understand the explanation.
And I'm not fond of watching Russian propaganda television.

You think there is a valid explanation as to why Clinton knew about the Saudis funding ISIL and did nothing...your naivete is very cute.

 

[OldLady]

Ok, you blind, deaf and dumb fool. Go ahead. Wanna know whats wrong with the country? Look in the mirror.

I'd more likely find the answer in the mirror than on Putin TV.

You wouldnt know the truth if it stripped you and raped you and you dont know how it feels to be stripped and raped by lies. What does that say about you?

What does that response say about YOU? I know.

 

[OldLady]

Wow. The Russians are really rooting for Donald!
Clinton should address this succinctly and clearly. If the Saudi's were writing checks directly to ISIS, they should be declared a terrorist state. It is not the case for good reason, but where is the government/Clinton camp on this, explaining what is actually the case?
We as the American people are smart enough to understand the explanation.
And I'm not fond of watching Russian propaganda television.

You think there is a valid explanation as to why Clinton knew about the Saudis funding ISIL and did nothing...your naivete is very cute.

No, I think there is a valid explanation for why Saudi funds are ending up in ISIS's hands without direct involvement by the government. Back when I was reading a bunch of stuff during the Gold Star Khan family kerfluffle, I read quite a a bit about it, and it wasn't 'spin,' it was Khan himself explaining how funding works over there. I don't remember details.
The Clintons aren't supporting ISIS via the Saudi's, and the Saudi's aren't giving ISIS a check and saying "blow 'em up, boys." Is money reaching ISIS through many ways? Yes. This is uninformed spin.

 

[gipper]

Wow. The Russians are really rooting for Donald!
Clinton should address this succinctly and clearly. If the Saudi's were writing checks directly to ISIS, they should be declared a terrorist state. It is not the case for good reason, but where is the government/Clinton camp on this, explaining what is actually the case?
We as the American people are smart enough to understand the explanation.According to Assange during Cankles reign at State, arms sells by the USA DOUBLED. I have not read that anywhere. Seems strange no? When you consider that the Clinton Crime Family's wealth also greatly increased during her time at State...only naive fools would think nothing is inappropriate.
And I'm not fond of watching Russian propaganda television.

You think there is a valid explanation as to why Clinton knew about the Saudis funding ISIL and did nothing...your naivete is very cute.

No, I think there is a valid explanation for why Saudi funds are ending up in ISIS's hands without direct involvement by the government. Back when I was reading a bunch of stuff during the Gold Star Khan family kerfluffle, I read quite a a bit about it, and it wasn't 'spin,' it was Khan himself explaining how funding works over there. I don't remember details.
The Clintons aren't supporting ISIS via the Saudi's, and the Saudi's aren't giving ISIS a check and saying "blow 'em up, boys." Is money reaching ISIS through many ways? Yes. This is uninformed spin.

According to Assange during Cankles reign at State, arms sells by the USA DOUBLED. I have not read that anywhere. Seems strange no? When you consider that the Clinton Crime Family's wealth also greatly increased during her time at State...only naive fools would think nothing is inappropriate.

 

[Windship]

the simple fact that you think clinton will be good for America speaks volumes about you. You dont know how anything works. You dont listen to what they say, then watch what they do and then hold them accountable. You dont look for whats true, you look to substantiate your ignorant beliefs and completely ignore whats true.Therefore, you do not know whats true and your stuck in mediocrity. The criminal gov see's you and they arent afraid and do whatever they want. But of course, you dont see it...

 

[Windship]

...because your stuck in mediocrity.

 

[gipper]

the simple fact that you think clinton will be good for America speaks volumes about you. You dont know how anything works. You dont listen to what they say, then watch what they do and then hold them accountable. You dont look for whats true, you look to substantiate your ignorant beliefs and completely ignore whats true.Therefore, you do not know whats true and your stuck in mediocrity. The criminal gov see's you and they arent afraid and do whatever they want. But of course, you dont see it...

She is not unlike millions of Americans, who get all their news from the liberal media.

 

[Windship]

And anybody LIKE you.

 

[Windship]

the simple fact that you think clinton will be good for America speaks volumes about you. You dont know how anything works. You dont listen to what they say, then watch what they do and then hold them accountable. You dont look for whats true, you look to substantiate your ignorant beliefs and completely ignore whats true.Therefore, you do not know whats true and your stuck in mediocrity. The criminal gov see's you and they arent afraid and do whatever they want. But of course, you dont see it...

She is not unlike millions of Americans, who get all their news from the liberal media.

I get my info from anywhere. It is totally against my principals to do otherwise. Its against my principals to stack the deck. I do not do that.

 

[Windship]

and....once again....it doesnt matter if its a lib source. All that matters is weather or not its true.

 

[OldLady]

You start a thread and then insult anyone stupid enough to enter it? Have fun playing with yourself.

 

[Windship]

Hillary Clinton Can’t Let Donald Trump Win the Corruption Issue
By Jonathan ChaitShareTweetShareShareEmailCommentcatchphrase “Follow the money.” This is probably Trump’s most fruitful avenue of attack. The Clinton Foundation has created appearances of a conflict of interest, and the Clintons’ policy of accepting speaking fees from any source as long as the check would clear the bank has tarnished her image, and months of bashing at the hands of Bernie Sanders left her branded in the mind of many young liberals as a handmaiden of Wall Street.

And yet the notion that a voter ought to support Trump over Clinton on grounds of financial ethics or transparency is insane. Trump is corrupt on a world-historic scale. Andrew Prokop’s summary merely skims the surface of a career that has left hardly any rule or norm of business conduct un-violated. It is not only Trump’s history of misconduct, or even his ongoing abuse of his foundation for personal gain, but his astonishing promise, if elected, to continue to abuse his power to enrich himself by having his children manage his branded business that he will enhance via public office.

Even if none of that were true, it remains the case that Trump has shattered modern precedent by refusing to disclose his tax returns. How on Earth can a candidate run on the slogan “Follow the money” while stonewalling any questions about his own money? The only possible context in which this makes sense is a myopic, context-free focus on Clinton’s ethical shortcomings, combined with the assumption that Trump’s dangerous lunacy amounts to some kind of independence from big moneyed interests.

That the latter is not the case is a point Clinton ought to press more forcefully. A Gallup poll finds that, for voters under 35 years old, the only issue on which Trump beats Clinton is “government regulation of Wall Street and banks.” This is an understandable heuristic based on a combination of Clinton’s paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, Sanders positioning himself to her left on financial regulation, and the uncertainty with which Wall Street views Trump.

But the reality is that Clinton favors strengthening the already-tough regulations on Wall Street created by Dodd-Frank, by levying a risk fee on the largest banks and tightening the Volcker Rule. Trump, on the other hand, proposes “close to dismantling of Dodd-Frank,” which, he claims, “has made it impossible for bankers to function.” This is a conventional Republican policy agenda strongly endorsed by Wall Street. Now, it is true that Wall Street does not like Trump, but this is not because he would regulate their activity, but because he is a dangerous buffoon who might bring down the world economy and them with it.

Clinton had the opportunity to draw this distinction in the first debate, after her opponent boasted of his opposition to regulation. She declined to point out that the regulations Trump would eviscerate include those on the financial industry. It is an opportunity she ought to seize the next time it comes.

 

[Windship]

Do you like that one better?