Muslim Brotherhood ties to Clinton

[tinydancer]

Why oh why are we letting this happen?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What kind of ties?

Does he have shirts and underpants as well?

 

[ogibillm]

Bachmann, is that you?

 

[ogibillm]

Ties what?

 

[bravoactual]

Why oh why are we letting this happen?

Do you have any thing remotely related to the truth to back your heretofore unfounded speculation, conjecture, contention, supposition and innuendo?

 

[S.J.]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

 

[B. Kidd]

Hill-Beast 2016!...........same as it ever was.......same as it ever was..........

 

[bravoactual]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

 

[S.J.]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

Denial on your part but that's always the case with liberal hacks. Just shake your head "no" and stick your fingers in your ears.

 

[Lakhota]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

Denial on your part but that's always the case with liberal hacks. Just shake your head "no" and stick your fingers in your ears.

So, you'd rather we believe rabid Conservative trash from links like American Thinker? Hell, why not just use the National Enquirer and skip the pretense of honesty?

 

[S.J.]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

Denial on your part but that's always the case with liberal hacks. Just shake your head "no" and stick your fingers in your ears.

So, you'd rather we believe rabid Conservative trash from links like American Thinker? Hell, why not just use the National Enquirer and skip the pretense of honesty?

You obviously are either too lazy, stupid, or incapable of reading the references in the article. Then again, what else can one expect from someone of your caliber?

 

[bravoactual]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

 

[Kosh]

Next these far left drones will deny that the Clinton Foundation gets millions from the middle East..

You know Hilary claiming she is for women's rights and accepts money from those that do not believe in such things..

 

[S.J.]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

See my post to the injun. It applies to you as well. Learn to read.

 

[Kosh]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

 

[bravoactual]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

See my post to the injun. It applies to you as well. Learn to read.

You post from RW blog.

You posted an opinion.

You are entitled to your own opinions.

Your are NO entitled to your own facts.

 

[S.J.]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

See my post to the injun. It applies to you as well. Learn to read.

You post from RW blog.

You posted an opinion.

You are entitled to your own opinions.

Your are NO entitled to your own facts.

You ignore references you don't like and call them opinions. You're disingenuous.

 

[Kosh]

No, you offered an opinion from a RW blog. You did not offer facts.

Opinions are not facts.

So far, all you have is an opinion

See my post to the injun. It applies to you as well. Learn to read.

You post from RW blog.

You posted an opinion.

You are entitled to your own opinions.

Your are NO entitled to your own facts.

You did it again!

And this irony impaired post from a far left drone!

 

[Lakhota]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

Denial on your part but that's always the case with liberal hacks. Just shake your head "no" and stick your fingers in your ears.

So, you'd rather we believe rabid Conservative trash from links like American Thinker? Hell, why not just use the National Enquirer and skip the pretense of honesty?

You obviously are either too lazy, stupid, or incapable of reading the references in the article. Then again, what else can one expect from someone of your caliber?

Sorry, retard, this shit has been thoroughly debunked. Hell, it's even debunked in Wikipedia.

The claims in the letter were widely rejected and condemned, and were generally labeled as unfounded conspiracy theories.[35][39][40][41][42]The Washington Post editorial board called the allegations "paranoid," a "baseless attack," and a "smear."[35]The Seattle Times compared the letter's accusations to the witch-hunts of Joseph McCarthy, calling the claims "unsupported ... assaults by an unthinking zealot."[43] The Anti-Defamation League condemned the letter as well, referring to it as "conspiratorial" and calling upon the Representatives involved to "stop trafficking in anti-Muslim conspiracy theories."[41]

Huma Abedin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dot Com]

Definitely has ties to Muslim Brotherhood.

Blog: Proof that Huma Abedin Has Muslim Brotherhood Connections

A ConJob posts an opinion piece, which is not proof but empty words.

Fail.

Denial on your part but that's always the case with liberal hacks. Just shake your head "no" and stick your fingers in your ears.

So, you'd rather we believe rabid Conservative trash from links like American Thinker? Hell, why not just use the National Enquirer and skip the pretense of honesty?

^ that