BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,376
- 17,026
- 2,180
Have they produced any crack whores yet? Are you just trying to cast aspersions on the women who have accused Donald "The Lying Groper" Trump of exactly what he bragged about?
Rigging the Election – Video III
- Thread starter cereal_killer
- Start date
Have they produced any crack whores yet? Are you just trying to cast aspersions on the women who have accused Donald "The Lying Groper" Trump of exactly what he bragged about?
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
- Thread starter
- #22
They've already tossed out "beauty queens" and porn stars. Crack whores are just a natural progression. Eventually we'll see drag queens accusing him of grabbing them by the dicks if Clinton keeps getting hammered by WikiLeaks and Project Veritas.
bendog
Diamond Member
Rudy!
Ravi
Diamond Member
How are the wikileaks emails going? Those are really your best bet. No one believes okeefe anymore. And wikileaks did prove that Hillary took Algeria off the terror list after all.
- Banned
- #26
LOL!!!!!
Parroted straight off the Hillary talking points sheet next to your keyboard.
Good little...
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,376
- 17,026
- 2,180
I'll take that as a no they haven't and yes I am and I'll double down. However Donald "The Lying Groper" Trump said absolutely nothing about being attracted to dicks or forcing himself on transvestites. So that might be a bit of a stretch.
Funny that the law and order candidate is relying on illegally hacked gmails and a convicted con artist.
Norman
Diamond Member
- Sep 24, 2010
- 31,254
- 15,217
- 1,590
This is the bombshell that is going to change the election?
What they did was once again illegal...
Campaign finance law broken.
Is there any law that she won't break in order to win?
Last edited:
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
- Thread starter
- #29
The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
She needed the media and everyone else to beat Sanders of all people. That in itself should tell you how voters are rejecting her
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
- Thread starter
- #30
The entire corrupt DC machine is on borrowed time and soon they will face the wrath of the American voter.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,376
- 17,026
- 2,180
The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
- Thread starter
- #32
Lot of denial in that post and article.The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
She can add violating federal election law to her resume or what you and the MSM may call, strategic campaign planning.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,376
- 17,026
- 2,180
Lot of denial in that post and article.The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
She can add violating federal election law to her resume or what you and the MSM may call, strategic campaign planning.
Easy to accuse,hard to prove. Why else come out with a shock video rather than go through legal channels where you have to show evidence rather than hearsay. Too many cries of wolf from O'Keefe to be taken seriously by anyone anymore.
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
- Thread starter
- #34
Yeah luckily this video was nothing more the actual people involved in violating federal election laws just talking about it. I mean there were actual Donald Ducks all over the place but that was just a coincidence. These people just wanted to take credit. Pretty sure they knew they were being taped too. I know they got fired but that doesn't mean they were guilty. It's hard to prove they were telling the truth when they were speaking so candid, but if you listen and WATCH closely you can hear/see they were lying.Lot of denial in that post and article.The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
She can add violating federal election law to her resume or what you and the MSM may call, strategic campaign planning.
Easy to accuse,hard to prove. Why else come out with a shock video rather than go through legal channels where you have to show evidence rather than hearsay. Too many cries of wolf from O'Keefe to be taken seriously by anyone anymore.
Ozone
Silver Member
ducks on the ground? seems like the killary is hinting at putting cosplay in the ground.
LeftofLeft
Diamond Member
- Oct 18, 2011
- 26,258
- 16,681
- 1,405
Yes, NBC and Michael Moore have shown us that time and time again. In these specific videos, show us where and how? In your definition, site a reliable news source.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,376
- 17,026
- 2,180
Yeah luckily this video was nothing more the actual people involved in violating federal election laws just talking about it. I mean there were actual Donald Ducks all over the place but that was just a coincidence. These people just wanted to take credit. Pretty sure they knew they were being taped too. I know they got fired but that doesn't mean they were guilty. It's hard to prove they were telling the truth when they were speaking so candid, but if you listen and WATCH closely you can hear/see they were lying.Lot of denial in that post and article.The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
She can add violating federal election law to her resume or what you and the MSM may call, strategic campaign planning.
Easy to accuse,hard to prove. Why else come out with a shock video rather than go through legal channels where you have to show evidence rather than hearsay. Too many cries of wolf from O'Keefe to be taken seriously by anyone anymore.
It is a highly edited video and it does not prove collusion. If there was actual proof there would be charges filed and not another shocking video for rubes from the honest folks at Brietphart.
- Banned
- #39
This is the bombshell that is going to change the election?
Mooch telling Hilly she has a bigger pecker than Barack.
Norman
Diamond Member
- Sep 24, 2010
- 31,254
- 15,217
- 1,590
Yeah luckily this video was nothing more the actual people involved in violating federal election laws just talking about it. I mean there were actual Donald Ducks all over the place but that was just a coincidence. These people just wanted to take credit. Pretty sure they knew they were being taped too. I know they got fired but that doesn't mean they were guilty. It's hard to prove they were telling the truth when they were speaking so candid, but if you listen and WATCH closely you can hear/see they were lying.Lot of denial in that post and article.The point is, its all BS. There's ZERO proof he groped those women and they (DNC/Clinton Campaign) parade those women out because they know the exposed WikiLeaks corruption is chipping away at whatever chance they perceive she has at winning the election. They desperately wanted to change the narrative and the media happily obliged
I guess we'll find out in two weeks and a day how many voters reject her or him.
What the Clinton Emails Show: A Politician Being Political
In fairness to Clinton, the emails made public by WikiLeaks reveal little about her as a person. These were hacked from the accounts of John Podesta, her campaign chairman, and very few of them are from Clinton herself. But they do shed light on Clinton as a candidate by showing just how carefully her closest aides crafted the message she presents to the world, down to the wording of her tweets and the jokes she does—or doesn’t—choose to tell.
How you react to the emails will almost certainly depend on how you already felt about Clinton. A diehard Bernie Sanders fan who sees Clinton as a corporate Democrat driven by expedience will find confirmation in her vacillation over what kind of Wall Street reform to support, her backing of the Bowles-Simpson plan that would have cut spending on entitlement programs, andher musing in a paid speech that “you need both a public and a private position” on policy.
Those who view Clinton as hopelessly liberal, craven, and corrupt will seize, as the Trump campaign has, on her stated “dream” of “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.” They’ll smell conspiracy when they read hints that a Clinton campaign spokesman who formerly worked for the Justice Department got a heads up on a court hearing related to the release of her State Department emails. The Trump campaign said it was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Justice Department, but notice of the hearing would have been public information.
She can add violating federal election law to her resume or what you and the MSM may call, strategic campaign planning.
Easy to accuse,hard to prove. Why else come out with a shock video rather than go through legal channels where you have to show evidence rather than hearsay. Too many cries of wolf from O'Keefe to be taken seriously by anyone anymore.
Yup, nothing to see here folks...
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
-
ancestryDNA eye color surveys of eastern european roma
- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 2
