Some Observations from Watching H.Clinton's Deposition

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2021
Messages
26,575
Reaction score
23,189
Points
2,288
Location
Texas
Only watched about 2.5 hours of a 4.5 hour video.



First thing I have to say is that if every "suspect" in this matter is held by Democrats to the same standard of proof of wrongdoing as Hillary sets for herself and for Bill, then Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to worry about.

Second, her "unhinged" behavior comes right after 02:31. Apparently a man named Lutnik was a bagman for donations to the Hillary campaign from Jeffrey Epstein. Nancy Mace asks her about this, and Hillary begins a speech about Lutinik's personal and business losses on 9/11. Mace interrupts, Hills raises her voice, Mace accuses her of yelling at Mace and Hillary yells louder.

Third, Hillary looks away and down when she lies, but only during the exact words containing the falsehood, then she looks right back at the questioner. She did it at least a half a dozen times by that point in the video. That's a weakness her husband has never shown to my knowledge.
 
Only watched about 2.5 hours of a 4.5 hour video.



First thing I have to say is that if every "suspect" in this matter is held by Democrats to the same standard of proof of wrongdoing as Hillary sets for herself and for Bill, then Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to worry about.

Second, her "unhinged" behavior comes right after 02:31. Apparently a man named Lutnik was a bagman for donations to the Hillary campaign from Jeffrey Epstein. Nancy Mace asks her about this, and Hillary begins a speech about Lutinik's personal and business losses on 9/11. Mace interrupts, Hills raises her voice, Mace accuses her of yelling at Mace and Hillary yells louder.

Third, Hillary looks away and down when she lies, but only during the exact words containing the falsehood, then she looks right back at the questioner. She did it at least a half a dozen times by that point in the video. That's a weakness her husband has never shown to my knowledge.

She made all of the Republicans look like complete idiots.

Pizzagate and UFO's didn't help Republicans either.
Now I see why they didn't want all of this out in open testimony. :)
 
Wow! I should have led with this.

At 2 hours, 50 minutes and :35 seconds, a Texas congressman (R) I never heard of before asks her if she's ever been to Little St James Island (AKA Epstein Island). She says "no," keeping her eyes straight, but with a long blink. Then he asks her, "just to be clear, it is your testimony that for instance, you never flew in a private plane, flew into St Thomas Airport, and then didn't enter the terminal, but intead boarded a helicopter to Little St James Island? Never did that?"

She answered "I did not," while looking down to the point of almost closing her eyes, and shaking her head. While he asked that question with such specificity, her blinking speeded up as did her weird half nod/half head shake she does sometimes.

He knows something. If he knows it, plenty of other people know it. Probably has proof. This may be this Clinton's Blue Dress Moment.
 
Only watched about 2.5 hours of a 4.5 hour video.



First thing I have to say is that if every "suspect" in this matter is held by Democrats to the same standard of proof of wrongdoing as Hillary sets for herself and for Bill, then Donald Trump has absolutely nothing to worry about.

Second, her "unhinged" behavior comes right after 02:31. Apparently a man named Lutnik was a bagman for donations to the Hillary campaign from Jeffrey Epstein. Nancy Mace asks her about this, and Hillary begins a speech about Lutinik's personal and business losses on 9/11. Mace interrupts, Hills raises her voice, Mace accuses her of yelling at Mace and Hillary yells louder.

Third, Hillary looks away and down when she lies, but only during the exact words containing the falsehood, then she looks right back at the questioner. She did it at least a half a dozen times by that point in the video. That's a weakness her husband has never shown to my knowledge.


So she knows nothing about it.

Why was she even forced to be there?

Oh wait!

OPTICS

okay
 
  • Winner
Reactions: IM2
Liars can't remember so she needs the script

Having heard many of the questions posed to the Clintons, they really sounded like a fishing expedition and I don't see where anything of value was gleaned. If anyone plans to implicate the Clintons, I hope they have some actual evidence of a crime because the Clintons are certainly not going to volunteer anything of value.
 
At about 3 : 23 : 45, one of the Democrats reads a list of names of people that Republicans brought in for hearings and asked HRC if each of them had been required to come in for a deposition. None of them had. This is supposed to imply that the Clintons are getting vindictive treatment by the GOP.

There's a reason for that. With the exception of James Comey, none of them are the world class liars that the Clintons are. The moment I mentioned above in which a (R) Congressman pins HRC down on a very specific alleged incident in which she snuck onto Lolita Island using a private plane and a helicopter to cover her tracks would not have been possible with Democrats interrupting at every turn as they love to do during hearings.
 
Hey Goofball, it is the burden of those saying she does to prove anything.

Nobody has ever claimed Hillary had anything to do with Trump's old Bestie
No, it is the burden of a person making a factual claim to at least provide evidence to support it. You stated:

So she knows nothing about it.

If you want to back pedal and say "as far as Dante knows, she knows nothing about," that's fine.

But you stated as a fact that she knows nothing about it.

So . . . What is your evidence that she knows nothing about it?
 
Trump is mentioned the most in the files, yet you morons want to try pinning this on the Clintons.

It's time the first lady who actually flew on the plane gets questioned.

1772646659979.webp
 
No, it is the burden of a person making a factual claim to at least provide evidence to support it. You stated:



If you want to back pedal and say "as far as Dante knows, she knows nothing about," that's fine.

But you stated as a fact that she knows nothing about it.

So . . . What is your evidence that she knows nothing about it?
Nobody has ever claimed Hillary had anything to do with Trump's old Bestie
 
Nobody has ever claimed Hillary had anything to do with Trump's old Bestie
Other than her husband flying on Epstien's plane more than 2 dozen times, cavorting with Epstein's girls in hot tubs, and wearing matching outfits?

Also inviting Epsien's top girl to her daughter's wedding?
 
15th post
Other than her husband flying on Epstien's plane more than 2 dozen times, cavorting with Epstein's girls in hot tubs, and wearing matching outfits?

Also inviting Epsien's top girl to her daughter's wedding?
Fake some of that.

They had a business relationship that Clinton broke off. Trump? He keeps fighting a full release and we now know:
Trump’s First Administration Shut Down Investigation Into Epstein - The state of New Mexico was investigating Jeffrey Epstein’s ranch, but then the Department of Justice intervened.


Trump’s First Administration Shut Down Investigation Into Epstein
 
Fake some of that.

They had a business relationship that Clinton broke off. Trump? He keeps fighting a full release and we now know:
Trump’s First Administration Shut Down Investigation Into Epstein - The state of New Mexico was investigating Jeffrey Epstein’s ranch, but then the Department of Justice intervened.


Trump’s First Administration Shut Down Investigation Into Epstein
And you're back in Trump ranting mode.

Learn to stay on topic.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom