Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thorolfr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
GaryTaylor said:
I know, its incredible to be invited for a 30-min dialogue under these conditions and accept and follow through with it, they both know better.
Click to expand...
I think they arranged a secret meeting and got sloppy. They also most likely figured the media wouldn’t run with it if they got caught (or at least that they could control the media)
 
phil19034 said:
I think they arranged a secret meeting and got sloppy. They also most likely figured the media wouldn’t run with it if they got caught (or at least that they could control the media)
Click to expand...
She is suppose to clarify her legal position on this at any moment. Lots of dancing on this and as everyone is saying the wording today is imperative as she never stated specifically recusal, but some idea of accepting the opinion of the FBI and other prosecutors. Thats still questionable as it indicates some type of overseeing the case.
 
Obama won last time because 60 percent Catholics voted for him and 45 percent of protestants. One of the reasons (he lost the Evangelical vote) was that Mitt Romney was a Mormon. How dumb! We are loosing our Religious freedom under Obama and we will loose more yet if not all under Clinton. This time lets put aside short sighted emotions and vote against abortion and vote for our religious freedom. I’ll say it, even though our Shepherd won’t. Vote Trump. He is for our religious freedom, and is a better choice for the unborn as he will appoint justices that will protect them, maybe even our right to post on this website.😉
 
Ridgerunner said:
It probably varies from portfolio to portfolio depending on which corporations “buy” her and keep her bought. But of course, there’s no way an ordinary investor can know who bought Hillary lately in order to gain advantage over competitors or consumers.
Click to expand...
Did Corporations that did not buy Bill fare badly under his administration? I don’t recall any evidence that they did. Why would we expect things to be significantly different under Hillary. I agree they are both corrupt politicians, but it is not clear how much they will affect the typical company. It is certainly better to have the government in your pocket, no doubt. The typical corporation did well under Obama, even those who did not buy Obama.
 
abelville said:
Obama won last time because 60 percent Catholics voted for him and 45 percent protestants. One of the reasons (he lost the Evangelical vote) was that Mitt Romney was a Mormon. How dumb! We are loosing our Religious freedom under Obama and we will loose more yet if not all under Clinton. This time lets put aside short sighted emotions and vote against abortion and vote for our religious freedom. I’ll say it, even though our Shepherd won’t. Vote Trump. He is for our religious freedom, and is a better choice for the unborn as he will appoint justices that will protect them, maybe even our right to post on this website.😉
Click to expand...
Trump is for your religious freedom…unless you’re Muslim. :rolleyes:
 
Maximilan_Kolbe said:
Sadly, anyone who supports or defends her (and there are plenty of “faith filled” folks on here who do so) clearly cares nothing for their safety or their children’s safety. The problem is the support is an invitation for attacks and death that is indiscriminate when it happens; my children are as likely a target as the children of someone who votes for her. She is ripe for blackmail, ripe for making deals to sell out the US, and our secrets are in the hands of our enemies, and she and her supporters (on here) couldn’t care less. Perhaps when the casualties are their own children or other dead relatives it will hit home.

Too many people in this country really have concept of the seriousness of what she did, or of the vote for President in general. It’s disgusting that they can even vote.

Dismissive brush offs and claims of paranoia are the lifeblood of the leftist posters on this board. If you are simply going to ignore the specifics of a topic with claims of conspiracy, why bother clogging the board?
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:because it is an easy cop out and low blow jab not supported by anything substantive ,that’s why.This tactic learned from the political elites lie HC Bill C Obama the list goes on and on…everything is a conspiracy:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Strydersroom said:
Trump is for your religious freedom…unless you’re Muslim. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Unless you are radical Muslim, proven to hate and kill. He just wants to protect you from that radicalism, so it doesn’t touch your family or mine. Trump doesn’t want to hurt or kill anyone who poses no threat. But, Clinton will ramp up even more won ton killing of the unborn and finish off our religious freedom. Peace loving Christians, Muslims, or anyone should be allowed their freedom and the pursuit of happiness.:o
 
I hope that Hillary is indicted. That will severely impede her chances of becoming President.
 
Maximilan_Kolbe said:
msn.com/en-us/news/politics/lynch-to-remove-herself-from-decision-over-clinton-emails-official-says/ar-AAhQbIL?li=BBnb7Kz

*A private meeting at the city’s airport between Ms. Lynch and former President Bill Clinton this week set off a political uproar.

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch plans to announce on Friday that she will accept whatever recommendation career prosecutors and the F.B.I. director make about whether to bring charges related to Hillary Clinton’s personal email server, a Justice Department official said*. Her decision removes the possibility that a political appointee will overrule investigators in the case.

The Justice Department had been moving toward such an arrangement for months — officials said in April that it was being considered — but a private meeting between Ms. Lynch and former President Bill Clinton this week set off a political furor and made the decision all but inevitable

…continued…

Thank goodness she became yet another person on the “women who just happened to run into Bill Clinton outside a restroom at an airport” list. That basically forced this decision.
Click to expand...
This may just be me being cynical, but I can perceive a great gulf between “accepting recommendations” and “implementing recommendations.”
 
Theo520 said:
Couple of thoughts
  • I suspect the evidence of abuse by her team must be overwhelming, not sure how they could sweep it under the rug.
  • I doubt Bill wants to go back into the WH as the First Man. He’s already got the perks and doesn’t want the constant scrutiny again. Bill was probably begging her to take action. 😊
Click to expand...
Interesting, especially your second statement.
 
estesbob said:
Depends-if she recuses herself then her underlings would make the decision. But is she agrees to accept the recommendation of the career prosecutors and the FBI then Hillary is in trouble.
Click to expand...
That’s why Bernie Sanders is waiting in the wings, and Joe Biden probably back stage.
 
DaveBj said:
This may just be me being cynical, but I can perceive a great gulf between “accepting recommendations” and “implementing recommendations.”
Click to expand...
Same here,feeling cynical and sceptical, this is wiggle room for Loretts Lynch…
 
_Abyssinia said:
Christopher Sign also said they have no idea what Bill Clinton was even doing in Phoenix, Loretta Lynch said they had talked about him playing golf, and Christopher Sign said he reached out to sources who work with dictionaries who come into Phoenix, and not one had said he had been playing golf, although Christopher Sign said he wasn’t saying that he hadn’t played golf, but that Christopher Sign had not been able to confirm it yet.
Click to expand...
I was in Phoenix that same day. It was about 115 degrees. We’ve had hikers die from the heat lately, there have been demands to shut down the city park trailheads because of the deaths, and they are not allowing dogs outside on the trails due to the danger. I doubt Bill Clinton was outside playing golf!
 
phil19034 said:
I think they arranged a secret meeting and got sloppy. They also most likely figured the media wouldn’t run with it if they got caught (or at least that they could control the media)
Click to expand...
I think that’s the most likely possibility.

But giving Lynch the minimal benefit of the doubt, she did have a reason to be here that day, to speak at a conference. Her schedule is open to the public, Bill could have looked up her schedule and decided, in his bull in a china shop way, to fly to Phoenix and “just happen” to be on the tarmac with her, to personally intercede on behalf of his wife. (He’s probably done the same thing effectively to connect with women he wanted to form other kinds of relationships with, “just happening” to be in the same restaurant or hotel.) Bill has used his personal charisma, which shouldn’t be underestimated, to influence people for years and could have thought he would be able to schmooze her as well. If that’s the case, I can imagine Lynch seeing Bill glad-hand his way up the ladder into her plane and thinking, “Oh, &%@!!!”

Not only is Hillary the subject of a criminal investigation by the FBI, so is Bill - part of the FBI’s investigation involves potential public corruption and influence selling through the Clinton Foundation, of which Bill is a part, and Trexit, the public relations firm he was instrumental in starting.

Lynch is not an idiot - if this was not collusion between both parties, she had to know this violated legal ethics by creating at least the appearance of impropriety. She should never have let him on the plane. If this was Bill trying to illegally influence the AG, his actions significantly reduced her ability to operate, and put a greater public spotlight on the case and her ability to decide the case “lacked prosecutive merit” or “didn’t rise to the level of a felony.”
 
The visit with Bill Clinton was particularly bad in that he could also be implicated in the investigation. He is the head/key member of the Clinton foundation, and some of the allegations are that there was pay-to-play going on which directly benefited the Foundation. That speaking fees he received which went to the Foundation were quid pro quos from folks seeking favorable decisions from the State Department.

Her meeting and talking grandkids and golf is far worse than a formal meeting specifically addressing those possibilities. It shows a close personal relationship which could in fact bias her decision regarding the Clintons.
 
styrgwillidar said:
The visit with Bill Clinton was particularly bad in that he could also be implicated in the investigation. He is the head/key member of the Clinton foundation, and some of the allegations are that there was pay-to-play going on which directly benefited the Foundation. That speaking fees he received which went to the Foundation were quid pro quos from folks seeking favorable decisions from the State Department.

Her meeting and talking grandkids and golf is far worse than a formal meeting specifically addressing those possibilities. It shows a close personal relationship which could in fact bias her decision regarding the Clintons.
Click to expand...
Surely you don’t think that was the topics being discussed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top