GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
I think that Hilary has been scrutinized more than any other position because of her relationship to Bill by about a factor of 1000 than anyone else, and that standard has gone waaaaayyyyy over the top.
She has been less than truthful and the grey area details are also very complicated.
What scandal has Hilary instigated or been involved with that has put you off and what did she do wrong? For some reason I think that list will be a lot short than expected. And I'm not talking about the Bill crap, the ones she is the primary.
Bonn1997 wrote:H1AND1 wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mreinman wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mreinman wrote:Nalod wrote:I vote for Hilary over trump even if she is on Chemo, one lung and in a coma.
what about if hillary can be replaced with someone else (biden?) who you can vote for? What if in 2 weeks we find out that hillary is too unhealthy to run and just drops out?
Another poster pointed out earlier you can't change the state ballots this late.
https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2...
The bottom line is that if Clinton dropped out before September ends, with plenty of time before the general election, all indications are that the DNC could anoint the candidate of its choice—again, likely Kaine, Biden, or Sanders—and make the late substitution with only the slim possibility of extreme GOP legal obstructionism getting in the way. After September, it would be a huge mess that would increase American political self-loathing by 300 percent.So, there’s your answer—now let’s hope Clinton returns to the campaign trail later this week in good health, and this is all a moot point.
OK, that's good to know
Yep, I was just about to post a similar article since I was the one who posted that it's too late. It's too late for a newcomer to enter the election but the GOP and/or Dem's can annoint a new candidate if their elected nominee has to drop out.
Wait, now I'm confused. So if Biden was the new nominee, would his name or Hillary's appear on the ballots?
If Hillary were to voluntarily drop out or become too sick or die, the DNC would have the power to take her off the ballot and place whoever they want onto it. She wouldn't appear at all.
martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
I think that Hilary has been scrutinized more than any other position because of her relationship to Bill by about a factor of 1000 than anyone else, and that standard has gone waaaaayyyyy over the top.
She has been less than truthful and the grey area details are also very complicated.
What scandal has Hilary instigated or been involved with that has put you off and what did she do wrong? For some reason I think that list will be a lot short than expected. And I'm not talking about the Bill crap, the ones she is the primary.
The recent scandals, Benghazi and mishandling of classified material. Her own server? The guy took the 5th today! Filegate, travelgate,fostergate, and finally when she made 100,000 in commodities without ever knowing how to do it. All plausible on the surface.
Scrutiny comes to those who invite it.
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
And not for nothing but Trump bald faces lies over and over and over directly to us every day. Not even a controversy or grey area or a "less than truthful" doubt. And he is the FURTHEST thing from transparent, and this is in relation to Hilary who does keep a closed lid on things.
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
I think that Hilary has been scrutinized more than any other position because of her relationship to Bill by about a factor of 1000 than anyone else, and that standard has gone waaaaayyyyy over the top.
She has been less than truthful and the grey area details are also very complicated.
What scandal has Hilary instigated or been involved with that has put you off and what did she do wrong? For some reason I think that list will be a lot short than expected. And I'm not talking about the Bill crap, the ones she is the primary.
The recent scandals, Benghazi and mishandling of classified material. Her own server? The guy took the 5th today! Filegate, travelgate,fostergate, and finally when she made 100,000 in commodities without ever knowing how to do it. All plausible on the surface.
Scrutiny comes to those who invite it.
so again, let's take these in context one by one.
What is the Benghazi scandal and what did she do wrong?
martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
And not for nothing but Trump bald faces lies over and over and over directly to us every day. Not even a controversy or grey area or a "less than truthful" doubt. And he is the FURTHEST thing from transparent, and this is in relation to Hilary who does keep a closed lid on things.
Its amazing. Reality is ignored if it does not support your agenda. But don't take my word for it. Lets try a Pulitzer winning unbiased media source:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/71% of what Trump says is either mostly false, completely false or a bold faced lie.
28% of what Clinton says is either mostly false, completely false or a bold faced lie.
And I do not support her.
In a brilliant move, Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn pledges to give veteran groups 5 million dollars if Donald Trump releases his taxes before Oct.19th debate...
Now the lame stream media is forced to talk about it and not give him a pass...
Lame street with those pesky fact checkers!!!
Better to rely on alternative with conspiracy to fill in the blanks?
now this is getting crazy funny/silly
luckily the body double had a solid alibi in LA
Nalod wrote:Lame street with those pesky fact checkers!!!
Better to rely on alternative with conspiracy to fill in the blanks?
Lame street because they fed into the email narrative and not ask the tough questions that should be at the forefront of this election...They should have been pressing Trump on specifics and how he will pay for things...Bernie for that matter too...They should be pressing Trump for more disclosure on his taxes..They have to be forced to ask the questions that should matter...
Matt Lauer was the perfect example..He spent a third of his time quizzing Hillary on emails...And fact check, who fact checks??
fishmike wrote:martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
And not for nothing but Trump bald faces lies over and over and over directly to us every day. Not even a controversy or grey area or a "less than truthful" doubt. And he is the FURTHEST thing from transparent, and this is in relation to Hilary who does keep a closed lid on things.
Its amazing. Reality is ignored if it does not support your agenda. But don't take my word for it. Lets try a Pulitzer winning unbiased media source:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
71% of what Trump says is either mostly false, completely false or a bold faced lie.
28% of what Clinton says is either mostly false, completely false or a bold faced lie.And I do not support her.
So together they lie 99% of the time... hmmm... I think it is about right about any politicians.
Pinocchio Syndrome is her worst malady as it impacts all citizens.
Players use their fame to promote products. Colin is promoting a conversation. I defend freedom of speech even if its not a comfortable conversation.
Nalod wrote:
Players use their fame to promote products. Colin is promoting a conversation. I defend freedom of speech even if its not a comfortable conversation.
you must have learned that by watching Facts on Fox
martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
I think that Hilary has been scrutinized more than any other position because of her relationship to Bill by about a factor of 1000 than anyone else, and that standard has gone waaaaayyyyy over the top.
She has been less than truthful and the grey area details are also very complicated.
What scandal has Hilary instigated or been involved with that has put you off and what did she do wrong? For some reason I think that list will be a lot short than expected. And I'm not talking about the Bill crap, the ones she is the primary.
The recent scandals, Benghazi and mishandling of classified material. Her own server? The guy took the 5th today! Filegate, travelgate,fostergate, and finally when she made 100,000 in commodities without ever knowing how to do it. All plausible on the surface.
Scrutiny comes to those who invite it.
so again, let's take these in context one by one.
What is the Benghazi scandal and what did she do wrong?
Benghazi was a cover for running guns to Syria for the rebels (Isis) fighting Assad. The whole idea of getting rid of Qaddafi was hers and the Obama Administration. She deleted emails in relation to What happened there. When the consulate was under attack, there was no support. She ignored emails from the ambassador to provide more security. As SoS she was responsible.
I am sure I am missing a few as I am not THAT entrenched in the details.
As for Trump, you may be right. But once again, his deficiencies in NO WAY lessen hers. If you want to argue she does not have any that is fine but to say she is good because he is bad too, doesn't really wash. I am not trying to defend Trump. I am sure he has done lots that we don't know that could be shown to be bad things. He absolutely ALSO changes his story to fit the narrative. One difference, so far, is that unlike HRC, he is discussing policy and ideas. She is doing it while under criminal investigation.
I am sure if there is something there against Trump it will be brought to light. Trump U? Trump Foundation? Trump hiring practices? Trump selective selection of tenants...to name a few.
To be in this situation to have these two candidates is as bad as it gets. It really is troubling.
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:martin wrote:GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I think there have been countless of scandals involving HRC, in which it has been shown she has been less than truthful. You can accept it or not. They are counting on you to not accept it.
I think that Hilary has been scrutinized more than any other position because of her relationship to Bill by about a factor of 1000 than anyone else, and that standard has gone waaaaayyyyy over the top.
She has been less than truthful and the grey area details are also very complicated.
What scandal has Hilary instigated or been involved with that has put you off and what did she do wrong? For some reason I think that list will be a lot short than expected. And I'm not talking about the Bill crap, the ones she is the primary.
The recent scandals, Benghazi and mishandling of classified material. Her own server? The guy took the 5th today! Filegate, travelgate,fostergate, and finally when she made 100,000 in commodities without ever knowing how to do it. All plausible on the surface.
Scrutiny comes to those who invite it.
so again, let's take these in context one by one.
What is the Benghazi scandal and what did she do wrong?
Benghazi was a cover for running guns to Syria for the rebels (Isis) fighting Assad. The whole idea of getting rid of Qaddafi was hers and the Obama Administration. She deleted emails in relation to What happened there. When the consulate was under attack, there was no support. She ignored emails from the ambassador to provide more security. As SoS she was responsible.
I am sure I am missing a few as I am not THAT entrenched in the details.
As for Trump, you may be right. But once again, his deficiencies in NO WAY lessen hers. If you want to argue she does not have any that is fine but to say she is good because he is bad too, doesn't really wash. I am not trying to defend Trump. I am sure he has done lots that we don't know that could be shown to be bad things. He absolutely ALSO changes his story to fit the narrative. One difference, so far, is that unlike HRC, he is discussing policy and ideas. She is doing it while under criminal investigation.
I am sure if there is something there against Trump it will be brought to light. Trump U? Trump Foundation? Trump hiring practices? Trump selective selection of tenants...to name a few.
To be in this situation to have these two candidates is as bad as it gets. It really is troubling.
France and Sarkozy were the ones who wanted to get rid of Gaddafi. They then asked for help from the US..Obama was reluctant but then agreed with Clinton's insistence..It was a US drone strike that took out Gadaffi if reports are to be believed...The republicans then pounced on Obama saying he is leading from behind for not leading the charge against Gaddafi..Let's keep the facts in line...
Nalod wrote:
Players use their fame to promote products. Colin is promoting a conversation. I defend freedom of speech even if its not a comfortable conversation.
I tend to think the National Anthem stands for the people from the 1700-through the Iraq war who have died making this a country. If it werent for those people none of us would be here. It's showing respect and pride for those people who came before us--its all about pure respect. Colin is a pro athlete--he has different avenues to express his opinion. By pirsing people off--it doesnt further his cause.
By the way
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-08...
There was twice as many white people killed by police --more than Latino and African American combined this year. Im a believer that the police need to take a step up and try not to use deadly force if at all possible to ANY race. I can stand for people who want police to tone it down--Id walk right next to that--but Im certainly not doing it during the National Anthem--that isnt about the police. Colin is a role model all of those guys are whether they like it or not--comes with the job. Be respectful of those who came before us to afford a better way of life--thats what the National anthem is.
BRIGGS wrote:Nalod wrote:
Players use their fame to promote products. Colin is promoting a conversation. I defend freedom of speech even if its not a comfortable conversation.
I tend to think the National Anthem stands for the people from the 1700-through the Iraq war who have died making this a country. If it werent for those people none of us would be here. It's showing respect and pride for those people who came before us--its all about pure respect. Colin is a pro athlete--he has different avenues to express his opinion. By pirsing people off--it doesnt further his cause.
By the way
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-08...
There was twice as many white people killed by police --more than Latino and African American combined this year. Im a believer that the police need to take a step up and try not to use deadly force if at all possible to ANY race. I can stand for people who want police to tone it down--Id walk right next to that--but Im certainly not doing it during the National Anthem--that isnt about the police. Colin is a role model all of those guys are whether they like it or not--comes with the job. Be respectful of those who came before us to afford a better way of life--thats what the National anthem is.
I defend your opinion as well as Colin's. When the conversation leans towards what you think/feel instead of learning then its about "Me".
A few months ago I read a story of a well to do attorney whose kids have been harassed by frat boys. Harmless, but scarey stuff. Not terrible but when his kids were out running an errand in Mom's BMW SUV cops pulled them over and were ruff with them. Imagine having to tell your kids what to do when the police pull you over for no reason and not get shot.
You know, I don't know how that feels, but the more I read about this the more I can imagine this.
So basically this black attorney has spend years in college, has taken an oath, did public service, pays big taxes, has succeeded and because he is black he is harassed. His children go to better schools and are harassed for being black.
How many uncomfortable stories about US military service man who are black only to return to the country and be treated like sub citizen? Gay. Transgender. Women. Its getting better, but today Trump says "Problem with rape in the military is there are women.....". And this is your guy?
ANd your problem is Colin sits? Im not calling you a racist as I don't know you, but you promote trump as your "feel" he would do a good job. Nothing in his background promotes this in my opinion.
Kudo's to Kaepernick. Kudo's to military that has defended his rights. Maybe we don't all agree with his action, but I defend his right to it.
