Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm just the messenger, for those kept in the dark, on purpose.
No question there is an investigation into Pay to Play. But that's not the BS you posted.
None of these links are about the Clintons offing a woman in Haiti who was allegedly investigating a link between the Clintons and human trafficking. For that, one needs to watch/ read Alex Jones and his ilk.
Reality is, she was a school teacher who committed suicide.
Your source was also a promoter of the Pizzagate fake news.
And lots of comments about how politically motivated it all appears to be. Given the extensive investigations that found nothing, this one appears to just be a rehash of those with the idea of doing the presidents bidding to investigate a political opponent despite a clear lack of evidence. Its not like she went and met with foreign nationals who are believed to be spies promising dirt on her opponent, and then lied about it or anything even remotely that interesting.
I could have posted the INFOwars and Brietbart links.
The links were to show, it is happening.
Now, feel free to carry on with the right-wing smear campaign that you guys are so good at.
.
Hillary disclosed the Clinton Foundation during her confirmation hearing. All but one Senator voted to confirm her appointment. It was not an issue until she made it clear she was running for her party's nomination and then for president.
The Clintons should have closed the foundation upon her appointment as SoS to avoid any perception of Pay to Play. How did they think this would not come back to bite them, given her political aspirations?
Regardless of which candidate won in 2016, he/ she would enter office with unprecedented conflicts of interest- different sides of same coin.
I could have posted the INFOwars and Brietbart links.
The links were to show, it is happening.
Being investigated for potential Pay to Play is common knowledge.
Being investigated does not imply guilt.
The Clintons were investigated by special counsel for 6 + years for their involvement in Whitewater which went down a decade before he ran for President. That scope of that investigation expanded as time wore on and was not limited to Whitewater. The investigation eventually concluded there was insufficient evidence to charge the Clintons with a crime.
At the end of the day, Bill Clinton's testimony lying about consensual relations with another woman resulted in the House vote to impeach.
I don't assume Trump colluded with Russia and believe it's quite possible the investigation will conclude there is insufficient evidence to charge him with a crime related to Russia. The investigation has and will continue to result in others being convicted of crimes, no different than the Whitewater investigation.
Trump and Bill Clinton are cut from the same cloth as it relates to women.
They were nothing more than allegations in a smear campaign. Yet, the Clinton Foundation is still doing good work and accepting donations despite the reduced level of contributions due to false negative publicity. I suggest all well meaning individuals consider contributing to help in their fine work.
What is funny is that we never follow anything Hillary is doing, but they are totally obsessed with every move she makes. You never see one post on here about her from us, every one is from some Trumpee.
Very odd.
Of course we don't "Hear" anything from you. You of course want everyone to forget what a loser Hillary is, and the fact that you voted for such, it must be like pouring salt into a wound that the old hag keeps putting herself in the news every week, and then you complain that someone RESPONDS TO WHAT THE OLD HAG DOES. Nah..not obsession, its called CURRENT EVENTS
Chozick’s unpublished color piece on Clinton’s drinking was meant to illustrate that Clinton was not the starchy, purse-lipped frump of popular perception but a freewheeling good-time gal. Why couldn’t the story have run during the campaign rather than after it? That seems obvious. The factual details were such that they might have made readers question the Times’s spin that Clinton’s drinking habits reflected well on her. The attentive reader will wonder whether Clinton has a drinking problem. Chozick says that Clinton would have been “the booziest president since FDR” and “enjoys a cocktail — or three — more than most previous presidents.” Chozick isn’t saying that Clinton has three cocktails but that she has three cocktails more than a man. So: five cocktails, then? Five cocktails for a woman is generally said to have the same effect as ten cocktails on a man. Would you want a man who regularly put away ten cocktails to be president?
LOL! That doesn't say she enjoys 3 more cocktails than men! It says she enjoys a cocktail, maybe 3. But that's more than most previous presidents. Chozick IS saying she may enjoy more than one cocktail. She is NOT saying Clinton drinks 5 cocktails at a time.
Perhaps we should ask the people of Haiti how much they like the Clinton Foundation.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
