Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Ready for another four or eight years of this type low-life mess?
"At this point, what difference does it make!"
Quote:
THE HILLARY LEGACY
JULY 17, 2015 COACH COLLINS 2 COMMENTS
By Ed Wood, staff writer
When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t get a vote in a Democrat controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion and other efforts.
Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.
Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovered of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration. LANI GUINIER
Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbell for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbell went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.
Many younger voters will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, that being the dastardly act of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.
Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for improper access to about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone and, of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House. Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.
Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the “bimbo eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in this debacle were as follows
She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.
She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr’s investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying and later admitting his affairs. Monica Lewinsky
Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for ‘lying under oath’ to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.
Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.
After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.
What a swell party – ready for another four or eight years of this type low-life mess?
Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next. But to her loyal fans – “what difference does it make?”
Electing Hillary Clinton president would be like granting Satan absolution while giving him the keys to heaven!
NOW PLAYING
Fox News poll suggests trouble ahead for Hillary Clinton
In an email to supporters, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman and founder of the pro-Clinton Center for American Progress, warned Republicans were out-fundraising the former secretary of state.
Podesta also declared the campaign to be under “a ferocious onslaught of dark money” from Republicans, but that Hillary is funded by grassroots Americans who’ve “chipped in $1, $5, or $10.” An examination of the facts shows something different.
The email, under the subject line: “A ferocious onslaught of dark money,” says, “Republicans are out-raising us 4 to 1. If we win the Democratic nomination for president and this pace keeps up, we are in for a ferocious onslaught of dark money, regardless of who the nominee is on the other side.” But what does that “4 to 1” margin mean?
The Clinton campaign took in $46.7 million in its first quarter of existence, no small sum. Even NBC News called it a “Huge Fundraising Haul.” The next highest total for a campaign was another Democrat, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders raised $15 million. Senator Marco Rubio came in third with $12 million. So where does the “4 to 1” come from? Turns out it’s creative math.
The Clinton campaign combined the totals each of the current top-tier Republican campaign raised, $53 million, with the money raised by Super PACs associated with them, $203 million, for a total of $256 million for the GOP. Clinton’s Super PACs raised $24.3 million. If you add that to her total, as she does with the GOP, her total is $71 million. That’s roughly 3 to 1, not 4 to 1, but it’s still a false number.
The Clinton camp combines all the money raised by GOP candidates, but ignores the money raised by Sanders.
If you add in the money Sanders raised, the Democrats’ total increases to $86 million, closer to 2.5 to one. But Clinton’s team created a false equivalence – one against all. Clinton’s campaign, by itself, has raised more than the top 4 GOP candidates combined – $46 million to $43 million.
The Clinton email also attempts to give the impression of a grassroots movement. It reads, in part:
We’re running a different kind of race. More than 250,000 people have chipped in $1, $5, or $10 because they care enough about this election to have a financial stake in it.
The wording is a deliberate attempt to mislead the reader into thinking the Clinton campaign is funded by small dollar donors, average Americans simply “chipping in” what they can. But again, math tells a different story.
If each of Clinton’s 250,000 donors “chipped in” all the low dollar amounts listed in the email — $1, $5, $10, for a total of $16 each — that would total $4 million. That leaves $42 million unaccounted for.
The Washington Post reports only 17 percent of Clinton’s haul, or $7 million, came from donations of $200 or less, which leaves $39 million from high dollar donors. Not exactly the grassroots “different kind of campaign” Podesta is telling supporters.
Add further fudging to the numbers, the New York Post reported the Clinton campaign made concerted effort to attract $1 donations from as many people as possible to dilute the high dollar donor numbers.
The empress has no clothes but please keep the pantsuit on
so great are the exposed flaws in Hillary's character its apparent and rightfully galling to us and should be to most how incomprehensible it is this avaristic, prevaricating, self indulgent, expedient, untalented, feral, vision less, scheming, reactionary, and soulless woman can be considered by a large segment of America as fit for any office of trust and leadership much more so that of president
Yep!! I agree with you. Have you ever heard of Alexander Tytler? If not, look it up, but he described a cycle , back in the 1700's. Meaning a political theory on stages of countries over time. If you want me to, i can post a picture:
Yep!! I agree with you. Have you ever heard of Alexander Tytler? If not, look it up, but he described a cycle , back in the 1700's. Meaning a political theory on stages of countries over time. If you want me to, i can post a picture:
I would say we are near the end of dependence. Let's all get ready for some bondage...
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the canidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy--to be followed by a dictatorship.”
The key is that the constitution not be destroyed. We will never see the courage phase,but maybe our great grandchildren. We are in a huge mess. Can you believe this man wrote this in the 1700's? Amazing. What insight.
But, we can say the same thing about communism or socialism.
WIth socialism, eventually, more people are on the government take than are working, and what happens in Greece is the result.
The key is that the constitution not be destroyed. We will never see the courage phase,but maybe our great grandchildren. We are in a huge mess. Can you believe this man wrote this in the 1700's? Amazing. What insight.
But, we can say the same thing about communism or socialism.
WIth socialism, eventually, more people are on the government take than are working, and what happens in Greece is the result.
I googled up Tytler yesterday and showed it to some old timers at work. They just sat there with their mouths open... It seemed, they still had hope.
Ready for another four or eight years of this type low-life mess?
