Hillary Clinton...traitor?

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

In a rational world, this would be the end of Hillary. But even some of our more reasonable leftists appear to be ok with this. Hillary should go to prison for this. But she won't. She'll probably become President. At least when that happens, Obama will no longer be the most dishonest and corrupt president in history.

I'm not ok with it. But you can't say look at A, now look at B and convict someone for C, without a link between them. If they find evidence, she should be brought up on charges, no doubt.

[SinsOfTheFlesh]

All I can do is shake my head. It honestly astounds me that this is the best the Dems have to offer.

The lefty's here like to babble about the Republican field, but FFS, they HAVE a field of candidates, as in more than one. Jesus, anything with a pulse and a D beside its name would be better than a flagrant scam artist, criminal, and traitor. You guys don't have enough lipstick to cover up this particular pig.

[SinsOfTheFlesh]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

You're dishonest, like your partner in crime JD. It doesn't place the majority of uranium production under Putin's control. The article states 20 percent. I'm not a math whiz, but that's not a majority. Not even half of a majority. The words you use matter. You don't get to just throw them around because you think it makes your case stronger. If you're found wanting, as in this instance, it makes your case look weaker because you had to fudge it.

You have no way of knowing if it could be easily cleared up by viewing the emails. That's speculation. As is the entire thing. If it's true, she should be charged with treason, but we don't have enough evidence, no matter how bad you WANT it to be true.

The State Dept has over 60K employees, give or take. You think the SOS has their hands in every single thing? How many people in the world do you think can give millions of dollars to a foundation? How many people have that kind of money. There are only 12 million millionaires in the entire world. Out of 8 billion people. People like that run in small circles. Look at who else they received money from. Look at who else he gave money to.

When we are talking about Uranium production and dealing with a country like Russia, you are Goddamned right I expect that Secretary of State to be eyeball deep in calling the shots. That was her JOB.

You say words matter. I say character matters. I say transparency matters. This shit stinks to high heaven, and you damned well know it, you just don't have the backbone to admit it.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

When we are talking about Uranium production and dealing with a country like Russia, you are Goddamned right I expect that Secretary of State to be eyeball deep in calling the shots. That was her JOB.

You say words matter. I say character matters. I say transparency matters. This shit stinks to high heaven, and you damned well know it, you just don't have the backbone to admit it.

I said she should be charged if the evidence is there. How is that not admitting it? I'm not ready to tar and feather her at this point, on speculation. And I notice you didn't address my catching of your math error. You realize that by jumping to the conclusion and being ready to burn her at the stake without absolute evidence, you're no better than what you accuse me of being. Just different letters beside our names.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

All I can do is shake my head. It honestly astounds me that this is the best the Dems have to offer.

The lefty's here like to babble about the Republican field, but FFS, they HAVE a field of candidates, as in more than one. Jesus, anything with a pulse and a D beside its name would be better than a flagrant scam artist, criminal, and traitor. You guys don't have enough lipstick to cover up this particular pig.

It's another 18 months yet. Plenty of time for one of the GOP guys to get caught with a dick in their mouth.

[Jackie S]

I doubt her actions quite qualify as her being a traitor. Lying sack of shit money grubbing cunt bitch, yes, but traitor, probably not.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

I doubt her actions quite qualify as her being a traitor. Lying sack of shit money grubbing cunt bitch, yes, but traitor, probably not.

Wow. And this from our resident Hillary hater. I guess I'm just not surprised when politicians turn out to be money-grubbing cunts. The way we have the system set up currently, you pretty much have to be that way in order to get anywhere.

[CuteOldGuy]

You're a fool. Something of this magnitude reaches even higher than the SOS. These decisions about the U.S. Uranium supply are not left to low level employees. If they are, that is enough to disqualify Clinton for any future position other than cleaner in the prison bathroom. This did not happen by accident. Hillary is not surprised by this. You are a moron if you think otherwise.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're a fool. Something of this magnitude reaches even higher than the SOS. These decisions about the U.S. Uranium supply are not left to low level employees. If they are, that is enough to disqualify Clinton for any future position other than cleaner in the prison bathroom. This did not happen by accident. Hillary is not surprised by this. You are a moron if you think otherwise.

I like to wait for evidence. You have no idea who these decisions are left to. You want to believe a certain thing so bad that it has short-circuited your ability to be objective. We have no evidence. If and when we do, I'll be the first to call for her head. Before then, I reserve judgement. As a prudent person would.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

Once again, you omit pertinent info that doesn't bolster your case. It explicitly states in the article that the decisions of the SD were not made at her level. You have all these instances, but you have nothing connecting them all. Where is the smoking gun?

You also provide no proof for your 85/15 claim. It's a foundation, not a charity.

Take some time to read the article from the NYT and let some light into your brain. You're a liberal, you can't argue with the NYT.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

I like to wait for evidence. You have no idea who these decisions are left to. You want to believe a certain thing so bad that it has short-circuited your ability to be objective. We have no evidence. If and when we do, I'll be the first to call for her head. Before then, I reserve judgement. As a prudent person would.

Is is drugs? First you say that Hillary was above the decision process (the NYT says different) and now you say that you don't know who was in the decision process.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Take some time to read the article from the NYT and let some light into your brain. You're a liberal, you can't argue with the NYT.

More effort to stuff me into a box. I won't go. I'm not a liberal and I CAN argue with the Old Grey Lady. Just because you ingest every ounce of jizz that a republican puts forth doesn't mean I do the same with any democrat. You're projecting. You can't imagine doing it differently so you can't imagine that I can either.

[gnadfly]

You aren't a liberal, WombatRaper, you are a Progressive, which is a polite way of saying "Fascist Socialist."

Now increase your post count...in your mouth.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Is is drugs? First you say that Hillary was above the decision process (the NYT says different) and now you say that you don't know who was in the decision process.

NO, you fucking idiot. Go back and read. I said that the article stated the decision was at a lower level. And the truth is we don't know who made the decision. We might at some point, but you can't wait because you've got to unload this bucket of hillary jizz all over the place before you burst.

PS = you can't go one goddamn post without an error in spelling or syntax. And I'm supposed to take you seriously when you can't even be bothered to communicate properly?

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You aren't a liberal, WombatRaper, you are a Progressive, which is a polite way of saying "Fascist Socialist."

Now increase your post count...in your mouth.

I thought you had me on ignore. Hmmm.... you're a douchebag. Which is a polite way of saying you're a shitmouth cunt.