- Joined
- Jul 19, 2014
- Messages
- 62,963
- Reaction score
- 27,366
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Seems a bit racist to me but whatever floats your boat
Well, anti cult at least.
Seems a bit racist to me but whatever floats your boat
Its was a name used as part of a religious sect but it turned into a pejorative for koreans.
Despite Gorka being himself for a few moments, its surprising to see that you are overlooking that he is actually right. Not so much about the possible execution aspect of punishment, but he does have a point that she should be set to stand trial for what she had a part in while she held that position.
Still using him as a source is far more credible then CNN, or The Young Turks at the very least.
Bribery, pay to play, treason, dereliction for starters.
Despite Gorka being himself for a few moments, its surprising to see that you are overlooking that he is actually right. Not so much about the possible execution aspect of punishment, but he does have a point that she should be set to stand trial for what she had a part in while she held that position.
Still using him as a source is far more credible then CNN, or The Young Turks at the very least.
Despite Gorka being himself for a few moments, its surprising to see that you are overlooking that he is actually right. Not so much about the possible execution aspect of punishment, but he does have a point that she should be set to stand trial for what she had a part in while she held that position.
Still using him as a source is far more credible then CNN, or The Young Turks at the very least.
That's true -- except for the fact that Mrs. Clinton committed no crimes that she could be prosecuted. I do remember a particular presidential candidate saying that if he was elected, he would lock her up. Since that hasn't happened, even he knows there are no chargeable crimes.Despite Gorka being himself for a few moments, its surprising to see that you are overlooking that he is actually right. Not so much about the possible execution aspect of punishment, but he does have a point that she should be set to stand trial for what she had a part in while she held that position.
Still using him as a source is far more credible then CNN, or The Young Turks at the very least.
Despite Gorka being himself for a few moments, its surprising to see that you are overlooking that he is actually right. Not so much about the possible execution aspect of punishment, but he does have a point that she should be set to stand trial for what she had a part in while she held that position.
Still using him as a source is far more credible then CNN, or The Young Turks at the very least.
That said, the possibility that a foreign entity would take a majority stake in the uranium operation meant that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, had to approve the deal. So did the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Utah’s nuclear regulator.
The membership of CFIUS includes the State Department, meaning that the Secretary of State would have had a voice. The panel also includes the attorney general and the secretaries of the Treasury (who chairs the committee), Defense, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
For those who have been obsessing about the Alexandria VA church that is supposedly "tearing down" Washington and Robert E Lee monuments, here's another factual story from the Washington Times, also known as the "Moonie Times"
Yep, a guy who got booted from the White House owing to his shady connections with a neo-Nazi group in his homeland of Hungary should always be seen as a reliable source. :roll:
Oh, that Sean guy is such a comedian, always the best entertainment. :monkey:2dance::monkey
It would if we were to ignore them. I include the press in we.
Wow, Gorka is one of the biggest idiots out there. Mr. connected to Nazi's should keep his "v." mouth shut and not make stupid comments.
O, what was going on at the time? You seem to think its critical to your belief that Hillary committed treason. thanks in advance
LOL! And what, pray tell, should she stand trial for? Please be very precise.
Seeing as you find Gorka credible, I won't hold my breath.
Bribery, pay to play, treason, dereliction for starters.
LOL! And what, pray tell, should she stand trial for? Please be very precise.
Seeing as you find Gorka credible, I won't hold my breath.
Wow, you're really easy to trigger. I see you're suffering from short-term memory loss, probably by accidentally shooting yourself in the head with one of your beloved guns. So let me remind you of my original question which you keep dodging:
What danger does the uranium deal pose to the United States?
LOL! And what, pray tell, should she stand trial for? Please be very precise.
Seeing as you find Gorka credible, I won't hold my breath.
LOL Yes the trading hands from Canada to Russia of less than 2% of our yearly uranium needs is a huge deal. I have never seen such a fuss over a nothing burger and a 6 year old one too. Can you say moldy?
No part of the Uranium One deal constitutes treason. That's ****ing stupid.
LOL! And what, pray tell, should she stand trial for? Please be very precise.
Seeing as you find Gorka credible, I won't hold my breath.
The GOP should have hired Mueller to get an indictment against Hillary, he is a fast worker.
Your missing the point, we are talking about bribery as well as a litany of other illegal actions here that Hillary possibly took part in.
The supply does not necessarily matter here, its what has been done in the pursuit of said supply.
...do you even know what uranium is? Or how its mistreatment can lead to third world countries, or more rogue states?
I mean, I shouldn't be surprised with this seeing with who I am conversing with.
But do you really not know?
There is no quid pro quo and this deal was approved by 8 other Depts. besides State. There is no bribery either. This was a private deal between a Canadian and a Russian company for a minuscule part of our uranium needs. Denying this to Russia could have jeopardized Russian cooperation with the U.N. sanctions on Iran that brought them to the table. I'de say we gained far more than we, no Canada lost, a measley 2% of our yearly needs.
Compared to the fact we learned today about Trump it is a joke. Trump knew about the Russians hacking the DNC and them having "dirt " on Hillary in APRIL 2016! He has been lying all this time about it. How does that make you feel?
How did you not know about that until today?
Even Bernie new about crap going on with the DNC, and that was a joke to begin with. Don't set your password as "password" everyone should know that.
Not to mention them having dirt on Hillary is some of the oldest news out there. So does that also mean that we can pull a red flag on the DNC for using what sources they did to dig up dirt on Trump.
This is not new news.
What's the crime? And Hillary didn't sign away that uranium, which cannot leave the U.S., because she doesn't have any authority over approving the deal. She was head of one of many agencies that were required to opine on the sale, none objected (including ALL our intelligence agencies on that committee), and Obama approved it. To believe there was a crime is to believe that multiple agencies engaged in treason, which is absurd.
Gorka and the right wing are trying to convince Trump lemmings that a policy disagreement (should we have allowed that sale to proceed) into treason. There's literally no basis for it. Even if we assume for this purpose Hillary was bought off, why did the intelligence agencies all also sign off, the Pentagon, and others? Who and how were they corrupted?
This BS red herring asserts, in effect, that everyone on the list engaged in or facilitated treason: