• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hillary: "We're all going to hang"

ttwtt78640 said:
OK, but simply because the source of some allegation is unknown/unnamed does lend any special credibility to that allegation. In your OP you admit to having no idea what dear Hillary was allegedly talking about and yet proceded to offer your personal guesses.
Click to expand...

Some clown who heard the phone call illegally leaked the contents of the call to an unauthorized third party who then took the flawed paraphrase of the call to biased key operatives in the DOJ. There is evidence the whistleblower met with Schiff and team before blowing the whistle, so the fix was obviously in. Michael Atkinson reviewed the whistleblower complaint and determined it should be looked into. The House deposed Michael Atkinson's testimony but never made it public, even though all other depositions from witnesses were. The House continues to hide the whistleblower and the testimony of the IG who examined the flawed whistleblower complaint.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
A third, and more likely, possible reason exists. It is easily proven that US aid (approved by congress) was given to Ukraine while Joe Biden was "in charge", that some of that aid was given by the Ukrainian government to Burisma (a Ukrainian energy company) and that Hunter Biden was paid handsomely (for doing ???) by Burisma. None of those aforementioned facts offer any indication of a violation of US law(s). What US crime, allegedly committed in Ukraine, would you suggest be investigated by the DOJ?
Click to expand...

Investigators do not usually solve the case before they examine the evidence. The money Joe Biden urged Congress to send to Ukraine coupled with the fact that his son was raking in millions of dollars from a known corrupt company in Ukraine benefiting from US aid is suspicious enough to warrant investigation.
 
marke said:
"Beyond unfounded rumors" is exactly what describes the reasons for the Mueller investigation. Biden is holding back $1 billion in US aid to a country known for being one of the most corrupt countries in the world while his son is raking in millions working for a company profiting from that US aid money. He has the prosecutor fired who is investigating his son's company and shuts the investigation down. Shortly afterward Obama appoints a new ambassador to Ukraine who shows up there ordering Ukrainian prosecutors not to investigate those Americans on her list. Don't tell me there are no reasons for investigating.
Click to expand...

About half of what you say is a Trump version of the "news" with fill in material that sounds like Hannity reading off his standard list of mischaracterizations.

There's no use in explaining the stupidity in a statement like "Biden is holding back a billion dollars...". It won't stop you repeating it.
 
rocket88 said:
I just wonder what Hannity woukd have said if Bill Clinton said "grab 'em by the *****." Do you think he'd ignore it or laugh it off?
Click to expand...

Why would Hannity say anything at all? Trump says something vulgar to his buddies off record years before entering politics and democrats think that disqualifies him from office. But who can take these clown seriously after they made jokes about Clinton doing more than just talking dirty in the closet of the oval office - repeatedly?
 
less right said:
About half of what you say is a Trump version of the "news" with fill in material that sounds like Hannity reading off his standard list of mischaracterizations.

There's no use in explaining the stupidity in a statement like "Biden is holding back a billion dollars...". It won't stop you repeating it.
Click to expand...

Biden himself said he was holding back a billion dollars and, as it turned out, he was still holding it back 6 months after he got the investigation into Burisma shut down because reports show he was still holding onto it when Obama's new ambassador, Yovanovitch showed up in Ukraine.
 
marke said:
Why do you think I should check with the media outlets who cover up democrat crimes by lying about them?
Click to expand...

What website told you Hillary said this?
 
marke said:
Biden himself said he was holding back a billion dollars and, as it turned out, he was still holding it back 6 months after he got the investigation into Burisma shut down because reports show he was still holding onto it when Obama's new ambassador, Yovanovitch showed up in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Like I said, there's no use explaining because in the end you'll still say the same thing.
 
marke said:
Democrat version of the law: 'It does not apply to democrats who think their flimsy excuses exempt them from compliance.' She conducted government business on her private server, making her entire private and public business government property. Nixon erased tapes which he made on his own tape recorder and he was facing serious charges over that which prompted him to resign before being charged. Comey is facing charges for leaking private notes he scribbled on a napkin in his car and leaked to the media. I don't think Hillary herself thinks destroying government documents is legal under her supposed special circumstance.
Click to expand...

But the DoJ is just too busy for a slam dunk.

You have a fascinating recollection of information.
 
marke said:
For whatever reason there are some people who simply will not believe the thousands of behind the scenes reports which expose Hillary for the very bad person she is. Even when Wikileaks exposed her own emails her supporters saw nothing but purity on her part and evil on the part of anyone who would dare do such a thing as expose the truth for what it is.
Click to expand...

None of my democrat friends like her. they voted for her because she was not Trump.
 
marke said:
A whistleblower close to Hillary during her campaign prior to the 2016 election provided this eyewitness quote from Hillary to her DNC staff after a bad interview with Matt Lauer:

"If that fu**ing basta** wins, we're all going to hang from nooses. You better fix this sh**!"

What is she talking about? Democrat corruption in DC which nearly all high level democrat politicians know about and are involved with, but which lowly democrats like her staff workers were probably mostly unaware of. Sure the democrats wanted her to win, but it scared them to death contemplating the possibility that Trump would win and bust up their crime and protection racket under which they had criminally operated for years with practically no danger of exposure.

INS officials under Obama feared a Trump presidency? Of course. They had willingly participated in illegal spy operations on the Trump campaign. They were desperate to come up with an insurance policy by which to bring him down if he won, to keep any investigators from entering in who were not on the democrat payroll, so to speak. Democrats are not just seeking vengeance on Trump for winning, but they desperately need to destroy him to shut down ongoing investigations into democrat corruption which continue to threaten them all the danger of "hanging from nooses" if investigations into democrat corruption are not shut down.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
marke said:
Biden himself said he was holding back a billion dollars and, as it turned out, he was still holding it back 6 months after he got the investigation into Burisma shut down because reports show he was still holding onto it when Obama's new ambassador, Yovanovitch showed up in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Stop lying.

The investigation into Burisma ended in 2012. The aid in question was held up in 2014.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Moved to CT.
 
Dragonfly said:
I think you stopped just a wee bit too far "north" with this move.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with it going to CT. It's designed for stupid **** like the argument in the op.
 
marke said:
CT? Is that where the Trump/Russian collusion discussion went? What is not a conspiracy is the fact that crooked democrats are desperate to bring Trump down before he brings them up on charges for their crimes.
Click to expand...

Trump Russian collusion was actually supported by facts. You have nothing supporting the garbage you posted in the op.
 
Remember, the OP is a self described evangelical. The truth is important to him.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
A third, and more likely, possible reason exists. It is easily proven that US aid (approved by congress) was given to Ukraine while Joe Biden was "in charge", that some of that aid was given by the Ukrainian government to Burisma (a Ukrainian energy company) and that Hunter Biden was paid handsomely (for doing ???) by Burisma. None of those aforementioned facts offer any indication of a violation of US law(s). What US crime, allegedly committed in Ukraine, would you suggest be investigated by the DOJ?
Click to expand...

Obama officials are on record expressing their concerns that Hunter's mysterious presence in Ukraine while his dad was raising American funding for Ukraine presents an appearance of impropriety.

However, there is no indication that serious investigators ever investigated Hunter's involvement with Burisma and Joe Biden had the Ukrainian prosecutor fired who had just turned up the heat on Burisma by seizing its owner's assets. That offers no support for the assumption that Burisma was not heavily involved in corruption with Hunter Biden on the board of the corrupt company.
 
Lisa said:
What website told you Hillary said this?
Click to expand...

Several sources reported this. Understandably, sources which desire to paint Hillary in a positive light claimed she never emailed the statement to Brazile. Of course she did not email the statement, but that is not what other witnesses said she did. Other witnesses claim she threw a glass and went on a curse-filled tirade against Matt Lauer and Donna Brazile for allowing Matt Lauer to question her about her emails. Both sources agree that Hillary was upset and sought to have Matt Lauer for for his impertinence. CNN also broke ties with Donna Brazile after it was discovered she was working with interviewers to select specific questions before the interview that Hillary agreed to.

So, what it boils down to is simply a matter of "he said - she said." One side claims Hillary cursed in a tantrum after the interview and the other side claims her response lacked violence and cursing, but neither side can prove they are right because Hillary had banned all cell phones behind stage for the event and it is certain nobody filmed the tirade, whether mild or not.

Did Hillary Clinton Throw a Tantrum with Matt Lauer?

Temper! Temper! Hillary Goes On Rampage For Over An Hour- Throwing Glass at Staffer’s Head – Victurus Libertas
 
bullseyelqcs said:
Stop lying.

The investigation into Burisma ended in 2012. The aid in question was held up in 2014.
Click to expand...

Totally inaccurate oversimplification of two misrepresented details which do not support the whole picture accurately in the slightest.
 
calamity said:
Trump Russian collusion was actually supported by facts. You have nothing supporting the garbage you posted in the op.
Click to expand...

Democrat zombies: 'Must...believe...DNC...narrative...do...not...let...facts...from...extensive....investigations...get...in...way.'
 
marke said:
Obama officials are on record expressing their concerns that Hunter's mysterious presence in Ukraine while his dad was raising American funding for Ukraine presents an appearance of impropriety.

However, there is no indication that serious investigators ever investigated Hunter's involvement with Burisma and Joe Biden had the Ukrainian prosecutor fired who had just turned up the heat on Burisma by seizing its owner's assets. That offers no support for the assumption that Burisma was not heavily involved in corruption with Hunter Biden on the board of the corrupt company.
Click to expand...

OK, but what US law does that (bolded above) violate?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK, but what US law does that (bolded above) violate?
Click to expand...

Biden's boss has been accused of money laundering and other crimes in several countries. Just because Hunter is on board does not mean America should have shut down Shokin's investigation of Burisma the way Joe Biden had it shut down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom