• 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!

Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and personal

Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
They have done something to her numbers. In Hillary's own words she wonders why she's not up by 50 points by now. No, I don't think committed liberals are going to change their minds. That's a given. But these releases certainly have an eroding effect on the squishy middle's opinion of her. That's likely who will decide this election.
Click to expand...

You could at least try to accurately quote people in context.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

blackjack50 said:
You think it matters. Cute. Democrats are just gonna vote for her corruption be damned. And as long as LEOs like Comey and lynch are threatened, bribed, or whatver...nothin happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Except FBI just reopened investigation....hold your breath.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
You could at least try to accurately quote people in context.
Click to expand...

Do you see any quotation marks? No. And yes, I could've looked up the exact quote. Then there would be quotation marks.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
Do you see any quotation marks? No. And yes, I could've looked up the exact quote. Then there would be quotation marks.
Click to expand...

If you hadn't hacked it up and bothered to quote her in context, you'd see she wasn't throwing a bitchfit over not being up 50 points. But I don't expect much from you other than boilerplate GOP rhetoric, so yay humbolt.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

NonoBadDog said:
It is getting traction now and the MSM is forced to cover it so I kindly disagree with you. Let's do this. Her poll numbers are +7.1 (RCP 4 way) on the 17th. They were 5.6 three days ago (23rd). They are +4.4 today. We can track it until the election. The story is getting traction today, since the email came out yesterday.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think it's a big deal.

Can you find any politician that didn't accept money from people ? Accepting money isn't proof of corruption.

Some random guy rambling about "no lines being drawn"- why should anyone care about vague rumors ?

That's why these wikileaks "leaks" aren't influencing anybody, they rely heavily on confirmation bias and intense loathing of Hillary.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Absentglare said:
I honestly don't think it's a big deal.
Click to expand...
You don't but people that actually count in the big scheme of things do. Big wheels turn slow.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...53a714-9ac3-11e6-9980-50913d68eacb_story.html

Can you find any politician that didn't accept money from people ? Accepting money isn't proof of corruption.
Some random guy rambling about "no lines being drawn"- why should anyone care about vague rumors ?
Click to expand...
Yeah, about 66 bucks million, total, as described by Doug Band,
Douglas Jay "Doug" Band (born 28 October 1972)[1] is an American businessman and lawyer. He is a founding partner and president of Teneo,[2] a global consulting firm. Previously he was personal assistant and counselor to former President Bill Clinton and [3][4][5] he assisted in creating the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).[2] Band later worked for the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Click to expand...
Not just some random guy. It would really be nice if you read the links. Then I wouldn't have to go through all this process again.
That's why these wikileaks "leaks" aren't influencing anybody, they rely heavily on confirmation bias and intense loathing of Hillary.
Click to expand...
It seems there are a lot of people that disagree with you.
Carr: Don't hang around Doug Band this weekend | Boston Herald
I wouldn’t want to be standing too close to this Doug Band guy anytime soon, especially not before the election Nov. 8.
Another thing I wouldn’t want to do is have to write a life insurance policy for Doug Band. In case you haven’t been paying much attention to the inner workings of the Clinton Foundation as detailed in the WikiLeaks dumps, Doug Band’s role is summed up nicely in this headline from the L.A. Times:
“An aide says he once arranged for $50 million in payments for Bill Clinton.”
Fifty million! And now it’s all laid out, in public documents, by Doug Band himself. Far, far beyond a reasonable doubt, if you want to get technical about it. Even James Comey could make this case — but he wants to keep breathing, too.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/23/b...uencers-behind-the-curtain-at-teneo.html?_r=0
Hacked Memo Reinforces Worst Perception of the Clintons - NBC News
The Clinton campaign will have to speak out, because the memo has been authenticated
What the memo makes clear is how inseparable the Clinton Foundation was to business interests. And while the Clinton campaign has refused to acknowledge the authenticity of the previous WikiLeaks emails, the company that Band co-founded -- Teneo -- did confirm the memo. And that puts extra pressure on Clinton and her campaign to speak out.
Click to expand...
Chuck Todd, 'Meet the Press' host: Clinton Foundation must close if Hillary elected - Washington Times

I could keep going but I think this is enough. Here is the email with the attachment.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32240
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
If you hadn't hacked it up and bothered to quote her in context, you'd see she wasn't throwing a bitchfit over not being up 50 points. But I don't expect much from you other than boilerplate GOP rhetoric, so yay humbolt.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh "context". Your selective concern about context is touching.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

j-mac said:
Except FBI just reopened investigation....hold your breath.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Meaning they have 8 days to come up with some monumental revelations very fast and we all know that is simply not going to happen. For those hoping to somehow stop her race in its tracks or hurting her numbers enough for Trump to win they might want to rethink a bit, most Dems as with most Repubs will vote as they always have, along Party Lines. In the end The EC will tells us who won and as it stands Hillary has the win and that will unlikely change. Heck even if they did file actual charges and she won it still would not mean Trump gets the Oval Office, her VP candidate would be the next President. Reality is harsh, but then again those "deplorables" should not have tied themselves so someone that has never been a Republican, is not a Conservative, and hated my Libs and Dems alike, they can only blame themselves for their own choices.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
Ahhhh "context". Your selective concern about context is touching.
Click to expand...

Ya know how dictionaries define words and give examples of how the word should be used in a sentence?
Well, I propose that after the definition of "context", the first example of it's use should be ...
"The partisan insisted on context depending on whose statement he was defending."
Imagine for how many words you'd see that example?
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

bubbabgone said:
Ya know how dictionaries define words and give examples of how the word should be used in a sentence?
Well, I propose that after the definition of "context", the first example of it's use should be ...
"The partisan insisted on context depending on whose statement he was defending."
Imagine for how many words you'd see that example?
Click to expand...

But Trump called all Mexicans rapists!
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
Ahhhh "context". Your selective concern about context is touching.
Click to expand...

My concern is "selective"? Care to back that up with examples?
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
My concern is "selective"? Care to back that up with examples?
Click to expand...

Nope. I'm not searching for anything. However, I haven't heard any objections from you regarding similar things taken out of context concerning Trump, and there are plenty of examples of that. Care to show me any instances in which you've defended Trump against out of context smears?
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
My concern is "selective"? Care to back that up with examples?
Click to expand...

Pfft, you only care about things that matter !! Selective indeed !
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
Nope. I'm not searching for anything. However, I haven't heard any objections from you regarding similar things taken out of context concerning Trump, and there are plenty of examples of that. Care to show me any instances in which you've defended Trump against out of context smears?
Click to expand...

Um, you made the accusation.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
Um, you made the accusation.
Click to expand...

So I can conclude that your objection is a purely partisan objection.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
So I can conclude that your objection is a purely partisan objection.
Click to expand...

Whatever helps you sleep better.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

Kobie said:
Whatever helps you sleep better.
Click to expand...

I cut a cord of oak today. I'll sleep just fine, secure in the knowledge that you wouldn't admit your partisan approach. Otherwise, you'd have shown me examples of your equanimity.
 
Re: Grifters-in-Chief The Clintons don’t draw lines between their ‘charity’ and perso

humbolt said:
I cut a cord of oak today. I'll sleep just fine, secure in the knowledge that you wouldn't admit your partisan approach. Otherwise, you'd have shown me examples of your equanimity.
Click to expand...

Onus is on you, pal. I am under no obligation to provide a defense for calling out your dishonesty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom