The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => National & International Politics => Topic started by: guido911 on April 28, 2017, 11:32:21 pm



Title: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on April 28, 2017, 11:32:21 pm
There are none.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on April 29, 2017, 09:22:19 am
Jesus...Did we ever dodge a  bullet....


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on April 29, 2017, 05:01:31 pm
Jesus...Did we ever dodge a  bullet....

THIS could have been the "Ivanka" of the white house...

(http://i0.wp.com/radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/chelsea-clinton-bikini-photos-husband-italy.jpg?fit=700%2C700)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on April 29, 2017, 07:38:07 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-n1orgXcAAQ7kg.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: RecycleMichael on April 30, 2017, 07:50:14 am
Your point of bashing Hillary on this forum?

Your posting of pictures of her kid in a swimsuit?

I think you are obsessed with Hillary. You probably have pictures of her under your pillow.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on April 30, 2017, 11:48:13 am
You probably have pictures of her under your pillow.


I do. It keeps the boogeyman away at night.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on April 30, 2017, 02:54:00 pm
Hillary's first 100 days were the best ever.....


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on April 30, 2017, 10:05:51 pm
I do. It keeps the boogeyman away at night.

And this unhealthy obsession with a couple of Arkansas goat roping queens may keep your wife away as well.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 01, 2017, 02:55:19 am
Hillary throwing up an alt-right gesture. I knew it.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-86351rOcCLY/UWYmHoOuOfI/AAAAAAAAIPU/6VD-nLLW-P8/s1600/Hillary+Clinton+Loose+Political+Point+Hand+Tension+Facial+Tension+Nonverbal+Communication+Expert+Body+Language+Expert+Speaker+Keynote+Las+Vegas+Los+Angeles+Orlando.png)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 01, 2017, 07:19:28 pm
Hillary throwing up an alt-right gesture. I knew it.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-86351rOcCLY/UWYmHoOuOfI/AAAAAAAAIPU/6VD-nLLW-P8/s1600/Hillary+Clinton+Loose+Political+Point+Hand+Tension+Facial+Tension+Nonverbal+Communication+Expert+Body+Language+Expert+Speaker+Keynote+Las+Vegas+Los+Angeles+Orlando.png)

That's just her asking for one of Bill's cigars.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 01, 2017, 10:34:43 pm
That's just her asking for one of Bill's cigars.

Terrific. Now I will never get that image out of my head.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 02, 2017, 08:28:25 pm
Will she ever just own it? Nope. Blame others because she was not awarded the presidency.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-blames-fbi-director-wikileaks-election-loss/story?id=47162791

Thank Almighty she did not win.

 Edited to add that the implications of her presidency remain "none".


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 11, 2017, 03:57:06 pm
Hillary buddy going to jail. Any of this sound familiar?

Quote
She used charities to cheat people and now she’s way beyond fixing.

(http://3dy8gw2t55ky2afnkd2ps0ql.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Screen-Shot-2017-05-11-at-3.27.40-PM-1050x525.jpg)

http://3dy8gw2t55ky2afnkd2ps0ql.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Screen-Shot-2017-05-11-at-3.27.40-PM-1050x525.jpg


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 12, 2017, 02:15:01 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_omQotUIAEGnkm.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on May 12, 2017, 02:53:14 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_omQotUIAEGnkm.jpg)

OK, that was actually pretty funny.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on May 13, 2017, 07:18:24 pm
From back before the election, I thought this was pretty clever:

(http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/comey-suicide-note.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 13, 2017, 08:46:52 pm
From back before the election, I thought this was pretty clever:

(http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/comey-suicide-note.jpg)

Before Hillary was "cleared":

(https://pics.onsizzle.com/just-in-james-comey-died-in-a-car-accident-tomorrow-5683281.png)

After she was "cleared":

(https://pics.me.me/hil-cancel-fbi-director-coments-suicide-6221602.png)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: RecycleMichael on May 14, 2017, 07:15:18 am
Let me suggest you get some professional help guido...

Your obsession with posting pictures of Hillary is truly disturbing.

Are you just bullying somebody because you think it is funny? Do you think TulsaNow posters want to see pictures of Hillary?

Please explain you inability to move on.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 14, 2017, 01:16:22 pm
Let me suggest you get some professional help guido...

Your obsession with posting pictures of Hillary is truly disturbing.

Are you just bullying somebody because you think it is funny? Do you think TulsaNow posters want to see pictures of Hillary?

Please explain you inability to move on.



Are you serious? Hillary is still whining about Wikileaks, Comey and Russia, blaming them for her loss. She is starting some bullcrap "resistance" PAC. And did you honestly assert that I am bullying Hillary Clinton? Come on man. Smile


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: RecycleMichael on May 14, 2017, 04:42:08 pm
I suspect most posters on TulsaNow have moved on and don't think of Hillary Clinton very often.

You do. You post so often that it is disturbing. You must have her picture filed all over your hard drive. I would hate to see your google history.

She lost the election. She has no power over you.

Let it go.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 14, 2017, 08:03:04 pm
I suspect most posters on TulsaNow have moved on and don't think of Hillary Clinton very often.



That's absolutely correct. Go to the "President Trump--The Implications" thread to get your fill of people that cannot get over the election and are still complaining about it. I mean, don't you remember the "President Obama--The Implications" thread started by someone just like you back in 2009?

In any case, if no one is thinking about Hillary, then no one should be worried about what I am babbling about.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on May 14, 2017, 09:00:07 pm
That's absolutely correct. Go to the "President Trump--The Implications" thread to get your fill of people that cannot get over the election and are still complaining about it. I mean, don't you remember the "President Obama--The Implications" thread started by someone just like you back in 2009?

In any case, if no one is thinking about Hillary, then no one should be worried about what I am babbling about.

You mean this Hillary love fest?

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=9355.0 (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=9355.0)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: RecycleMichael on May 15, 2017, 06:43:28 am
... then no one should be worried about what I am babbling about.

Good point. Why should I worry about you?

I just wonder about your obsession with Hillary.

Let me assure you. She is not interested in you as a sex partner.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 15, 2017, 07:43:05 am
This made me chuckle...

Quote
Rendell notes when he hired Host Committee workers, he made it clear, since they didn’t know how much money would be raised, salaries would be below market rates.

Rendell says because of a surplus, they were able to do “salary adjustments and bonuses.” Also, leftover money went to the School District of Philadelphia ($750,000) and several non-profits ($10,000 each to the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, the Food Trust of Philadelphia, and the Committe of Seventy, and $25,000 each to Independence Visitor Center and Visit Philly).

One of the lead plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit is Bethany Katz of Rosemont.

Swidler says she and others believed in the Democratic platform and ideals, and put in 80-to-90-hours a week in the last stages of the race to support Hillary Clinton.

“They got paid a flat salary of $3,000 a month, which isn’t even minimum wage for some of the hours that they were working,” said Swidler.
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2017/05/12/dnc-workers-file-lawsuit-for-fair-pay/


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: AquaMan on May 15, 2017, 10:09:17 am
This is certainly not TulsaNow at its best. When ol' Tumpy Numpkins is called to task for his corruption and collusion, I expect Bread and Guido to simply...spontaneously combust. Then we can discuss politics in a reasonable manner again.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 15, 2017, 10:25:42 am
This is certainly not TulsaNow at its best. When ol' Tumpy Numpkins is called to task for his corruption and collusion, I expect Bread and Guido to simply...spontaneously combust. Then we can discuss politics in a reasonable manner again.

It's just trollish deflection. There's no defending the crap Trump is doing so they pointlessly attack Clinton.

Some people treat politics as tribal. For them politics is a sport first and not about good policy or making this a better country. All these people care about is winning and gloating over the other team. It's like dealing with OU fans vs Texas fans. When this kind of behavior is about actual sports it's a bit childish, but when it's politics and people are really impacted, it's just plain mean. Evil even.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Hoss on May 15, 2017, 10:48:10 am
It's just trollish deflection. There's no defending the crap Trump is doing so they pointlessly attack Clinton.

Some people treat politics as tribal. For them politics is a sport first and not about good policy or making this a better country. All these people care about is winning and gloating over the other team. It's like dealing with OU fans vs Texas fans. When this kind of behavior is about actual sports it's a bit childish, but when it's politics and people are really impacted, it's just plain mean. Evil even.

What I'm really upset about with what's going on in national politics is the fact that now, it appears the Republicans (and I'm not saying Dems wouldn't do this either but that hasn't been tested yet) have a pack mentality when it comes to 'high crimes and misdemeanors'.  Circling the wagons even.

I saw a pretty funny meme this morning.  It essentially said "Someone take one for the team and give Trump a BJ in the Oval Office so we can get the impeachment proceedings started".  Classic.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 15, 2017, 12:02:38 pm
What I'm really upset about with what's going on in national politics is the fact that now, it appears the Republicans (and I'm not saying Dems wouldn't do this either but that hasn't been tested yet) have a pack mentality when it comes to 'high crimes and misdemeanors'.  Circling the wagons even.

I saw a pretty funny meme this morning.  It essentially said "Someone take one for the team and give Trump a BJ in the Oval Office so we can get the impeachment proceedings started".  Classic.

I don't seem to recall any calls for special prosecuters and such when the Obama admin was...

* Spying on adversarial reporters
* using the IRS to persecute political opponents
* arming violent criminals along the border
* orchestrating a cover-up to blame a YouTube video

Ya, you all are right, it's a tribe mentality, but it ain't unique. They learned from the best.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: CharlieSheen on May 15, 2017, 12:52:32 pm
I don't seem to recall any calls for special prosecuters and such when the Obama admin was...

* Spying on adversarial reporters
* using the IRS to persecute political opponents
* arming violent criminals along the border
* orchestrating a cover-up to blame a YouTube video

Ya, you all are right, it's a tribe mentality, but it ain't unique. They learned from the best.

Totally wasn't any investigation with Benghazi. 

"Arming violent criminals along the border" coming from the same party that wants to be able to arm the terrorist watch list too. I don't
think the plan was bad. Unless of course you think guns kill people and not people. Also that they couldn't get guns without this.

It does appear there were some IRS "apologies" that shows they did things wrong.  I know the tea party "attacks" were because they filed as non-political non-profits. There were other things that should have been looked into.  I'm sure they were, I mean Republican Congress and Senate.

The reporter thing should have been looked into.  Not sure why it wasn't. Again, Republican Congress.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 15, 2017, 02:29:30 pm
I don't seem to recall any calls for special prosecuters and such when the Obama admin was...

* Spying on adversarial reporters
* using the IRS to persecute political opponents
* arming violent criminals along the border
* orchestrating a cover-up to blame a YouTube video

Ya, you all are right, it's a tribe mentality, but it ain't unique. They learned from the best.

Thanks Rush, that's very balanced.

Spying on reporters was wrong and should have been investigated. Better laws need to be crafted to protect reporters and whistleblowers.

The IRS “scandal” was a load of crap. The IRS targeted groups that by their very name sounded like they were participating in banned political activity. Both liberal and conservative  groups were targeted, there were just more the conservative groups.

Fast and Furious didn’t arm Mexican gangs. It was an undercover effort to track the guns the gangs bought to attempt to uncover the people selling the guns and buying the guns so they could be prosecuted in order to stop gun running.

Benghazi was an attack under the cover of a real protest. The whole scandal over what was said publicly was asinine as facts were shifting and much of the information classified. Especially compared to this current president who has moved lying to stunning levels that truly threaten our democracy. But then he wasn’t democratically elected, was he?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 15, 2017, 03:23:03 pm
Thanks Rush, that's very balanced.

Spying on reporters was wrong and should have been investigated. Better laws need to be crafted to protect reporters and whistleblowers.

The IRS “scandal” was a load of crap. The IRS targeted groups that by their very name sounded like they were participating in banned political activity. Both liberal and conservative  groups were targeted, there were just more the conservative groups.

Fast and Furious didn’t arm Mexican gangs. It was an undercover effort to track the guns the gangs bought to attempt to uncover the people selling the guns and buying the guns so they could be prosecuted in order to stop gun running.

Benghazi was an attack under the cover of a real protest. The whole scandal over what was said publicly was asinine as facts were shifting and much of the information classified. Especially compared to this current president who has moved lying to stunning levels that truly threaten our democracy. But then he wasn’t democratically elected, was he?


Please take your anti-Trump/Sore Loserman stuff to the President Trump--The Implications Thread. This is a thread to discuss how thankful many of us are (and how hilarious by the way) that Hillary is not president. :)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 15, 2017, 03:26:37 pm
This is certainly not TulsaNow at its best. When ol' Tumpy Numpkins is called to task for his corruption and collusion, I expect Bread and Guido to simply...spontaneously combust. Then we can discuss politics in a reasonable manner again.

Tulsa Now is at its best when the same, or only, 4-5 posters has their circle jerk/echo chamber complaining about how rotten Oklahoma is, how they know more about making Tulsa better than those that are actually doing something, whining about how things are just darned unfair to them because Oklahoma is a red state, and generally being bitter and disgruntled about how their lives turned out.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 15, 2017, 03:47:40 pm
Thanks Rush, that's very balanced.

Spying on reporters was wrong and should have been investigated. Better laws need to be crafted to protect reporters and whistleblowers.

The IRS “scandal” was a load of crap. The IRS targeted groups that by their very name sounded like they were participating in banned political activity. Both liberal and conservative  groups were targeted, there were just more the conservative groups.

Fast and Furious didn’t arm Mexican gangs. It was an undercover effort to track the guns the gangs bought to attempt to uncover the people selling the guns and buying the guns so they could be prosecuted in order to stop gun running.

Benghazi was an attack under the cover of a real protest. The whole scandal over what was said publicly was asinine as facts were shifting and much of the information classified. Especially compared to this current president who has moved lying to stunning levels that truly threaten our democracy. But then he wasn’t democratically elected, was he?


There was no more or less "evidence" for any of the above than there is with the any of the Trump stuff. And because you say so doesn't make it true.

Not saying we should have had a special investigator or anything on any of those. What I am saying though is that if none of those (that were conveniently overlooked by Comey) rose to that level, Trump sure as hell ain't to that level either. He may suck as a president, but to date, I'm pretty sure that ain't against the law.

And to date, not one iota of evidence has been brought about that the election was compromised (ie your claim that he wasn't democratically elected). No state/county agency has made a complaint that any election system was rigged, hacked, or otherwise tampered with. So again, dial it back a notch and come back to reality. If you really are of the belief that the revelation of some emails in the waning months of the election cost Hillary the election, then she wasn't very electable in the first place.

And because the president is not elected directly (as if it was different this time) does not mean he was not elected democratically, because he sure as smile was.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 15, 2017, 05:53:36 pm
There was no more or less "evidence" for any of the above than there is with the any of the Trump stuff. And because you say so doesn't make it true.

Not saying we should have had a special investigator or anything on any of those. What I am saying though is that if none of those (that were conveniently overlooked by Comey) rose to that level, Trump sure as hell ain't to that level either. He may suck as a president, but to date, I'm pretty sure that ain't against the law.

And to date, not one iota of evidence has been brought about that the election was compromised (ie your claim that he wasn't democratically elected). No state/county agency has made a complaint that any election system was rigged, hacked, or otherwise tampered with. So again, dial it back a notch and come back to reality. If you really are of the belief that the revelation of some emails in the waning months of the election cost Hillary the election, then she wasn't very electable in the first place.

And because the president is not elected directly (as if it was different this time) does not mean he was not elected democratically, because he sure as smile was.

He wasn't democratically elected because he got 3 million less votes than the loser, that is in accordance with our system, but it's not democratic.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 15, 2017, 06:13:54 pm
Tulsa Now is at its best when the same, or only, 4-5 posters has their circle jerk/echo chamber complaining about how rotten Oklahoma is, how they know more about making Tulsa better than those that are actually doing something, whining about how things are just darned unfair to them because Oklahoma is a red state, and generally being bitter and disgruntled about how their lives turned out.


Says the Trump apologist extraordinaire !   Rationalizing, excusing, ignoring, deflecting, diverting, every step of the way.  Ya gotta be loving his disclosure of highly classified information to Putin!  Just the latest treason.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Hoss on May 15, 2017, 06:38:36 pm

Says the Trump apologist extraordinaire !   Rationalizing, excusing, ignoring, deflecting, diverting, every step of the way.  Ya gotta be loving his disclosure of highly classified information to Putin!  Just the latest treason.



Nah, he'll just do like I've seen him (and many others) do on FB...scream 'Fake news' without any means to back up the claim of fake news.  All too common these days.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: joiei on May 15, 2017, 07:02:23 pm
So Guido, are you excited seeing those pictures of our new first lady when she was a model? Or do you save everything for your guy fascination? 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 15, 2017, 07:10:19 pm
I don't seem to recall any calls for special prosecuters and such when the Obama admin was...

* Spying on adversarial reporters
* using the IRS to persecute political opponents
* arming violent criminals along the border
* orchestrating a cover-up to blame a YouTube video

Ya, you all are right, it's a tribe mentality, but it ain't unique. They learned from the best.


Really?    Where exactly were you during Obama and Clinton years...??



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 15, 2017, 07:11:57 pm
So Guido, are you excited seeing those pictures of our new first lady when she was a model  porn star ? Or do you save everything for your guy fascination? 


Fixed it for you... message still applicable.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: joiei on May 15, 2017, 07:25:32 pm
Thanks h,  tomorrow is another twitter. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 15, 2017, 08:10:19 pm
He wasn't democratically elected because he got 3 million less votes than the loser, that is in accordance with our system, but it's not democratic.

You keep conflating democratically with directly. I think you know this though, because saying he wasn't democratically elected is more powerful, no matter how false it is.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 15, 2017, 08:12:33 pm

Really?    Where exactly were you during Obama and Clinton years...??



Yes, that was my point. It's a chicken or egg came first thing.

It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.

Playing politics with the facts isn't a new thing. You know that. You're deflecting is absolutely the same thing I just did.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 15, 2017, 11:13:02 pm
So Guido, are you excited seeing those pictures of our new first lady when she was a model? Or do you save everything for your guy fascination? 

She beats the hell out of this...

(https://weeklyworldnews.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/michelle_obama_short_shorts2.jpg?w%20450%20h%20327)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/70/55/24/705524b2a7d1023f958bab1d74260d33.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 15, 2017, 11:23:01 pm

Says the Trump apologist extraordinaire !   Rationalizing, excusing, ignoring, deflecting, diverting, every step of the way.  Ya gotta be loving his disclosure of highly classified information to Putin!  Just the latest treason.



Trump apologist? I am not even that much of a fan. I am too busy enjoying the fact that HILLARY is not the president. That is what I am grateful for. Getting some control over the border, getting rid of criminal illegals, stopping international funding for abortion, ending PP funding for its infanticide, corporate tax cuts, increasing manufacturing jobs,  increasing investment in U.S. business, etc. You know, things that you hate. That is the topping on the sh$t sundae folks like you have been eating since election.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on May 16, 2017, 06:01:28 am
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170516/63247f3c0b89617759b43d66c8984234.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 07:51:59 am
Yes, that was my point. It's a chicken or egg came first thing.

It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.

Playing politics with the facts isn't a new thing. You know that. You're deflecting is absolutely the same thing I just did.


Lol....



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 07:53:52 am
You keep conflating democratically with directly. I think you know this though, because saying he wasn't democratically elected is more powerful, no matter how false it is.


Read it again.  That is not what was said. 

What WAS said is that in fact, Trump was NOT democratically elected because that is not the system we have.  Slow down, read carefully.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 08:17:24 am
Trump apologist? I am not even that much of a fan. I am too busy enjoying the fact that HILLARY is not the president. That is what I am grateful for. Getting some control over the border, getting rid of criminal illegals, stopping international funding for abortion, ending PP funding for its infanticide, corporate tax cuts, increasing manufacturing jobs,  increasing investment in U.S. business, etc. You know, things that you hate. That is the topping on the sh$t sundae folks like you have been eating since election.




You know nothing about me, but that's ok 'cause that 'projection' is exactly what the RWRE script-kiddies are all about.  Let's rational, thinking, people who form their own thoughts pick them out of a crowd instantly.  

What is so amazing is the apparent belief, against ALL evidence to the contrary, that these things will happen.


As for abortions and planned parenthood... isn't it interesting how the number of abortions peaked strongly during the Reagan/Bush era?  I can understand how people might see and feel the hopelessness of the country's situation at that time with those guys in office - it must have been one of those "Okinawa" moments like when the Americans were winning the island in WWII, so people jumped off cliffs rather than go through that torture.  

But since 1993, when Clinton took office, the rate and numbers of abortions has been steadily dropping - most likely because of the counseling and other women's health efforts of Planned Parenthood - since they are about the only widespread realistic opportunity for many women's health care.  Despite the RWRE lies and Fake Fox News efforts, PP has always counseled a wide variety of birth control methods - NEVER encouraging abortion as the first "go to" plan.  But if you got away from Fake Fox News, and actually watched real news - NPR, PBS - you would have already known this.  But hey, get rid of PP....throw the baby out with the bath water!!   Good plan!  Lol...

And these reductions sure weren't because of any kind of "abstinence" lack-of-education program in this country!


Abortion rates;
About 1.5 million per year through the Reagan/Bush era officially reported abortions.  Slowly going down to somewhere in the 500,000 to 600,000 by 2014.  Still way too high, but very much visible forward progress.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 08:47:56 am

Read it again.  That is not what was said. 

What WAS said is that in fact, Trump was NOT democratically elected because that is not the system we have.  Slow down, read carefully.



Swake said he was NOT democratically elected. I said he was. I got it, the first and second times.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 08:53:54 am

You know nothing about me, but that's ok 'cause that 'projection' is exactly what the RWRE script-kiddies are all about.  Let's rational, thinking, people who form their own thoughts pick them out of a crowd instantly.  

What is so amazing is the apparent belief, against ALL evidence to the contrary, that these things will happen.


As for abortions and planned parenthood... isn't it interesting how the number of abortions peaked strongly during the Reagan/Bush era?  I can understand how people might see and feel the hopelessness of the country's situation at that time with those guys in office - it must have been one of those "Okinawa" moments like when the Americans were winning the island in WWII, so people jumped off cliffs rather than go through that torture.  

But since 1993, when Clinton took office, the rate and numbers of abortions has been steadily dropping - most likely because of the counseling and other women's health efforts of Planned Parenthood - since they are about the only widespread realistic opportunity for many women's health care.  Despite the RWRE lies and Fake Fox News efforts, PP has always counseled a wide variety of birth control methods - NEVER encouraging abortion as the first "go to" plan.  But if you got away from Fake Fox News, and actually watched real news - NPR, PBS - you would have already known this.  But hey, get rid of PP....throw the baby out with the bath water!!   Good plan!  Lol...

And these reductions sure weren't because of any kind of "abstinence" lack-of-education program in this country!


Abortion rates;
About 1.5 million per year through the Reagan/Bush era officially reported abortions.  Slowly going down to somewhere in the 500,000 to 600,000 by 2014.  Still way too high, but very much visible forward progress.



I'm sure the RWRE attack on women (by closing abortion mills) had nothing to do with this statistic. With state houses all over the country turning red I expect this statistic to improve more and more, and I fully expect you to somehow attribute it to Democrats while at the same time criticizing Republicans for not giving a smile about women.

And to be fair, the run up was during the Ford/Carter years. Platauing at during the Reagan/Bush years. Admittedly they don't appear to have done much about it. And let's not forget the huge coincidence of the proliferation of sex education in schools and the aptly named Sexual Revolution of the 60s and 70s. But all those things would get in the way of a good punch line for you. Sorry.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 09:21:30 am

And to be fair, the run up was during the Ford/Carter years. Platauing at during the Reagan/Bush years. Admittedly they don't appear to have done much about it. And let's not forget the huge coincidence of the proliferation of sex education in schools and the aptly named Sexual Revolution of the 60s and 70s. But all those things would get in the way of a good punch line for you. Sorry.



Once again, goes to the lack of knowledge or sense of history...the real Sexual Revolution occurred in this country in the 1920's - runup and peak.  It took until the late 70's before we again achieved the same rates of children born out of wedlock that they had in the 20's.

Ahh...yes...during a Republican administration - the same one that brought us the Great Depression.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 09:32:55 am

Once again, goes to the lack of knowledge or sense of history...the real Sexual Revolution occurred in this country in the 1920's - runup and peak.  It took until the late 70's before we again achieved the same rates of children born out of wedlock that they had in the 20's.

Ahh...yes...during a Republican administration - the same one that brought us the Great Depression.



I hate to be that guy, but I'm gonna need some citation on that one cause everything I have found so far has out of wedlock births at about 1% in the 20's and double that in the 70's.

The passage below pretty much sums up everything I have found so far:

Quote
For some history on the black out-of-wedlock birth ratio, from the end of slavery until 1920 the black out-of-wedlock birth ratio was about 10 percent. From 1920 until 1960 this ratio went up to 20 percent. In 1970, the ratio was at 38 percent. In 1980, it was 55 percent. In 1990, it was 67.

Here are comparable figures for whites. In 1920 the white out-of-wedlock birth ratio was about one percent. In 1960 it was two percent. In 1970 it was six percent (to be more precise in 1960 it was 2.3 and in 1970 it was 5.7). In 1980 it was 11 percent. By 1990, it had climbed to 20 percent; followed by 25 percent in 1995 and 32 percent in 2005. These figures are for whites including Hispanics; that is why they are higher than the figures for non-Hispanic whites mentioned above.

So I am batting a thousand so far for NOT concurring with your statistics.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 09:37:05 am
And I think you mistakenly blamed the depression on Hoover, when I think you meant this guy...

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Woodrow_Wilson_1902_cph.3b11773.jpg/170px-Woodrow_Wilson_1902_cph.3b11773.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 09:43:20 am
And I think you mistakenly blamed the depression on Hoover, when I think you meant this guy...

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Woodrow_Wilson_1902_cph.3b11773.jpg/170px-Woodrow_Wilson_1902_cph.3b11773.jpg)


Nope.  It was Coolidge followed by Hoover - the guys that let all the banks and wall street go wild and caused the crash.  Just one of the reasons the shanty towns were called Hoovervilles....



Edit;  Coolidge did do one good thing - he granted citizenship to all Native Americans born in this country!   Think about that for a while...  He gave Native Americans citizenship....   But it took until 1924 to do that...


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 10:07:45 am

Nope.  It was Coolidge followed by Hoover - the guys that let all the banks and wall street go wild and caused the crash.  Just one of the reasons the shanty towns were called Hoovervilles....



Edit;  Coolidge did do one good thing - he granted citizenship to all Native Americans born in this country!   Think about that for a while...  He gave Native Americans citizenship....   But it took until 1924 to do that...


But if it weren't for Wilson, the Depression likely wouldn't have been the GREAT depression. If it wasn't for the creation of the federal reserve and the elimination of the regional banks it far more likely that the great depression, while a rough patch for sure, wouldn't be called so today. It would have just been another run on banks and a struggle for a bit, but managed by a regional banking system that had done this very thing time and time again. The inaction by the federal reserve compounded by the fact that the previous institutions that would have dealt with this could no longer made the depression great.

And don't give me that ole you don't know history bull smile. It ain't like you were a young lad in the 20's with first hand knowledge. I've said it a bunch already but I'll say it again, come off your high horse and join us in realityville.

You are the epitome of what you claim to hate. You are party first. Facts to fit that second.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 10:32:26 am
But if it weren't for Wilson, the Depression likely wouldn't have been the GREAT depression. If it wasn't for the creation of the federal reserve and the elimination of the regional banks it far more likely that the great depression, while a rough patch for sure, wouldn't be called so today. It would have just been another run on banks and a struggle for a bit, but managed by a regional banking system that had done this very thing time and time again. The inaction by the federal reserve compounded by the fact that the previous institutions that would have dealt with this could no longer made the depression great.

And don't give me that ole you don't know history bull smile. It ain't like you were a young lad in the 20's with first hand knowledge. I've said it a bunch already but I'll say it again, come off your high horse and join us in realityville.

You are the epitome of what you claim to hate. You are party first. Facts to fit that second.


Again, since you just don't get it...  No high horse.  Study history.  Talk to people that did live it.  It IS reality!  No matter how much the RWRE wants to create a revisionist fantasy of it.  (And talk about revisionist - I have even heard Limbaugh go on about what a noble cause VietNam was...from the Draft Dodger in Chief of the Fake Fox News Fantasy World.)

Everybody's got to have a dream...no matter how delusional, and you are buying into some whoppers!!  Anyone who knows anything about the economy or banking knows that the Fed ain't the one that caused the problems.  And even non-economists can just look at the history of severe depressions we had - every few years for many decades - can see that it wasn't the Fed.  It WAS exactly those regional, lone wolf banks going crazy out of control, along with decades of uncontrolled speculative insanity in the stock market with no brakes on either section.  Was happening way before the 20's - continued "hands off" non-participation by the govt just let it get worse every time. 

Ya gotta look at what leads up to stuff.  Bad depressions were happening - and that is why there were so many changes made during that time.  And why we have had such a long run of relative stability since then.  Until recently.
 
Probably the biggest contribution was the fact that the Fed was a paper tiger through that time with no real means to provide help/input.  Kind of like what Trump and Pruitt are doing to the EPA today.  Just wait - you may not only get water in the river, you may get to light it on fire for a picnic cookout !!    Bonus!




Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 10:40:11 am
Here is the history of recessions/depressions in this country.  Very easy to see that after WWII, we have had an easy ride compared to any time before.  All due to getting a Fed policy and entity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States


In particular, notice the comments about how new tariffs - as now being proposed by Trump - was also a significant factor in the Great Depression.  Among so many others brought about by Coolidge/Hoover incompetence.  But I am sure somehow the RWRE will spin it so the 3 and 4 and 5% drops in the economy we have under the Fed system are just as bad as the 15 and 20 and 25% drops in the economy we had before that...


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 10:40:14 am
Anybody that read what I said will understand that I did NOT claim that the FED CAUSED the depression. They only led to letting become Great, by not doing the very thing they untrusted to do...provide liquidity. I understand this smile, trust me.

I know you want to be right and peg it on a Republican or some Right Wing conspiracy, but the fact is the inaction by the FED led the that particular depression becoming way worse than it should have. And the depressions prior were dealt with by regional guarantors that were basically put out of business when the fed was created. While maybe not perfect, they didn't allow what happened in the 20s and 30s to happen. It wasn't hands off, it was federal hands off. There is a difference.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 16, 2017, 10:41:10 am
But if it weren't for Wilson, the Depression likely wouldn't have been the GREAT depression. If it wasn't for the creation of the federal reserve and the elimination of the regional banks it far more likely that the great depression, while a rough patch for sure, wouldn't be called so today. It would have just been another run on banks and a struggle for a bit, but managed by a regional banking system that had done this very thing time and time again. The inaction by the federal reserve compounded by the fact that the previous institutions that would have dealt with this could no longer made the depression great.

And don't give me that ole you don't know history bull smile. It ain't like you were a young lad in the 20's with first hand knowledge. I've said it a bunch already but I'll say it again, come off your high horse and join us in realityville.

You are the epitome of what you claim to hate. You are party first. Facts to fit that second.

No, you need to study the history of depressions in this country, especially in the 19th century. You are just flat wrong. The depression was in fully ugly swing by the FDR came to office.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 10:42:14 am
Here is the history of recessions/depressions in this country.  Very easy to see that after WWII, we have had an easy ride compared to any time before.  All due to getting a Fed policy and entity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States



None of that refutes the fact that they did not act as they should have during time after the stock market bust in the 20's. Liquidity dried up because the FED wasn't purchasing bonds. They did take a hands off approach, which was the exact opposite approach their predecessors took.

The reasons for the hands off approach can be speculated, but most of the speculation has to do with the fact that the most important people at the FED were on the east coast, and most of the leading problems were in the midwest. They thought they were letting competition banks fail, and never thought it would reach their doorstep. But again, that is complete speculation. Even more wild speculation would be that the WH was dictating this policy.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 10:42:44 am
No, you need to study the history of depressions in this country, especially in the 19th century. You are just flat wrong. The depression was in fully ugly swing by the FDR came to office.

Where am I wrong. Point it out, because nothing you said refuted anything I said.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 10:50:53 am
None of that refutes the fact that they did not act as they should have during time after the stock market bust in the 20's. Liquidity dried up because the FED wasn't purchasing bonds. They did take a hands off approach, which was the exact opposite approach their predecessors took.

The reasons for the hands off approach can be speculated, but most of the speculation has to do with the fact that the most important people at the FED were on the east coast, and most of the leading problems were in the midwest. They thought they were letting competition banks fail, and never thought it would reach their doorstep. But again, that is complete speculation. Even more wild speculation would be that the WH was dictating this policy.


Because of Coolidge/Hoover... again.  The reasons are the same reasons the RWRE today is saying the same stuff that the clowns then said.  And BIG tax cuts for the richest, of course...

And geez...where do you get this stuff??   No.  The leading problems were NOT in the midwest - it was policies, or rather lack of same, from the eastern bankers and Wall Street - the same Wall Street that is still in New York - near the east coast.

WH was dictating NO policy.  That was the problem - nobody in the govt was doing anything.  It was very clear case of continuation of Nero's policy - let it burn while they fiddle.





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 10:59:50 am

Because of Coolidge/Hoover... again.  The reasons are the same reasons the RWRE today is saying the same stuff that the clowns then said.  And BIG tax cuts for the richest, of course...

And geez...where do you get this stuff??   No.  The leading problems were NOT in the midwest - it was policies, or rather lack of same, from the eastern bankers and Wall Street - the same Wall Street that is still in New York - near the east coast.

WH was dictating NO policy.  That was the problem - nobody in the govt was doing anything.  It was very clear case of continuation of Nero's policy - let it burn while they fiddle.





Freak do you read anything I say. The panic happened just as many had before. The greatness happened because of the inaction of the fed to increase liquidity of cash in the market. The speculative reason for the inactivity (not the run on the banks) was that the banks in the midwest were being hurt initially and the banks on the east coast were not. The FED heads were all east coast bankers.

Google New York Clearing House Association. That is why none before were great (among many other reasons). And while none since are called great, the swings since the FED have been bigger and bigger. Probably just a coincidence though.

And D.C. wasn't doing nothing.

1. Realizing that tax revenues of 1930 and 31 were lower (naturally) the largest peacetime tax increase was passed (pre-FDR). I'm sure you will inform me that this helped the recovery.
2. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 was passed.
3. Hoover's version of public works got kicked off
4. National Recovery Administration enacted some price and wage controls between 33 and 35 (unconstitutionally might I add) which distorted market prices
5. And I guess I can't say the fed didn't do anything because starting in 36 they raised the reserve requirements, further limiting the monetary supply.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 11:00:36 am
Anybody that read what I said will understand that I did NOT claim that the FED CAUSED the depression. They only led to letting become Great, by not doing the very thing they untrusted to do...provide liquidity. I understand this smile, trust me.

I know you want to be right and peg it on a Republican or some Right Wing conspiracy, but the fact is the inaction by the FED led the that particular depression becoming way worse than it should have. And the depressions prior were dealt with by regional guarantors that were basically put out of business when the fed was created. While maybe not perfect, they didn't allow what happened in the 20s and 30s to happen. It wasn't hands off, it was federal hands off. There is a difference.


Ahhh...the plaintive bleat of the RWRE - beyond the sound bite, name calling!


You ARE saying that somehow the Fed made it worse when ALL the history and evidence shows that it was not that the Fed didn't want to do something - it IS that they were kept from doing something before it got bad - by Coolidge/Hoover, as stated before and obviously ignored before.  And if you look at the fights that Roosevelt had while in office trying to beef up the Fed to make it more effective, you would see that there was huge resistance that did in fact prolong the depression much longer than it should have!

He$$, even after we were in WWII, fighting the Germans - literally! - there was enough resistance to doing the right thing that it took until almost 1943 - over a year after we had started shooting at Germany - and the Germans were killing our kids - before Roosevelt was actually able to get Preston Bush's bank shut down in this country to stop financing the Nazi war machine!!   George's Daddy.  And Baby Bush's granddaddy!  

THAT is the kind of resistance he got!  So, no, you don't know the history!  Or understand the smile.  And prove it repeatedly.







Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 11:09:34 am

Ahhh...the plaintive bleat of the RWRE - beyond the sound bite, name calling!


You ARE saying that somehow the Fed made it worse when ALL the history and evidence shows that it was not that the Fed didn't want to do something - it IS that they were kept from doing something before it got bad - by Coolidge/Hoover, as stated before and obviously ignored before.  And if you look at the fights that Roosevelt had while in office trying to beef up the Fed to make it more effective, you would see that there was huge resistance that did in fact prolong the depression much longer than it should have!

He$$, even after we were in WWII, fighting the Germans - literally! - there was enough resistance to doing the right thing that it took until almost 1943 - over a year after we had started shooting at Germany - and the Germans were killing our kids - before Roosevelt was actually able to get Preston Bush's bank shut down in this country to stop financing the Nazi war machine!!   George's Daddy.  And Baby Bush's granddaddy!  

THAT is the kind of resistance he got!  So, no, you don't know the history!  Or understand the smile.  And prove it repeatedly.







Show me where they were kept from acting? by an outside force, presumably the white house.

All of history bears out to what I have been saying. There are those that refute it, so I'll say that it could be wrong, but no less so than you might be. But I'm sure you are sure of yourself.

I'm just going to put this here. The FED technically has admitted to it. So if you want to keep it up, it's at your own risk. I'm sure your take will be I don't know what I'm talking about and neither do those FED chairmen.

https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great_depression


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 16, 2017, 11:19:16 am
Freak do you read anything I say. The panic happened just as many had before. The greatness happened because of the inaction of the fed to increase liquidity of cash in the market. The speculative reason for the inactivity (not the run on the banks) was that the banks in the midwest were being hurt initially and the banks on the east coast were not. The FED heads were all east coast bankers.

Google New York Clearing House Association. That is why none before were great (among many other reasons). And while none since are called great, the swings since the FED have been bigger and bigger. Probably just a coincidence though.

And D.C. wasn't doing nothing.

1. Realizing that tax revenues of 1930 and 31 were lower (naturally) the largest peacetime tax increase was passed (pre-FDR). I'm sure you will inform me that this helped the recovery.
2. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 was passed.
3. Hoover's version of public works got kicked off
4. National Recovery Administration enacted some price and wage controls between 33 and 35 (unconstitutionally might I add) which distorted market prices
5. And I guess I can't say the fed didn't do anything because starting in 36 they raised the reserve requirements, further limiting the monetary supply.

You want specifics?

GDP reached a peak in 1929 right after Hoover took office, by 1933, about the time he left office, GDP had fallen by about 25%, unemployment was 25%.
In 1930 Hoover tried the Smoot/Hawley tarrifs and the economy shrank by 8.9%
In 1931 the dust bowl hit and the economy shrank by 6.4%
In 1932 Hoover raised taxes and the economy shrank by 12.9%!!!

How on earth is FDR responsible for a 25% decline in GDP before he ever took office?

In 1934, FDR’s first full year in office, the GDP growth rate was 10.8%
In 1935 it was 8.9%
In 1936 it was 12.9%.

Oh, and FYI, the “Great Depression”, actually wasn’t our worst depression. Again, read up on the economy in the 19th century. Also, the “Austrian School” of economics is more a political system of ideas than real math based economics. It’s kinda crap.

>>minored in economics some time ago


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 11:27:13 am
Show me where they were kept from acting? by an outside force, presumably the white house.

All of history bears out to what I have been saying. There are those that refute it, so I'll say that it could be wrong, but no less so than you might be. But I'm sure you are sure of yourself.

I'm just going to put this here. The FED technically has admitted to it. So if you want to keep it up, it's at your own risk. I'm sure your take will be I don't know what I'm talking about and neither do those FED chairmen.

https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great_depression


You didn't even read your own reference.  A very cursory glance through it showed this;

"At the start of the Depression, the Federal Reserve’s decision-making structure was decentralized and often ineffective. Each district had a governor who set policies for his district, although some decisions required approval of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, DC. The Board lacked the authority and tools to act on its own and struggled to coordinate policies across districts."


The board lacked the authority!!   Exactly what I have been saying - they were prevented from doing effective things by the Presidents of the time.  Coolidge/Hoover and a Congress that had the same mindset that we have today!





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 11:31:02 am

That is why none before were great (among many other reasons). And while none since are called great, the swings since the FED have been bigger and bigger. Probably just a coincidence though.




Bigger and bigger.... Wow!

Ok, Donald... your alternative facts are showing again.  Check that link I provided a while ago - it shows the swings over the entire history of the US.  And as I mentioned a while ago, I knew someone would equate 4-5% swings to 25% swings.... just didn't think you would do it quite this fast!!   Never underestimate the power of the RWRE sound bite culture!!



Think in terms of who was put in charge - one might ask oneself the question about why the EPA is going to be failing soon in it's responsibilities to protect air/water/land.  Scott Pruitt.  Same thing happened with Fed in the 20's.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 11:32:16 am

Bigger and bigger.... Wow!

Ok, Donald... your alternative facts are showing again.  Check that link I provided a while ago - it shows the swings over the entire history of the US.  And as I mentioned a while ago, I knew someone would equate 4-5% swings to 25% swings.... just didn't think you would do it quite this fast!!   Never underestimate the power of the RWRE sound bite culture!!



And if it hadn't been implemented, the crisis likely would have been averted. Hence my posting of the picture of Woodrow Wilson as the ultimate culprit in the matter. Get it. It all should make sense now.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 11:34:36 am
And if it hadn't been implemented, the crisis likely would have been averted. Hence my posting of the picture of Woodrow Wilson as the ultimate culprit in the matter. Get it. It all should make sense now.


Lol... does that Kook-Aid come in the 64 oz mega-mug??




Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 11:52:35 am

Lol... does that Kook-Aid come in the 64 oz mega-mug??




Your best and most effective retort. I'd stick with this line as well if I was you.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 01:09:07 pm
Your best and most effective retort. I'd stick with this line as well if I was you.



You have the reality spread out in front of you and typical RWRE sound-bite-world fashion, you are ignoring it - including specific quotes from YOUR references!  Others have also tried to help you to understand.  You ignore them, too.    What does it take to get you to actually read something?  And understand it??  English ain't working for you... Klingon maybe??  Probably not.  The Kook-Aid is strong in this one....






Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 02:21:57 pm


You have the reality spread out in front of you and typical RWRE sound-bite-world fashion, you are ignoring it - including specific quotes from YOUR references!  Others have also tried to help you to understand.  You ignore them, too.    What does it take to get you to actually read something?  And understand it??  English ain't working for you... Klingon maybe??  Probably not.  The Kook-Aid is strong in this one....






Lecturing me on ignoring the facts from you is going to be a discussion we will NOT agree on. I present facts to substantiate my claims (not contradict as you claim, I even pointed out how it didn't for you, you are welcome). You follow up by saying I don't understand without showing me how I don't understand except regurgitating some old tried and true talking points, and your source is Wikipedia. I know we are all busy and everything. But come on.

And when you are going to realize that what you are trying to prove (and myself as well) is literally UN PROVE ABLE. It's all conjecture. The reason I keep telling you to get off your high horse is because you approach everything from some sort of mythical stance of superiority, when in reality there is no way in hell you can back it up any more than I can, yet I am the delusional one.

There were a lot of moving parts that went into the great depression. You understandably want to simplify and tie it to the nearest conservative available (or Okie because that's a favorite pass time here too), which is par for the course for you.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 16, 2017, 02:23:35 pm
You want specifics?

GDP reached a peak in 1929 right after Hoover took office, by 1933, about the time he left office, GDP had fallen by about 25%, unemployment was 25%.
In 1930 Hoover tried the Smoot/Hawley tarrifs and the economy shrank by 8.9%
In 1931 the dust bowl hit and the economy shrank by 6.4%
In 1932 Hoover raised taxes and the economy shrank by 12.9%!!!

How on earth is FDR responsible for a 25% decline in GDP before he ever took office?

In 1934, FDR’s first full year in office, the GDP growth rate was 10.8%
In 1935 it was 8.9%
In 1936 it was 12.9%.

Oh, and FYI, the “Great Depression”, actually wasn’t our worst depression. Again, read up on the economy in the 19th century. Also, the “Austrian School” of economics is more a political system of ideas than real math based economics. It’s kinda crap.

>>minored in economics some time ago


You are offering up a Red Herring. Not once did I implicate FDR in this whole mess.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on May 16, 2017, 02:54:35 pm
None of that refutes the fact that they did not act as they should have during time after the stock market bust in the 20's. Liquidity dried up because the FED wasn't purchasing bonds. They did take a hands off approach, which was the exact opposite approach their predecessors took.

The reasons for the hands off approach can be speculated, but most of the speculation has to do with the fact that the most important people at the FED were on the east coast, and most of the leading problems were in the midwest. They thought they were letting competition banks fail, and never thought it would reach their doorstep. But again, that is complete speculation. Even more wild speculation would be that the WH was dictating this policy.

Crap, I misread. You're blaming the FED? That's a far crazier argument and makes it even more important to research the 19th century. Specifically the period between Jackson ending the Second Bank of the United States in 1833 and the start of the 3rd bank (The Fed) in 1913. Compare the number and severity of recessions and depressions in that time, known as the free banking period, and the time since. The improvement is huge. Especially since FDR. 

In the 80 years of the free banking period there were 18 recessions/depressions with economic shrinkage greater than 10% include five! with greater than 30% shrinkage. That's five events 25-50% worse than the Great Depression.

Since the Fed was instituted we have had just 7 recessions/depressions with of 10% of greater economic shrinkage, the largest being the depression of 1920 at 38.1%, which was worse than the great depression at 26.7%. Since the FDIC was added in 1933 there have been NO depressions and just two large recessions. Our recent great recession was 10.0%, the largest since 1938.  We are doing a good job of managing the economy overall since we went to a Keynesian model management via the FED with FDIC protections. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 16, 2017, 04:07:44 pm
swake,

I put a link to all those events.  Just one more thing he ignored.

It all goes back - as always - knowledge and sense and understanding of history.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 16, 2017, 10:45:51 pm
Back to more important things:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_98VKxUQAA1q2l.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 17, 2017, 09:02:32 am
Back to more important things:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_98VKxUQAA1q2l.jpg)


Just keeps on propagating and spreading the lies.... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX8oPjPU5x8



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 17, 2017, 04:18:41 pm

Just keeps on propagating and spreading the lies.... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX8oPjPU5x8



Lighten up Francis. It's funny. Or, maybe you are complaining because deep down you fear Arkancide.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: RecycleMichael on May 17, 2017, 09:05:15 pm
What is it guido?

Is it some sexual fantasy about strong women that causes these posts? Do you also have these feelings toward Oprah Winfey?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 17, 2017, 10:47:21 pm
Lighten up Francis. It's funny. Or, maybe you are complaining because deep down you fear Arkancide.


Always the real you.  So, the message you are trying to get across here is that because I think it is wrong to lie, that presumably leads to some kind of 'effeminate' sensitivity that is unbecoming a man...??  Or an aspersion based on that implication of being effeminate...?  Yep, you're ongoing homophobia is pretty astounding.  What is this...the 4th or 5th time you have tried to insult me in that fashion...?   Keep on truckin', dude!   


As for being funny...well, maybe once.  30 years ago when the attacks first started on the Clintons.  In 7th grade.  After decades of the lies being propagated by Fake Fox News as being true, not nearly so much.  I am a little bit surprised  you haven't referred to her as Killary yet.





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 21, 2017, 10:13:42 pm
Saw this on twitter re: Weinergate

Quote
Anthony Wiener Found Dead! Shot 15 Times In The Back "Worst Case Of Suicide I Ever Saw" - Hillary Clinton

https://twitter.com/2ALAW/status/866484903558365184


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 27, 2017, 12:48:38 pm
Why can't she just go away? Shut up and go away. But how appropriate is this tweet which pretty much sums up the feeling held by numerous TNF posters.

Quote
Hillary's friends say she's seething with rage & haunted by losing to someone she considers a soulless manipulator.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/868462810245844992/ePMpXLtN?format=jpg&name=600x314)


I think these are the thoughts held by Bernie's babies after the DNC manipulated their way into getting Hillary nominated. But that's Russia's fault.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on May 31, 2017, 05:06:13 pm
Has anyone else been reading/watching Hillary's "blame everyone else" tour she is on. Today she blamed the bankrupt DNC.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on May 31, 2017, 05:19:01 pm
Has anyone else been reading/watching Hillary's "blame everyone else" tour she is on. Today she blamed the bankrupt DNC.

They do deserve it. If they would have just stayed out of her way, she would have saved a lot of face after loosing to Bernie.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on June 01, 2017, 10:52:02 am
A real quote:

"I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost"

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5014/5543864653_5ac1097dce_b.jpg)

Honestly this fits right in with the younger generations understanding of who everything happens to them, not the other way around.

"The teacher hated me" "the coach doesn't like kids from the west side of town". It wreaks of laziness.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on June 01, 2017, 10:57:48 am
A real quote:

"I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost"

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5014/5543864653_5ac1097dce_b.jpg)

Honestly this fits right in with the younger generations understanding of who everything happens to them, not the other way around.

"The teacher hated me" "the coach doesn't like kids from the west side of town". It wreaks of laziness.

If we gave Hillary a participation trophy do you think she might calm down and be happy finally?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2017, 11:07:49 am
If we gave Hillary a participation trophy do you think she might calm down and be happy finally?


Who cares about her in particular.  The concern is the events and actions that manipulated the process.

It was just as bad when Nixon lost against Kennedy in part due to Alabama (not Cook County as some like to prattle on about) but even that would not have been enough for Nixon.  And when Bush was selected by the SC.  Fraud on either side is intolerable.





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on June 01, 2017, 11:12:27 am

Who cares about her in particular.  The concern is the events and actions that manipulated the process.



I think Hillary is pissed because her whole life she's been studying how to be the president and then at the last minute the teacher (us) switched it up and gave her a test on the electoral college and she didn't study for that (or visit states that would have made a difference). And she REALLY feels jilted. She said so herself that despite all the negative things that had happened she was still sure she was going to win. She hadn't even considered the possibility that she might loose, even though every election, someone looses.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on June 01, 2017, 12:26:17 pm
I think Hillary is pissed because her whole life she's been studying how to be the president and then at the last minute the teacher (us) switched it up and gave her a test on the electoral college and she didn't study for that (or visit states that would have made a difference). And she REALLY feels jilted. She said so herself that despite all the negative things that had happened she was still sure she was going to win. She hadn't even considered the possibility that she might loose, even though every election, someone looses.

"Lose", "Loses"    Sorry, just bugging me...  (and yeah, I make my own mistakes as well)

Regarding Hillary's "I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost",  I get it.  Not eloquently said, but I get it.  Her assertion, wrong on not, is that outside meddling from Russia and others is what flipped the election.  I don't necessarily agree with that, and I do agree that her hubris gets in the way of her thinking clearly on it, especially as recent as the events were.

But I look at this one kind of like a look at Trump's "Covfefe" tweet.  Yeah, it's fun to poke him with, but honestly it's just a typo late at night that he missed.   I'll pay more attention to the actual message he was trying to convey and judge on that.   My issue with "Covfefe" is not tweet or the lack of auto-correct.  It's that Trump won't simply admit that.  Instead, we get Spicer saying that Trump meant to tweet that, and there are a select few that know what it means.   Even though he tweeted to the masses, and did nothing but confuse everyone and open himself to ridicule for no reason.

And that is also the issue with Hillary here.  Not the quote itself, but the unwillingness to look beyond the emotion and be candid with herself and her followers as to her shortcomings.  Trump, obviously, has that same affliction in spades. 


 
     







Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2017, 01:19:08 pm
I think Hillary is pissed because her whole life she's been studying how to be the president and then at the last minute the teacher (us) switched it up and gave her a test on the electoral college and she didn't study for that (or visit states that would have made a difference). And she REALLY feels jilted. She said so herself that despite all the negative things that had happened she was still sure she was going to win. She hadn't even considered the possibility that she might loose, even though every election, someone looses.


No, we didn't give her a lesson in electoral college.  That was a very small group of pious, self-involved, intellectually dishonest, intellectually lazy, extremist left-wing, bunch of people who voted for the 3rd party candidates in the swing states.  People who claimed to "vote their conscience" instead of being practical about politics.  They literally ARE the ones who cost Hillary the election - no one else.  Not the Russians, not Trump, not the Easter Bunny!  People who let their extreme leftist ideology hurt the country.

Our democracy - and politics in general - is not gentle or restrained with any punches held.  It is down and dirty, rolling in the dirt, barroom brawl, sawdust-on-the-floor-to-soak-up-the-blood from the knife fights messy!!  Saying you voted for these 3rd party candidates as a protest or claiming to "vote their conscience" is no choice at all - it is an absolute abdication of ones duty as a citizen of this republic.  And that points out how stupid the left has become - would rather keep their "purity" than win an important race.  

I am never a single topic voter - ya gotta look at the totality and go with the least obnoxious choice.  If you are lucky, you get something above 51% good/bad ratio.  But if it is only 40% and the other is 30%, well that is easy, too.   Don't care and it doesn't matter how one feels about Hillary - I don't like her at all just because of how wrong she is about 2nd amendment and her efforts along those lines - but even she would still be better than what we have just on a relative moral consideration, not even considering the amazing ignorance and total lack of knowledge Trump has.   Yeah...I know...but it's true - Hillary was the moral choice in this one.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 01, 2017, 04:31:08 pm
When CNN's John King mocks you, time to rethink your whining.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=IcLqgymApjQ


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2017, 07:51:12 pm
When CNN's John King mocks you, time to rethink your whining.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=IcLqgymApjQ



Ya gotta admit, she isn't exactly a likeable person.  This was her last hurrah which is probably good.  Dems have needed some different faces and to get back to their roots for a long time.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on June 02, 2017, 09:40:20 am


Ya gotta admit, she isn't exactly a likeable person.  This was her last hurrah which is probably good.  Dems have needed some different faces and to get back to their roots for a long time.



What pains me is Elizabeth Warren seems to be the heir apparent.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 02, 2017, 10:29:20 am


Ya gotta admit, she isn't exactly a likeable person.  This was her last hurrah which is probably good.  Dems have needed some different faces and to get back to their roots for a long time.



Don't like her, and I really don't like most national political figures either. Both parties suck there.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 02, 2017, 11:36:12 am
What pains me is Elizabeth Warren seems to be the heir apparent.


I think I like Elizabeth - relatively speaking.   Gotta admit, she smarter, more articulate, and overall seems to be and have a better personality than Hillary.  Still way wrong about gun control.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on June 02, 2017, 06:15:12 pm

I think I like Elizabeth - relatively speaking.   Gotta admit, she smarter, more articulate, and overall seems to be and have a better personality than Hillary.  Still way wrong about gun control.



Hillary is a very smart woman it’s the conniving beotch routine which ruins it for her.

I’m not so certain Warren is any brighter than any of the GOP hacks like Sarah Palin who simply drank the Kool Aid and was good at reciting the party line.  I’d put Senator Warren’s level of intellect about in line with Al Franken.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 02, 2017, 06:20:41 pm
Hillary is a very smart woman it’s the conniving beotch routine which ruins it for her.

I’m not so certain Warren is any brighter than any of the GOP hacks like Sarah Palin who simply drank the Kool Aid and was good at reciting the party line.  I’d put Senator Warren’s level of intellect about in line with Al Franken.


Yeah, probably right... Harvard and GW are both just passing out degrees like candy at Halloween.  I think they realize it, too, but have to maintain the facade to keep all those endowments coming.

But the again, 'W' went there too....

As for Sarah, well she truly is profoundly stupid.  Went to 5 colleges.  Flunked out of 4, no doubt.  Finally got a degree from one of them...probably just to get her out of the way.  It was embarrassing having someone her age in freshman level classrooms with 30 and under's....






Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 03, 2017, 03:50:17 pm
Damn you Macedonia and all your tricky, conniving internet trolls...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=49&v=tkzaDoNgnLI


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on June 03, 2017, 06:46:58 pm
Damn you Macedonia and all your tricky, conniving internet trolls...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=49&v=tkzaDoNgnLI


Amazing how the RWRE keeps on calling facts revisionist.  Especially since Putin now admits to the meddling that everyone else except Kook-Aid Land knew about - and even they new it, but gotta keep lying to keep their hand in the game.  But hey, wouldn't expect anything else from them. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 21, 2017, 04:01:57 pm
How bad is it? It's this bad:

Quote
"Our brand is worse than Trump," Rep. Tim Ryan (D., Ohio) said, urging Democrats to make a clear economic message an urgent priority. "We can't just run against Trump."

http://freebeacon.com/politics/democrats-are-frustrated-after-ossoff-loss-our-brand-is-worse-than-trump/




Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 23, 2017, 02:24:41 pm
Loretta "matter" Lynch getting a dose of the "obstruction" medicine. Lynch v. Cruz should be epic television.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/23/senate-announced-probe-loretta-lynch-behavior-2016/


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 27, 2017, 09:59:13 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDYBcuXVYAAjhQ8.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on June 28, 2017, 10:49:33 am
Still tilting at windmills I see.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on June 28, 2017, 10:58:53 am
Still tilting at windmills I see.

Bringing your stupidity to another thread. And you have ZERO, and I mean that, self-awareness.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on June 28, 2017, 11:06:32 am
Bringing your stupidity to another thread. And you have ZERO, and I mean that, self-awareness.

Oh noes, Snowflaky is melting!


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on August 15, 2017, 01:31:10 am
Here's your chance everyone...

A special evening with Sir Edmond and the Clenis

https://www1.ticketmaster.com/event/0C0052FCCBBA68E7?camefrom=cfc_LNDALLAS_111717TheClintons_TWT080817#efeat4212


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 15, 2017, 10:22:38 am
Here's your chance everyone...

A special evening with Sir Edmond and the Clenis

https://www1.ticketmaster.com/event/0C0052FCCBBA68E7?camefrom=cfc_LNDALLAS_111717TheClintons_TWT080817#efeat4212

Funny how you've stopped posting about Trump.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Hoss on August 15, 2017, 10:23:21 am
Funny how you've stopped posting about Trump.

Yeah, I thought the same thing.   8)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on August 24, 2017, 01:05:15 am
She just won't shut up. Trump. That's right. Trump makes the loser's skin crawl. Not Clenis, the stogey, the rapes. Trump does.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/08/23/back-creep-hillary-clinton-relives-night-trump-made-skin-crawl-528774?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 24, 2017, 09:02:41 am
She just won't shut up. Trump. That's right. Trump makes the loser's skin crawl. Not Clenis, the stogey, the rapes. Trump does.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/08/23/back-creep-hillary-clinton-relives-night-trump-made-skin-crawl-528774?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter



The bigger question is why doesn't Trump make your skin crawl ??



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 24, 2017, 09:26:58 am


The bigger question is why doesn't Trump make your skin crawl ??



He's happy with the Tiny Hands, Snowflake Con Man, Pedophilic Nazi lover and Russia colluder, but she's awful. Things that make you go Hmmmm.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on August 24, 2017, 10:07:43 pm
He's happy with the Tiny Hands, Snowflake Con Man, Pedophilic Nazi lover and Russia colluder, but she's awful. Things that make you go Hmmmm.

The short form for Trump is "President". Just reminding you.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on August 24, 2017, 10:12:45 pm


The bigger question is why doesn't Trump make your skin crawl ??



Or why Clenis does not make youre skin crawl. Or Anthony Weiner for that matter.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Red Arrow on August 24, 2017, 10:48:09 pm
Or why Clenis does not make youre skin crawl. Or Anthony Weiner for that matter.

Folks on both sides of the political spectrum ascribe intelligence and high moral standing to political views compatible with their own.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 25, 2017, 07:48:26 am
The short form for Trump is "President". Just reminding you.

You keep feeling good about that, ok? It's going so well.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on August 25, 2017, 08:04:31 am
Folks on both sides of the political spectrum ascribe intelligence and high moral standing to political views compatible with their own.

I can't tell if you are backhanding Guido, or making a much deeper point.  Maybe both.

But my issue is not with Trump's political views.  Heck, I don't think that he has any real political views other than whatever makes him look best in the near-term.  Pick most recent Presidents and political leaders, and for the most part their actual political leanings are generally well understood.  From a personal side, they vary (and I suppose "varied", for those no longer with us) from fairly upstanding individuals, to being of dubious moral character.  (Although, Trump takes "of dubious moral character" to the limits of kindness...)   

Pick any other leading politician, on either side of the aisle, and the country would be better off with them instead of Trump.  I'm well past looking past looking for "intelligence and high moral standing", and am now willing to settle for sanity.

 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Red Arrow on August 25, 2017, 05:30:19 pm
I can't tell if you are backhanding Guido, or making a much deeper point.  Maybe both.

Not so much Guido (but I won't worry about him) as everyone who thinks the politician of their choice is the the most intelligent person who ever lived.  One of my more liberal friends (yes I have some) was nearly blabbering about how intelligent Steven Colbert is a few weeks ago. I don't think SC is anywhere near stupid but I do believe he has some good writers and makes a good presentation. I put up with the Obama love fest but I just got tired of the Trump hate fest so I watch Wings on Antenna TV now.  FWIW, I am not a Trumpster.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: joiei on August 25, 2017, 07:04:15 pm
Hey Guido, the rest of us have already moved on.  What is your sickness with keeping bringing up your Hillary?  Does it make you feel more manly?  Just asking. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 25, 2017, 07:21:50 pm
Or why Clenis does not make youre skin crawl. Or Anthony Weiner for that matter.


They do.  And I have said so.  Weiner is sick.   Clinton is oversexed.   

BUT the ONE BIG difference that YOU don't get is that Clinton's problems were between consenting adults.  Not anyone else's business, especially the biggest hypocrite of our time - Newt Gingrich.   Never heard you say anything condemning him and his long term harlot, either.   You seem to be just fine with the concept...hmmm... ??

As for Weiner, well the women he assaulted have taken justice into their own hands.  But I do wonder why none of them has pressed actual charges?  That is a Federal felony...probably got paid off.  Their adult, consenting choice on whether to pursue further.

The kids Trump perved did not have that recourse for some reason - the system got bought off.

Come on... you can do better than that!  Can't you??

Still haven't heard your condemnation of Trump on ANY of the topics I mention.  Why is that??  In a real world it can only be because you condone massively inappropriate behaviour as well as criminal activity.  Or do you have some other rationalization?   Besides, "it's not Hillary".  And by the way, what has Billy Bob got to do with Hillary being or not being President? 







Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 25, 2017, 11:43:53 pm
 

BUT the ONE BIG difference that YOU don't get is that Clinton's problems were between consenting adults. 


Except for the ones he raped or made unwanted advances at.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Red Arrow on August 26, 2017, 08:11:43 pm
Except for the ones he raped or made unwanted advances at.
Which kind of proves my earlier point of like political views.

 :(



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on August 28, 2017, 10:16:38 am
Except for the ones he raped or made unwanted advances at.

Who did Clinton rape?   Did I miss that, or am I mis-reading this comment?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 28, 2017, 03:20:37 pm
Who did Clinton rape?   Did I miss that, or am I mis-reading this comment?

Are you being serious or obtuse?

We can start with Juanita Broderick who claims it was an all out rape in Little Rock. Then there Kathleen Willey who claims it was a sexual assault in the Oval Office, and Paula Jones who claims Clinton exposed himself.  All which are criminal acts.  Granted only one of the three are “rape” but there was a clear pattern following him.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on August 28, 2017, 03:52:18 pm
Who did Clinton rape?   Did I miss that, or am I mis-reading this comment?

Google "Trooper Gate".


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on August 28, 2017, 04:05:46 pm
Google "Trooper Gate".

What does Mary Failin's affair have to do with anything?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 29, 2017, 08:32:34 am
Except for the ones he raped or made unwanted advances at.


Oh, please.... Still a long way to go in that recovery...!  The debunking of all that stuff has been around for years.  And David Brock and Ken Starr both have admitted to their parts in all the carp.  And apologized for it.  Even wrote books to try to undo some of the lies they spun.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 29, 2017, 08:35:39 am
Are you being serious or obtuse?

We can start with Juanita Broderick who claims it was an all out rape in Little Rock. Then there Kathleen Willey who claims it was a sexual assault in the Oval Office, and Paula Jones who claims Clinton exposed himself.  All which are criminal acts.  Granted only one of the three are “rape” but there was a clear pattern following him.



Check your spelling, too.

Statement in 1997;

Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones' lawyers stating there were unfounded rumors and stories circulating "that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies... These allegations are untrue"


So which time was she lying??

She also says she told her husband, but HE says he doesn't remember that at all.   I think that is something a husband would remember.  I would.






Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 29, 2017, 08:44:14 am
The whole Troopergate thing, like Whitewater, was a smear jobs funded by Clinton enemies and was much more than thoroughly investigated by Ken Starr who brought no charges.

That does not mean that Clinton is innocent of sexual misconduct. I doubt rape, but I am not sure. Broaddrick’s story certainly changed over the years. I am sure he cheated constantly and he probably at least came on to women in very gross ways. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 29, 2017, 08:59:49 am
The whole Troopergate thing, like Whitewater, was a smear jobs funded by Clinton enemies and was much more than thoroughly investigated by Ken Starr who brought no charges.

That does not mean that Clinton is innocent of sexual misconduct. I doubt rape, but I am not sure. Broaddrick’s story certainly changed over the years. I am sure he cheated constantly and he probably at least came on to women in very gross ways. 



He was always a womanizer.  Most of whom turned him away and ya never heard another thing about it.  The ones we heard about so much were found to have 'mixed' stories - every one.  Like maybe they were up for it to start, but then when husbands found out, not so much.  And these were in every case coached and vetted by the organization that also hired Ken Starr and David Brock.

Both of whom have recanted.

Don't care about Billy Bob's sexual exploits - I still suspect he and Hillary were 'swingers' and into group activities. 



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 29, 2017, 10:53:34 am
So Clinton’s accusers lack veracity but Trump’s don’t.  M’kay, Heir.

At least swake is willing to be objective about it.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 29, 2017, 11:04:30 am
So Clinton’s accusers lack veracity but Trump’s don’t.  M’kay, Heir.

At least swake is willing to be objective about it.


Didn't say that at all - what I said was the specific one YOU mentioned (and there have been others that made accusations that were debunked) have been shown to be at best ambiguous, and in Broaddrick's case, flat out lied about at least one of the things - either it did or it didn't - NOT both.  It's the actual historical record.


And mass number of Trump's accusers are only verifying what Trump himself has specifically mentioned himself - all they are doing is verifying, yeah, that's what he did all right.  Like the women in the beauty pageant he said he walked in on naked.  And the 16 year old girls he said he walked in on because he "had to check them out - make sure everything is ok...".   Couple of dozen of the adult women AND the teen age girls made statements saying, yes that is what he did.

But ok, if you don't see a difference in that, well, that's just sad.  Goes to the whole recovery effort and whether it is working or not.






Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 29, 2017, 04:37:51 pm

Didn't say that at all - what I said was the specific one YOU mentioned (and there have been others that made accusations that were debunked) have been shown to be at best ambiguous, and in Broaddrick's case, flat out lied about at least one of the things - either it did or it didn't - NOT both.  It's the actual historical record.

And mass number of Trump's accusers are only verifying what Trump himself has specifically mentioned himself - all they are doing is verifying, yeah, that's what he did all right.  Like the women in the beauty pageant he said he walked in on naked.  And the 16 year old girls he said he walked in on because he "had to check them out - make sure everything is ok...".   Couple of dozen of the adult women AND the teen age girls made statements saying, yes that is what he did.

But ok, if you don't see a difference in that, well, that's just sad.  Goes to the whole recovery effort and whether it is working or not.


Trump was accused of walking in on naked women.  That's a bit different than showing Little Willy to an unsuspecting female, and sexually assaulting others.

It's quite common for rape victims to either keep the assault to themselves or outright deny it.  That's a known issue with rape victims.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-juanita-broaddrick-the-woman-accusing-bill-clinton-of-rape

I think we can at least agree on one thing, people with wealth and power have a sense of entitlement and can get away with more than you or I could (not that I'd ever want to get away with the smile these two as$ clowns have)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 29, 2017, 05:51:54 pm
Trump was accused of walking in on naked women.  That's a bit different than showing Little Willy to an unsuspecting female, and sexually assaulting others.

It's quite common for rape victims to either keep the assault to themselves or outright deny it.  That's a known issue with rape victims.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-juanita-broaddrick-the-woman-accusing-bill-clinton-of-rape

I think we can at least agree on one thing, people with wealth and power have a sense of entitlement and can get away with more than you or I could (not that I'd ever want to get away with the smile these two as$ clowns have)

Oh god no Conan. Trump has done far more than his walk-in on the Miss Universe Pageant, which he was accused of doing by several women.

Trump was also accused of a very ugly forcible rape by Ivana which was backed up by others that she told at the time. The account of the rape is really, really nasty. The accusation was sealed as part of the settlement of their divorce, but he most certainly has been very credibly accused of rape.

Trump also was accused, by six different witnesses, of walking in on naked teens as young as 13. You know, at the Jr Miss Pageant, just like he bragged about.

And that's all aside from the couple of dozen accusations of dropping trou and showing off his little Cheetos, forcible groping and fondling women, all as bad and worse, than anything Clinton was ever accused of. With many, many more accusers.

He's currently fighting against being deposed in a related lawsuit from one of the women saying he is protected while he is president.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 29, 2017, 08:30:18 pm
Oh god no Conan. Trump has done far more than his walk-in on the Miss Universe Pageant, which he was accused of doing by several women.

Trump was also accused of a very ugly forcible rape by Ivana which was backed up by others that she told at the time. The account of the rape is really, really nasty. The accusation was sealed as part of the settlement of their divorce, but he most certainly has been very credibly accused of rape.

Trump also was accused, by six different witnesses, of walking in on naked teens as young as 13. You know, at the Jr Miss Pageant, just like he bragged about.

And that's all aside from the couple of dozen accusations of dropping trou and showing off his little Cheetos, forcible groping and fondling women, all as bad and worse, than anything Clinton was ever accused of. With many, many more accusers.

He's currently fighting against being deposed in a related lawsuit from one of the women saying he is protected while he is president.

I know what he’s been accused of, swake.  I was commenting back on Heir mentioning the walking in on nude pageant contestants.  I have little doubt Trump has taken certain liberties, yet one of the many reasons I’ve despised this man for decades.

As far as the rape allegation from Ivana Trump, she has since walked it back.  I think we can agree that ABC would be as non-partisan a source as you could find, yes?

Quote
Donald Trump's first wife, Ivana Trump, said today that she is "the best of friends" with her ex-husband, responding to a report in the Daily Beast on Monday that cited her 1989 divorce case deposition in which the former Mrs. Trump claimed Trump allegedly raped her once.

A statement today from Ivana Trump appeared to refute the allegations in the deposition, which were revealed in a 1993 book, "The Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump."

"I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald," she said in the statement today. "The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised 3 children that we love and are very proud of."

Ivana Trump had already walked back the rape allegation in 1993 as the book was about to be published.

“During a deposition given by me in connection with my matrimonial case, I stated that my husband had raped me,” Ivana Trump said in a statement at the time, as the Daily Beast reported. "
  • n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-wife-ivana-disavows-rape-allegation/story?id=32732204

Of course, we have no idea how much the original allegations in the depo were an attempt to sweeten the settlement nor do we know if she was paid a Trumpster-load of cash to walk this back now.  That’s the sometimes disgusting aspect of the rich and famous.  Most everyone has their price for silence or some other action and slime balls like Trump and the Clintons have either the cash or influence to make it happen.

Bill Clinton and Donald Trump are cut from the same cloth.  Clinton being more charismatic either makes it more palatable or less believable when he engages is accused of engaging in sicko behavior.  And I will admit Clinton was a reasonably good president, personal peccadilloes aside.  The Trump Admin on the other hand, is a rolling train wreck.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 08:22:08 am
Trump was accused of walking in on naked women.  That's a bit different than showing Little Willy to an unsuspecting female, and sexually assaulting others.

It's quite common for rape victims to either keep the assault to themselves or outright deny it.  That's a known issue with rape victims.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-juanita-broaddrick-the-woman-accusing-bill-clinton-of-rape

I think we can at least agree on one thing, people with wealth and power have a sense of entitlement and can get away with more than you or I could (not that I'd ever want to get away with the smile these two as$ clowns have)


Right...got it.  You still think walking in on a group of naked 15 and 16 year old girls is no biggie... Got it...

And again, NO, he was not accused of walking in on naked women.  He talked about it.  Admitted it.  Bragged about doing it.  As if it were his right.  Another big difference you don't seem to get.  And by definition, when he does that to a 15 year old girl, it is rape.  When he does it to a room full of them, it is serial rape.


As for your link, yeah, I have seen it before and read it.  Let's see if you will read this one...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 08:27:32 am


As far as the rape allegation from Ivana Trump, she has since walked it back.  I think we can agree that ABC would be as non-partisan a source as you could find, yes?




Just like Juanita Broaddrick "walked back" her accusations of Billy Bob.  But you are now willing to give Trump a pass, but still condemn BB.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 09:18:28 am

Right...got it.  You still think walking in on a group of naked 15 and 16 year old girls is no biggie... Got it...

And again, NO, he was not accused of walking in on naked women.  He talked about it.  Admitted it.  Bragged about doing it.  As if it were his right.  Another big difference you don't seem to get.  And by definition, when he does that to a 15 year old girl, it is rape.  When he does it to a room full of them, it is serial rape.


As for your link, yeah, I have seen it before and read it.  Let's see if you will read this one...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick


From your link, an eye witness who shared a room with Broaddrick corroborates her account, so what was your point in posting the wiki link?

Quote
Broaddrick shared the hotel room with her friend and employee Norma Rogers. Rogers attended a conference seminar that morning, and says she returned to their room to find Broaddrick on the bed “in a state of shock,” her pantyhose torn in the crotch and her lip swollen as though she had been hit.[7] Rogers says Broaddrick told her Clinton had "forced himself on her."[7] Rogers helped Broaddrick ice her lip, and then the women left Little Rock. Rogers said that Broaddrick was very upset on the way home and blamed herself for letting Clinton in the room.[3] Broaddrick says she did not tell her husband, Gary Hickey, about the incident, and told him she accidentally injured her lip. He told NBC he did not remember the injury or her explanation.[3][8] David Broaddrick, however, has said he noticed her injured lip, and she told him that Clinton had raped her when he asked about it.[3] Three other friends confirmed that Broaddrick had told them about the incident at the time: Susan Lewis, Louis Ma, and Jean Darden, Norma Rogers’ sister.[3] Broaddrick did not recall the date of the alleged incident, but said it was spring of 1978 and that she had stayed in the Camelot Hotel. Records show Broaddrick attended a nursing home meeting at the Camelot Hotel in Little Rock on April 25, 1978.[3][8] The Clinton White House would not respond to requests for Clinton's official schedule for the date,[9] but news reports suggest that he was in Little Rock that day, with no official commitments in the morning.[3]


Walking in on a group of naked women (or girls) on purpose or accident is nowhere close to the definition of rape.  Peeping Tom possibly.  I think you need to look up the legal definition of rape, even age doesn’t make a difference on that as you assert.  

Well here, I saved you the time.  Here’s the DOJ’s official definition of rape, updated in 2012:

Quote
“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape

Did any contestant make claims of any penetration or unwanted advance?  No.

One would think out of all the teen contestants in the dressing room, someone’s parents would have taken Trump to task at the time or had gone to the authorities, but we can find no evidence of that, can we?

So four women said Trump came in the dressing room, 11 say it either didn’t happen or they don’t remember.  Of the ones who say it happened, they rushed to cover their bodies so there’s not even any clear statement that he saw a nude teen.  Four witnesses saying it happened and 11 questioning if it did or not remembering it seems to bring up reasonable doubt.

I’m not a Trump apologist but people have a serious problem with picking up bits of facts and creating their own reality with it.  Walking in on naked women suddenly becomes serial rape? Really?  He had no right to do it as pageant owner or interested spectator, but it’s still not rape and no allegations were ever brought that it was.  

I really don’t see a difference than gym or sports coaches walking through the locker room while teen athletes are showering and changing yet I don’t recall that as leading to rape allegations nor anyone talking about it being creepy when I was a teen.  Well, except Trump is a creep.

Still you don’t have a legit claim to rape, that’s just hyperbole.

Quote
:

Four women who competed in the 1997 Miss Teen USA beauty pageant said Donald Trump walked into the dressing room while contestants — some as young as 15 — were changing.

"I remember putting on my dress really quick because I was like, ‘Oh my god, there’s a man in here,’ " said Mariah Billado, the former Miss Vermont Teen USA.

Trump, she recalled, said something like, "Don’t worry, ladies, I’ve seen it all before."

Three other women, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of getting engulfed in a media firestorm, also remembered Trump entering the dressing room while girls were changing. Two of them said the girls rushed to cover their bodies, with one calling it "shocking" and "creepy." The third said she was clothed and introduced herself to Trump.

The story also reported:

Of the 11 (contestants) who said they don’t remember Trump coming into the changing room, some said it was possible that it happened while they weren’t in the room or that they didn’t notice. But most were dubious or dismissed the possibility out of hand.

Allison Bowman, former Miss Wisconsin Teen USA, cast doubt on whether it happened. "These were teenage girls," Bowman said. "If anything inappropriate had gone on, the gossip would have flown."


http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2016/oct/18/allegations-about-donald-trump-and-miss-teen-usa-c/

Quote
None of the women who talked to BuzzFeed News said Trump touched them or said anything explicit. Meanwhile, 11 other contestants didn’t remember seeing Trump walk into the dressing area. The Trump campaign has called these stories “totally false.”

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-beauty-pageants-naked-2dc4b6c6d507/

Even from a far left site, their story states Trump never touched anyone nor said anything explicit.  Let’s see you document how this becomes rape.

Trump is a creep, we all get it, there’s no need to try and convince anyone of it.  Yet you persist in trying to diminish Clinton’s behavior in a rape or sexual assault allegation on Clinton which had corroborating witnesses simply to make Trump look worse.  That is clearly what you are doing here.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 09:27:41 am

Just like Juanita Broaddrick "walked back" her accusations of Billy Bob.  But you are now willing to give Trump a pass, but still condemn BB.



As I already explained Broaddrick did what many rape victims do: deny it happened at first.  To my knowledge, she has never walked back her claims of the rape since she finally did go public with it.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 09:29:20 am
Wow!   Trump Apologist.


Broaddrick told two stories.  As I asked before, which one was the lie??   And she repeated the "didn't happen" story on several occasions.  Since she said it didn't happen so many times, if it did, then she is a proven liar, so why should she believed then?   Oh, yeah...testified under oath.  Billy Bob got impeached - why is she unimpeachable?

And why would she keep working for his campaign for weeks after being raped?  Voluntarily.

And even Paula Jones sister and brother in law didn't believe her...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_sexual_misconduct_allegations





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 09:42:29 am
Wow!   Trump Apologist.


Broaddrick told two stories.  As I asked before, which one was the lie??   And she repeated the "didn't happen" story on several occasions.  Since she said it didn't happen so many times, if it did, then she is a proven liar, so why should she believed then?   Oh, yeah...testified under oath.  Billy Bob got impeached - why is she unimpeachable?

And why would she keep working for his campaign for weeks after being raped?  Voluntarily.

And even Paula Jones sister and brother in law didn't believe her...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_sexual_misconduct_allegations


Uh no.  I believe that to be a pretty fair and accurate account at least from what is publicly known about Trump’s creepy behavior at his pageants and you still have not established that is rape aside from your personal opinions.  

Even faced with the facts on the Broaddrick case and known behavior of rape victims after an attack, you still are dumping on an alleged rape victim.  

Keepin’ it classy, I see, just like the Clintons!  Did you work for the Clintons at some point?  I’m seeing a pattern here.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 09:43:18 am
From your link, an eye witness who shared a room with Broaddrick corroborates her account, so what was your point in posting the wiki link?

Walking in on a group of naked women (or girls) on purpose or accident is nowhere close to the definition of rape.  Peeping Tom possibly.  I think you need to look up the legal definition of rape, even age doesn’t make a difference on that as you assert.  

Well here, I saved you the time.  Here’s the DOJ’s official definition of rape, updated in 2012:

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape

Did any contestant make claims of any penetration or unwanted advance?  No.

One would think out of all the teen contestants in the dressing room, someone’s parents would have taken Trump to task at the time or had gone to the authorities, but we can find no evidence of that, can we?

So four women said Trump came in the dressing room, 11 say it either didn’t happen or they don’t remember.  Of the ones who say it happened, they rushed to cover their bodies so there’s not even any clear statement that he saw a nude teen.  Four witnesses saying it happened and 11 questioning if it did or not remembering it seems to bring up reasonable doubt.

I’m not a Trump apologist but people have a serious problem with picking up bits of facts and creating their own reality with it.  Walking in on naked women suddenly becomes serial rape? Really?  He had no right to do it as pageant owner or interested spectator, but it’s still not rape and no allegations were ever brought that it was.  

I really don’t see a difference than gym or sports coaches walking through the locker room while teen athletes are showering and changing yet I don’t recall that as leading to rape allegations nor anyone talking about it being creepy when I was a teen.  Well, except Trump is a creep.

Still you don’t have a legit claim to rape, that’s just hyperbole.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2016/oct/18/allegations-about-donald-trump-and-miss-teen-usa-c/

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-beauty-pageants-naked-2dc4b6c6d507/

Even from a far left site, their story states Trump never touched anyone nor said anything explicit.  Let’s see you document how this becomes rape.

Trump is a creep, we all get it, there’s no need to try and convince anyone of it.  Yet you persist in trying to diminish Clinton’s behavior in a rape or sexual assault allegation on Clinton which had corroborating witnesses simply to make Trump look worse.  That is clearly what you are doing here.

Here are 13 women who accuse Trump of groping and kissing without permission dating to the 1980s. This the pattern of a serial sexual assault.

•   Jessica Leeds  - Accused Trump of groping her on a flight in the 1980, he grabbed her breast and attempted to put his hand up her skirt. She had never met him before
•   Rachel Crooks – Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission in 2005, she was a receptionist in Trump tower and made this accusation BEFORE the Access Hollywood tape was released.
•   Natasha Stoynoff - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission also in 2005 while she was interviewing him for People Magazine
•    Mindy McGillivray - Accused Trump of groping her butt during a photo shoot at Mar A Lago in 2003 when she was a photographers assistant
•   Cassandra Searles  - Accused Trump of “continually grabbing her donkey” at the Miss USA Pageant while she was Miss Washington in 2013
•   Temple Taggart – Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission two different times while she was the 1997 Miss Utah
•   Kristin Anderson – Accused Trump of sticking his hand up her miniskirt and into her underwear without permission while in a nightclub in the 1990s
•   Summer Zervos - Accused Trump of groping her and forcibly kissing her without permission two different times in 2007, she was a contestant on season five of the Apprentice
•   Cathy Heller - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her at Mar A Lago in 1997 while she was having brunch with her husband and children
•   Ninni Laaksonen – Accused Trump of groping her during a taping the Late Show with David Letterman where she was appearing as Miss Finland before the 2006 Miss Universe Pageant
•   Jessica Drake - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission and offering the porn star $10,000 to come to his room in 2006 at Lake Tahoe
•   Karena Virginia – Accused Trump of groping her breast while waiting for a car service outside the US Open
•   Jill Harth – Accused Trump of groping her and attempting to assault in 1997, she sued him for this in the 1990s

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303122-ex-miss-finland-trump-groped-me
https://www.vox.com/2016/10/12/13265206/trump-accusations-sexual-assault
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-apprentice-contestant-sues-trump-for-defamation-for-denying-alleged-groping/2017/01/17/9c88acb2-dcd9-11e6-acdf-14da832ae861_story.html?utm_term=.9711cb325a51
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/woman-says-trump-reached-under-her-skirt-and-groped-her-in-early-1990s/2016/10/14/67e8ff5e-917d-11e6-a6a3-d50061aa9fae_story.html?utm_term=.5f426f58937b



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 09:48:10 am
Here are 13 women who accuse Trump of groping and kissing without permission dating to the 1980s. This the pattern of a serial sexual assault.

•   Jessica Leeds  - Accused Trump of groping her on a flight in the 1980, he grabbed her breast and attempted to put his hand up her skirt. She had never met him before
•   Rachel Crooks – Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission in 2005, she was a receptionist in Trump tower and made this accusation BEFORE the Access Hollywood tape was released.
•   Natasha Stoynoff - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission also in 2005 while she was interviewing him for People Magazine
•    Mindy McGillivray - Accused Trump of groping her butt during a photo shoot at Mar A Lago in 2003 when she was a photographers assistant
•   Cassandra Searles  - Accused Trump of “continually grabbing her donkey” at the Miss USA Pageant while she was Miss Washington in 2013
•   Temple Taggart – Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission two different times while she was the 1997 Miss Utah
•   Kristin Anderson – Accused Trump of sticking his hand up her miniskirt and into her underwear without permission while in a nightclub in the 1990s
•   Summer Zervos - Accused Trump of groping her and forcibly kissing her without permission two different times in 2007, she was a contestant on season five of the Apprentice
•   Cathy Heller - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her at Mar A Lago in 1997 while she was having brunch with her husband and children
•   Ninni Laaksonen – Accused Trump of groping her during a taping the Late Show with David Letterman where she was appearing as Miss Finland before the 2006 Miss Universe Pageant
•   Jessica Drake - Accused Trump of grabbing her and forcibly kissing her without permission and offering the porn star $10,000 to come to his room in 2006 at Lake Tahoe
•   Karena Virginia – Accused Trump of groping her breast while waiting for a car service outside the US Open
•   Jill Harth – Accused Trump of groping her and attempting to assault in 1997, she sued him for this in the 1990s

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303122-ex-miss-finland-trump-groped-me
https://www.vox.com/2016/10/12/13265206/trump-accusations-sexual-assault
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-apprentice-contestant-sues-trump-for-defamation-for-denying-alleged-groping/2017/01/17/9c88acb2-dcd9-11e6-acdf-14da832ae861_story.html?utm_term=.9711cb325a51
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/woman-says-trump-reached-under-her-skirt-and-groped-her-in-early-1990s/2016/10/14/67e8ff5e-917d-11e6-a6a3-d50061aa9fae_story.html?utm_term=.5f426f58937b



This is not surprising and I don’t doubt any of this happened.  It fits somewhat of a pattern of the rich and powerful.  For the thousandth time: TRUMP IS A CREEP, AND FOR GOOD MEASURE, A PREDATOR!

Yet not a single one of these supports Heir’s claim of rape at the Miss Teen pageant, does it?

I can care less about defending anyone, but facts matter in a society which seems so consumed with making up its own facts these days.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 09:49:31 am
This is not surprising and I don’t doubt any of this happened.  It fits somewhat of a pattern of the rich and powerful.  For the thousandth time: TRUMP IS A CREEP, AND FOR GOOD MEASURE, A PREDATOR!

Yet not a single one of these supports Heir’s claim of rape at the Miss Teen pageant, does it?

I can care less about defending anyone, but facts matter in a society which seems so consumed with making up its own facts these days.

This isn't the pattern of a creep, it's the pattern of a sexual predator.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 10:43:40 am
This is not surprising and I don’t doubt any of this happened.  It fits somewhat of a pattern of the rich and powerful.  For the thousandth time: TRUMP IS A CREEP, AND FOR GOOD MEASURE, A PREDATOR!

Yet not a single one of these supports Heir’s claim of rape at the Miss Teen pageant, does it?

I can care less about defending anyone, but facts matter in a society which seems so consumed with making up its own facts these days.


Ok.  Let's take rape out of it.  It is child molestation.  Pedophilia.  Trump is a pedophile along with all his other criminal activity.  



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 10:45:27 am

Ok.  Let's take rape out of it.  It is child molestation.  Pedophilia.  Trump is a pedophile along with all his other criminal activity.  





There are a couple of video tapes out there of Trump going up to and talking to pre-teen and young teen girls on the street telling them they are attractive and will be dating him in a few years.

He's a sicko.

Hey, where's Guido in this conversation? He's stopped bragging about Trump again.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 10:48:12 am

He also said he would like to date his daughter, but I think even he felt that was too far for the public.  But given the reactions of many of his minions, they would be ok with that, too.  As long as it isn't Hillary!!





Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 11:29:33 am

Ok.  Let's take rape out of it.  It is child molestation.  Pedophilia.  Trump is a pedophile along with all his other criminal activity.  


Keep digging.  The teen pageant issue doesn't rise to molestation by any legal definition since there's no claim of physical contact.

Pedophile may still fit though, although I'm not sure that counts if he wasn't taking photos.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 11:44:25 am
Keep digging.  The teen pageant issue doesn't rise to molestation by any legal definition since there's no claim of physical contact.

Pedophile may still fit though, although I'm not sure that counts if he wasn't taking photos.

Being a peeping tom is still illegal and is a sex crime.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 11:47:09 am
Keep digging. 



Keep rationalizing.  You're recovery seems to have stalled.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 12:19:44 pm

Keep rationalizing.  You're recovery seems to have stalled.



Really? Faced with facts you keep rationalizing and making up charges which don’t fit the action.  I’m the one who recognizes Trump is a predator and a creep yet you still can’t admit the same about Clinton.  Instead you keep dirtying up the victim which happens to be a move right out of the Clinton playbook.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on August 30, 2017, 12:20:25 pm
Being a peeping tom is still illegal and is a sex crime.

Are either of you reading what I’ve posted?  I said as much on a prior post.  Sheesh.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on August 30, 2017, 01:10:31 pm
This is how it works.

Trump is a rapist.

Well, maybe he isn't a rapist, but he is a pedophile.

Well, maybe he isn't a pedophile, but he is _________.

The last step to take is, well he ain't that much different than the guy that we hold in high esteem. That's just not a step some are willing to take.

This course is taken many many times by people on all sides of the aisle. Hyperbole is extraordinary effective in modern politics apparently.

Now, if we just didn't have power hungry sleeze balls running the country, that would be nice. If they don't have morals in this regard, then where do they have morals?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 01:46:24 pm
This is how it works.

Trump is a rapist.

Well, maybe he isn't a rapist, but he is a pedophile.

Well, maybe he isn't a pedophile, but he is _________.

The last step to take is, well he ain't that much different than the guy that we hold in high esteem. That's just not a step some are willing to take.

This course is taken many many times by people on all sides of the aisle. Hyperbole is extraordinary effective in modern politics apparently.

Now, if we just didn't have power hungry sleeze balls running the country, that would be nice. If they don't have morals in this regard, then where do they have morals?

Oh, Trump most certainly is a pedophile, which is someone attracted to children. He’s on tape ogling young girls. He’s quoted about his own daughter. He’s accused to peeping on young girls. Has he raped or molested a child? He has been accused but I didn’t include it because the accusation was pretty thin, so I would say that I haven’t seen him credibly accused of molesting or raping a child. But he is a pedophile. You elected a pedophile.

Has he raped someone? I believe Ivana’s story, but I’m not positive it’s true. You probably elected a rapist.

Has he sexually assaulted women? Yes, many times. You elected a sexual predator.

Bill Clinton’s problems in no way excuse Trump’s. It’s not ok.

And please note, I didn’t vote for Bill Clinton. I voted for Bush Sr and then didn’t vote the next election.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on August 30, 2017, 02:16:44 pm
Oh, Trump most certainly is a pedophile, which is someone attracted to children. He’s on tape ogling young girls. He’s quoted about his own daughter. He’s accused to peeping on young girls. Has he raped or molested a child? He has been accused but I didn’t include it because the accusation was pretty thin, so I would say that I haven’t seen him credibly accused of molesting or raping a child. But he is a pedophile. You elected a pedophile.

Has he raped someone? I believe Ivana’s story, but I’m not positive it’s true. You probably elected a rapist.

Has he sexually assaulted women? Yes, many times. You elected a sexual predator.

Bill Clinton’s problems in no way excuse Trump’s. It’s not ok.

And please note, I didn’t vote for Bill Clinton. I voted for Bush Sr and then didn’t vote the next election.


I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton (technically I couldn't vote for Bill not that I would have anyway).


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on August 30, 2017, 02:27:34 pm
I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton (technically I couldn't vote for Bill not that I would have anyway).

Yeah, Trump voters are hard to find these days.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 03:26:32 pm
This is how it works.

Trump is a rapist.

Well, maybe he isn't a rapist, but he is a pedophile.

Well, maybe he isn't a pedophile, but he is _________.

The last step to take is, well he ain't that much different than the guy that we hold in high esteem. That's just not a step some are willing to take.

This course is taken many many times by people on all sides of the aisle. Hyperbole is extraordinary effective in modern politics apparently.

Now, if we just didn't have power hungry sleeze balls running the country, that would be nice. If they don't have morals in this regard, then where do they have morals?


You haven't been listening, let alone paying attention.  Since before the election...decades before...he has been the same vile, disgusting, garbage that he is spewing today.  (Did you hear about his speech in TX where he was talking about what a great turnout it was and not a word about the victims or the suffering of the people there??   Of course not...)

And I have been saying exactly the same things all that time - from his self-admitted pedophilia, to his self-admitted sexual molestation of women, to his accusations of cowardice about our POW's, to his ridicule of handicapped people, to his serial criminal activities in his business'.   I have not changed that message at all.

And it isn't hyperbole at all when all one does is report on what he said himself.  You really need to get a dictionary...

And yet, with all that - not even bringing into the discussion any of the immoral, unethical, lying things he has done since Jan - apologists abound in this state in an unbelievable denial of reality.  Showing with no possibility of doubt that not only are they condoning, but endorsing these actions. 

Just so long as it isn't Hillary...!!



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on August 30, 2017, 03:27:45 pm
Yeah, Trump voters are hard to find these days.



Just like no one ever listens/watches Fake Fox News except for me.  Yet, they quote the script verbatim, chapter and verse.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on August 30, 2017, 03:29:19 pm

You haven't been listening, let alone paying attention.  Since before the election...decades before...he has been the same vile, disgusting, garbage that he is spewing today.  (Did you hear about his speech in TX where he was talking about what a great turnout it was and not a word about the victims or the suffering of the people there??   Of course not...)

And I have been saying exactly the same things all that time - from his self-admitted pedophilia, to his self-admitted sexual molestation of women, to his accusations of cowardice about our POW's, to his ridicule of handicapped people, to his serial criminal activities in his business'.   I have not changed that message at all.

And it isn't hyperbole at all when all one does is report on what he said himself.  You really need to get a dictionary...

And yet, with all that - not even bringing into the discussion any of the immoral, unethical, lying things he has done since Jan - apologists abound in this state in an unbelievable denial of reality.  Showing with no possibility of doubt that not only are they condoning, but endorsing these actions. 

Just so long as it isn't Hillary...!!



Not just unwilling to take the step, but go kicking and screaming....


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 05, 2017, 09:05:54 am
Welp. It's Bernie Sanders's turn to be the reason why Hillary (thankfully) lost.

Quote
(CNN)Hillary Clinton casts Bernie Sanders as an unrealistic over-promiser in her new book, according to excerpts posted by a group of Clinton supporters.
She said that his attacks against her during the primary caused "lasting damage" and paved the way for "(Donald) Trump's 'Crooked Hillary' campaign."
Clinton, in a book that will be released September 12 entitled "What Happened," said Sanders "had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character" because the two Democrats "agreed on so much."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-what-happened/index.html



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 05, 2017, 09:59:52 am
Not just unwilling to take the step, but go kicking and screaming....


But you go ahead and stay with your revisionist Fake Fox News Narrative... 

What is amazing is how the Apologists can't even admit to themselves the things that Trump has literally said, admitted to, and bragged about. 

Just so long as it isn't Hillary.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: TeeDub on September 05, 2017, 01:02:57 pm

Finally, there’s a website just for people who think Clinton should have won

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/4/16251726/verrit-clinton-facts


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 05, 2017, 11:58:58 pm
Finally, there’s a website just for people who think Clinton should have won

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/4/16251726/verrit-clinton-facts


Insist on genuine, 7 digit authentication codes. No substitutes!


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 11, 2017, 12:14:18 am
Will she finally shut up? Probably not.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJYFvVdXcAUobKv.jpg:large)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on September 11, 2017, 04:53:31 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJUfZHfXkAA1HUc.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Hoss on September 11, 2017, 05:14:20 am
Maybe Trump should think about building the border wall with stuff about Hillary.  Because much like you two, nobody will get over it.  :)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on September 11, 2017, 09:53:05 am
Maybe Trump should think about building the border wall with stuff about Hillary.  Because much like you two, nobody will get over it.  :)

So good...     8)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 11, 2017, 06:48:01 pm
I was reminded on twitter today about the solemnity of this day, and the future determining event that took place. 1 year ago today, Hilary performed her one woman stagger dance and had to be rushed off in a van.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 12, 2017, 03:29:54 pm
Maybe Trump should think about building the border wall with stuff about Hillary.  Because much like you two, nobody will get over it.  :)

Oh I'm sorry. I guess that book "What happened" wasn't just released, and Hillary is not out pumping it, and Hillary is not saying she is staying out of politics, and not blaming everyone but herself for losing.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Hoss on September 12, 2017, 03:36:10 pm
Oh I'm sorry. I guess that book "What happened" wasn't just released, and Hillary is not out pumping it, and Hillary is not saying she is staying out of politics, and not blaming everyone but herself for losing.

thanks for validating my point.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 12, 2017, 10:58:54 pm
thanks for validating my point.

You are incapable of making a point. Apart from her wanting to make voodoo dolls of reporters, this is the greatest passage in her book, and is perhaps the most tone deaf and lacking in self-awareness that could have been written by this clown:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJjOi6HXoAAhJBP.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on September 13, 2017, 08:35:58 am
You are incapable of making a point. Apart from her wanting to make voodoo dolls of reporters, this is the greatest passage in her book, and is perhaps the most tone deaf and lacking in self-awareness that could have been written by this clown:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJjOi6HXoAAhJBP.jpg)

Somehow, I'm not thinking you can simply accost a former First Lady without a Secret Service take-down.  This is truly baffling because Hillarity has never been known to bend the truth before.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on September 13, 2017, 08:48:01 am
Somehow, I'm not thinking you can simply accost a former First Lady without a Secret Service take-down.  This is truly baffling because Hillarity has never been known to bend the truth before.

The only person accosted in that passage is the daughter.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 08:52:02 am
Somehow, I'm not thinking you can simply accost a former First Lady without a Secret Service take-down.  This is truly baffling because Hillarity has never been known to bend the truth before.

And she still is a far, far better person than Trump and would have been a far, far better president. None of this remotely excuses Trump's election or behavior.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on September 13, 2017, 08:57:25 am
And she still is a far, far better person than Trump and would have been a far, far better president. None of this remotely excuses Trump's election or behavior.

have you forgotten about her emails?!
(Pay no attention to Pence's emails or Don Jr's "If it is what I think it is" email)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 09:20:26 am
have you forgotten about her emails?!
(Pay no attention to Pence's emails or Don Jr's "If it is what I think it is" email)

Or the fact the White House is using a private RNC server for email right now.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 11:24:11 am
have you forgotten about her emails?!
(Pay no attention to Pence's emails or Don Jr's "If it is what I think it is" email)


What swake said...

Plus the 22 million emails that Baby Bush and Karl Rove deleted from BB's private server.  In the White House, also.

Mote meet beam.  Beam meet mote...


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on September 13, 2017, 03:32:17 pm
And she still is a far, far better person than Trump and would have been a far, far better president. None of this remotely excuses Trump's election or behavior.

Trump is a really low bar when it comes to saying anyone would have been a better president.  I think Idi Amin might have even been better.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 04:42:53 pm
Trump is a really low bar when it comes to saying anyone would have been a better president.  I think Idi Amin might have even been better.

And yet we elected that really low bar.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 18, 2017, 07:21:33 pm
She will never go away. Never. She's the incurable STD

Quote
Hillary Clinton said she wouldn’t rule out challenging the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election if Russian interference turned out to be deeper than previously thought.

“No, I wouldn't rule it out,” she said in an interview with NPR published Monday.

The defeated Democratic nominee stressed, however, that she does not believe there is a means to officially challenge the election’s outcome.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/351189-clinton-wont-rule-out-questioning-legitimacy-of-election


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on September 18, 2017, 08:42:02 pm
She's the incurable STD

and you've got the disease.  
Shut up about her already.
Maybe, not have a Hillary avatar?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: TeeDub on September 18, 2017, 10:12:35 pm
Even the famous "hanging chad" AL Gore had given up by now.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: joiei on September 19, 2017, 03:12:42 am
The democrat is not the president.  Your buddy, the orange one is.  Why do you insist on making like your girlfriend is in charge.  She isn't.  Are you trying to make excuses about  and for your poor choice? 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on September 19, 2017, 07:34:11 am
Even the famous "hanging chad" AL Gore had given up by now.

Trump's the one claiming voter fraud.  Trump created a whole voter-fraud commission.  

One of the smaller problems with his commission:
Experts Say the Use of Private Email by Trump’s Voter Fraud Commission Isn’t Legal (https://www.propublica.org/article/experts-say-the-use-of-private-email-by-trumps-voter-fraud-commission-isnt-legal)

But Her Emails!


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: TeeDub on September 19, 2017, 08:19:00 am

But Her Emails!

I love this, "we trained them that they needed a public email... really...  I have proof".... (from your article)

"Dunlap’s account is disputed by Andrew Kossack, the executive director of the commission. Kossack said attorneys from the Government Services Administration provided training on the PRA before the commission’s first meeting on July 19. Kossack provided a copy of the PowerPoint presentation. However, the word “email” appears in only a single slide — with no mention of anything relating to the use of government email....

In a statement, Kossack denied there is an obligation to provide commissioners with government email addresses. He maintained that the commission is required only to “preserve emails and other records related to work on commission matters, regardless of the forum on which the records are created or sent, which the commission and its members are doing.”"


How the hell are you supposed to use a .gov email address for retention if no one will provision you one?

Wow...   Just....   Wow.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on September 19, 2017, 08:50:03 am

Maybe, not have a Hillary avatar?

All the scribbled dbag avatars were taken.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on September 19, 2017, 09:49:43 am
All the scribbled dbag avatars were taken.

Created with Adobe Illustrator.  

Would you believe this forum has guidelines?
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=1299.0

Do you have any arguments, or just personal attacks?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on September 19, 2017, 12:50:08 pm
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/0cee138762977fb9ed8c47ddcfb8a332/tumblr_od84wyxwkD1qbo36wo1_250.gif)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 19, 2017, 12:55:21 pm


Do you have any arguments, or just personal attacks?




No.  Only the Fake Fox News Clown Show Sound Bite response.  Never goes even one step further, nor ever answers a direct question.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on October 11, 2017, 03:18:45 pm
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/10/05/us/00Inquiry8/00Inquiry8-master675.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on October 11, 2017, 03:38:06 pm
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/10/07/23/4521BF2000000578-0-image-a-1_1507413713852.jpg)

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/10/07/23/4521E38800000578-4959266-image-a-19_1507414985370.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: bluelake on October 11, 2017, 09:16:51 pm
(http://c1.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/160519-trump-clinton-0014_43b68e75ee8a5e932bc0b4007dccfc02.nbcnews-fp-1200-800.jpg)

(http://www.eawag.ch/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_teaser_d2c624ac3e.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 14, 2017, 11:51:42 pm
Keep talking there Hillary...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-we-made-a-person-who-committed-sexual-assault-president/ar-AAtqWYC?li=BBnb7Kz


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 14, 2017, 11:53:00 pm
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/10/05/us/00Inquiry8/00Inquiry8-master675.jpg)

Love that chest rub. But even Harvey could not look Hil in the face.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 16, 2017, 02:08:40 pm
Hillary cannot even walk down stairs without injuring herself. Must have been an injury from dodging sniper fire. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 26, 2017, 04:52:53 pm

(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/Tom-Cruise-crazy-laugh.gif)

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/10/26/19/39BE2F5600000578-3875474-Hillary_Clinton_took_to_Twitter_Wednesday_to_wish_herself_a_happ-m-56_1477508066805.jpg)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on October 26, 2017, 07:24:52 pm
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/Tom-Cruise-crazy-laugh.gif)

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/10/26/19/39BE2F5600000578-3875474-Hillary_Clinton_took_to_Twitter_Wednesday_to_wish_herself_a_happ-m-56_1477508066805.jpg)

Is Hillary paying you rent for the all the space she takes up in your head?


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: joiei on October 26, 2017, 08:51:10 pm
You know Guido, we do really worry about you and your obsessions.  It's not normal. 


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Ed W on October 27, 2017, 12:46:27 pm
Don't complain. At least he's not posting love poems about Sarah Palin these days.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 30, 2017, 08:43:57 pm
You know Guido, we do really worry about you and your obsessions.  It's not normal. 

MY obsession? There's this...

https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/925165920565284864




Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Red Arrow on October 30, 2017, 09:07:34 pm
You know Guido, we do really worry about you and your obsessions.  It's not normal. 

I don't worry about Guido. I like the entertainment value.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on October 30, 2017, 09:16:17 pm
I don't worry about Guido. I like the entertainment value.



And that's all it is--entertainment.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on November 01, 2017, 08:35:02 am
And that's all it is--entertainment.


Like Fake Fox News...???


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on November 02, 2017, 11:49:36 pm
Well this is interesting stuff about Donna "Debate Questions" Brazile and her ratting out Hillary's takeover of the DNC BEFORE she was nominated, and the rigging of the democratic primary. Enlightening stuff.

Quote
The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.

“What?” I screamed. “I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.”

That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt—$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign—and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.

If I didn’t know about this, I assumed that none of the other officers knew about it, either. That was just Debbie’s way. In my experience she didn’t come to the officers of the DNC for advice and counsel. She seemed to make decisions on her own and let us know at the last minute what she had decided, as she had done when she told us about the hacking only minutes before the Washington Post broke the news.


Quote
I told Bernie I had found Hillary’s Joint Fundraising Agreement. I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee. Had I known this, I never would have accepted the interim chair position, but here we were with only weeks before the election


https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on November 03, 2017, 05:37:04 am
Not illegal, just unethical.

Wait, I seem to have heard that somewhere else too...


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Breadburner on November 03, 2017, 06:18:46 am
Anyone feeling the Bern...???


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: BKDotCom on November 03, 2017, 08:25:19 am
I don't worry about Guido. I like the entertainment value.

A lot of people didn't worry about Trump.  They liked the entertainment value.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: Conan71 on November 03, 2017, 09:16:54 am
A lot of people didn't worry about Trump.  They liked the entertainment value.

And you see what that got us.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on November 03, 2017, 12:47:49 pm
And you see what that got us.


A desperate need for a nationwide enema.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: swake on November 04, 2017, 09:57:44 am
So let me get this straight, the DNC was bankrupt and Clinton's team gave them a bunch of money and then Clinton's team wanted control of how that money they gave was spent? Shocking.

And Bernie could have done the exact same thing but never gave any money to the DNC? It's almost like he isn't a Democrat.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/aa/ec/4e/aaec4e11b091d90bbdc0d17ee0f6a2b1--great-depression-we-the-people.jpg)

Give it up. Clinton doesn't matter and this is stupid.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on November 05, 2017, 11:41:13 pm
So let me get this straight, the DNC was bankrupt and Clinton's team gave them a bunch of money and then Clinton's team wanted control of how that money they gave was spent? Shocking.



(https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19260373_937851603038193_6994322895864843368_n.jpg?oh=60eaa952082fd7f50d4525b62c153ced&oe=5A6F0E51)


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: rebound on November 06, 2017, 09:25:45 am
(https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19260373_937851603038193_6994322895864843368_n.jpg?oh=60eaa952082fd7f50d4525b62c153ced&oe=5A6F0E51)

There's probably an interesting discussion here about the fungibility of money, etc, here. But I'm having a hard time getting excited when the meme comes from Chachi's wife.



Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: guido911 on November 07, 2017, 08:58:21 pm
It's a meme without any real evidence. I posted it because it was Chachi's wife, and it was funny.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: erfalf on November 08, 2017, 09:19:57 pm
So Donna "Debate Questions" Brazile is out peddeling her book, basically contradicting it at every turn. It's like the person who wrote the book and the person who is currently out promoting it are two different people.


Title: Re: President Hillary--The Implications
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on November 09, 2017, 08:49:03 am
So Donna "Debate Questions" Brazile is out peddeling her book, basically contradicting it at every turn. It's like the person who wrote the book and the person who is currently out promoting it are two different people.


Roses are red...
  Violets are blue...
I'm schizophrenic...
  ....and so am I !