• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

First Charges Filed in Mueller Investigation

MichDeac25 said:
It was a smear campaign to make her look corrupt. People couldn't name specifics about what she had done. It didn't matter. She was branded as untrustworthy.
Click to expand...

Meh. She didn't exactly help herself when it came to branding. Her blanket denial on the email thing at the beginning didn't help. Nor did her total flip on free trade. Toss in the Clinton Foundation and underlings like DWS trying to rig the primary process, and yeah, she doesn't come across as the most trustworthy pol in recent years. And she ran bad campaigns in 2008 and 2016. The 1 thing she couldn't help was we like to like our presidents, and she just doesn't have a winning personality. Since the invention of radio and TV, only 1 president has been elected with a similarly dour personality - Nixon. Obama was wrong - she wasn't likeable enough.
 
Why do people engage Palma outside of mockery?
 
Jared Kushner just got his security clearance back. Are you fricking kidding me? This guy lied dozens of times regarding 100s of contacts.

Hell, even Erdowan and Putin are saying ,"Are you fucking kidding me?"
 
cville deac said:
Obama was wrong
Click to expand...

source.gif
 
Could Rosenstein be setting Trump, Nunes and Gowdy up?

He knows more than anyone other than Mueller about the data he's giving them. If any of them lie about what he told them, could he hold a press conference to call each of them out for lying. He could take the high road saying he wanted to be transparent assuming they would keep the information confidential or at least tell the truth.
 
cville deac said:
Meh. She didn't exactly help herself when it came to branding. Her blanket denial on the email thing at the beginning didn't help. Nor did her total flip on free trade. Toss in the Clinton Foundation and underlings like DWS trying to rig the primary process, and yeah, she doesn't come across as the most trustworthy pol in recent years. And she ran bad campaigns in 2008 and 2016. The 1 thing she couldn't help was we like to like our presidents, and she just doesn't have a winning personality. Since the invention of radio and TV, only 1 president has been elected with a similarly dour personality - Nixon. Obama was wrong - she wasn't likeable enough.
Click to expand...

The notion that any rational human thinks Trump's personality is better than Hillary's is mind boggling to me. But he is a man, I guess.
 
WakeForestRanger said:
Click to expand...

Does this type of shit even make it to Fox News or Drudge Report these days? This is blatant corruption.

I'm old enough to remember when Trumpists railed against HRC for non-existent pay to play politics.

Partisan hacks.
 
Last edited:
cville deac said:
Meh. She didn't exactly help herself when it came to branding. Her blanket denial on the email thing at the beginning didn't help. Nor did her total flip on free trade. Toss in the Clinton Foundation and underlings like DWS trying to rig the primary process, and yeah, she doesn't come across as the most trustworthy pol in recent years. And she ran bad campaigns in 2008 and 2016. The 1 thing she couldn't help was we like to like our presidents, and she just doesn't have a winning personality. Since the invention of radio and TV, only 1 president has been elected with a similarly dour personality - Nixon. Obama was wrong - she wasn't likeable enough.
Click to expand...
Damn that Hillary Clinton and her charitable foundation that has high ratings from every watchdog group and issues audited financial statements.
 
Shooshmoo said:
The notion that any rational human thinks Trump's personality is better than Hillary's is mind boggling to me. But he is a man, I guess.
Click to expand...

I've soured on the Clintons in recent years and thought she was a poor candidate who had elbowed all other decent candidates out of the race to where we were left with her, Bernie and MOM. I skipped the primary for the 1st time since the 1980s because I was so disappointed in that field. That said, when it came down her v. that horrific socially right wing Pub field, it was no choice. I would have voted for Weld had he been the Pub nominee over her, but that wasn't an option. And I do know a handful of establishment Pubs who have always hated the Clintons but voted for her because Trump got the Pub nomination. Similarly, there were a bunch of Obama/Bernie in the primary voters who went Trump. But I don't think it was because he's male. I think it's more because they bought his anti politically correct gunslinger schtick who want to blow it all up. One of my sisters falls into that koolaid drinking category. My other sister and parents didn't buy into him and didn't vote for him in the primary, but they're social conservatives.

Now 2020, OTOH, could end up being like the Pub primary was in 2016 with 15+ candidates, and I'm looking forward to that.
 
 
ChrisL68 said:
Damn that Hillary Clinton and her charitable foundation that has high ratings from every watchdog group and issues audited financial statements.
Click to expand...

C'mon man, I'm not saying the foundation didn't do great stuff. But there was an appearance of potential conflicts of interest with them raking in that kind of dough from big corporations and rich world leaders while she was running for president. That and they've been investigated by the FBI - don't know if that's been cleared up yet. Now why we hold the Clintons to a more traditional standard yet 40+% of the country is apparently fine with all of the Trump conflicts of interest and trampling all over the emoluments clause, I can't come up with an explanation for that.
 
cville deac said:
C'mon man, I'm not saying the foundation didn't do great stuff. But there was an appearance of potential conflicts of interest with them raking in that kind of dough from big corporations and rich world leaders while she was running for president. That and they've been investigated by the FBI - don't know if that's been cleared up yet. Now why we hold the Clintons to a more traditional standard yet 40+% of the country is apparently fine with all of the Trump conflicts of interest and trampling all over the emoluments clause, I can't come up with an explanation for that.
Click to expand...
Because the right is very adept at using the left's desire to be above it all against them. The idea that donations to a charitable Foundation which is audited would somehow be a conflict of interest is silly. But the right can pretty much make anybody seem nefarious because It will just keep throwing crap up against the wall and the left will buy it.
 
Dems are such wusses. They should go on a counter attack. They should show how many lives have been saved by confidential informants. They should have ads with all the people have pleaded guilty. Have ads with Leslie Stahl talking about Trump telling her that everything he says is an act and more...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top