DescentBB

...because of them, she is our next president.



We're getting Nixon x100 in a pantsuit. The first female president of the US will be this sad sack of crap.

I am angry with idiots who think a concussion in 2012 affects, in any way, the woman's fitness in 2016.

Reminds me of another politician who kept saying "I do not recall". Who was that?

I’m not saying is does, but it can…since it only takes one.

That doesn’t mean her brain is damaged, but it could have been.

All of the evidence the NFL and other contact sports organizations are trying to hide is...all it really takes is one.

Nightshade wrote:The first female president of the US will be this sad sack of crap.

I'd like to see you do better. And since you seem barely capable of writing, I'm guessing it wouldn't go so good.

Ferno wrote:Reminds me of another politician who kept saying "I do not recall". Who was that?

The selective outrage machine is out in full force this election.

Spidey wrote:I’m not saying is does, but it can…since it only takes one.

When did the burden of proof change from "does" to "can"? This is tabloid gossip that some people choose to entertain because it is politically expedient.

tough deal she has, going up against THIS physical specimen:

callmeslick wrote:I am angry with idiots who think a concussion in 2012 affects, in any way, the woman's fitness in 2016.

No. I'm angry she didn't die and do us all a favor. That lying sack of horsesh*** excuse for a human is elitist trash of the first order.

callmeslick wrote:I am angry with idiots who think a concussion in 2012 affects, in any way, the woman's fitness in 2016.

It's not at all about a concussion... it's about hiding behind a concussion to avoid accountability to American public. If she's used the concussion as an excuse to avoid answer self-incriminating answers, what make you think that she won't find another excuse next time to slide out of the next instance where her personal agenda puts national security at risk? Understand, people loose their jobs and get thrown in jail over mishandling of classified information - so if she admitted that she ignored training, she's criminally liable... by taking the "I don't remember" tact she essentially pleads the fifth... but it's also quite hard to believe if you're not a disciple.

Nightshade wrote:No. I'm angry she didn't die and do us all a favor. That lying sack of horsesh*** excuse for a human is elitist trash of the first order.

YEAH THERE IT IS! Wow what a piece of crap you are, wishing for the death of someone because they hold different views than you. Perfect.

snoopy wrote:[It's not at all about a concussion... it's about hiding behind a concussion to avoid accountability to American public.

Or, you know, maybe nursing a concussion will affect the recollection of what was almost certainly a routine event in her day several years ago. How good are your memories about things you do every day? Do you remember every meeting you ever had? Every day of every class you ever took in school? Every procedure in your company's handbook?

Hell, I can't remember half the minutiae of the in-service I had two days ago without checking my iPad notes. Does that mean I'm concussed too?

vision wrote:wishing for the death of someone because they hold different views than you.

No, because she could well mean the destruction of our country and the deaths of millions. That aside, she's a corrupt vile witch that may have caused the deaths of many Americans already.

Yeah, that's a perfectly valid excuse to wish death on someone.

fucks' sake dude, get your ★■◆● together.

Nightshade wrote:

vision wrote:wishing for the death of someone because they hold different views than you.

No, because she could well mean the destruction of our country and the deaths of millions. That aside, she's a corrupt vile witch that may have caused the deaths of many Americans already.

holy ★■◆● you are psychotic

the truth will out, eh?

Top Gun wrote:

Nightshade wrote:

vision wrote:wishing for the death of someone because they hold different views than you.

No, because she could well mean the destruction of our country and the deaths of millions. That aside, she's a corrupt vile witch that may have caused the deaths of many Americans already.

holy ★■◆● you are psychotic

She's a neocon. Perfectly able to start WW3 by continuing Obama's insane foreign "policy."

It's such a weird disconnect from reality I see in goofballs like ThunderBunny. For 8 year people have been saying Obama is literally the Anti-Christ and will destroy the country, but it's still here and going strong. In fact, he's turning out to be one of the better presidents in history. If TB is to be used as a barometer of presidential success, I look forward to Mrs Clinton's inevitable presidency!

"Well, per the Nondisclosure Agreement below, signed by Hillary, we would guess she received her "briefing or training by State" on or around January 22, 2009. So that leads us to derive only 3 logical conclusions, either (1) Hillary committed perjury by signing the NDA below without receiving the training indicated, (2) Hillary lied to the FBI during her interview or (3) Hillary simply has no long-term recollection of many of the key moments of her term as Secretary of State which brings into question her mental competency."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-0 ... -interview

Zerohedge


last bastion of the truly insane.

Except they have a point.

Of course, training wasn't even that relevant because Clinton doesn't "recall" ever even receiving a single "classified" email on her private server. And even if she did, it would be the fault of her staffers as she "relied on State officials to use their judgement when emailing her" on her "unclassified system." Which begs the question, how else were people supposed to get her information since the only email she had was hosted on her "unclassified" private server? We're sure Clinton does not recall.

This is really being passed off as analysis? I'd use a pseudonym, too.


*edit - I'm curious, do you guys have anything that disputes this take? Like, is anything factually incorrect or left out?

callmeslick wrote:Zerohedge .

According to slick, Hillary is a shining example of a presidential candidate.

If his standards were just a little higher, he'd vote in a bucket of manure instead.

what a load of crap. Hillary has some serious flaws and gives me reason to pay attention to her administration. She was, as anyone with reading skills on here should have known a year ago, my FOURTH pick for the Dem candidate, behind Biden, Webb and Sanders in that order of preference. That said, she is so vastly more qualified, competent and intelligent than the opposition candidate that it is an increasing insult to common intelligence to even suggest some equivalency.

Vander wrote:*edit - I'm curious, do you guys have anything that disputes this take? Like, is anything factually incorrect or left out?

HA! Don't expect much response from this bunch. First, there are too many words in that article for the Clinton bashers. Second, the only thing they care about is that the outrage machine rolls forward, even if multiple inquiries and the FBI have not found anything. In the minds of these simpletons, the Clinton presidency is a conspiracy of epic proportions.

What I really love is the overall conceit of certain groups going on and on and on and on about where and how Hillary chose to store and access her e-mails, questions that literally do not tangibly affect anyone in the entire country, and yet do not bat an eye at a candidate who has made an art form of making provably false statements, including to other heads of state, on literally a daily basis. Oh, and he is pretty much a textbook case of narcissistic personality disorder, a trait almost universally shared by the most vile despots in history. But we should totally give a damn about some ★■◆●ing e-mails, because reasons!

Top Gun wrote:But we should totally give a damn about some ★■◆●ing e-mails, because reasons!

I get the feeling a lot of people latched on to this email thing think that there would be something equivalent to the Enigma Code in there. It's just not gonna happen. The Secretary of State Office just isn't that juicy. Wikileaks has proven that it's mostly a bunch of boring cables. YAWN...

vision wrote: HA! Don't expect much response from this bunch. First, there are too many words in that article for the Clinton bashers. Second, the only thing they care about is that the outrage machine rolls forward, even if multiple inquiries and the FBI have not found anything.

"You may know society is doomed when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors; when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you; [and] when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice."

vision wrote:...something equivalent to the Enigma Code in there.

This is a good point. She wasn't National Security Advisor or CIA Director. Her communications centered on diplomacy. So if the communications were exposed, it could've harmed U.S. diplomatic efforts, which also seemed to be a goal of many of her detractors. Is that ironic or coincidence? Alanis Morissette ruined the word.

ThunderBunny isn't using enough large text in her posts. We need larger text to understand the message.

Had a read of the article that Vision posted. like he said, it's amounted to little more than 'so ★■◆●ing what?'

so f-ing what, as I've been maintaining for a while now. Even before she was the nominee.

Ferno wrote:Had a read of the article that Vision posted.

Vander, not me. I don't care enough about this issue to post an analysis.