The Hillary-thread

[Animavore]

I'd love to see Trump rile Clinton, and then Clinton lose it and beat the shit out of him and leave him on his knees, crying, begging her to stop, while all his disgusted, red neck fans walk off, throwing in their red, Make America Great Again caps, saying, "You ain't the alpha male."

[laklak]

I just want to see a few punches, I don't care who throws them.

[Woodbutcher]

Lol, fuckin' A, that would be utterly awesome. First she freezes and gets that deer in the headlights look. The Donald runs over, oozing concern, takes her arm, and says "It's OK, we're here, just keep talking", then punches her in the gut. She bends over and he knees her in the face. The SS dude dives sideways in Slo-Mo and does a John Woo two Glock tattoo to The Donald's center of mass. Meanwhile Hillary is gasping like my gran when you accidentally stepped on her oxygen hose. She aspirates her own vomit and they drag her off the stage. Jill Stein leaps out of the wings and starts beating Trump's lifeless body with a baseball bat and screaming "Fuck YOUUUU you patriarchal prick!" Gary Johnson wanders on stage, smoking a fat spliff, says "Farrrr out, Dude" and wanders back offstage.

One can but hope.

I would watch that! That is probably how the elections will be run in the near future, sort of like a cage fight with the last person breathing becoming the next president. One can but hope! The fucking show ratings would be sky high.

[Tero]

Crooked Hillary Had Server! Someone must go to jail!

According to the source, the FBI requested the laptops of Clinton's attorneys, Mills and Heather Samuelson, after they conducted a 2014 review of what emails Clinton sent were work-related and which were personal. Work-related emails were turned over to the State Department and personal emails were deleted.
In exchange for giving the laptops they used to the FBI, Mills and Samuelson were given a limited immunity agreement from the Department of Justice, the Democratic source said, that they would not face prosecution for any information that was found on those laptops.

[Brian Peacock]

Lolz. You don't want to get into a 'who's the biggest liar' contest when Trump is one of the contestants. It's amusing to see Trumpeteers asserting Hillary is untrustworthy while Trump plays fast and loose with facts on a daily basis. It makes me think that Clinton's character isn't really the issue - particularly if we're being asked to take our personal standards of propriety and probity from a draft and tax dodging bankruptee who thinks that boasting about the size of his genitals says something important about his qualifications for public office.

The difference is the MSM covers and make excuses for Clinton's lies and corruption, whilst they will scrutinize anything Trump says with a microscope. If you want a MSM that does its fucking job in the first place you better hope that Trump gets elected president.

That's one way to excuse Trump's lies I guess. Now if we accept both candidates have lied what makes Trump's lying less worse than Clinton's?

Trump's "lies" (no specific "lie" has been identified here, but assuming arguendo one was identified, his lies would not have effected national security, whereas Hillary's did pose national security risks.

So a lying Trump is better because he didn't hold public office when he lied - about, say, thousands and thousand of Muslims cheering in New Jersey when the twin-towers came down? You don't think that lying on that matter to that extent has national security implications, or only because Trump didn't hold public office at the time? Will that lie count later? Will it have national security implications if he does achieve office? Does this mean that other lies, say, about donating huge chunks of money to veteran's charities which nobody can actually find or identify, or repeating demonstrable false overestimates of the level of violent crime or unemployment are not really that important or significant?

If it's your inclination to respond with something bad that Clinton has done, as if trading the import or significance of wrongs somehow casts the wrongness of the least wrong in a more virtuous light, then I think you'll have missed the point.

[pErvinalia]

But Trump will stop lying when he becomes a politician.

[Scot Dutchy]

That of course means never. Trump will stop lying when he becomes human.

[Tero]

I'm not all that convinced:
https://conservativedailypost.com/cia-o ... afficking/

Wouldn't Bill snort thecoke off the mistress' body?

[Brian Peacock]

Why would they need to smuggle coke when there's no shortage of doctors who would be willing to prescribe a Presley, Prince, or Jackson?

[DaveDodo007]

Lolz. You don't want to get into a 'who's the biggest liar' contest when Trump is one of the contestants. It's amusing to see Trumpeteers asserting Hillary is untrustworthy while Trump plays fast and loose with facts on a daily basis. It makes me think that Clinton's character isn't really the issue - particularly if we're being asked to take our personal standards of propriety and probity from a draft and tax dodging bankruptee who thinks that boasting about the size of his genitals says something important about his qualifications for public office.

The difference is the MSM covers and make excuses for Clinton's lies and corruption, whilst they will scrutinize anything Trump says with a microscope. If you want a MSM that does its fucking job in the first place you better hope that Trump gets elected president.

That's one way to excuse Trump's lies I guess. Now if we accept both candidates have lied what makes Trump's lying less worse than Clinton's?

Trump's "lies" (no specific "lie" has been identified here, but assuming arguendo one was identified, his lies would not have effected national security, whereas Hillary's did pose national security risks.

So a lying Trump is better because he didn't hold public office when he lied - about, say, thousands and thousand of Muslims cheering in New Jersey when the twin-towers came down? You don't think that lying on that matter to that extent has national security implications, or only because Trump didn't hold public office at the time? Will that lie count later? Will it have national security implications if he does achieve office? Does this mean that other lies, say, about donating huge chunks of money to veteran's charities which nobody can actually find or identify, or repeating demonstrable false overestimates of the level of violent crime or unemployment are not really that important or significant?

If it's your inclination to respond with something bad that Clinton has done, as if trading the import or significance of wrongs somehow casts the wrongness of the least wrong in a more virtuous light, then I think you'll have missed the point.

Lying government official/citizen seriously fuck off. BTW I have written paragraphs in response to the bullshit Brian is spouting here but every single one has been swallowed up by the ether. I need a tin foil hat right now.

[Brian Peacock]

I'm asking questions, thas' all.

[JimC]

I'm asking questions, thas' all.

That's what evil intellectual socialists always claim!

[pErvinalia]

What a cucksist!

[tattuchu]

Funny, it seems to me that everything Clinton does/has done is intensely scrutinized by the media while Trump somehow gets a free pass blustering and bullshitting his way through everything unchallenged

[Tero]

How did Wikileaks get the emails again?
https://investmentwatchblog.com/importa ... sed-i-did/