Ted Kennedy?
Gonna tell us in your own words?
No this is about what I expected. I was just curious to see how you would rationalize the fact that until he ran against the Democrats, there were no cries of outrage or protest against him for these allegations of bad behavior. The Clintons were even willing to attend his wedding. He was welcomed on shows like Oprah. Hip hop songs mentioned him as something to aspire to. So it seems like either people didn’t know or somehow didn’t care as much until he was no longer a Dem.
I looked at four or five of those, and in none of them did the actual text of the email come anywhere near supporting the, uh, creative interpretation of what it “proved.” I’m going to assume that the other 95 are equally shaky.
"Trump really is a terrible racist, sexist, serial groping, mentally ill, narcissist idiot. " —skyr
I have no seen any solid evidence that she was corrupt, except the usual Fake news spread by the GOP and the Kremlin.
Wikileaks is full of crap. They take things out of context all the time. Yes, she took support from our friends, the Saudis, as almost every other politico has.
One of the things I’ve learned being here is that a lot of people are reading at workplaces where they can’t just click on random links. So you need to actually quote the link to make it part of the discussion.
As for the topic at hand, does it seem plausible to you that, in the midst of dumping lots of stolen emails, it would be quite easy to plant a few fakes with dastardly comments in them so that they will be discovered by those digging through the pile? In the absence of some independent verification, I don’t believe that any particular email from Wikileaks is authentic. Why should I?
Until then, he was a lifelong private citizen and a celebrity TV host, never a public servant. Do you think that makes a difference?
#3 on that list states: “Hillary Clinton received money from and supported nations that she KNEW funded ISIS and terrorists”
It then offers links to three email chains in defense of the above statement.
I assume you’ve read those links thoroughly. Please provide the relevant passages written by Clinton and/or her staff members that prove the above statement.
I’ll wait.
Interesting site. Seems like there’s only three people who actually say that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC hacks: Trump, Putin, and your little website there.
Both 1 and 2 contain lies. Trump was well known to be a racist, sexist, narcissistic idiot for decades. WikiLeaks was not held in high regard widely on the left.
OP will be banned by the end of summer, book it.
Not necessary. OP has taken a page from Trump’s lifelong policy of telling huge lies knowing that some people will believe anything they’re told as long as it comports with their pre-existing bias, or congenital credulity.
I know this has become a meme these days, even amongst liberals, but so far as I can tell, it’s entirely imaginary; basically a reaction to Fox and the like’s continual repetition of the claim. Hillary has been investigated by openly hostile and partisan “committees” and agencies more than perhaps any politician in history, and they’ve got…bupkus.
Three e-mails that were clearly sent in error, from a server that–while it wasn’t secured according to the rules–was exactly the same as all her predecessors used. That’s it. Literally thousands of hours of investigation found nothing at all.
If she’s corrupt, she bloody well ought to be President, since she’s the most competent criminal in history.
Because until he ran for President there was no need to pay attention to the doofus.
Until his politically in-experienced ass decided he was ready for the top chair despite all of these failings, I, as a normal every day citizen could ignore whatever he was doing.
Same as I do today with Kim Kardashian or Kanye West or Dennis Miller or Tim Tebow or Oprah or whoever.
Those people can go and do things and they have very, very little to absolutely no impact on my life, so who cares*?
Until he lied, cheated, and stole a position where he’s making a material impact on my life and my friends/families lives, he was a nothing to me.
Now he’s something alright…
- Yeah some people do, but those are probably the same people who - as been noted - have been pointing out Trump’s assholishness for years.
Those facts were well known. Biff Tannen from Back to the Future (1989), for example, is notoriously based on Donald Trump.
You say, though, that nobody noticed this until he decided to run against Democrats. Since I showed that he was known for those traits way back in '89, what you *should *be asking yourself, instead, is why did Republicans elect him knowing that he had those faults?
Yep. Anyone who didn’t know what kind of person he is before the campaign certainly did by Election Day. But, for many, that was actually a positive.
The election proved to me that my countrypeople aren’t who I had always thought we were. I still have trouble facing that.
Trump didn’t “get lucky” beating out all the other Republicans running for President, then beating Clinton. He got tons of free publicity from the media, who went into a frenzy over every nugget of Twitterrhea, rather than reporting on candidates and issues. Because “News” is just another department in the Entertainment division now, and it’s all about ratings, not good reporting.
Racist - There was pre-2016 reporting to this effect.
Sexist - There was pre-2016 reporting to this effect.
Serial groping - There was pre-2016 reporting to this effect. However, Trump seems to have been protected from this quite a bit by the catch-and-kill business and his own legal offensive plays. The math changed after he was elected.
Mentally ill - He’s not (or at least not in the way that most people accuse him of being.)
Narcissist - There’s never been any question on this front, since the 80s, if not earlier.
Idiot - Only became clear to me during the election, from reading his depositions where he described how he ran his businesses.
Hillary has most likely been corrupt and criminal since she was young (judging by her cattle futures fortune). The only real question is how corrupt Bill is.
In either case, at least they’re not stupid.
But, I will note, if you wanted a small government non-interventionist who wasn’t corrupt nor stupid and had run a successful business, you could always have voted for Johnson. The media only bothered to show two clips of him, where he did something stupid, but by all accounts he seems to have been a fairly realistic candidate and would certainly have been better than Trump if you were looking for policy along the line of what he advocated.
Well, given how absolutely disgusting unarguably Trump really is by examining his own words and deeds, I guess we have to go with #1. Is this a trick question?
This is a warning for accusing another poster of lying. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.
[/moderating]