|
Oh so he is basically Western Conference Jim Webb.
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
FAUXTON posted:There's reason to suspect the timing but there's no evidence indicating actual quid pro quo. Bill Clinton wasn't working at the State Department and he wasn't operating in any governmental capacity pertaining to the decision process at the State Department. The fact that he's married to the then-Secretary of State doesn't suddenly put the money in Hillary's pocket. Look at what you're arguing. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Look at what you're arguing. Come on. statistically, there are far more examples of hilary being charged with false ethics allegations that are investigated endlessly that never pan out than there are actual instances of wrongdoing it's only rational to everyone who's paying attention to assume the charges are baseless until otherwise substantiated
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Look at what you're arguing. Come on. Speaking of what people are arguing: Pinterest Mom posted:If only there was some way to elect someone who isn't Hillary Clinton, but also isn't a Republican. You still didn't answer my question: Sharkie posted:Do you think one exists in the year 2016, in the realm of reality?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
I think there's a plausible world in which Clinton is forced out of the race, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:There's reason to suspect the timing but there's no evidence indicating actual quid pro quo. Menendez was indicted on arguably less evidence. quote:Bill Clinton wasn't working at the State Department and he wasn't operating in any governmental capacity pertaining to the decision process at the State Department. The fact that he's married to the then-Secretary of State doesn't suddenly put the money in Hillary's pocket. What. Your spouse makes $150 million in "speaking fees". How does that not mean you just made $150 million? I understand Hillary just throws out crazy mental gymnastics like this and expects people to accept them, but we don't actually have to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:I think there's a plausible world in which Clinton is forced out of the race, yes. If you're relying on a scandal or a disease that does not currently exist then you're not talking about reality as we currently know it. If you're talking about something else that actually currently exists then what is it and what's the evidence it's at all possible to force Hillary out while also preventing a dem loss, cause I'm sure O'Malley would probably enjoy learning about it. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:I'm still giving Hillary the benefit of the doubt because Republicans have been throwing bullshit scandals at the Clintons for literally as long as I've been alive, and frankly they've cried wolf too many times to deserve it themselves. Yup, that's pretty much how I feel as well. So far, this whole "Clinton Cash" story has been driven not by any definitive proof of an actual scandal, but rather by the GOP and the media desperately hoping that there might be some kind of scandal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Menendez was indicted on arguably less evidence. i like the scare quotes around speaking fees, as if people paying to hear your opinions is some kind of liberal witchcraft
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
I'm of the opinion that if Hillary is forced out the race (and the only possible thing that would force her out of the race is health issues, an accident, or she gets caught admitting to personally committing Benghazi into a hot mic), then a republican will probably win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:If you're relying on a scandal or a disease that does not currently exist then you're not talking about reality as we currently know it. What are you actually trying to say? "We're stuck with Hillary so learn to love her"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
It would sure be nice if the left had more than one serious candidate in the event of any actual problem for Hillary. Oh well, guess that's just a pipe dream.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:What are you actually trying to say? "We're stuck with Hillary so learn to love her"? Yeah pretty much. Welcome to the two party system, it's lovely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:What are you actually trying to say? "We're stuck with Hillary so learn to love her"? I'm saying I would rather have Hillary than a republican, and Hillary is going to be the democratic nom. Now, what are you trying to say with: Pinterest Mom posted:If only there was some way to elect someone who isn't Hillary Clinton, but also isn't a Republican. I've asked you if you think there actually is a way, and if so what it is, and you've just responded with innuendo about how it's plausible while still neglecting to state what this way is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:i like the scare quotes around speaking fees, as if people paying to hear your opinions is some kind of liberal witchcraft The main spell components are: grits, saxophone polish, and having a spouse that happens to be a Senator/SecState. Poof: hundreds of millions of dollars
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:The main spell components are: grits, saxophone polish, and having a spouse that happens to be a Senator/SecState. so are you just mad at bill clinton's sucess or what is your angle here an ex-pres cleaning up on the lecture circuit isn't exactly uh a thunderclap breach of ethics or anything
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:The main spell components are: grits, saxophone polish, and having a spouse that happens to be a Senator/SecState. Were you upset that George Bush Senior undoubtedly used some of the money he made in speaking tours to help fund Dubya's campaigns?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:What are you actually trying to say? "We're stuck with Hillary so learn to love her"? You don't have to love Hillary. But you might want to keep in mind that whoever wins the next presidential election is very likely going to dictate the balance of the Supreme Court for the next decade or so, if not longer. Plus, on the foreign policy front, there's the fact that one party is heavily pushing for a course of action that would lead to a highly destructive war with Iran.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Nobody would be paying former President Bill Clinton to speak if his wife wasn't the head of one of nine departments required to authorize an international minerals sale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:What are you actually trying to say? "We're stuck with Hillary so learn to love her"? There really isn't anyone else and O malley is just as much as a piece of garbage, Bernie's not going to win because he is a literal socialist in America who I'm surprised he hasn't be shot at and is also old. These are the candidates right now so as of now, no there is no one else. edit: Not that I'm voting for her ,the electoral college has it benefits, not that any of them are going to win 
SirKibbles fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nobody would be paying former President Bill Clinton to speak if his wife wasn't the head of one of nine departments required to authorize an international minerals sale. Yes they would, he's by far the most popular living ex-president known for his excellent speaking skills and knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Look at what you're arguing. Come on. I looked, I'm arguing against  speaking fees with coincidental timing, literally worse than Grant's cabinet given the subject. It isn't like Bill Clinton is some nobody hick from the prairie, he's one of the most internationally respected and beloved individuals of the 20th/21st centuries, and one of the best orators to boot, it isn't a shock that people would want him to speak at their events.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nobody would be paying former President Bill Clinton to speak if his wife wasn't the head of one of nine departments required to authorize an international minerals sale. That's ridiculous and you know it. George W. Bush has made over $15 million in speaking fees since leaving office. Tell me, what government department does Laura Bush control?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Trotsky was joking...
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nobody would be paying former President Bill Clinton to speak if his wife wasn't the head of one of nine departments required to authorize an international minerals sale. Reeeeeeeeallly hope you're joking, because I've heard this man speak and he is quite possibly one of the most electrifying public speakers I've ever heard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Zelder posted:Yeah pretty much. Welcome to the two party system, it's lovely. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAT_BuJAI70
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Yes they would, he's by far the most popular living ex-president known for his excellent speaking skills and knowledge. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nobody would be paying former President Bill Clinton to speak if his wife wasn't the head of one of nine departments required to authorize an international minerals sale. Would Russians involved in the sale be paying him $500,000 for a single speaking engagement?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
I mean guys these are the Clintons we're talking about. Do each of these litany of issues have some explanation that makes the action legal and ethical? Sure. If you believe that all of them are true, you are literally the liberal version of a young earth creationist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Would Russians involved in the sale be paying him $500,000 for a single speaking engagement? That's small fries in exchange for a shipment of clean West Virginia coal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I mean guys these are the Clintons we're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Would Russians involved in the sale be paying him $500,000 for a single speaking engagement? W gets $150k for a speech, so that doesn't seem out of line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Bobby Digital posted:W gets $150k for a speech, so that doesn't seem out of line. It's not like *ten* times the amount, only three. And I'm sure that Russians are super interested in what an American ex-prez has to say. And the fact that they stood to gain from the sale of the mine was just a coincidence. Come on guys, listen to yourselves. Look at what you're defending here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:If you believe that all of them are true, you are literally the liberal version of a young earth creationist. And if you unquestioningly believe every single accusation flung at the Clintons by the GOP and the media, I've got a bridge formerly owned by Vince Foster I'd like to sell you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
The article I posted this morning on the Clintons' finances is by David Sirota, who's not exactly a conservative sympathizer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:It's not like *ten* times the amount, only three. Clinton is more than 3 times the speaker that W is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:What. You're being stupid as hell. Rick Synder directly funneled money to his own company and his cover for it is basically "well I signed control over to my wife so I'm not actually in charge" and nothing has or ever will be done to him for it. But yeah keep thinking that Bill Clinton's speaker fees are signs of some nefarious poo poo and that you aren't just dumb. I thought your redtext was a joke from some spiteful goon but apparently it fits you like a mitt. TheDisreputableDog posted:Would Russians involved in the sale be paying him $500,000 for a single speaking engagement? He's gotten upwards of a million or more for some speaking engagements, so yes. And yes, Russia and much of the world cares about what Bill Clinton has to say because unlike the Bush family Bill Clinton is hugely popular. HW Bush was also decently popular as a speaker but time and his moron son(s) have not been helpful to him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The article I posted this morning on the Clintons' finances is by David Sirota, who's not exactly a conservative sympathizer. Yeah, it's a bit weird to see the "right-wing conspiracy" line invoked to describe questions raised by Chait and Sirota, who (while hardly flawless journalists) are not exactly frothing right-wingers or even anti-Clintonite.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
It could be revealed that Hillary accepted money from Mexican cartels and once stabbed a homeless man to death just to see how it felt and you'd still be an idiot for not voting for her in the general election after she wins the primary, which she will, because the alternatives in the GOP really are that much worse. You get to pick between a power hungry sociopath or a person who will start a war with Iran, pack the supreme court with far-right nuts who will roll America's social progress back a hundred years, and who's every bit as dirty anyway. These petty maybe-scandals are going to keep popping up and until the American system provides any real choice in elections the response will continue to be the same: What difference does it make?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
Wheeee posted:It could be revealed that Hillary accepted money from Mexican cartels and once stabbed a homeless man to death just to see how it felt and you'd still be an idiot for not voting for her in the general election after she wins the primary, which she will, because the alternatives in the GOP really are that much worse. I don't know why everyone is so convinced Hillary will get the nomination. In the 08 primaries her victory was touted as just as inevitable and well, she got blown out of the water by a relative nobody. If anything, she has become a weaker candidate since then. Personally I don't think she'll win the nomination, and that would be a pretty good thing for the Dems tbh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2015 18:34
|
|
