2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
The GOP seems to have done everything it can to verify all the worst things liberals have been saying about them for the past several decades. I think we're seeing their brand get permanently poisoned.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I think the point is most of America loves Bill Clinton. He is a pretty widely beloved guy. But when it came to womanizing he was as bad as they come. Truth be told I could give a shit less about it. I care about our country, not whether my president is trying to bang every girl he meets.
How is that the point?

If Trump had shown any remorse and accepted any blame he would be doing much better with the public, its his fault that he continues to be abhorrent to the general public.

If he had shown any contrition he could be talking about Hillary and her many flaws.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220


So apparently that sheriff Fox trots out to counter Black Lives Matter after every police shooting is calling for mob violence.
Talk about hypocrisy.:lol
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
https://www.yahoo.com/news/another-woman-accuses-trump-of-sexual-misconduct-194904656.html

A 10th woman has come forward to accuse Donald Trump of sexual misconduct.

Cathy Heller told the Guardian that during her first and only meeting with Donald Trump approximately 20 years ago, the businessman grabbed her and attempted a kiss, from which she recoiled. Visibly irritated, Heller claims, Trump snapped, “Oh, come on,” held her still, and forcibly kissed her on the lips.

“He kept me there for a little too long,” Heller, now 63, said of the incident, which she claims took place during a Mother’s Day brunch at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. “And then he just walked away.”

Heller’s story is an increasingly familiar one. Not only does it echo those of several other women who’ve accused the Republican presidential nominee of unwanted groping, kissing and other sexual advances, like the others, her account also seems to corroborate Trump’s own description of how he treats women, as recently revealed by a recording from 2005.

And like many of the women who’ve come forward in recent days, Heller says she was motivated to share her story after Sunday’s presidential debate, during which Trump publicly denied having engaged in the behavior he described in the 2005 video.

Trump and members of his campaign team have vehemently denied the accusations that surfaced in the wake of the latest debate, suggesting that based on the timing, the women who’ve come forward this week must be part of a conspiracy aimed at derailing Trump’s presidential campaign involving Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and the mainstream news media.

Heller’s claims come in the wake of a Friday afternoon press conference in which former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos, with the help of famed civil rights attorney Gloria Allred, alleged that she, too, had been forcibly groped and kissed by Trump years ago.

Late Friday, the Trump campaign attempted to discredit Zervos by releasing a statement from one of her cousins, who said he was “shocked and bewildered” by the story, suggesting that Zervos simply “wishes she could still be on reality TV” and her account is “nothing more than an attempt to regain the spotlight at Mr. Trump’s expense.”

A little over an hour after Heller’s story was published on the Guardian’s website, Trump reiterated his blanket denial of the actions he’s been accused of by 10 women and counting.

Later Saturday afternoon, the Trump campaign issued an official response to the Guardian story, arguing that, “There is no way that something like this would have happened in a public place on Mother’s Day at Mr. Trump’s resort. It would have been the talk of Palm Beach for the past two decades.”

The Guardian spoke to several friends and relatives of Heller’s who corroborated the story that they say she’s been sharing with those close to her for more than a year. In fact, according to the story published Saturday, Heller first told a Guardian reporter about her encounter with Trump back in February but at the time chose not to speak on the record.

“He said this is just talk, but it’s not just talk,” Heller said, explaining why she’s chosen to speak up now. “This was him.”

-------------

10 women. This is really turning into a Bill Cosby situation.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
https://www.yahoo.com/news/another-woman-accuses-trump-of-sexual-misconduct-194904656.html

A 10th woman has come forward to accuse Donald Trump of sexual misconduct.

Cathy Heller told the Guardian that during her first and only meeting with Donald Trump approximately 20 years ago, the businessman grabbed her and attempted a kiss, from which she recoiled. Visibly irritated, Heller claims, Trump snapped, “Oh, come on,” held her still, and forcibly kissed her on the lips.

“He kept me there for a little too long,” Heller, now 63, said of the incident, which she claims took place during a Mother’s Day brunch at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. “And then he just walked away.”

Heller’s story is an increasingly familiar one. Not only does it echo those of several other women who’ve accused the Republican presidential nominee of unwanted groping, kissing and other sexual advances, like the others, her account also seems to corroborate Trump’s own description of how he treats women, as recently revealed by a recording from 2005.

And like many of the women who’ve come forward in recent days, Heller says she was motivated to share her story after Sunday’s presidential debate, during which Trump publicly denied having engaged in the behavior he described in the 2005 video.

Trump and members of his campaign team have vehemently denied the accusations that surfaced in the wake of the latest debate, suggesting that based on the timing, the women who’ve come forward this week must be part of a conspiracy aimed at derailing Trump’s presidential campaign involving Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and the mainstream news media.

Heller’s claims come in the wake of a Friday afternoon press conference in which former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos, with the help of famed civil rights attorney Gloria Allred, alleged that she, too, had been forcibly groped and kissed by Trump years ago.

Late Friday, the Trump campaign attempted to discredit Zervos by releasing a statement from one of her cousins, who said he was “shocked and bewildered” by the story, suggesting that Zervos simply “wishes she could still be on reality TV” and her account is “nothing more than an attempt to regain the spotlight at Mr. Trump’s expense.”

A little over an hour after Heller’s story was published on the Guardian’s website, Trump reiterated his blanket denial of the actions he’s been accused of by 10 women and counting.

Later Saturday afternoon, the Trump campaign issued an official response to the Guardian story, arguing that, “There is no way that something like this would have happened in a public place on Mother’s Day at Mr. Trump’s resort. It would have been the talk of Palm Beach for the past two decades.”

The Guardian spoke to several friends and relatives of Heller’s who corroborated the story that they say she’s been sharing with those close to her for more than a year. In fact, according to the story published Saturday, Heller first told a Guardian reporter about her encounter with Trump back in February but at the time chose not to speak on the record.

“He said this is just talk, but it’s not just talk,” Heller said, explaining why she’s chosen to speak up now. “This was him.”

-------------

10 women. This is really turning into a Bill Cosby situation.
No one has accused Trump of date rape like Cosby. Overly frisky yes. Cosby extreme no. More along the lines of Bill Clinton and John Kennedy.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
10 women. This is really turning into a Bill Cosby situation.
Yeah, wouldn't really compare this to decades of actual rape. Reminds me a lot more of Bill Clinton and all the women who came out and said he did creepy things around them.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
Former Miss Teen USA contestant defends Trump on allegations
KRQE Staff
Published: October 14, 2016, 5:23 am Updated: October 14, 2016, 11:22 am

NEW MEXICO (KRQE) – The former New Mexico Miss Teen USA is talking about Donald Trump visiting the contestant’s dressing room.

“I had all my clothes on. It was just someone coming in to say hello to us and wish us good luck. I didn’t even think twice about it,” Former NM Miss Teen USA Victoria Hughes said in a phone interview with KRQE News 13.

FIve other teen beauty queens have come forward telling “Buzzfeed News” teens were changing their clothes back in 1997 when Trump walked in.

One saying, they rushed to cover up and found it creepy.

But, Victoria Hughes,the contestant from Las Cruces, says what she saw was innocent.

“A lot of people have wondered why I’m saying he’s innocent when I’m not voting for him,” said Hughes. “Well, I wouldn’t want people to say false things about me. As a business owner. Maybe he did things, maybe he didn’t. But I personally didn’t see anything that night.”

Trump is denying he did anything wrong and denying the new claims that he touched women inappropriately.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220


So apparently that sheriff Fox trots out to counter Black Lives Matter after every police shooting is calling for mob violence.
VIDEO
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-supporter-assassinate-hillary-clinton-video-watch-us-election-2016-a7366301.html

Mr Trump has reiterated his claim that the election will be rigged, in preparation for a loss to the former Secretary of State. He continues to assert that Ms Clinton should be locked up for general corruption, while his supporters appear to take this message to heart.

A Trump supporter in Cincinnati went so far as to suggest he would take matters into his own hands should Ms Clinton win the race to the White House, hoping for a “coup” or “revolution”.

“I feel like Hillary needs to be taken out if she gets in the government,” Dan Bowman, 50, told CNN. “I’ll do everything in my power to take her out of power – which, if I have to be a patriot, I will.”

When asked if he was physically threatening Ms Clinton, he answered: “I don’t know, is it?”
So when do we start calling Trump supporters terrorist?

I mean this is the same as BLM right?
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
How do we respond to threats after our endorsement? This is how
Mi-Ai Parrish, The Republic | azcentral.com 10:17 a.m. MST October 17, 2016


What is the correct response to these threats? Today, I offer you a few.


As someone who has spent a career in the business of words, it’s unusual to find myself speechless.

Yet, there I was, a little more than two weeks ago.

What is the correct response, really, to this?

YOU'RE DEAD. WATCH YOUR BACK.

WE WILL BURN YOU DOWN.

YOU SHOULD BE PUT IN FRONT OF A FIRING SQUAD AS A TRAITOR.

How did I come to be hearing these threats?

The endorsement question we faced

More than a year ago, The Republic’s editorial board began taking a stand against the actions and positioning of Donald Trump. In piece after piece, we made it clear that his principles weren’t conservative. They were bad for the party, bad for Arizona, dangerous for America.

But in its more than 125 years, The Republic had never endorsed a Democrat for president. So, over the many months of the campaign, we found ourselves with this question: Endorse no one, or endorse a Democrat for the first time in our history?

We made our choice soberly. We knew it would be unpopular with many people. We knew that, although we had clearly stated our objections to Trump, it would be a big deal for a conservative editorial board in a conservative state to break ranks from the party.

We chose patriotism over party. We endorsed the Democrat.

And then the reaction started pouring in. Threats against our business. Threats against our people.

So, what is the response?

What is the correct response to any of the vile threats against me? What is the correct response to the more disturbing actions and words directed against so many others?

I've thought about those responses a lot. Today, I offer you a few.

First, to those who called

To the anonymous caller who invoked the name of Don Bolles — he’s the Republic reporter who was assassinated by a car bomb 40 years ago — and threatened that more of our reporters would be blown up because of the endorsement, I give you Kimberly. She is the young woman who answered the phone when you called. She sat in my office and calmly told three Phoenix police detectives what you had said. She told them that later, she walked to church and prayed for you. Prayed for patience, for forgiveness. Kimberly knows free speech requires compassion.


To those who said we should be shut down, burned down, who said they hoped we would cease to exist under a new presidential administration, I give you Nicole. She is our editor who directs the news staff, independent of our endorsements. After your threats, Nicole put on her press badge and walked with her reporters and photographers into the latest Donald Trump rally in Prescott Valley, Ariz. She stood as Trump encouraged his followers to heckle and boo and bully journalists. Then she came back to the newsroom to ensure our coverage was fair. Nicole knows free speech requires an open debate.


To those of you who have said that someone who disagrees with you deserves to be punished, I give you Phil. Our editorial page editor is a lifelong Republican, a conservative and a patriot. He was an early voice of reason, arguing calmly that Donald Trump didn't represent the values of the party he loves. Phil understands that free speech sometimes requires bravery.


To those of you who have spit on, threatened with violence, screamed at and bullied the young people going door-to-door selling subscriptions, I give you those dozens of young men and women themselves. Many sell subscriptions to work their way through school. Most were too frightened to share even their first names here. But they are still on the job. They know that free speech is part of a society that values hard work and equal opportunity.


To those of you who have called us hacks and losers with no purpose, and that we are un-American, I give you Dennis. He is the investigative reporter who first revealed the despicable mistreatment of our veterans at the VA hospital. His work triggered comprehensive debate and, one hopes, lasting change. He and others on his team have been hailed as heroes by veterans’ families across the country. Dennis knows that free speech is sometimes the only way to hold the powerful accountable.

To those of you who have invoked the name of longtime publisher Gene Pulliam, saying he is spinning in his grave, I give you his wife, Nina. After reporter Don Bolles was targeted by a bomber for doing his job, Nina Pulliam wept at his hospital bed. He died there slowly over 12 days. The Pulliams understood that free speech, and a free press, come at a cost.

Then, of course, there are the threats against the publisher today.

Next, a personal word

To those of you who have said Jesus will judge me, that you hope I burn in hell, that non-Christians should be kept out of our country, I give you my pastor grandfather. He was imprisoned and tortured for being a Christian, and suffered the murder of his best friend for also refusing to deny Christ. He taught all that freedom of religion is a fragile and precious thing.

Much as my grandfather taught, I also know there are a lot of things worth standing up for.

To those of you who said we should go live with the immigrants we love so much, and who threatened violence against people who look or speak a different way, I give you Jobe Couch.

He was the Army cultural attache and Alabama professor who sponsored my aunts and my mother when they arrived in America from Korea after World War II. There are dozens of descendants of his kindness. Citizens with college degrees, a dentist, lawyers, engineers, pastors, teachers, business owners, a Marine, a publisher and more. Uncle Jobe stood for the power of America as a melting pot. He taught me that one kind man can make a difference.

An open exchange of ideas

To all the other people who we heard from, who thanked us for our courage and our bravery, or who were bold enough to disagree with us on principle — the people who didn’t threaten to bomb our homes or harm our families — I have something for you, too. To you, I give my gratitude. I’m grateful that you stood up to say that we live in a better world when we exchange ideas freely, fairly, without fear.


To all of you who asked why we endorsed — or what right we had to do so — I give you my mother. She grew up under an occupying dictatorship, with no right to an education, no free press, no freedom of religion, no freedom to assemble peaceably, no right to vote. No right to free speech. She raised a journalist who understood not to take these rights for granted.

Don Bolles and Nina Pulliam are gone now, and Uncle Jobe is, too.

But the journalists I introduced you to here walk into the newsroom every day to do their jobs.

When they do, they pass by an inscription that fills an entire wall, floor to ceiling. It is 45 words long. It is an idea that is in my thoughts a lot these days.

It is the First Amendment.

Mi-Ai Parrish is president of The Arizona Republic and Republic Media.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/10/18/trump-electoral-college-victory-non-existent/
Trump’s path to an electoral college victory isn’t narrow. It’s nonexistent.
By Stuart Rothenberg October 18 at 6:00 AM
Trump: Election is 'rigged,' sex assault allegations 'proven false' Play Video2:46


At an Oct. 15 campaign rally, Donald Trump said the election was being rigged by "corrupt media" pushing "false allegations" and "lies." (The Washington Post)
The trajectory of the 2016 presidential race — which will result in a Hillary Clinton victory — remains largely unchanged from May, when Donald Trump and Clinton were in the process of wrapping up their nominations.

But what has changed recently is Clinton’s likely winning margin. For many weeks, even months, I have believed that Clinton would defeat Trump by three to six points. If anything, that range now looks a bit low, with the Democratic nominee apparently headed for a more convincing victory, quite possibly in the four-to-eight-point range.

Trump continues to be his own worst enemy, saying or tweeting things that only fuel chatter about his current and past views, values and behavior. His comments about people — from Vladimir Putin and Alicia Machado to some of the women who have accused him of sexual assault — have kept the focus on him at a time when he should be making the election a referendum on Clinton.

No, Trump’s supporters have not turned on him. But he trails badly with only a few weeks to go until Nov. 8, and he must broaden his appeal to have any chance of winning. That is now impossible.


Major national polls show Clinton leading among likely voters by anywhere from as few as four points, in the Oct. 10-13 Washington Post-ABC News poll, to as many as 11 points, in the Oct. 10-13 NBC News-Wall Street Journal survey.

Clinton’s personal ratings among registered voters remain terrible. A mind-boggling 62 percent of respondents in the Post-ABC poll said she is not “honest and trustworthy,” and 57 percent of those polled said they had an unfavorable view of her.

Yet these numbers help explain why Clinton is ahead in the race and could win by a large margin: Trump’s numbers are even worse.

A sizable 64 percent in the same poll said Trump is not honest or trustworthy, and an identical percentage said that he doesn’t have the temperament to be an effective president. A majority, 58 percent, said Trump is not qualified to be president, and 2 out of 3 respondents had an unfavorable view of the GOP nominee.

Trump is and has been a disaster as a presidential nominee, and that will not change in the campaign’s final days. Nor is there any reason to believe that voters from important demographic groups will warm to him. He continues to play only to his core supporters.


There is no surge among white voters for Trump — at least not enough to offset the Republican and swing voters he will lose.

The newest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll shows Trump doing worse against Clinton than Mitt Romney did against President Obama with almost every demographic group, including men, women, whites, Latinos, Republicans, voters with household incomes of more than $100,000 per year, voters with a college degree, voters with a postgraduate degree and voters 65 and older.

African Americans, white men without a college degree and younger voters are among the few groups with which Clinton is underperforming compared with Obama. But that should not give much comfort to Trump, who is drawing only 9 percent of African Americans, compared with the 6 percent that Romney drew against the first African American president.

It would be a mistake to call Trump’s current path to an electoral-college victory narrow. It is nonexistent. Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, once part of the Trump scenario, have never been “in play,” and he is not competitive in states Obama won only narrowly in 2012, such as Virginia and Colorado. Trump is more likely to lose North Carolina than win it, which would put him under 200 electoral votes.

Frankly, the writing has been on the wall for months about this race. You simply needed to look at the candidates, their campaign teams, the map and the voters.

The public’s mood certainly offered Trump an opportunity to make the election about Clinton and the president, and a serious Republican nominee could have taken advantage of the desire for change and Clinton’s baggage to win the race. But Donald Trump was always the worst messenger possible for delivering that message.


In one of my last columns for Roll Call, on May 10, I wrote that:

Given the makeup of the likely electorate, state voting patterns, the images of the candidates, the deeply fractured GOP and the early survey data, Clinton starts off with a decisive advantage in the contest. A blowout is possible.

Three months later, on Aug. 9, I reiterated that Trump was so poorly positioned for the fall campaign that he “needs a miracle to win.”

That conclusion was based both on the polls and on the reality that nominees who trail by double digits after the second national convention do not win presidential elections.


Now, with early voting already underway and only three weeks left until Election Day, the writing is on the wall. Clinton is headed for solid popular-vote and electoral-vote victories that are larger than Obama’s were over Romney.

While last-minute WikiLeaks releases could be embarrassing for Clinton, the battle lines of the 2016 presidential race are already set. Both the Post-ABC and NBC-Wall Street Journal polls show only a handful of voters still undecided in the race, and few committed voters are open to changing their minds.

Clinton’s lead could still widen or narrow a couple of points, depending on events. If her victory looks inevitable, some progressives may conclude that they can defect to Jill Stein without handing the White House to Trump. But the most important question is no longer whether Trump or Clinton will win but how large Clinton’s margin will be and whether she will have coattails.

Actually, those have been the most important questions for months.

Stuart Rothenberg writes about the politics of the presidential and congressional races.
-----------
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
I joked about Nodak posting INFOWARS videos soon. I didn't think you'd be that level of gullible.
Hillary Clinton’s email problems just came roaring back

By Chris Cillizza October 17 at 12:22 PM
Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail

For the past few months, Hillary Clinton's decision to exclusively use a private email server while at the State Department has receded as a campaign issue as Donald Trump's comments about women have come to dominate the daily chatter about the 2016 race.

On Monday, however, the various issues associated with Clinton's email setup came roaring back. According to emails released by the FBI, Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy asked the FBI to ease up on classification decisions in exchange for allowing more FBI agents in countries where they were not permitted to go. The words "quid pro quo" were used to describe the proposed exchange by the FBI official. (The State Department insists it was no such thing; "This allegation is inaccurate and does not align with the facts," said State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner in a statement. "To be clear: the State Department did upgrade the document at the request of the FBI when we released it back in May 2015.")

17 Oct
Matt Zapotosky ✔ @mattzap
Dust up between State Department, FBI over classification pic.twitter.com/AHnggvyMkE
Follow
Matt Zapotosky ✔ @mattzap
Oh, boy. Quid pro quo allegation between State and FBI over classification. That is messy. pic.twitter.com/Kf5FcSFQjb


The FBI responded that the classification specialist with whom Kennedy made this request was not part of the investigation into Clinton's emails and is now retired.


The Clinton campaign will, as it has done every time there is any news about whether she sent or received classified material on her private server, chalk this up to an interagency dispute over classification. Typical bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo, they will say. This sort of stuff happens all the time!

FBI Director James Comey testified on July 7 at a U.S. House of Representatives hearing on presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's decision to use a personal email server while serving as Secretary of State. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)
Except, not really. First of all, we already know from FBI Director James B. Comey that Clinton sent and received emails and information that was classified at the time. ("110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received," Comey said in his remarkable press conference on the FBI investigation.) Clinton's explanation has now evolved to this: She didn't know documents marked with a "c" meant they were confidential (and therefore classified) and, therefore, she never knowingly sent or received classified material — with the emphasis on "knowingly."

That's a tough position to hold in light of Kennedy's attempted quid pro quo, which suggests that at least some people at State were actively trying to fiddle with classification determinations made by the FBI.


It's hard to square the idea of Kennedy offering a quid pro quo to the FBI regarding a classification decision and Clinton not even knowing that "c" on documents stands for "classified." One suggests deep understanding of how the classification process works. The other, um, doesn't.

Now, simply because Kennedy asked for a quid pro quo regarding classification doesn't mean that Clinton asked him to do so. There's no evidence of that. There's also no evidence that Clinton had a conversation of any sort with Kennedy about his classification request. And it's important to remember that Kennedy is a career officer at State, having worked in the same administrative job for Condoleezza Rice prior to Clinton, so he's not exactly a partisan.

That said, this latest revelation adds more evidence to the "where there's smoke, there's fire" argument that Republicans have long made about Clinton's email setup. The idea of setting up a quid pro quo when it comes to classifications of information will, for many people, confirm their suspicions that the government bureaucracy is simply protecting Clinton. If a State Department official is offering a quid pro quo in this one exchange, can you imagine what they are doing off the books?

Speaker Paul Ryan's statement speaks directly to that suspicion. “A senior State Department official’s attempt to pressure the FBI to hide the extent of this mishandling bears all the signs of a cover-up," Ryan said. "This is why our aggressive oversight work in the House is so important, and it will continue.”

___________________

More gullible conspiracy stuff. Oh wait...
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Now, simply because Kennedy asked for a quid pro quo regarding classification doesn't mean that Clinton asked him to do so. There's no evidence of that. There's also no evidence that Clinton had a conversation of any sort with Kennedy about his classification request. And it's important to remember that Kennedy is a career officer at State, having worked in the same administrative job for Condoleezza Rice prior to Clinton, so he's not exactly a partisan.
So more smoke and no fire. God knows this will be the thing that blows this wide open. :jerk

But posting another lead in this long wild goose chase doesn't change the fact that you just posted a video by a known charlatan. Because you're so deep in the weeds that any nonsense that verifies your suspicions short circuits past your God given common sense.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
So more smoke and no fire. God knows this will be the thing that blows this wide open. :jerk

But posting another lead in this long wild goose chase doesn't change the fact that you just posted a video by a known charlatan. Because you're so deep in the weeds that any nonsense that verifies your suspicions short circuits past your God given common sense.
There may be fire but there are too many cronies with fire extinguishers keeping it at bay.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
There may be fire but there are too many cronies with fire extinguishers keeping it at bay.
Yeah, more or less. I don't pretend there isn't corruption in the Clinton administration. I just think that it's the garden variety corruption that we've more or less tolerated for the last century.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom