What's new
By:
Filters

2020 Presidential election

So here's what was on Mark Levin yesterday..... an Arkansas talk show host filled in for him. Someone who had some on-the-ground news about the Clinton Foundation. The Little Rock media didn't touch this, but some locals at the airport noticed a plane being loaded with boxes of stuff.....with DOJ labels. It was not a regular plane they see there so they ran the numbers and found it was a federal plane. They tracked it after it left Little Rock. It went to Washington, DC. I think that was last August.

Then, in some recent hearing, some Republican mentioned something about how the DOJ was investigating records from the Clinton Foundation.

And, in a similar vein, a week or so ago, someone came on the MSM talking about how an FBI official was being investigated for altering a document, and the MSM went on a spin to paint it out as an everyday sort of event, and was probably only a perfectly OK reasonable correction anyway.

So the topic was like this. A lot of people think Barr, Durham, Huber are just gonna tank whatever issues because, well, we can't really rock the boat. We gotta patch things up and go on with things "The Way Things Are".

The guy was saying it appears there is a serious investigation going on, on several issues..... going back to Comey's fake whitewashing of Hillary. Apparently, the investigation is going deeper than was originally believed necessary. Clinton and Obama. Just couldn't stop with the little peeps who did what they were told.

I don't think a majority, or even 40% of American Voters, are going to be OK with what HIllary and Obama have done. I mean, they are going to jail.
 
another sign of the times. The Clinton Foundation stash is now down to a mere $20M. The rest has been laundered offshore.

(edit)
So I went to the Clinton Foundation website. No information beyond 2015, when they stated 2000 employees, 450M in assets, and around 200M in current year donations. You can double your donate if you wanna throw in 200,000.

Other news sorta articles now exist stating that after Hillary lost in 2016, donations plummeted 86%. Sources include a number in excess of 25M, and nearly 20 donations between 10M and 25M, showing to some that it appears that donations were being made largely for political access. Most of the donations came from other foundations, with liberal social agendas.

The issue of tax evasion is on the radar.

The issue of pay-to-play, "quid pro quo" and the like..... negotiated sales of US favors.

Actually, everything the dems are so righteous about prosecuting Trump for....

well, I'm not just trolling here. I'm saying that the whole DumpTrump crusade is not unlike a troll project, maybe more like organized "projection",.... a term that has been thrown about in criminal prosecution cases for multiple decades, denoting how liars are really quick to defend themselves with accusations against their accusers.... in a manner that exposes their own thought processes generally.

But, hey.... Hillary and Bill were Trumps bought-and-paid for politicians, whom he gave millions of his own funds to, whom he called in a friendly gesture, before he announced his candidacy.

Is Trump part of this club, or not?

Is Trump gonna pardon the Clintons?
 
Last edited:
babe said:
another sign of the times. The Clinton Foundation stash is now down to a mere $20M. The rest has been laundered offshore.
Click to expand...

dude, I’m totally open to the idea that the clintons are criminals.

but your credibility here is totally shot since you keep spouting stuff and you never have any evidence to back it up.
 
Kamala Harris has ended her campaign.

A couple other people no one was talking about, Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak also recently ended their campaigns.
 
Gameface said:
Kamala Harris has ended her campaign.

A couple other people no one was talking about, Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak also recently ended their campaigns.
Click to expand...
I'm far from a Harris fan, but it's a little ****ed up that she and Castro are out while a couple billionaires with no coalition to speak of are still trying to buy their way in.

*edit* Castro is in still apparently, but hasn't qualified for the last few debates.
 
Harris is out of money apparently. Several of the Dems have been having trouble raising enough funds to continue their campaign.
 
Catchall said:
Harris is out of money apparently. Several of the Dems have been having trouble raising enough funds to continue their campaign.
Click to expand...
Makes sense. The field needs to narrow. Not too many people are going to donate to multiple campaigns.
 
Catchall said:
Harris is out of money apparently. Several of the Dems have been having trouble raising enough funds to continue their campaign.
Click to expand...

that’s what primaries are supposed to do. Or were you expecting 10 people to win the nomination?

Republicans had 16 candidates fighting for their party’s nomination in 2016 and 15/16 ran out of money and/or support. Trump won it.
 
Gameface said:
Makes sense. The field needs to narrow. Not too many people are going to donate to multiple campaigns.
Click to expand...
Why do you need so called "campaign money" in USA? Assuming your income is little bit more than Al Bundy or Homer Simpson look/behave-alike? Aren't posters and ads in the media enough assuming you are popular and well liked in general? Should for example Bill Gates want do be elected as POTUS - am i correct that according to US law he needs to only announce his wish as an independent candidate at the correct deadline, pay some election related fees and then just wait for results on the election day?

For example, during the European Parliament elections, the only big money was "bail money" which the candidate paid to the election organizers. It was about 20000 EUR which you got back if you were elected to the EU Parliament - Estonia had 6 positions and the amount of candidates was about 100. Of course, USA is bigger and therefore if you use traditional media to promote yourself, the expenses are higher. But do you really need millions?
 
Gameface said:
So you are NOT a conservative? I didn't call you a Republican.

I'm asking, not telling.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't label myself as a conservative, necessarily. By today's standards of progressive liberalism, I would be considered moderate. The political spectrum as a whole seems to have slid to the left over the last 20 years, making moderates look more conservative.
 
Catchall said:
I wouldn't label myself as a conservative, necessarily. By today's standards of progressive liberalism, I would be considered moderate. The political spectrum as a whole seems to have slid to the left over the last 20 years, making moderates look more conservative.
Click to expand...

By the standards of 150 years ago, you're a flaming liberal. Are the standards of 150 years ago, or 20 years ago, relevant to deciding your political position today?
 
One Brow said:
By the standards of 150 years ago, you're a flaming liberal. Are the standards of 150 years ago, or 20 years ago, relevant to deciding your political position today?
Click to expand...

I haven't moved to the conservative right just because liberals continue to slide left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top