The Clinton foundation

[ecduzitgood]

I suppose this doesnt matter to the Hillary Clinton supporters. Hopefully some will wake up to the dangerous position this puts America in when it comes to potentially influencing decisions made in regards to foreign donors and their agenda for America.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...eek-probe.html

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...-countries-go/

[spence]

Endless scandal mongering.

When are the Republicans going to realize they can't lift America up simply by trying to bring others down. This is why you have Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Endless scandal mongering.

When are the Republicans going to realize they can't lift America up simply by trying to bring others down.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no but you improve things by putting crooked criminal types in jail, not electing them to the highest offices in the land and giving them unchecked power .....stupid

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

Endless scandal mongering.

When are the Republicans going to realize they can't lift America up simply by trying to bring others down. This is why you have Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't think Hillary got that memo either...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

Endless scandal mongering.

When are the Republicans going to realize they can't lift America up simply by trying to bring others down. This is why you have Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The scandal mongering accelerates as more evidence of pay to play and corruption comes out every day it seems.

Trump is winning because of the Democrats candidate is the most corrupt in history and the people are fed up with it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Three words you won't hear at the DNC. The Clinton foundation
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...s.html?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/...e.html?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Another coincidence....
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-securit...ed-in/?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Another coincidence....
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-securit...ed-in/?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Read up on this...

[ecduzitgood]

The Russian reset Hillary may have helped the Russins to develope their hacking capabilites in return for donations to the Clinton foundation and speaking fees. She may have helped them hack her server...lol
http://nypost.com/2016/07/31/report-...reset/?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Raider Ronnie]

[wdmso]

You guys dont stop do you> How many of theses Hillary outrages have you been trying to Make real from Whitewater to Benghazi to the Bill Clinton’s foundation was actually established in 1997

1 the GOP has never been able to prove anything

2 Show any criminal activity

Because if they are as corrupt as the GOP and their supporters say they are .. then Hilliary and Bill are superheroes or are wizards wiping aways all there illegal activities .. as the march thru history . or the GOP are just that Dumb

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

You guys dont stop do you> How many of theses Hillary outrages have you been trying to Make real from Whitewater to Benghazi to the Bill Clinton’s foundation was actually established in 1997

1 the GOP has never been able to prove anything

2 Show any criminal activity

Because if they are as corrupt as the GOP and their supporters say they are .. then Hilliary and Bill are superheroes or are wizards wiping aways all there illegal activities .. as the march thru history . or the GOP are just that Dumb

We can prove that she has lied on multiple occasions (sniper fire, GOP framing Bill to make it appear as though he cheated).

Most people feel that Benghazi was not handled well (Ambassadors request for extra security was denied).

The FBI concluded that she was extremely careless with sensitive information.

Is any of that criminal? Nope. Does it all amount to nothing? For you and Spence yes, not for many others.

When you and Spence refuse to look for any flaws, you won't find any.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

We can prove that she has lied on multiple occasions (sniper fire, GOP framing Bill to make it appear as though he cheated). Who keep a dress with jizz on it
talk to me when she lied under oath and can prove it

Most people feel that Benghazi was not handled well (Ambassadors request for extra security was denied). no just some people and requested get denied all the time

The FBI concluded that she was extremely careless with sensitive information. Agreed

Is any of that criminal? Nope. Does it all amount to nothing? For you and Spence yes, not for many others. Big picture

When you and Spence refuse to look for any flaws, you won't find any.
un like you who do nothing but look for flaws and hidden meaning in everything Democratic Put willfully stick you head in the sand when it comes to the GOP and their Man seem spence and I don't allow you and others to post misinformation with out rebuttal and we dont start many threads we spend most of it de bunking your propaganda

ok

[spence]

Originally Posted by wdmso

and we dont start many threads we spend most of it de bunking your propaganda

I really wish they'd start debunking their own propaganda. The google is pretty easy to use. If they'd make a minuscule effort to reduce the BS there would be plenty of bandwidth for some real discussion.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

I really wish they'd start debunking their own propaganda. The google is pretty easy to use. If they'd make a minuscule effort to reduce the BS there would be plenty of bandwidth for some real discussion.

I see more deflecting than debunking.
Pot calling kettle spence
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

spence and I don't allow you and others to post misinformation with out rebuttal and we dont start many threads we spend most of it de bunking your propaganda

I love you Wayne...that was freaking hilarious!

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

I love you Wayne...that was freaking hilarious!

isn't it .. I mean look at the effort put into theses threads when 2 people post an opposite view.. you would think the world was on fire ..

Say what you want believe what you want but dont post feelings as facts .. or stories sent to your inbox or FB

you can hate Hillary but you cant Cherry pick her public record and not acknowledge her commitment to public service but some how = bad POTUS

love or hate the the Donald But you cant Cherry pick his success as a businessman and ignore his statements some how = good POTUS

I am an independent and have voted for R's and D's and was part of Reagans Inaugural Parade Canceled by Cold in 1984 as a young marine at 8th&I and voted for the person with the best plan for America not party ..never vote just party and this election is no different

[ecduzitgood]

Anything specific?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Anything specific?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, the link you posted. Good lord.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

Yes, the link you posted. Good lord.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Typical non answer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Typical non answer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's like fishing, you've got to put your time in.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

isn't it .. I mean look at the effort put into theses threads when 2 people post an opposite view.. you would think the world was on fire ..

Say what you want believe what you want but dont post feelings as facts .. or stories sent to your inbox or FB

you can hate Hillary but you cant Cherry pick her public record and not acknowledge her commitment to public service but some how = bad POTUS

Does commitment trump performance. Being committed loses its flavor if you fail. How does failure=good POTUS?

love or hate the the Donald But you cant Cherry pick his success as a businessman and ignore his statements some how = good POTUS

So, can you cherry pick his statements and ignore his success?

I am an independent and have voted for R's and D's and was part of Reagans Inaugural Parade Canceled by Cold in 1984 as a young marine at 8th&I and voted for the person with the best plan for America not party ..never vote just party and this election is no different

If you voted for Reagan, you must have changed your mind about what the best plan for America is if you vote for Hilary.

As for voting for the person not just the party, in this race, of the two candidates, the one that is least affiliated with party is Trump. Hilary is the embodiment of what the Democrat Party has become. Separating her from the party doesn't leave a whole lot left in terms of what is best for the country. At least Bernie had some degree of separation.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you voted for Reagan, you must have changed your mind about what the best plan for America is if you vote for Hilary.

As for voting for the person not just the party, in this race, of the two candidates, the one that is least affiliated with party is Trump. Hilary is the embodiment of what the Democrat Party has become. Separating her from the party doesn't leave a whole lot left in terms of what is best for the country. At least Bernie had some degree of separation.

Voting for Reagan and not voting for Trump . there is no moral equivalency . sadly the best. Plan for America is not electing Trump. Well just have to agree to disagree. On which of the 2 would be worse for America aka big picture not vs singular issues like SCJ appointments
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Voting for Reagan and not voting for Trump . there is no moral equivalency . sadly the best. Plan for America is not electing Trump. Well just have to agree to disagree. On which of the 2 would be worse for America aka big picture not vs singular issues like SCJ appointments
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

SCJ appointments are , at least to me , the single biggest issue critical to the big picture .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Voting for Reagan and not voting for Trump . there is no moral equivalency . sadly the best. Plan for America is not electing Trump. Well just have to agree to disagree. On which of the 2 would be worse for America aka big picture not vs singular issues like SCJ appointments
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The makeup of the Supreme Court is not a singular issue. As the two previous posts to this have said, it encompasses all issues. All the other so-called issues in this election are minor to it. They can all be fixed by following administrations. Most major changes in the way we are governed have had to go through the Supreme Court in order to be made law. The character and constitutional philosophy of those in the Supreme Court can permanently change how we are governed.

That you do not understand that is an indication that you think our elections are a matter of personality, not legal substance. This is a pernicious mind set that we have been conditioned into by popular and inattentive media and evasive politicians who know our weaknesses, and convince us that their niceness and goodness, and political correctness are the keys to good governance. And that hoodwinks us into disregarding and eventually not even considering that rule of law is far, far more important then their promises and personalities. It leads us into a lawless government which rules by whim and personal "interpretation."

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The makeup of the Supreme Court is not a singular issue. As the two previous posts to this have said, it encompasses all issues. All the other so-called issues in this election are minor to it. They can all be fixed by following administrations. Most major changes in the way we are governed have had to go through the Supreme Court in order to be made law. The character and constitutional philosophy of those in the Supreme Court can permanently change how we are governed.

That you do not understand that is an indication that you think our elections are a matter of personality, not legal substance. This is a pernicious mind set that we have been conditioned into by popular and inattentive media and evasive politicians who know our weaknesses, and convince us that their niceness and goodness, and political correctness are the keys to good governance. And that hoodwinks us into disregarding and eventually not even considering that rule of law is far, far more important then their promises and personalities. It leads us into a lawless government which rules by whim and personal "interpretation."

I do understand it .. But I just dont share your apocalyptic view on the matter.. if Justices are nominated by a Dem and approved by the full United States Senate .. But yet you have no issues with the GOP stone walling Obamas nomination to serve yours and their agenda and stack the court with your minions . OK

[ecduzitgood]

Singular issue like SCJ appointments?
Singular issue that will have the potential to impact any and all issues this country and it's citizens face moving foward.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I do understand it .. But I just dont share your apocalyptic view on the matter..

If you understand, and don't disagree that Supreme Court appointments can permanently change how we are governed, then you do share what you call my apocalyptic view on the matter. My "apocalyptic" view is exactly that which you say you understand. I wouldn't call it apocalyptic. The world will not be destroyed. Civilization will not be destroyed. But, which you claim to understand, the way we are governed will ultimately be destroyed.

if Justices are nominated by a Dem and approved by the full United States Senate ..

Hillary will nominate Progressive Judges. Progressive Judges will not strike down Progressive legislation whether it is allowed by the Constitution or not. They will, until such time we are fully governed by Progressive ideology and it is no longer necessary to do so, they will "interpret" the Constitution to support whatever legislation Progressives create. Thusly, Constitutional government will be replaced by Progressive government. I guess that's a form of apocalypse. If you don't disagree with that, then you share my "apocalyptic" view on the matter.

But yet you have no issues with the GOP stone walling Obamas nomination to serve yours and their agenda and stack the court with your minions . OK

Conservatives and the GOP in general tend and claim to try to nominate Judges who apply the Constitution by the original text (the kind which Trump says he will nominate). Thus, with textualist adjudication Constitutional government will not be replaced by Progressive government. If you don't disagree with that, then you share my view that the Constitutional "apocalypse" will be avoided.

Whatever view you have, and if you care to "share" it, your comments indicate that you don't think that the legal framework for government we have really matters. What seems to matter to you is the persons or personalities we have running that framework. Which, actually, reduces the framework to insignificance. As Jim in CT would say, Constitution Schmonstitution.

I guess, in my opinion, what you don't understand is that personal "interpretation" to some degree changes, rewrites, that which is interpreted. And the less that interpretation is anchored in the text, the more it is rewritten, reshaped, the more it becomes totally different than the original.

The Supreme Court, through Progressive "interpretation," has been the main vehicle by which Progressives have overcome the obstacles imposed by the Constitution (FDR's New Deal, and the multitude of progressive legislation that followed up till now would never have happened, except in States where the people voted for it, if the Constitution had been faithfully followed by the Court); and even the vehicle by which Progressives have overcome the so-called "will of the people" expressed by their votes (gay marriage and abortion, for instance).

Of course, if you agree with what the Progressives have done, your response might be "so what!" " It's all good." Some of it may be good. And even if a lot of it is good, the problem is in how it has been accomplished, and what has been destroyed in the process. What "apocalypse" has happened.

If what is left of our framework of government is personalities who we invest by our votes with the power to shape our society, then we are basically under the thumb of the chosen. You worry about what Trump will do. Others worry about what Hillary will do. Minorities will worry about what the majority will do. No one is safe from the hand of government. There is no framework that stops it.

Not even your God. There will be no unalienable rights provided by your creator or by nature. Government, Progressive government, will replace that.

If you disagree with that, tell us how.