Author Topic: Hillary Clinton  (Read 284335 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8880 on: January 03, 2018, 03:05:31 PM »
I wonder if it was Bill or Hillary’s pants that caught on fire.


Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8881 on: January 03, 2018, 03:14:05 PM »
I just heard, maybe I haven’t been paying attention, that the Huma/Carlos Danger email account to which she forwarded the classified emails, was a yahoo account. Now we know the Russians, hackers and every Nigerian prince has those documents and how they got them.
Ha, ha, ha.  Who needs to collude with the Russians when you had Mrs. Carlos Danger at work.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8882 on: January 03, 2018, 03:14:38 PM »
I wonder if it was Bill or Hillary’s pants that caught on fire.
Considering the problems they had not getting permits and outsourcing to questionable/illegal contractors for things like government emails  and lackluster book  sales I'm going with the more prosaic insurance fraud and/or covering up the illegal home renovations. Or maybe just faulty wiring by the illegal contractor?
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/10/28/clinton-house-renovated-without-permits-records/92878768/

Plus, I think the Ba'al worship is done in the living room, "Spirit Cooking" and black candles in the kitchen annex.


Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8884 on: January 04, 2018, 09:05:22 PM »
Ha, ha, ha.  Who needs to collude with the Russians when you had Mrs. Carlos Danger at work.

Couldn't even choose "Carlos Boring" as a handle! IDIOT!

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8885 on: January 06, 2018, 05:27:53 PM »
Styxxxxxx has a new set. Dayummm, he should probably go back to the old set. 😂😂😂



Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8886 on: January 06, 2018, 10:38:13 PM »
Styxxxxxx has a new set. Dayummm, he should probably go back to the old set. 😂😂😂



i don't get it.  the previous background had character and texture.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8887 on: January 06, 2018, 10:45:45 PM »
i don't get it.  the previous background had character and texture.

Nerd Conan has gone austere! He's growing in Satanic powa!

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8888 on: January 06, 2018, 11:13:57 PM »
I would like to know why he shits all over everyone for being un-thinking and un-original, yet horked his style from a Bad Company album fold-out. Ideology is from AC/DC circa 1976.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8889 on: January 07, 2018, 09:12:44 AM »
Styxxxxxx has a new set. Dayummm, he should probably go back to the old set. 😂😂😂

I thought he said in a previous video that this set-up was just temporary and that he's still working on it.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8890 on: January 07, 2018, 09:49:18 AM »
I thought he said in a previous video that this set-up was just temporary and that he's still working on it.

I think we all just got used to that bedroom with the window open and the various flags draped in the background. ;)

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8891 on: January 07, 2018, 09:51:22 AM »
I think we all just got used to that bedroom with the window open and the various flags draped in the background. ;)

 ;D  yeah, and the plants.


Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8893 on: January 09, 2018, 06:50:38 PM »
I often wonder how many "actual" ballots were cast for Hillary, that is to say non-fraudulent ballots.

Just for shits and giggles and since it is an obvious conspiracy theory, I will estimate that out of the purported 65,853,516 "votes" cast for Hillary only 75% were legitimate votes (illegal aliens, space aliens, ballot-box stuffing, Raytheon Corporation e-ballot hackery, etc.. making up the 25% that were fraudulent).

That would mean that the actual popular vote would have been 49,390,137 votes for Clinton vs 62,984,825 votes for Trump.

I personally believe that a 25% (or 1 out of 4) fraudulent vote count for Clinton is a generous number, i.e. the number must be much higher.  This country is really not that full of morons, or we would not be as great as we are, and will be again...

Had I the time or inclination, I would go through the individual voting precincts in each state and apply the 25% Clinton vote fraud to each precinct and make that cool nationwide red/blue map into a ".gif" that faded from one reality to the other on a loop.  Maybe throw in some trigger-word or phrase that would smash-cut in from time to time, I dunno maybe "Fake News" or "Vote Fraud" or somesuch.  I would find that delicious.

Make America Pate Again!


bonus: "Faithless Electors in the 2016 Electoral College."  Someone loses bigly there too!

that is all, Carry On...

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8894 on: January 10, 2018, 02:50:26 PM »
Hillary's gal-pal Huma is not divorcing underage girl sexting hubby Weiner? Or are they? Hmmmm*
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/anthony-weiner-huma-abedin-settle-divorce-case-court-article-1.3748999
https://pagesix.com/2018/01/10/huma-abedin-and-anthony-weiner-call-off-divorce/


* "Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, in a criminal case the prosecution cannot compel the defendant's spouse to testify against him. This privilege only applies if the defendant and the spouse witness are currently married at the time of the prosecution."

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8895 on: January 10, 2018, 03:06:58 PM »
Hillary's gal-pal Huma is not divorcing underage girl sexting hubby Weiner? Or are they? Hmmmm*
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/anthony-weiner-huma-abedin-settle-divorce-case-court-article-1.3748999
https://pagesix.com/2018/01/10/huma-abedin-and-anthony-weiner-call-off-divorce/


* "Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, in a criminal case the prosecution cannot compel the defendant's spouse to testify against him. This privilege only applies if the defendant and the spouse witness are currently married at the time of the prosecution."

Once a beard, always a beard. When it comes to finding doormat women with zero self esteem just look to the left. They’re so incredibly weak and unattractive. Scream girl power while being walked all over. A truly pathetic example for young women. Even Orpah knows when it’s time to be a woman.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8896 on: January 10, 2018, 08:36:41 PM »
Hillary's gal-pal Huma is not divorcing underage girl sexting hubby Weiner...

She seems drawn to sleasy scummy politicians.  Now that Al Franken no longer qualifies for the role, she figured she'd keep what she has

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8897 on: January 10, 2018, 09:14:03 PM »
She seems drawn to sleasy scummy politicians.  Now that Al Franken no longer qualifies for the role, she figured she'd keep what she has
I'm sticking with Rule 501 and her gal-pal Hillary forced her to stay married so as to not being able to testify against her underage girl sexting husband and vice-versa.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_501

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8898 on: January 10, 2018, 10:27:11 PM »
She seems drawn to sleasy scummy politicians.  Now that Al Franken no longer qualifies for the role, she figured she'd keep what she has

Franken is a flaming homo. Ask Jojo.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8899 on: January 11, 2018, 07:36:45 PM »


Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8901 on: January 12, 2018, 12:56:57 AM »


This guy is a dope.

First off, the image of that report was originally peddled in September 2016. It's from 16 months ago. Second, the "WikiLeaks" account he references, @TheRealJulian, is not the real Julian. Third, the doctor named in the report says it's forged (although I don't believe it would break any laws for her to lie about that).

If this dude hasn't figured out @TheRealJulian isn't Julian Assange and that this questionable document is 16 months old, I'm sure there's plenty of other stuff he's a little slow about.

Having said all of that, I don't doubt Hillary is quite sick, both physically and spiritually.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8902 on: January 12, 2018, 08:08:43 AM »
This guy is a dope.

First off, the image of that report was originally peddled in September 2016. It's from 16 months ago. Second, the "WikiLeaks" account he references, @TheRealJulian, is not the real Julian. Third, the doctor named in the report says it's forged (although I don't believe it would break any laws for her to lie about that).

.....

The information may not all be true but the spirit is correct.  And that is the important thing, right?

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8903 on: January 12, 2018, 12:55:47 PM »
The information may not all be true but the spirit is correct.  And that is the important thing, right?

Maybe.  Maybe not.  I don't know.  I've watched several of this guy's videos and I've come away each time pretty unimpressed.  He definitely knows how to employ clickbait video titles, though, so I'll give him that.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8904 on: January 12, 2018, 12:59:52 PM »
Maybe.  Maybe not.  I don't know.  I've watched several of this guy's videos and I've come away each time pretty unimpressed.  He definitely knows how to employ clickbait video titles, though, so I'll give him that.

You don't like him. You don't like Lionel. Tough customer!

I'm actually with you on Lionel. I like what he has to say overall but he's too in love with language and takes too long thinking of 4 different words for the same thing. Also, the tonal quality of his voice gets to me after awhile.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8905 on: January 12, 2018, 02:16:09 PM »
You don't like him. You don't like Lionel. Tough customer!

I'm actually with you on Lionel. I like what he has to say overall but he's too in love with language and takes too long thinking of 4 different words for the same thing. Also, the tonal quality of his voice gets to me after awhile.

i'd have to say i don't dislike lionel, necessarily.  i realize we're on the same side and he probably sees the world in much the same way i do.  it's just that i come away from his videos feeling like he talks a lot without really contributing any useful information or new ways of seeing an issue.  i think he's actually a terrible communicator.  but overall, yeah, my gripe with lionel is probably well summarized with what you just said.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8906 on: January 12, 2018, 02:20:52 PM »
i come away from his videos feeling like he talks a lot without really contributing any useful information or new ways of seeing an issue. 

You're too lit, fam.


Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8908 on: January 14, 2018, 09:58:56 AM »
Maybe.  Maybe not.  I don't know.  I've watched several of this guy's videos and I've come away each time pretty unimpressed.  He definitely knows how to employ clickbait video titles, though, so I'll give him that.

I think i forgot the '/s' tag.

Re: Hillary Clinton
« Reply #8909 on: January 14, 2018, 11:10:18 AM »
I think i forgot the '/s' tag.

Sorry.

I slow.