The All Purpose Hillary Clinton Thread

acbytesla said:
Did you write 5 checks Tony? If you want democracy or at least the Democratic party you're going to have to pay for it. Or at least someone will.
Click to expand...

LOL, I've given her plenty of money. Which is probably why she keeps asking for more.
 
Bob001 said:
Someone who has actually read Hillary's Goldman Sachs speeches (really conversations) says they make her look good, and she should have released them herself. Another example of her suspicious secrecy hurting her more than than the actual facts:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...surprised-me-the-most/?utm_term=.695968b98f8e
Click to expand...

I looked through this NPR link earlier:

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/15/49808...se-hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-transcripts

And wondered why this topic had not come up yet.

I figured people were waiting for brietbart et al to tell them what was bad about the speech. Maybe I'll be waiting longer than i thought :)
 
It is completely unsurprising to me that those speeches don't make her look bad.

I always thought that people who were super concerned about them were idiots or liars.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
Someone who has actually read Hillary's Goldman Sachs speeches (really conversations) says they make her look good, and she should have released them herself. Another example of her suspicious secrecy hurting her more than than the actual facts:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...surprised-me-the-most/?utm_term=.695968b98f8e
Click to expand...

Unfortunately there is a big difference between someone who is pro-Hillary (or at least not anti-Hillary) reading those speeches and considering them in full and a partisan hack taking one or two phrases out of context and use them as a weapon to bash her.

For example, the article mentions that she praises Chinese President Xi Jinping - I'm sure some of those words could be used to imply that she is anti American. Likewise he apparently says that the US has a strong "know nothing" streak - that sounds like an attack on middle-America to me :rolleyes:
 
Tony Stark said:
I'm kinda getting tired of getting like five emails a day from Hillary begging for money.
Click to expand...
No idea how I got on their email list, but I get these emails too.

One of the last describes me as "one of our most committed supporters".

Of course I never gave a dime, as that would be illegal.
 
The Don said:
Unfortunately there is a big difference between someone who is pro-Hillary (or at least not anti-Hillary) reading those speeches and considering them in full and a partisan hack taking one or two phrases out of context and use them as a weapon to bash her.

For example, the article mentions that she praises Chinese President Xi Jinping - I'm sure some of those words could be used to imply that she is anti American. Likewise he apparently says that the US has a strong "know nothing" streak - that sounds like an attack on middle-America to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I can't wait to see the Conservative Outrage Machine try to spin something positive she said about Xi. After the Dem writers finish laughing they just put out six more commercials of Donald and his homo-erotic fascination with political strong men, past and present.
 
Firestone said:
No idea how I got on their email list, but I get these emails too.

One of the last describes me as "one of our most committed supporters".

Of course I never gave a dime, as that would be illegal.
Click to expand...

If you send me money, I will donate it to her. I haven't hit the $2700 limit yet.
 
Tony Stark said:
It is completely unsurprising to me that those speeches don't make her look bad.

I always thought that people who were super concerned about them were idiots or liars.
Click to expand...

It goes back to her behavior. She acted like she had something to hide even when she apparently didn't, a characteristic she has displayed before. If she had just said "Publish and be damned," there would have been no Goldman Sachs issue.
 
Bob001 said:
It goes back to her behavior. She acted like she had something to hide even when she apparently didn't, a characteristic she has displayed before. If she had just said "Publish and be damned," there would have been no Goldman Sachs issue.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your description.

I don't think she acted like she had something to hide, I think her political opponents were simply under the impression there was something juicy in there and the general feeling that people were "owed" a transcript.
 
Bob001 said:
It goes back to her behavior. She acted like she had something to hide even when she apparently didn't, a characteristic she has displayed before. If she had just said "Publish and be damned," there would have been no Goldman Sachs issue.
Click to expand...

I think her issue was that it was a ridiculous demand brought up by someone who was losing pretty badly. So why should she submit.

And I think Bernie knew there was nothing damning in them. He was just desperate.
 
Last edited:
Tony Stark said:
I'm kinda getting tired of getting like five emails a day from Hillary begging for money.
Click to expand...

Did you write 5 checks Tony? If you want democracy or at least the Democratic party you're going to have to pay for it. Or at least someone will.
 
PartSkeptic said:
I am not a professional psychic. I do not do readings or stuff for money or gain. I do the occasional reading now and then to get information in a situation where there is uncertainty as to what might happen and why.

When asked if Trump will win the election the cards said no and yes. And then gave no further information except that there would be a lot of social unrest. The cards were quite positive that Trump would win the nomination, be sworn in, serve 4 years, and be considered successful.

The cards are not a prediction machine. More like insider information which may turn out to be wrong. But correct often enough to be useful.
Click to expand...
Well that helps explains things. :yikes: You did manage to get one thing right though.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
I disagree with your description.

I don't think she acted like she had something to hide, I think her political opponents were simply under the impression there was something juicy in there and the general feeling that people were "owed" a transcript.
Click to expand...

The allegation throughout the primaries was that she collected $675,000 for something, and the something was kept secret. If she had just said "Here's what I said, and I meant every word," it would have made Sanders look foolish.There would be no email scandal either if she had been more upfront when questions were first raised.
 
Bob001 said:
The allegation throughout the primaries was that she collected $675,000 for something, and the something was kept secret. If she had just said "Here's what I said, and I meant every word," it would have made Sanders look foolish.
Click to expand...

Then they would say they gave you that much money for boring speeches. Must have been a cover for bribery.

There would be no email scandal either if she had been more upfront when questions were first raised.
Click to expand...

Laughable.
 
Tony Stark said:
Then they would say they gave you that much money for boring speeches. Must have been a cover for bribery.
Click to expand...
But that's what they said anyway. At least she could have responded with the facts.

Laughable.
Click to expand...
You think it would have hurt her more than what she actually did? That's what's laughable.
 
Bob001 said:
But that's what they said anyway. At least she could have responded with the facts.
Click to expand...

I fail to see why the winner should submit to ridiculous demands from the loser.

You think it would have hurt her more than what she actually did? That's what's laughable.
Click to expand...

That's a strawman. I know that the Republicans and the media would have made it a scandal no matter what she said.
 
Last edited:
The Don said:
Unfortunately there is a big difference between someone who is pro-Hillary (or at least not anti-Hillary) reading those speeches and considering them in full and a partisan hack taking one or two phrases out of context and use them as a weapon to bash her.

For example, the article mentions that she praises Chinese President Xi Jinping - I'm sure some of those words could be used to imply that she is anti American. Likewise he apparently says that the US has a strong "know nothing" streak - that sounds like an attack on middle-America to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

We've seen this right here on this board with a few sentences alleged quoted from the speeches being used to attack Clinton, even when the comments appear innocuous by and large. I guess when you've been subjected to a 20 year long witch hunt your bound to be more than a little cagey.

Bob001 said:
It goes back to her behavior. She acted like she had something to hide even when she apparently didn't, a characteristic she has displayed before. If she had just said "Publish and be damned," there would have been no Goldman Sachs issue.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but this is disingenuous at best. As stated the woman has been subjected to a 20 year with witch hunt that has spawned untold conspiracy theories, if she did release the full transcripts you can bet we would have been subjected to far more nonsense, not one Goldman Sachs issue but a dozen spun out of the zealous quote mining by the Trump supporters.
 
Last edited:
Garrison said:
....
I'm sorry but this is disingenuous at best. As stated the woman has been subjected to a 20 year with witch hunt that has spawned untold conspiracy theories, if she did release the full transcripts you can bet we would have been subjected to far more nonsense, not one Goldman Sachs issue but a dozen spun out of the zealous quote mining by the Trump supporters.
Click to expand...

Sitting on the transcripts allowed her enemies to imagine/postulate literally anything. Actual facts would at least have set limits to the debate. She might have had to explain and justify what she did say, but she couldn't have been accused of hiding what he didn't say. Maybe it's just me: I have a bias in favor of information and transparency. I'd like to see Trump's tax returns and the outtakes from his TV shows, too.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom