Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, do understand that they were what we call "swingers" and they played with other couples. I can't prove that, but I do have friends who would swing with a couple that reported frequently playing with the Clintons. So that explains at least some of that.

Oh for pity's sake. Really? This is the crap you've stooped to, Hillary was a swinger? :rolleyes:
 
Well, do understand that they were what we call "swingers" and they played with other couples. I can't prove that, but I do have friends who would swing with a couple that reported frequently playing with the Clintons. So that explains at least some of that.

"Friends who swing with a couple who claims....? " I'll bet you have friends who have friends who claim to have been abducted by Martians, even if they haven't told you about it. Ken Starr spent five years and $70 million investigating the Clintons. Everything you know about Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones is from that. If anybody could have revealed anything close to what's you're talking about, it would have been out long ago. The Clintons have been among the most recognizable people in the world for a quarter-century, with some of the wealthiest and most powerful enemies. Is it conceivable that they could have behaved like this and kept it secret, especially considering that by many reports they don't even spend much time together?
 
"Friends who swing with a couple who claims....? " I'll bet you have friends who have friends who claim to have been abducted by Martians, even if they haven't told you about it. Ken Starr spent five years and $70 million investigating the Clintons. Everything you know about Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones is from that. If anybody could have revealed anything close to what's you're talking about, it would have been out long ago. The Clintons have been among the most recognizable people in the world for a quarter-century, with some of the wealthiest and most powerful enemies. Is it conceivable that they could have behaved like this and kept it secret, especially considering that by many reports they don't even spend much time together?

Well, we are not talking about the last 16 years. This was all when they were in Arkansas.

My friend and her guy haven't been active in the lifestyle for two decades or so, and I know her not through that but because we are both sex worker's rights activists. I trust her not to have made this up, and I trust her judgement that the couple they used to play with were trustworthy as well.

And I am not the only one saying this. If you do some searching you will find that this is a quite old rumor about them.

As for Ken Starr, being a swinger isn't anything he could have used to prosecute them, so even if he knew about it, and he likely did, he had no way to make that relevant to the Whitewater investigation.

And again, I do not think it is a negative, though I do think it puts DOMA into the category of hypocrisy.

I've been a swinger since the 1970s and sill occasionally attend club events. I used to help run a swinger's club here in the Chicago area, and I also helped put on BDSM events here.
 
Well, we are not talking about the last 16 years. This was all when they were in Arkansas.
.....

You mean when he was governor for 10 consecutive years, and a two-year term before that (ending when he was defeated for re-election), before which he was state Attorney General? The Clintons have been public figures for 40 years. You think their enemies -- especially in a rural, Bible Belt state -- wouldn't have used something like this against them if they could? Far less prominent people have been embarrassed, if not brought down, by far more private antics. I think the Clintons have plenty to answer for. I also know that people often boost their self-importance by lying about connections with celebrities.
 
Right, because she sat around baking cookies the whole time she was First Lady of AK and the US. She didn't really get a law degree, hasn't ever been involved in political issues....

I think she's very politically experienced, but just in a bad way. Her time in the senate was spent literally representing Wall Street, she was a terrible SoS, IMO, etc.
 
Fixed it for you...
Well, do understand that they were what we call "swingers" and they played with other couples. I can't prove that, but I do have friends who would swing with Kevin Bacon, who would swing with a couple that reported frequently playing with the Clintons. So that explains at least some of that.
 
I think she's very politically experienced, but just in a bad way. Her time in the senate was spent literally representing Wall Street, she was a terrible SoS, IMO, etc.
I'm slightly perplexed when I see this, as I frequently do in these threads. Cabinet members aren't exactly independent. For this criticism to be valid, this means you think Obama's foreign policy is/was terrible. Is this the case?

Out of curiosity, are you similarly on record here during her tenure? Same question for Ben and anyone else who thinks she was a terrible SoS (and who was a member during that time period).
 
I'm slightly perplexed when I see this, as I frequently do in these threads. Cabinet members aren't exactly independent. For this criticism to be valid, this means you think Obama's foreign policy is/was terrible. Is this the case?

Of course it's terrible. And Clinton did nothing to improve it.

Out of curiosity, are you similarly on record here during her tenure?

Why does it matter if I'm on record as saying it was bad? I'm certainly not on record ever claiming her tenure was any good.
 
I'm slightly perplexed when I see this, as I frequently do in these threads. Cabinet members aren't exactly independent. For this criticism to be valid, this means you think Obama's foreign policy is/was terrible. Is this the case?

Out of curiosity, are you similarly on record here during her tenure? Same question for Ben and anyone else who thinks she was a terrible SoS (and who was a member during that time period).


I am. Here are five examples from the big picture Syria thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8061298&postcount=383
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8073503&postcount=449
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8114251&postcount=645
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8400210&postcount=798
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8966240&postcount=1966

You're welcome. I noticed btw that you didn't reply to my explanation of why she was terrible a couple of days ago, so it would be welcomed to hear something about this from you, including in reply to the information provided in the linked posts.
 
Cabinet members aren't exactly independent. For this criticism to be valid, this means you think Obama's foreign policy is/was terrible. Is this the case?

Out of curiosity, are you similarly on record here during her tenure? Same question for Ben and anyone else who thinks she was a terrible SoS (and who was a member during that time period).

I lost interesting in politics for a while when I saw Obama/Clinton trying to overthrow Assad by funding terrorists, and I do think Obama's FP was terrible, although better than what most republicans would have done, probably. I get the sense that John Kerry talked Obama into making peace with Iran and Cuba when he came in as SoS.

My sense is that both Clinton and Obama agree with the FP think tanks who push regional hegemony in the middle east via regime changes, and the only real difference there with Republicans are the timeline and methods (Did you watch the SOTU and notice the angry, scowling joint chiefs? Pretty sure they REALLY wanted to bomb and invade both Iran and Syria.)
 
I am. Here are five examples from the big picture Syria thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8061298&postcount=383
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8073503&postcount=449
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8114251&postcount=645
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8400210&postcount=798
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8966240&postcount=1966

You're welcome. I noticed btw that you didn't reply to my explanation of why she was terrible a couple of days ago, so it would be welcomed to hear something about this from you, including in reply to the information provided in the linked posts.

Did you see the interview with the Al Jazeera journalists who resigned because they were forbidden to report accurately on Syria? Or see the video evidence that it was the "rebels" (many, if not most of whom aren't even Syrian) who released the chemical weapons? AND in the debate last, night Hillary said "IF Assad HAD used chemical weapons, it would have been horrible, and I'm proud of getting them out of his hands!"
 
Did you see the interview with the Al Jazeera journalists who resigned because they were forbidden to report accurately on Syria?


Yes, there have been several Al Jazeera journalists resigning over this, including Aktham Suliman, the head of the Berlin office which is likely not the one you are referring to.

edit: btw, there's a great documentary about the media (not least Arab (Qatar and Saudi)) role in the Syria catastrophe, already from 2012 as well.

Or see the video evidence that it was the "rebels" (many, if not most of whom aren't even Syrian) who released the chemical weapons?


I don't know which specific video evidence you're referring to, but was involved (at our wiki and elsewhere) with the open source investigation that led to this being almost a certainty.

AND in the debate last, night Hillary said "IF Assad HAD used chemical weapons, it would have been horrible, and I'm proud of getting them out of his hands!"


Hahaha, yes indeed I noticed that.
 
Last edited:
Oh, and sweet Jesus, Bahrain. Clinton/Obama on Bahrain. Unforgivably awful.
 
I am. Here are five examples from the big picture Syria thread: ...
You're welcome. I noticed btw that you didn't reply to my explanation of why she was terrible a couple of days ago, so it would be welcomed to hear something about this from you, including in reply to the information provided in the linked posts.
Thanks, also to kellyb and Zig.

I'm not arguing that she was a good SoS, mainly because I don't know how to separate the SoS from administration policies. I'm simply trying to understand to what extent criticisms are based on 2016 partisanship. You've made it pretty clear that your criticism is consistent. I don't have the time for a deep dive into your links at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom