Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Does it matter? Why isn't the MSM themselves talking about the latter in lieu of the former?

 

Well, a presidential candidate suggested that people shoot his opponent. That's moderately newsworthy.

Shes a f*ing POS. Shame on all America is she gets elected.

 

Agreed. We are all responsible.

Posted (edited)

Does it matter? Why isn't the MSM themselves talking about the latter in lieu of the former?

 

Because it's bigger news when the Republican nominee suggests/jokes/insinuates (whatever you want to call it) that assassinating the Democratic nominee is something worth pondering aloud.

 

Even if you want to contort yourself into a knot attempting to explain what he meant to say, it doesn't matter. He once again demonstrates that he cannot help himself. A disciplined candidate would be shredding Hillary with the email and foundation stuff, but he simply cannot allow someone else to be in the spotlight, even if it is to his benefit.

Edited by Magox
Posted (edited)

dayum..sh#t be gettin' real here. Those mofos challenging clinton and DNC be dyin'

 

Since the Democratic National Committee emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all been found dead under what could be questionable circumstances, Alexander wrote. Some including Bernie Sanders supporters suspect the Clintons were behind the deaths, just more episodes in the alleged Clinton body count dating back to the 1990s.

 

She cited the recent deaths of Democratic National Committee worker Seth Rich on July 10; Shawn Lucas, who helped serve the DNC with a summons in a fraud allegation, on Aug. 2; and John Ashe, the former president of the United Nations General Assembly, on June 22, just before he was scheduled to begin pretrial meetings involving shady financial dealings regarding a former Clinton crony.

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/08/3-dead-spark-new-interest-in-clinton-body-count/#T6HSgAPm5RFH1vbR.99

Edited by truth on hold
Posted

Shes a f*ing POS. Shame on all America is she gets elected.

 

The ruthless Clinton machine had it locked up before the primaries ever started .

 

No credible candidate would waste there time trying to beat her except Sanders .

 

The closed primary at least in NY meant Independents like myself could not vote. I would have voted Kasich.

 

I wonder what the Republican winner or Democrat would have been if Independents were allowed to vote.

Posted

 

Well, a presidential candidate suggested that people shoot his opponent. That's moderately newsworthy.

 

Agreed. We are all responsible.

You mean like Sarah Palin did? The media went bat-**** crazy over that too.

I'm no Trump fan, but what I think he was suggesting was that the 2nd Amendment "people" don't vote for Hillary, not to shoot her. But his pea-brain didn't allow him to form the proper sentence structure.

Picture-11.png

Posted

 

Because it's bigger news when the Republican nominee suggests/jokes/insinuates (whatever you want to call it) that assassinating the Democratic nominee is something worth pondering aloud.

 

Even if you want to contort yourself into a knot attempting to explain what he meant to say, it doesn't matter. He once again demonstrates that he cannot help himself. A disciplined candidate would be shredding Hillary with the email and foundation stuff, but he simply cannot allow someone else to be in the spotlight, even if it is to his benefit.

 

In a nutshell. If Trump would stop saying stupid stuff and ask the media about the issues with Hillary, maybe they'd probe it more. But your last line is the truth.

 

I'm no Trump fan, but what I think he was suggesting was that the 2nd Amendment "people" don't vote for Hillary, not to shoot her. But his pea-brain didn't allow him to form the proper sentence structure.

 

Then why not refer to the 'evangelical" or 'pro-life' people? Because he meant what he meant. He thinks he's on a TV show and can say what he wants. He's undisciplined, and it's embarrassing. He's the Billy Joe Hobert of the GOP.

 

And you know the worst part, at least for me? I spent more time than I cared defending a RINO like McCain (up until his mortgage bailout plan) and I tried even harder to defend Romney because the stuff he would get beat up on, like "binders full of women," was just the left being the left. But now I find myself, sadly, joining a chorus of leftist people whose ideology and company I simply can not stand, simply because Trump is, without question, the worst candidate I have ever seen pretend to be a conservative. Suddenly I'm not just ignoring, but I'm actually mocking Chris Christie, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram, Bill O'Reilly, Breitbart, Drudge, etc. because it's all just too embarrassing to watch.

Posted

Well, some of the stuff I think is a bit overblown. BUT, I do agree that she's rather shady, largely on the level of a great many of our politicians. That being said, I think Trump is dangerous due to his temperament. The other two... loony and don't have a shot. So in that regard, yes 'I'm with her', but I also am not exactly enthused by it, if that makes sense. I think if we 'survived' our last handful of Presidents, we'll be just fine with Clinton.

in your honest opinion. How does Hilary rate as a candidate? Ho many others would yo rather have?
Posted

 

Because it's bigger news when the Republican nominee suggests/jokes/insinuates (whatever you want to call it) that assassinating the Democratic nominee is something worth pondering aloud.

 

Even if you want to contort yourself into a knot attempting to explain what he meant to say, it doesn't matter. He once again demonstrates that he cannot help himself. A disciplined candidate would be shredding Hillary with the email and foundation stuff, but he simply cannot allow someone else to be in the spotlight, even if it is to his benefit.

I don't have to contort at all. I realize his words are his own worst enemy. But I also realize that that's all they are at this point. LIAR is far more dangerous because of what she's done, not just said.

 

My issues have to do with the media exposing what many have suspected all along: that they're liberally slanted. Which means that any non-lib candidate will have anything and everything scrutinized while real issues involving lib candidates are ignored. if it wasn't Trump, it would be another candidate. Romney proved that 4 years ago.

Posted

More on this: (zero hedge source, so...)

 

Wikileaks' Assange Hints Murdered DNC Staffer Was Email-Leaker, Offers $20k Reward For Info

 

The mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of 27-year-old Democratic-staffer Seth Rich (shot multiple times, and not robbed, at 420am near his home in Washington D.C., where no homicides have been reported within 1500 feet) have stirred Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to offer a $20,000 reward for information leading to a conviction. But it is Assange's comments during a Dutch TV interview that are most disturbing as he hinted that Rich - who was in charge of DNC voter expansion data - was the email-leaker and his death was a politically-motivated assassination.

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-10/wikileaks-assange-hints-murdered-dnc-staffer-was-email-leaker-offers-20k-reward-info

Posted

Clinton campaign/DNC/MEDIA has developed a new PR strategy.

 

All future corruption revelations about her are the work of Russia and can be ignored.

Posted

Nobody here thinks Trump was suggesting or even hinting that someone shoot Hillary, right?

 

What was he suggesting?

Posted

 

"Armed insurrection."

 

That's what "Second Amendment" means to his far-right supporters.

 

Good. A much better message than urging an assassination.

Posted

 

In a nutshell. If Trump would stop saying stupid stuff and ask the media about the issues with Hillary, maybe they'd probe it more. But your last line is the truth.

 

 

Then why not refer to the 'evangelical" or 'pro-life' people? Because he meant what he meant. He thinks he's on a TV show and can say what he wants. He's undisciplined, and it's embarrassing. He's the Billy Joe Hobert of the GOP.

 

And you know the worst part, at least for me? I spent more time than I cared defending a RINO like McCain (up until his mortgage bailout plan) and I tried even harder to defend Romney because the stuff he would get beat up on, like "binders full of women," was just the left being the left. But now I find myself, sadly, joining a chorus of leftist people whose ideology and company I simply can not stand, simply because Trump is, without question, the worst candidate I have ever seen pretend to be a conservative. Suddenly I'm not just ignoring, but I'm actually mocking Chris Christie, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram, Bill O'Reilly, Breitbart, Drudge, etc. because it's all just too embarrassing to watch.

Believe me, I feel your pain.

 

 

What was he suggesting?

That people who value their rights under the 2nd Amendment sack up and vote for him - not for Hillary because once she appoints her SCJs it's over and it'll be a sad day.

Posted

 

That people who value their rights under the 2nd Amendment sack up and vote for him - not for Hillary because once she appoints her SCJs it's over and it'll be a sad day.

 

So he's like Obama? He misspoke?

×
×
  • Create New...