80
   

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

 
 
snood
 
  2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 11:22 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Looks like we'll be hearing a lot from Clinton victims. I predict a Cosby-like Avalanche, unless they prefer to get paid off by the Clinton Machine.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/264988-bill-clinton-rape-accuser-hillary-tried-to-silence-me#

This line of attack should be below you.
revelette2
 
  2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 12:34 pm
@snood,
Have you read her account of how Hillary tried to silence her? It really doesn't make any sense, at least to me it doesn't.

Quote:
About six months after her initial interviews in 1999, Broaddrick told the Drudge Report that mere weeks after the alleged assault, Hillary Clinton had tried to thank her for her silence on the matter at a political rally:


"[Hillary] came directly to me as soon as she hit the door. I had been there only a few minutes, I only wanted to make an appearance and leave. She caught me and took my hand and said 'I am so happy to meet you. I want you to know that we appreciate everything you do for Bill.' I started to turn away and she held onto my hand and reiterated her phrase -- looking less friendly and repeated her statement — 'Everything you do for Bill'. I said nothing. She wasn't letting me get away until she made her point. She talked low, the smile faded on the second thank you. I just released her hand from mine and left the gathering."

source

Does that read to you like Hillary was thanking Broaddrick for her silence on the alleged assault, or just thanking Broaddrick for her support of Bill Clinton? After all, Broaddrick is there at a political rally, why wouldn't Hillary thank her? Makes much more sense than to think Bill Clinton rushed right home and told Hillary he raped a woman and then Hillary basically admitting to it by thanking her for keeping silent about it.
0 Replies
 
blindspot
 
  -3  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 01:06 pm
Quote:
Billionaire Sex Offender's Phone Book Contained E-Mail Addresses, 21 Phone Numbers For Bill Clinton


What will we call Bill if Hillary is elected? The First Pedophile?
Quote:
As part of a civil suit filed against Epstein by several of his victims, lawyers for the women floated the possibility of subpoenaing Clinton since he “might well be a source of relevant information” about Epstein’s activities.

While Clinton was never deposed, lawyers obtained Epstein’s computerized phone directory, which included “e-mail addresses for Clinton along with 21 phone numbers for him, including those for his assistant (Doug Band),” according to a court filing.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-and-jeffrey-epstein-908671
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  0  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 04:34 pm
@snood,
I have zero interest in cloaking someone in a crime - no matter who they are.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  0  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 04:37 pm
@Blickers,
She said it was assault back then. As did several others. The Clintons were able to shut it up.

Not sure it will go away for them this time. Guess we'll see.
Blickers
 
  1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 05:52 pm
@Lash,
You're not going to see much. She didn't convince anyone back then, and she won't now.
roger
 
  1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 06:22 pm
@Blickers,
Didn't convince anyone? That statement is obviously false.
Blickers
 
  3  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 07:12 pm
@roger,
Didn't convince the majority.
blatham
 
  4  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 08:02 pm
Not sure why anyone is bothering with these rightwing folks on this stuff.

We know that Hillary was responsible for the murder made to look like suicide of Vince Foster. We know that the Clinton's were selling cocaine in Arkansas. We know Max Cleland lost his limbs in Viet Nam while out on a drunk. We know John Kerry's wound (for which he was falsely awarded the Purple Heart) was self-inflicted. We know Obama was not born in America and is a Muslim. We know Hillary's assistant is a Muslim infiltrator.

We know, in short, how the right plays this game. Engaging folks who so zestily accept such stories and then forward them in discussion is futile. Don't do it. You just mess up the board.
blindspot
 
  0  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 09:01 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
Not sure why anyone is bothering with these rightwing folks on this stuff.


Are you denying that Epstien had those numbers? Because if you are, you are mistaken.

Why don't you just say, that you realize Hillary is hopelessly corrupt and morally bankrupt, but that is cool with you.
roger
 
  0  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 09:54 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Not sure why anyone is bothering with these rightwing folks on this stuff.

We know that Hillary was responsible for the murder made to look like suicide of Vince Foster. We know that the Clinton's were selling cocaine in Arkansas. We know Max Cleland lost his limbs in Viet Nam while out on a drunk. We know John Kerry's wound (for which he was falsely awarded the Purple Heart) was self-inflicted. We know Obama was not born in America and is a Muslim. We know Hillary's assistant is a Muslim infiltrator.


Well, sure, but sometimes we bring it up just to be annoying.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 09:55 pm
@Blickers,
That's possible.
Blickers
 
  1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:30 pm
@roger,
From 1999:
Poll: Most believe media should lay off Broaddrick allegation
By Keating Holland/CNN

March 1, 1999
Web posted at: 5:00 p.m. EST (2200 GMT)

WASHINGTON (March 1) -- About a third of all Americans believe that Juanita Broaddrick's allegation that Bill Clinton raped her in 1978 is definitely true or probably true, and two-thirds of the public thinks that the media should stop pursuing the story, a new CNN/USA Today/ Gallup Poll shows.

Fourteen percent, according to the survey, are convinced that Broaddrick's charge that Clinton raped her is definitely not true, while another 40 percent say that the charge is probably not true.

Most Americans do not believe that Broaddrick has gone public with her allegations to harm Clinton for political reasons. How has the charge affected the public's view of Clinton? Only 32 percent have a positive opinion of him as a person, but that is down only 3 points (within the margin of sampling error) from two weeks ago.

So NBC's airing of the Broaddrick interview last week did not produce a statistically significant change in the public's view of Clinton. His approval rating, now at 66 percent, has also not suffered a significant decline in the wake of the Broaddrick charges, the poll indicated.

The survey of 1,013 adult Americans was conducted February 26-28, and has a margin of sampling error of +/- 3 percentage points.

Here are the questions and results:

Do you think Juanita Broaddrick's allegation that Bill Clinton raped her in 1978 is definitely true, probably true, probably not true, or definitely not true?
Definitely true 5%
Probably true 29
Probably not true 40
Definitely not true 14

Thinking about Juanita Broaddrick's allegation against President Clinton, which of the following statements do you agree with more: This is an important matter that the press should continue to cover and investigate, or this matter is no big deal and the press should stop pursuing this story.
Press should stop pursuing this story 66%
Press should continue to cover this story 29

Why do you think Juanita Broaddrick has gone public with her allegations against Bill Clinton -- mostly to harm Clinton for political reasons, or mostly to get her story out for personal reasons?
Harm Clinton 31%
Personal reasons 55

Thinking about Bill Clinton as a person, do you have a positive or negative opinion of him?
Now Feb. 12-13
Positive 32% 35%
Negative 60 57

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Bill Clinton is handling his job as president?
Now Feb. 12-13
Approve 66% 68%
Disapprove 31 30
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:33 pm
@Blickers,
This proves to me that surveys are a mixed bag - of nuts. Wink
0 Replies
 
blindspot
 
  -1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:37 pm
@Blickers,
Quote:
From 1999:


Funny you should bring up the past when most people are saying Bills past doesn't matter. Why should your article matter?
Blickers
 
  2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:42 pm
@blindspot,
Say haven't you been reading the thread? Or are you just a troll who pops in to leave his droppings and departs?

I told Lash that nobody believed Broaddrick then and they won't now. Roger said that there had to be some people who believed Broaddrick, I said the majority did not and found this poll to back up my assertion.

You should at least read the the threads you comment on.
blindspot
 
  0  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:49 pm
@Blickers,
Quote:
Say haven't you been reading the thread?


I have been reading the thread and see people bending over backwards to kiss Hillarys ass. I see one person that finds her contemptable. And being in total agreement I couldn't let another bullshit excuse go by.
Blickers
 
  2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:52 pm
@blindspot,
Well if you were reading the thread you wouldn't need to question why I posted the poll from back then-you would know.

You weren't reading the thread at all, you're just a troll who comes by and makes comments for his side.
blindspot
 
  -2  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 10:56 pm
@Blickers,
Quote:
for his side.


You admit there is another side? Laughing
Blickers
 
  1  
Fri 8 Jan, 2016 11:17 pm
@blindspot,
There's always another side. Nobody said it had to make sense, though.
 

Related Topics

The Pro Hillary Thread - Discussion by snood
get this woman out of my view/politics - Discussion by ossobuco
Hillary Clinton hospitalized - Discussion by jcboy
Has Hillary's Time Come? - Discussion by Phoenix32890
I WANT HILLARY TO RUN IN 2012 - Discussion by farmerman
Hillary's The Secretary Of State..It's Official - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
Hillary the "JOKESTER"?? - Discussion by woiyo
Hillary Rebuked by Iraqi Leader - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 12:31:45