PDA

View Full Version : The Official unofficial Hillary Clinton Thread...



Pages : [1] 2

RonW
04-14-2015, 09:56 AM
Might as well try to keep all that is coming on this subject in one place for not only easy reference, but to keep the bilge less cluttered up with democrat bashing and reserved for more important republican bashing.

So all the good, bad, sad, pathetic, stupid and laughable things to come on bill's wife. Oh and the corrupt and illegal stuff too..

Oh here is one to kick start the fun and games ..

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On Monday, Hillary Clinton was stopped at an Ohio Chipotle with top aide Huma Abedin en route to Iowa.

ABC News reported that “according to Manager Charles Wright, no one recognized Clinton, who was wearing sunglasses.” She reportedly “ordered a chicken bowl with guacamole, a chicken salad, and fruit juice.”

Clinton announced her candidacy on Sunday and embarked on a road trip in what has been called her “Scooby van.”

Clinton will meet with community college students in Iowa on Tuesday.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/Hillary-Chipotle--640x480.jpg


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/mystery-machine-AP-640x480.jpg

Tom Wilkinson
04-14-2015, 10:40 AM
That is a kick ass van.

Lew Barrett
04-14-2015, 10:46 AM
It is, but it isn't hers. She's in a minivan. Ron starts the thread as he will continue it, with false and implied but inaccurate innuendo. ;)

RonW
04-14-2015, 10:55 AM
It is, but it isn't hers. She's in a minivan. Ron starts the thread as he will continue it, with false and implied but inaccurate innuendo. ;)

Nope, no where in my post is it stated that is her van .......But it does state that she stopped to eat in Ohio and nobody cared or asked for her autograph..

Hopefully some of the posts to come on hillary will be far more interesting....

Tom Wilkinson
04-14-2015, 11:02 AM
I just like the van.

bobbys
04-14-2015, 11:03 AM
Hillary and Huma lookin good, kinda a salt and pepper thing goin on!.

They can take me for a ride in the scooby van anytime!

S.V. Airlie
04-14-2015, 11:05 AM
Nope, no where in my post is it stated that is her van .......But it does state that she stopped to eat in Ohio and nobody cared or asked for her autograph..

Hopefully some of the posts to come on hillary will be far more interesting....Yup, her eating lunch is HEADLLINE news for sure! WHOOPIE!

Peter Malcolm Jardine
04-14-2015, 11:09 AM
Personally, I think it's appropriate that the woman who is going to be the next president should have multiple threads.


BTW, that is one cool van.

genglandoh
04-14-2015, 11:30 AM
I wonder if Bill was on the roof with an intern.

Couple Caught Having Sex on Chipotle Roof
www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Couple-Arrested-for-Having-Sex-on-Chipotle-Roof-267032481.html#ixzz37bGIOyfO (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Couple-Arrested-for-Having-Sex-on-Chipotle-Roof-267032481.html#ixzz37bGIOyfO)

Lew Barrett
04-14-2015, 11:59 AM
Nope, no where in my post is it stated that is her van .......But it does state that she stopped to eat in Ohio and nobody cared or asked for her autograph..

Hopefully some of the posts to come on hillary will be far more interesting....


As I said, innuendo.

Jim Bow
04-14-2015, 12:03 PM
Of the four, Rubio, Paul, Cruz, and Clinton. She's the one I'd have a beer with.

RonW
04-14-2015, 12:09 PM
Of the four, Rubio, Paul, Cruz, and Clinton. She's the one I'd have a beer with.

I bet she's got some really good stories about Bill......

RonW
04-14-2015, 12:30 PM
Here's some more news concerning our elite .......1% er..


HILLARY RESIGNS FROM CLINTON FOUNDATION BOARD

--Hours after announcing her presidential bid on Sunday, Hillary Clinton resigned from the board of her family’s Clinton Foundation.

“While I have cherished my time serving on the board and engaging in the day-to-day work of the Foundation, in order to devote myself to this new, all-encompassing endeavor, I have resigned from the board of directors effective today,” Clinton wrote in an e-mail the New York Times obtained. “As I step down from that position, I know that I am leaving the Foundation in great hands. I am equally as excited that Chelsea will continue to lead the Foundation’s mission with Bill, building upon our family’s commitment to help all people live their best life story.”

Clinton and her family’s foundation have been hammered for hypocritically accepting millions in donations from repressive Middle Eastern regimes. The Clinton Foundation has also come under fire for having stopped disclosing its donors since 2010.

In addition, Clinton breached a disclosure agreement with the Obama administration while she was secretary of state. According to a Reuters report, the State Department did not review “any new or increased contributions to CHAI by foreign governments” while Clinton served as secretary of state even though the Clinton Foundation reportedly received “millions of dollars in new or increased payments from at least seven foreign governments.” Clinton had reportedly promised the Obama administration that the Clinton Foundation would disclose “any new or increased contributions to” the foundation by foreign governments during her tenure at the State Department.

According to the Times, the Clinton Foundation may “consider changes this week in their donor policies,” including “more frequent disclosures of donors.”

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/03/ap_ap-photo279-640x425.jpg

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/13/hillary-resigns-from-clinton-foundation-board/

switters
04-14-2015, 01:15 PM
In defense of the ad, the Clinton campaign issued the following statement: “America loves kittens. Loving kittens makes America strong. Hillary is ready for kittens. Kittens are ready for Hillary. Meow meow meow meow.”

ever notice that when Borowitz is not on the front page of the bilge....he is making fun of Democrats.Y>

bobbys
04-14-2015, 01:21 PM
In defense of the ad, the Clinton campaign issued the following statement: “America loves kittens. Loving kittens makes America strong. Hillary is ready for kittens. Kittens are ready for Hillary. Meow meow meow meow.”

ever notice that when Borowitz is not on the front page of the bilge....he is making fun of Democrats.Y>
.

Are you telling me Keith and DavidG pass on those?

LeeG
04-14-2015, 02:06 PM
http://www.maliasmiles.com/ForFun/Images/StrangeRVs/Eric1.jpg

switters
04-14-2015, 02:12 PM
.

Are you telling me Keith and DavidG pass on those?

Haven't seen anything from John Oliver lately, hmmmm.

RonW
04-14-2015, 02:26 PM
Oh no, looks like more controversy over who she really is and what her vision is for us peasants............

AFTER RECEIVING AT LEAST $200K PER SPEECH, HILLARY ATTACKS CEO PAY

On Monday, pandering to her party’s left-wing that has always distrusted her close ties to Wall Street, Hillary Clinton, who made at least $200,000 per speech since leaving the State Department and is reportedly in the top one-hundredth of the 1%, attacked CEO pay in an email to supporters, saying that everyday Americans are struggling at a time “when the average CEO makes about 300 times what the average worker makes.”

According to a Bloomberg report, in the 16 months since leaving the State Department, Clinton “earned at least $12 million” from speaking fees and book contracts. She reportedly made at least $200,000 a speech–the University of Buffalo reportedly paid $275,000 for Clinton to speak at an October 23 event. Bill Clinton, according to the report, has made at least $105 million in speaking fees alone (some speeches reportedly pay as much as $750,000) since leaving the White House. Bloomberg noted that Hillary’s “earnings represent a fraction of the Clinton family’s total income and yet were large enough to rank her not only in the top 1 percent of the nation’s earners but in the top one-hundredth of the 1 percent.”

Clinton was widely lampooned after she matter-of-factly declared that she was “dead broke” after her family left the White House. A Washington Post analysis of Clinton’s finances revealed how tone deaf her “dead broke” remarks were. According to the Post report, “tax returns Hillary Clinton released during her 2008 campaign show that the Clintons made $87.3 million in joint adjusted gross income between 2001 and 2006.” The Post also noted that “in 2010, then-Secretary Clinton’s financial disclosures revealed a net worth totaling between roughly $10 and $50 million” and “in 2012, the last year for which she disclosed finances, Clinton’s net worth was estimated to be between $5 million and $25 million,” which was the same range that she reported while she was in the Senate. The family’s “confirmed income between 2001 and 2012 was at least $136.5 million.”

Last decade, the Clintons also purchased a $1.7-million home in New York and a $2.85-million home in Washington, D.C. She recently told Univision’s Jorge Ramos in an interview in which she uncomfortably conceded that she was worth millions that her family would not be selling those homes in the near future.

Bloomberg News predicted that that progressives will “question how Clinton will appeal to working-class voters and serve as the party’s chief crusader against stagnant wages and the gap between rich and poor, given that she has received millions from financial firms and other corporations.” And Mother Jones, the left-wing magazine, did exactly that, writing: “Hillary’s for-profit speaking gigs raise a serious question for a possible presidential candidate: Is she being courted by and/or providing access to the well-heeled companies and industry groups—including Goldman Sachs, the Carlyle Group, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, the National Association of Realtors, and the US Green Building Council, among many others—that have paid her to speak?”

Clinton is blatantly trying to play the “income inequality”/”class warfare” card to appeal to President Barack Obama’s coalition and progressives who are yearning for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) to primary her. Warren has hammered Wall Street and income inequality, which prompted even Warren Buffett to call her out for being “angry and demonizing.” Warren recently responded by asking, “Do you think if I smiled more at banking committee hearings that Wall Street would put me on their Christmas Card list? Give me a break.”

In her announcement video, Clinton said she wanted to be a champion for “everyday Americans.” She has vowed to meet with voters in smaller settings instead of large rallies, been traveling in her “Scooby van” and stopped by places like Chipotle (while wearing sunglasses indoors) in blatant attempts to seem “normal” and “in touch” with “everyday Americans.”

Obama and Democrats incessantly demonized Mitt Romney for representing the 1% in 2012, and it was a strategy that worked for the Obama campaign. Bloomberg News pointed out that the “annual U.S. mean wage for all occupations was $46,440 as of May 2013,” and in the 2012 election, exit polls found that among Obama supporters, 60% made $50,000 or less. Bloomberg noted that 41% of the 2012 electorate also made $50,000 or less.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/14/after-receiving-at-least-200k-per-speech-hillary-attacks-ceo-pay/

bobbys
04-14-2015, 03:32 PM
Every thing the Clintons do is carefully staged, This is to show she is "everywoman" just chowing down on every mans food. ?

Bobcat
04-14-2015, 03:38 PM
Every thing the Clintons do is carefully staged, This is to show she is "everywoman" just chowing down on every mans food. ?

and the same is true for any politician, especially those running for president

Keith Wilson
04-14-2015, 03:42 PM
Ah, the old 'rich candidates are wrong to favor policies that help anyone but themselves' bullsh!t. http://www.reduser.net/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif If you don't see the logical fallacy here, you're not thinking.

Given the choice between two rich candidates, one of whom supports polices to make economic inequality greater, one of whom supports policies to make it less, I'll pick the latter, thank you.

ccmanuals
04-14-2015, 03:44 PM
The rich candidate ploy was not used much during the last Presidential election season by conservatives. In fact it wasn't mentioned at all.

But, never too late to pull it out and dust it off.

RonW
04-15-2015, 03:25 PM
Doesn't anyone have anything nice to say that they can add to the thread, anything .?

Maybe we could outline Hillary's agenda.........whenever she decides to inform us......

RonW
04-15-2015, 07:43 PM
Here are things you might be surprised to learn are younger than Hillary Clinton is now.

1. Saran Wrap

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hqdefault.jpg

2. Double “A” Batteries

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/8680_0.jpg

3. “The Lone Ranger“

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/lone-ranger-TV-title.jpg

4. NATO

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/general-cold-war-history0.jpg

5. The People’s Republic of China

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/0013729e40c30df28e4614.jpg

6. Israel

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/download.jpg

RonW
04-15-2015, 07:46 PM
7. Agatha Christie’s “Witness for the Prosecution“

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/book.jpg

8. Bette Davis in “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane“

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/psycho.jpg

9. The Polaroid

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/polaro9.gif

10. The Answering Machine

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/elecsecy.jpg

11. Power Steering

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/wheel2.jpg

Tom Wilkinson
04-15-2015, 07:48 PM
Doesn't anyone have anything nice to say that they can add to the thread, anything .?

Maybe we could outline Hillary's agenda.........whenever she decides to inform us......

I said it was a nice van. Kick ass van actually.

RonW
04-16-2015, 08:49 AM
CHIPOTLE MANAGER: HILLARY DIDN’T LEAVE TIP

--Hillary Clinton did not leave a tip at the Ohio Chipotle she visited on Monday en route to Iowa.
Charles Wright, the Chipotle manager, told Bloomberg that Hillary’s bill “was $20 and some change, and they paid with $21 and left.”
Wright said that “we get a bunch of tips” in the tip jar but Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin, who accompanied her on the trip and paid for the lunch, did not put their change in the tip jar.
The Clinton campaign tipped off mainstream media outlets about Hillary’s trip to Chipotle to make her seem like an “everyday American.” Chipotle later released surveillance video of Clinton (wearing sunglasses indoors) and Abedin ordering their lunch.
As conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh pointed out, the “everyday Americans” who work at Chipotle get to take home a little extra money from tips left in the tip jar.
“I would like to know if she left anything in the tip jar, because that would be an indication that she understands the average, ordinary, everyman that she seeks to represent,” Limbaugh said. “I mean, that’s where the people that work at Chipotle, that’s where they make a little extra, in the tip jar, and I haven’t heard a word about whether or not she visited the tip jar, whether she put anything in it or not.”
According to a Politico report, the 25-year-old Chipotle worker who “cooked the chicken that went into the burrito bowl Hillary Clinton ordered” makes “$8.20 an hour and splits rent with two roommates” while the “29-year-old general manager used to work three jobs and now is thrilled to be able to have just this one.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/16/chipotle-manager-hillary-didnt-leave-tip/

Tom Wilkinson
04-16-2015, 08:57 AM
It's pretty uncommon to tip at restaurants where you carry your own food and bus your own table. Is this really all you got?

Frikking cool van by the way.

Garret
04-16-2015, 09:02 AM
Here are things you might be surprised to learn are younger than Hillary Clinton is now.


Younger than me too. But then lots of things are. So - Obama's too young, Clinton's too old. Who's in baby bear's bed that's just right?

Sheesh.

bobbys
04-16-2015, 09:55 AM
CHIPOTLE MANAGER: HILLARY DIDN’T LEAVE TIP

--Hillary Clinton did not leave a tip at the Ohio Chipotle she visited on Monday en route to Iowa.
Charles Wright, the Chipotle manager, told Bloomberg that Hillary’s bill “was $20 and some change, and they paid with $21 and left.”
Wright said that “we get a bunch of tips” in the tip jar but Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin, who accompanied her on the trip and paid for the lunch, did not put their change in the tip jar.
The Clinton campaign tipped off mainstream media outlets about Hillary’s trip to Chipotle to make her seem like an “everyday American.” Chipotle later released surveillance video of Clinton (wearing sunglasses indoors) and Abedin ordering their lunch.
As conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh pointed out, the “everyday Americans” who work at Chipotle get to take home a little extra money from tips left in the tip jar.
“I would like to know if she left anything in the tip jar, because that would be an indication that she understands the average, ordinary, everyman that she seeks to represent,” Limbaugh said. “I mean, that’s where the people that work at Chipotle, that’s where they make a little extra, in the tip jar, and I haven’t heard a word about whether or not she visited the tip jar, whether she put anything in it or not.”
According to a Politico report, the 25-year-old Chipotle worker who “cooked the chicken that went into the burrito bowl Hillary Clinton ordered” makes “$8.20 an hour and splits rent with two roommates” while the “29-year-old general manager used to work three jobs and now is thrilled to be able to have just this one.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/16/chipotle-manager-hillary-didnt-leave-tip/
.

To be fair Hillary has said she was dead broke. come to think of it the manager could have comped the meals and the cook could have thrown in a little gas money.

bobbys
04-16-2015, 09:58 AM
CHIPOTLE MANAGER: HILLARY DIDN’T LEAVE TIP

--Hillary Clinton did not leave a tip at the Ohio Chipotle she visited on Monday en route to Iowa.
Charles Wright, the Chipotle manager, told Bloomberg that Hillary’s bill “was $20 and some change, and they paid with $21 and left.”
Wright said that “we get a bunch of tips” in the tip jar but Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin, who accompanied her on the trip and paid for the lunch, did not put their change in the tip jar.
The Clinton campaign tipped off mainstream media outlets about Hillary’s trip to Chipotle to make her seem like an “everyday American.” Chipotle later released surveillance video of Clinton (wearing sunglasses indoors) and Abedin ordering their lunch.
As conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh pointed out, the “everyday Americans” who work at Chipotle get to take home a little extra money from tips left in the tip jar.
“I would like to know if she left anything in the tip jar, because that would be an indication that she understands the average, ordinary, everyman that she seeks to represent,” Limbaugh said. “I mean, that’s where the people that work at Chipotle, that’s where they make a little extra, in the tip jar, and I haven’t heard a word about whether or not she visited the tip jar, whether she put anything in it or not.”
According to a Politico report, the 25-year-old Chipotle worker who “cooked the chicken that went into the burrito bowl Hillary Clinton ordered” makes “$8.20 an hour and splits rent with two roommates” while the “29-year-old general manager used to work three jobs and now is thrilled to be able to have just this one.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/16/chipotle-manager-hillary-didnt-leave-tip/.

Tip jar empty?..

broke woman drive up in a scooby van on a road trip..

You do the math here.

jclays
04-16-2015, 10:01 AM
It's pretty uncommon to tip at restaurants where you carry your own food and bus your own table. Is this really all you got?

Frikking cool van by the way.
Agreed. I see tip jars all the time even in drive thru lines.

ccmanuals
04-16-2015, 10:16 AM
Tipping at Chipotle, jeez, that's fricken hilarious.

When is the last time anyone in the country tipped at a fast food place. :)

You can smell the fear on the republicans when all they got is this stupid stuff.

Norman Bernstein
04-16-2015, 10:30 AM
There's clearly NO detail too small to fixate on, if it can generate some animosity towards the woman. Sarah Palin got loads of criticism on this forum... but my criticism of the woman was for substantive things, not trivial crap like whether she tips at fast food restaurants.

For the record, I tip generously at full service restaurants.... but NEVER tip at fast food places. Anyone want to criticize me too? :)

switters
04-16-2015, 11:01 AM
Stupid red team focusing on Candidate Clinton's every campaign move rather than focusing on the specific policy and platform planks she has been promoting during her campaign.

switters
04-16-2015, 11:10 AM
One issue she has talked about, campaign finance reform, I'm a bit skeptical.


NYT explains it better than I do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/17/us/politics/another-clinton-now-vows-to-fix-political-finance-system.html

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-16-2015, 11:12 AM
Ronnie's been sipping on "snarky juice" again. Be advised, Ronnie, that no amount of snarkiness is going to keep Hillary out of the Oval Office. If you want to fight this battle you may have to acquire some weapons beyond what you have used in the past.

RonW
04-16-2015, 11:19 AM
Stupid red team focusing on Candidate Clinton's every campaign move rather than focusing on the specific policy and platform planks she has been promoting during her campaign.

Well uhh, uhh, well anyhow feel free to post Hillary's clinton's agenda, campaign promises, pledges to the peasants, what ever just as soon as anyone finds out what they are, and so far the most we have heard from her is.... I is the one, I is the one......

I always tip at tip jars , but then I ain't broke and strapped for cash like hillary is.........I wonder why she didn't buy a campaign bus, instead of using a minivan ?

bobbys
04-16-2015, 11:29 AM
There's clearly NO detail too small to fixate on, if it can generate some animosity towards the woman. Sarah Palin got loads of criticism on this forum... but my criticism of the woman was for substantive things, not trivial crap like whether she tips at fast food restaurants.

For the record, I tip generously at full service restaurants.... but NEVER tip at fast food places. Anyone want to criticize me too? :).

On HCs Gonzo tour she met with typical people who just happened to be party hacks that were driven in..

LOL.

Dave Wright
04-16-2015, 12:13 PM
There's clearly NO detail too small to fixate on, if it can generate some animosity towards the woman. Sarah Palin got loads of criticism on this forum... but my criticism of the woman was for substantive things, not trivial crap like whether she tips at fast food restaurants.

For the record, I tip generously at full service restaurants.... but NEVER tip at fast food places. Anyone want to criticize me too? :)


I say nasty non-substantive things about Sarah Palin and I tip at Subway.

Do you think that I should discontinue either behavior?:)

switters
04-16-2015, 12:44 PM
I felt bad about the snark towards Candidate Clinton's supposed lack of specifics so I went direct to the source, her campaign page.

She specifically wants to be president.

She specifically wants me to donate and/or volunteer.

She is certain she could be my champion, which is cool because I'm afraid of dragons and being carried off by dark knights.

We should probably be friends on facebook, if I want to.



Now I dont have plans to vote for Candidate Paul, but in addition to specifically wanting to be president and wanting money from me and possibly being my friend on facebook, he has long list of issue statements.

For instance under energy category he is proud to proclaim that he is 100% in favor of keystone pipeline and would like deregulate energy companies and it sound like he would want to get rid of some or all of the EPA. All of which I disagree with.

What am I supposed to agree with from Candidate Clinton? It is not like she just started thinking about running for president. We do have several ideas from her 2007 campaign, but how many of those are valid? At the time she was backing off of support for nuclear power. What about Keystone? Inher last campaign she backed away from NAFTA, is she going to limit the TTP if the current administration doesn't get that taken care of by the time they leave?

Norman Bernstein
04-16-2015, 12:56 PM
What am I supposed to agree with from Candidate Clinton? It is not like she just started thinking about running for president. We do have several ideas from her 2007 campaign, but how many of those are valid? At the time she was backing off of support for nuclear power. What about Keystone? Inher last campaign she backed away from NAFTA, is she going to limit the TTP if the current administration doesn't get that taken care of by the time they leave?

It's a valid criticism, but a premature one. It's pretty clear that her strategy is to concentrate, for now, on retail politics, which is more about shaking hands and getting known on a more personal basis, than it is about spouting policy.

We've got a VERY long way to go, in this campaign cycle... and she's going to be talking about policy along that way. Stand by for that, commend her for the stuff you like, and criticize her for the stuff you don't.

That is what *I* plan to do.

RonW
04-16-2015, 04:23 PM
ENTITLED: HILLARY CLINTON PARKS IN HANDICAP SPOT. Although there appears to be an open spot directly in front of her, one stop along Hillary Clinton’s road trip was in a handicapped parking spot. While Ms. Clinton could become the second oldest president in our nation’s history and has suffered some serious health issues, there is no record of her being so infirmed she is entitled to take a parking spot legally reserved for someone who legitimately needs it.

Rules are for little people.



http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/proxy.jpg.png

bobbys
04-16-2015, 04:27 PM
I say nasty non-substantive things about Sarah Palin and I tip at Subway.

Do you think that I should discontinue either behavior?:)
.

Once one person starts to tip at subway for the 5.oo lunch special then everyone will have to start tipping..

people like you can ruin society.

RonW
04-16-2015, 04:29 PM
HILLARY CLINTON STAFFERS INTERROGATED ‘ORDINARY AMERICANS’ FOR 30 MINUTES BEFORE ALLOWING MEETING..

More details about the behind-the-scenes orchestration of Hilary Clinton’s meetings with “ordinary” Iowans are leaking out.

It has been reported that the Iowans at these purportedly spontaneous meetings were quizzed and vetted by Hillary staffers for 30 minutes before being allowed to meet the candidate.

It has already been reported that several of those “ordinary” Americans who met with Hillary in an Iowa coffee shop are longtime Democrat operatives as opposed to average, everyday citizens.

But even these Democrat operatives were not ushered right into the meeting with Hillary without first being quizzed and vetted for a half hour beforehand.

Democrat operative and coffee house attendee Austin Bird admitted to the Daily Mail that Clinton campaign staffer Troy Price drove them to the meeting with Hillary only after “vetting them for about a half-hour.”

More of the Hillary campaign’s orchestration has already backfired. On Wednesday it was reported that many of Hillary’s Facebook and Twitter followers were either fake accounts or purchased by the campaign to make it seem like she had more “ordinary Americans” as followers.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hillary-clinton-diner2-ap-640x426.jpg

JimD
04-16-2015, 04:39 PM
...... she stopped to eat in Ohio and nobody cared ... That is a shame. Especially when you consider that the Republican Party has agreed to hire paid mourners to follow all their candidates around. That's a neat van!

PeterSibley
04-16-2015, 05:14 PM
I still reckon Hillary is the best Republican candidate and I know Ron secretly agrees !

delecta
04-16-2015, 06:38 PM
I still reckon Hillary is the best Republican candidate and I know Ron secretly agrees !

How do you determine what constitutes a republican/democrat? Considering you're from afar, you should grasp the concept that we have two major political parties and while the left and right might not lean as far to either extreme as they do in your soon to be China out post, there is a subtle difference.

Calling Hillary a republican is quite silly and you should consider either educating yourself on politics here or not.

Dave Wright
04-16-2015, 08:35 PM
I'm just catching up with my reading finally getting to the March issue of thee Atlantic. Now I'll be voting for Hillary, but if you want stuff for this thread, check out the article on page 60, "Among the Hillary Haters." Bobbys there's stuff there you'd love, e.g., R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., author of "Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House." Tyrrell says when Hillary arrived in Arkansas she had "baggy clothes and eyebrows so thick they would have collected coal dust in a Welsh mining village."

Just a sample of good ol' hate for ya. Lot's of stuff there, you boys all enjoy now!

Peter Malcolm Jardine
04-16-2015, 08:41 PM
The republicans complaining about no tip.... that's rich.... they probably own the fast food joints that pay crap to begin with.

genglandoh
04-16-2015, 08:58 PM
Let’s recap
1. Hillary announces she is on a van tour to meet with ordinary people.
2. She stops at a fast food restaurant hides behind big sunglasses and does not meet with anyone.
3. Her campaign stages a meeting with planted Democrats in a coffee shop and tries to sell it as a meeting with ordinary people.
4. She is caught on camera using a handicapped parking spot.

It does not look like she van tour is going working.

Famed Clinton van parked in handicapped spot
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/politics/hillary-clinton-van-handicap/

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-16-2015, 09:05 PM
Let’s recap
1. Hillary announces she is on a van tour to meet with ordinary people.
2. She stops at a fast food restaurant hides behind big sunglasses and does not meet with anyone.
3. Her campaign stages a meeting with planted Democrats in a coffee shop and tries to sell it as a meeting with ordinary people.
4. She is caught on camera using a handicapped parking spot.

It does not look like she van tour is going working.

Famed Clinton van parked in handicapped spot
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/politics/hillary-clinton-van-handicap/

Sorry,booger! It was the Secret Service that made her do it.

bobbys
04-16-2015, 10:39 PM
Let’s recap
1. Hillary announces she is on a van tour to meet with ordinary people.
2. She stops at a fast food restaurant hides behind big sunglasses and does not meet with anyone.
3. Her campaign stages a meeting with planted Democrats in a coffee shop and tries to sell it as a meeting with ordinary people.
4. She is caught on camera using a handicapped parking spot.

It does not look like she van tour is going working.

Famed Clinton van parked in handicapped spot
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/politics/hillary-clinton-van-handicap/.

Some are trivial , No tip, where the scooby van was parked, However a staged meeting with liberal plants as if no one would know is showing she figured she already won and has the media in her pocket in her mind.

let's face it Bill could have met with anyone and charmed them but she is not Bill.

let's see if other Democrats have watched this disaster and will come out of the shadows.

bobbys
04-16-2015, 10:42 PM
Let's recap again!
1) Ms. Clinton declares her candidacy for POTUS!
2) Gengster's brain begins to dissolve and leak from his ears and puddle on his shoulders!.

Let's face it you would have bought into HC meeting with the ordinary folk .

You need to read what conservitives report back here to learn the truth.

Don't worry about gengs brain , worry about this disaster of a start for HC.

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-17-2015, 09:51 AM
.

Let's face it you would have bought into HC meeting with the ordinary folk .

You need to read what conservitives report back here to learn the truth.

Don't worry about gengs brain , worry about this disaster of a start for HC.

I am listening to Dianne Rehm right now and none of her journalistic guests have said anything critical about what Hillary has done this week. Same thing for last night's TV news. I suspect that none of what conservatives are saying "back here", wherever that is, is having much impact.

genglandoh
04-17-2015, 11:38 AM
.

Some are trivial , No tip, where the scooby van was parked, However a staged meeting with liberal plants as if no one would know is showing she figured she already won and has the media in her pocket in her mind.

let's face it Bill could have met with anyone and charmed them but she is not Bill.

let's see if other Democrats have watched this disaster and will come out of the shadows.

Obama has not endorsed Hillary.
I think he is hoping someone else will get into the race so he can endorse them not Hillary.

bobbys
04-17-2015, 11:52 AM
I am listening to Dianne Rehm right now and none of her journalistic guests have said anything critical about what Hillary has done this week. Same thing for last night's TV news. I suspect that none of what conservatives are saying "back here", wherever that is, is having much impact.
.

So HC met with ordinary folk that turned out to be democrat plants and they said nothing about this?..

Did you wonder why she needs to be protected from ordinary folk on a meet the ordinary folk tour?.

I think you need a more objective news source, unless of course you are content. With hearing what you wish to hear.

RonW
04-18-2015, 02:31 PM
‘Hookers for Hillary’: Bunny Ranch Employees Endorse Clinton for President

Prostitutes from Dennis Hof’s Moonlite Bunny Ranch in Mound, Nevada have officially endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. With a new campaign called “Hookers for Hillary,” Hof says his girls will do anything they can to support Hillary. “I’m reaching out.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hookers-for-hillary-facebook-420x315.jpg

You just can't make this stuff up....

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/18/hookers-for-hillary-bunny-ranch-employees-endorse-hillary-clinton/

RonW
04-18-2015, 02:35 PM
HIPSTERS HIT HILLARY CLINTON OVER CAMPAIGN LOGO..

According to a Politico report, “To many graphic design experts of both political stripes, Hillary Clinton’s new logo would be better off in the trash bin.”

It only gets worse from there. Even Obama’s design guy piles on, and some suggest the arrow pointing to the right is a bad sign, ideologically speaking.

“I think the Hillary logo is really saying nothing,” said Scott Thomas, the design director for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and who later worked on the Whitehouse.gov website’s redesign. “It’s just a red arrow moving to the right.”

True to big media form, nothing will ever be as wonderful as anything Obama does. But if you can get through that aspect of the piece, Politico discusses political logo design in the new media age at length and, however you slice it, Hillary comes up short.

The presidential candidates of 2016 are facing perhaps the toughest audience yet when it comes to their design elements. Obama’s 2008 and 2012 logos — an iconic ‘O’ that went through numerous iterations widely interpreted as a rising sun — loom as the best-in-class benchmarks. Twitter and other social media allow for instant criticism, and there’s the prospect that the reaction to a new logo can go even more viral than the logo itself.

Consider the response since Clinton unveiled her logo less than a week ago. On the online image hosting service Imgur, more than 1.1. million views have landed on a post featuring a “five-minute” redesign of Clinton’s logo that turns the image entirely to different shades of blue and adds in a more curved arrow which “gives the logo a feeling of energy and life.”

In the New Yorker, a daily cartoon published shortly after the Clinton launch depicted two people looking at a campaign poster with the ‘H’ logo and this caption: “I’m just not entirely sure a big red arrow pointing right is the best logo for a Democratic candidate, is all.”

“Obama’s ‘O’ was handled with a certain amount of nuance and elegance and Hillary’s ‘H’ has none of that nuance or elegance,” said Steven Heller, a design critic and former art director at The New York Times. The Clinton logo, he added, looks like she’s overtly trying to avoid using her last name. “Her name is Hillary. We don’t know her as Ms. H,” he said.

RonW
04-18-2015, 02:36 PM
DEMOCRATS HOPE HILLARY CLINTON RAISES $100S OF MILLIONS FROM WALL STREET

The first fundraising numbers for Hillary Clinton’s White House bid will not be posted until July, but Wall Street took leadership roles in fundraising for both of her New York Senate campaigns, and nine of Mrs. Clinton’s top 20 donor organizations in her 2008 presidential bid were financial services firms. But after six years of a Wall Street donation boycott in retaliation for passing Dodd-Frank, Clinton is the Democrats’ best hope for reviving access to $100s of millions from Wall Street’s firehose of political donations.

Wall Street was reliably bipartisan from 1985 to 2010, according to the Open Secrets.org blog. Their number one philosophical criteria for financial donations seemed to be backing elected incumbents. They would secondarily triangulate between the left and the right to stay financially aligned with the party holding the most power.

Citicorp was number one, and Goldman Sachs was the number four contributor to Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign. Six years later, Citicorp and Goldman Sachs were the top two contributors to Hillary’s reelection campaign. Furthermore, six of the top ten organizations that gave to her campaign and leadership PAC between 2001 and 2006 were from banks, investment firms, and insurance companies.

Clinton’s strong ties with Wall Street were evident in her first run for the presidency in 2008. Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, and the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers led a gaggle of banks and their lawyers as Hillary Clinton’s third-largest source of campaign cash. Financial service industry contributions were far ahead of the cash Clinton raked in from donors tied to public education and women’s issues.

After Barack Obama won the 2008 nomination, the future president tripled the level of fundraising by any presidential candidate to $745 million. An enthusiastic Goldman Sachs was his second-largest Obama contributor, and 8 of the 20 largest contributors to the future president were Wall Street banks and law firms.

But all this go-with-the-winner contribution strategy ended in 2010, after a Democrat Congress single-handedly passed and a Democrat president signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The legislation drastically constrained very profitable securities trading by banks and severely limited their executive’s compensation.

Cash from Wall Street commercial banks, brokers, and their lawyers took a hard pivot away from Democrats in the late 2010 election cycle as Democrats fought Republicans to prevent repeal of the Dodd-Frank Act passed that summer. Despite Democrat control of Congress, Wall Street gave 51 percent of its money to Republicans in 2010, up 9 percentage points from 2008.

With Obama on the ballot in 2012, over two-thirds of Wall Street’s campaign cash was steered toward Republicans, giving conservative candidates an $84.2 million advantage over Democrat incumbents.

Two years later, the 20 organizations whose employees contributed the most to Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign included only one company somewhat related to financial services–accounting and consulting firm Deloitte LLP. Republicans maintained a 61 percent campaign cash advantage with Wall Street that amounted to a $30 million advantage over the Democrats.

One of the Democrats’ most enduring friends on Wall Street, regardless of which party is in power, has been JPMorgan Chase. But after donating $3.9 million to Democrats in the 2008 presidential cycle, the bank only gave Democrats $973,000 in 2010, the lowest total since 1998. JPMorgan donors did double their contributions in 2012 to $1.8 million, but that was only half of the bulge-bracket bank’s political generosity in 2008.

Whether Wall Street donors come back to the Democratic Party has a lot to do with what policies Hillary Clinton runs on. In the past, she was able to get elected on a “listening tour.” She spent two days this week traveling across Iowa to listen to the concerns of highly staged small group coffees with party activists.

But as Breitbart published in “The Real Elizabeth Warren Stands Up to Trash Wall Street,” Clinton’s folksy message was drowned out by the insurgent political threat launched by Senator Warren, who emboldened the extreme leftist wing of the Party to demand that real Democrats pile on more Dodd-Frank punitive regulations against Wall Street.

Clinton defensively replied at one of her coffees, “It’s fair to say that if you look across the country, the deck is still stacked in favor of those already at the top.” She added. “There’s something wrong when hedge fund managers pay lower tax rates than nurses or the truckers I saw on I-80 as I drove here the past few days.”

This type of populist rhetoric is an anathema to Wall Street, who is expected to continue to be the number one or two top source of political action committee cash, following the U.S. Supreme Court overturning PAC contribution limits in the Citizen United case. Total PAC contributions amounted to $96.8 million in 2012 and $78.9 million in 2014. But as of April 2015, 1,360 “Super PACs” already have $350.9 million available for 2016.

The Clinton campaign expects to raise $2.5 billion from supporters and outside “super PACs” for her presidential bid. Although Mrs. Clinton and the Democrat establishment had hoped Wall Street would contribute up to $250 million as a leader in this effort, that “money bomb” will evaporate if Democrats continue “trash talking” Wall Street.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/18/democrats-hope-hillary-clinton-raises-100s-of-millions-from-wall-street/

bobbys
04-18-2015, 04:30 PM
‘Hookers for Hillary’: Bunny Ranch Employees Endorse Clinton for President

Prostitutes from Dennis Hof’s Moonlite Bunny Ranch in Mound, Nevada have officially endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. With a new campaign called “Hookers for Hillary,” Hof says his girls will do anything they can to support Hillary. “I’m reaching out.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hookers-for-hillary-facebook-420x315.jpg

You just can't make this stuff up....

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/18/hookers-for-hillary-bunny-ranch-employees-endorse-hillary-clinton/.

talk about voteing against Yer own self intrest, Obamas secret service people outsourced hookers in Columbia.

RonW
04-18-2015, 05:16 PM
.
.
.
.
I wonder if Bill is behind this............



http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hookers-for-hillary-facebook-420x315.jpg

RonW
04-21-2015, 01:17 PM
NEW YORK TIMES: CLINTON CASH ‘MOST ANTICIPATED AND FEARED BOOK OF A PRESIDENTIAL CYCLE’ ..


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/clinton-cash-cover.jpg


The New York Times reported Sunday evening that a forthcoming investigative bombshell book on Hillary and Bill Clinton will soon be the focus of major feature stories and is regarded as “the most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle.”

For weeks, news outlets from the Washington Post to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer have alluded that the highly-anticipated May 5 release of Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich by three-time New York Times bestselling investigative journalist Peter Schweizer could be a presidential game-changer. Schweizer is President of the non-partisan Government Accountability Institute (GAI) and a Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News.

The New York Times revealed that Clinton Cash describes how the Clintons’ income from 2001 to 2012 was at least $136.5 million, how Mr. Clinton would routinely fetch half-a-million dollar honorariums for speeches while Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State, and much more.

Despite the Clinton campaign’s ability to dismiss “critical books as conservative propaganda,” the Times says “Clinton Cash is potentially more unsettling, both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations are expected to pursue the story lines found in the book.”

The Times adds, “Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have been briefed about the book’s findings.”

Publishing giant HarperCollins said in a press release that the book represents the culmination of a one-year deep dive investigation by Schweizer’s GAI investigative unit. The GAI, which has quickly established itself as one of the nation’s most respected—and feared—Washington watchdog organizations, has gained notoriety for vigorously investigating both Republicans and Democrats, as well as releasing its investigative findings through major national mainstream media partners, such as CBS News’ 60 Minutes, New York Times, Politico, ABC News, and Fox News.

Indeed, GAI and Schweizer have already left their investigative mark on Capitol Hill. Schweizer, whom Newsweek dubbed “The Wonk Who Slays Washington,” was responsible for the ouster of former Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), then-chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, after his book, Throw Them All Out, exposed insider trading by members of Congress.

The driving force behind the only significant bipartisan reform legislation to pass during the Obama presidency—the STOCK (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) Act—Schweizer is, as David Weigel (then of Slate) put it, the “author of the book that started the STOCK Act stampede.” Schweizer partnered with veteran CBS News 60 Minutes reporter Steve Kroft for an insider trading report based on the book that resulted in CBS winning the coveted Joan Shorenstein Barone Award for excellence in Washington-based reporting on congressional political affairs.

Former Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ) also knows the sting of a Schweizer book investigation. In October 2013, Schweizer once again partnered with CBS 60 Minutesand Steve Kroft to report the revelations of his book, Extortion, which exposed how Republicans and Democrats use leadership PAC “slush funds” to bankroll lavish lifestyles. The Sunday before the book’s release, CBS 60 Minutes did a story titled “Washington’s Open Secret” based on Schweizer’s book revelations that led to Andrews’ resignation from Congress.

Whether Schweizer’s soon-to-be-released book will spell the same political fate for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential aspirations remains to be seen. The Washington Post has already done two major stories based off the Clinton Cash press release’s revelation that Hillary’s brother, Tony Rodham, sat on the board of a mining company that in 2012 received one of only two “gold exploitation permits” from the Haitian government—a coveted concession that was the first of its kind issued in over 50 years.

Now, with major media all preparing feature reports on Clinton Cash’s myriad revelations, Hillary Clinton’s defenders are already in damage control mode. “The newly assembled Clinton campaign team is planning a full-court press to diminish the book as yet another conservative hit job,” reports the Times.

That will be difficult, however, says the New York Times, because “Mr. Schweizer writes mainly in the voice of a neutral journalist and meticulously documents his sources, including tax records and government documents, while leaving little doubt about his view of the Clintons.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/19/new-york-times-clinton-cash-most-anticipated-and-feared-book-of-a-presidential-cycle/

I don't think the huff post is gonna run this article....or the let's think progressive rags....

S.V. Airlie
04-21-2015, 01:19 PM
Why report Sleaze?

RonW
04-21-2015, 01:22 PM
--Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich..

now available at amazon for $20.51..........expected to hit the best seller's list and wreak havoc in the political arena..


http://www.amazon.com/Clinton-Cash-Foreign-Governments-Businesses/dp/0062369288

ccmanuals
04-21-2015, 01:27 PM
Wow, you can smell the fear on these guys. Pretty funny.

S.V. Airlie
04-21-2015, 01:29 PM
I love it, P Scheizer was a foreign policy advisor for some lady named Sarah Palin! Nuf said!

RonW
04-21-2015, 01:33 PM
ABC’S KARL: CAMPAIGN CLEARLY WORRIED ABOUT ‘CLINTON CASH’

Monday on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” while discussing “Clinton Cash,” the forthcoming book to be released May 5 that raises questions about State Department favors linked to foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, ABC News chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl said, “The Clinton campaign is clearly worried about this.”

Karl said, “That’s right, they limited the number of foreign government donations that the Clinton foundation would take. This new book takes a close look at the tens of millions of dollars in donations that the Clinton foundation received and also the speaking fees that Bill Clinton received while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. It charges that those donors got favors for their donations. The Clinton campaign is clearly worried about this. They are portraying it a partisan hit job, pointing out that the author is a former Bush speechwriter.”

Looks like the fear is coming from the clinton campaign ........and rightfully so......

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/20/abcs-karl-campaign-clearly-worried-about-clinton-cash/

Barry
04-21-2015, 01:36 PM
You mean this Guy:

Jonathan Karl: I 'Regret' Inaccuracies In Benghazi Reporting.

RonW
04-21-2015, 01:47 PM
Well lets try this guy then ..........sooner or later we will get one that everybody approves of.........

WATCH: MMFA’S BROCK DODGES QUESTIONS ABOUT ‘CLINTON CASH,’ HILLARY SCRUBBED SERVER.

On Tuesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Media Matters head David Brock took to the camera to answer questions about allegations that the Clinton Foundation took money from foreign countries in the forthcoming book “Clinton Cash” while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.

Although Brock admitted he had not read the book, he downplayed its findings.

“I think what we’re going to be left with here is 100 percent innuendo,” Brock said.

“Morning Joe” panelists Mark Halperin, Willie Geist and Dorian Warren pressed Brock on the content of the book. Brock, however, deflected and insisted on discussing the book’s author, Peter Schweizer.

Show co-host Mika Brzezinski questioned Brock’s ability to debunk the allegations in the book with Clinton having deleted emails from her time at State Department that may or may not have offered additional information. Brock downplayed the emails as well and said the 50,000 she handed over that weren’t deleted and that may be made public may show shed on the allegations.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/21/watch-mmfas-brock-dodges-questions-about-clinton-cash-hillary-scrubbed-server/

ccmanuals
04-21-2015, 06:00 PM
Jeez, even the Chamber of Commerce gets donations from foreign nations and they aren't even in the charity business like the Clinton Foundation.

This is a bizarre thread.

Mike Dawson
04-21-2015, 08:42 PM
Viewing the whole Hillary Clinton phenomenon from the view point of an independent voter I have been amazed at the almost total support by Democrats for her, nearly to the level of a blind religious fervor. I can only guess that it is one or more of the following.

brand loyalty to the Clinton name (same goes for Bush on the other side)
no one in the Dem. party dare oppose her lest they be thrown out of the party
people back her to ensure that statistically she will win even if she is not the best candidate that Dems have to offer (same goes for Bush on the other side)
because she is a women she is ENTITLED to be POTUS anyway (she and many others seem to think so)

IMHO, Hillary Clinton is a poster child for sleazy, self centered politicians (and there are way more than enough on both sides). She flip flops faster than a weather vane on ball bearings to whatever will get her more votes and/or personal enrichment. Again most politicians do the same, it just that she does it with a huge "smugness" factor. She IS one of the hated 1%'ers after all. It seems that she thinks that the election is in the bag and this campaign stuff is all just a unnecessary distraction.

Again this is from the viewpoint of an independent voter. I have and will continue to vote for either party's candidate, usually for who is the LEAST worse. No need to flame me, I am just curious as to the rational for her somewhat fanatical support (choose from above or add your own).

RonW
04-22-2015, 10:34 AM
Looks like the left ain't taking these new book charges so lightly, this might be the crack that opens up and breaks the damm......

--NEW MEDIA VICTORY: MSM SERIOUSLY INVESTIGATING ‘CLINTON CASH’ ALLEGATIONS

As the allegations from Peter Schweizer’s blockbuster new book Clinton Cash spread through the media, Clinton flacks are spinning the charges as “old news” — but many in the media aren’t playing along with the official line.

Clinton operatives are trying to tear down the book before its release. Top Clinton operative John Podesta came out of the gate early to denounce the book with a Monday interview on The Charlie Rose Show.

But not everyone is toeing the Clinton line. In its first article introducing readers to the soon-to-be-released Clinton Cash, The New York Times took a serious tone on the allegations contained in the book. As former Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs pointed out, while the paper of record wasn’t glowing about Schweizer, “it certainly wasn’t disparaging of the author,” Gibbs said.

The Huffington Post also hastened to point out that Schweizer’s book isn’t a work to be easily dismissed. They found the author’s history to be notable and not one of a simple right-wing partisan: “Schweizer’s material has been solid enough to earn him partnerships with mainstream news outlets.”

Long-time journalist Carl Bernstein also disparaged the Clinton camp for its base assumptions about the public. Clinton and her team, Bernstein said, “don’t trust the ability of readers, viewers, voters to process the best obtainable version of the truth.”

The left-wing website Think Progress is also not laughing book away.

Like many on the left, Think Progress feels that some of the charges that the Clintons have taken donations from some pretty bad actors is not something to so easily dismiss.

Think Progress particularly lighted on Schweizer’s revelations about Clinton’s largess from “shady donors” like the Lundin Group, “a mining, oil and gas company that was investigated for war crimes in Sudan and has reportedly reaped massive profits in the war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo.”

Lundin committed $100 million to the Clinton Foundation shortly after Hillary announced her presidential candidacy in 2007. Schweizer points to a 2006 law co-sponsored by Clinton and Obama, which gave the secretary of state powers to hold destabilizing forces in the DRC accountable, and notes that Clinton declined to employ those powers after Lundin’s donation.

“Another murky practice discussed in the book was the State Department’s use of the special government employee (SGE) rule,” Think Progress wrote, “which allowed some staffers to simultaneously work for the State Department and non-government organizations, including the Clinton Foundation.”

It’s looking like if Team Clinton thinks that the media will simply dismiss Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash as instructed, they might be disappointed.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/clinton-cash-cover.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/21/new-media-victory-msm-seriously-investigating-clinton-cash-allegations/

RonW
04-22-2015, 04:11 PM
DAILY BEAST – ‘LEFT TO HILLARY: YOU’RE A PHONY’

At The Daily Beast, David Freedlander writes:

Liberals have spent much of the past year trying to pull Hillary Clinton to the left, even betting behind a phantom Elizabeth Warren candidacy to exert pressure on her. But now that Clinton in the early going of her campaign sounds a lot like the senator from Massachusetts, progressives should be pretty pleased.

But several leading figures of American liberal groups say that, so far, they are not much impressed.



Robert Reich, a longtime Clinton friend and former Secretary of Labor in the Bill Clinton White House, said Hillary deserved credit for her language on CEO pay and taxes, but added that most of what Clinton has discussed so far on the campaign trial would not do much to alter the structural reasons for the widening inequality.

If Clinton wants to reassure the progressive base, he added, she should call for the restoration of Glass-Steagall (which her husband dismantled) and break up the big banks.

It is one thing to call for higher taxes on hedge fund managers, a continued Democratic talking point, he said, it is another to talk about restoring workers’ bargaining power and making it easier for workers to organize.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/22/daily-beast-left-to-hillary-youre-a-phony/


Looks like mutiny is in the air.....

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-22-2015, 05:26 PM
Viewing the whole Hillary Clinton phenomenon from the view point of an independent voter I have been amazed at the almost total support by Democrats for her, nearly to the level of a blind religious fervor. I can only guess that it is one or more of the following.

brand loyalty to the Clinton name (same goes for Bush on the other side)
no one in the Dem. party dare oppose her lest they be thrown out of the party
people back her to ensure that statistically she will win even if she is not the best candidate that Dems have to offer (same goes for Bush on the other side)
because she is a women she is ENTITLED to be POTUS anyway (she and many others seem to think so)

IMHO, Hillary Clinton is a poster child for sleazy, self centered politicians (and there are way more than enough on both sides). She flip flops faster than a weather vane on ball bearings to whatever will get her more votes and/or personal enrichment. Again most politicians do the same, it just that she does it with a huge "smugness" factor. She IS one of the hated 1%'ers after all. It seems that she thinks that the election is in the bag and this campaign stuff is all just a unnecessary distraction.

Again this is from the viewpoint of an independent voter. I have and will continue to vote for either party's candidate, usually for who is the LEAST worse. No need to flame me, I am just curious as to the rational for her somewhat fanatical support (choose from above or add your own).

Wrong. We progressives know that it is important for the history of this country that NO Republican gain the White House while Republicans control the congress. Right now Hillary is our choice because she has the ability to assure that end for the next few years. I, personally don't want the federal government to end up like the state of Ohio where all the branches of government play to the least common denominater of our citizenry to maintain Republican control.

skuthorp
04-23-2015, 12:11 AM
All you say might be true Mike (#75) but from this distance, and with a history of interest in US politics going back to Ike, Hillary is the best on offer at present. The fact that she doesn't have to pander to sectional lobbies and wacko primaries and that she's had a life in US politics and OS relations is about the biggest plus you could get. In any normal circumstances she'd be a GOP candidate, and that fact indicates how far to the right the Dem's are, which forces the Rep's. out into no man's land. Actually the Reps could easily undercut the Dems on social policy if they had a mind.
But getting out the voters is another matter. If it is decided by 39% of the electorate again then all bet's are off, but you'd hardly call any decision a mandate would you?

RonW
04-23-2015, 01:47 PM
Exclusive: Clinton charities will refile tax returns, audit for other errors .

Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.

The foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks. Republican critics say the foundation makes Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, vulnerable to undue influence. Her campaign team calls these claims "absurd conspiracy theories."

The charities' errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters.

The errors, which have not been previously reported, appear on the form 990s that all non-profit organizations must file annually with the Internal Revenue Service to maintain their tax-exempt status. A charity must show copies of the forms to anyone who wants to see them to understand how the charity raises and spends money.

The unsettled numbers on the tax returns are not evidence of wrongdoing but tend to undermine the 990s role as a form of public accountability, experts in charity law and transparency advocates told Reuters.

"If those numbers keep changing - well, actually, we spent this on this, not that on that - it really defeats the purpose," said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government transparency advocacy group.

For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the foundation's work on climate change and economic development through this three-year period. Those governments were identified on the foundation's annually updated donor list, along with broad indications of how much each had cumulatively given since they began donating.

FOUNDATION DEFENDS TRANSPARENCY

"We are prioritizing an external review to ensure the accuracy of the 990s from 2010, 2011 and 2012 and expect to refile when the review is completed," Craig Minassian, a foundation spokesman, said in an email.

The decision to review the returns was made last month following inquiries from Reuters, and the foundation has not ruled out extending the review to tax returns extending back 15 or so years.

Minassian declined to comment on why the foundation had not included the necessary break-down of government funding in its 990 forms. He said it was rare to find an organization as transparent as the foundation.

"No charity is required to disclose their donors," he said. "However, we voluntarily disclose our more than 300,000 donors and post our audited financial statements on our website along with the 990s for anyone to see."

Separately, the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), the foundation's flagship program, is refiling its form 990s for at least two years, 2012 and 2013, CHAI spokeswoman Maura Daley said, describing the incorrect government grant break-outs for those two years as typographical errors.

CHAI, which is best known for providing cheaper drugs for tens of thousands of people with HIV around the world, began filing separate tax returns in 2010, and has previously refiled at least once both its 2010 and 2011 form 990s. For both those years, CHAI said its initial filings had over-reported government grants by more than $100 million.

Some experts in charity law and taxes said it was not remarkable for a charity to refile an erroneous return once in a while, but for a large, global charity to refile three or four years in a row was highly unusual.

"I've never seen amendment activity like that," said Bruce Hopkins, a Kansas City lawyer who has specialized in charity law for more than four decades, referring to the CHAI filings.

Clinton stepped down from the foundation's board of directors this month but her husband, Bill Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea Clinton, remain directors.

The foundation said last week after Hillary Clinton became a candidate that it would continue to accept funding from foreign governments, but only from six countries that are already supporting ongoing projects. CHAI will also continue to receive foreign government funding, again with additional restrictions.

Nick Merrill, Clinton's spokesman, has declined to answer inquiries about the foundation and CHAI.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/23/us-usa-election-clinton-taxes-exclusive-idUSKBN0NE0CA20150423

RonW
04-23-2015, 01:49 PM
NYT: CLINTONS FAILED TO DISCLOSE $2.35M DONATION FROM RUSSIAN-OWNED URANIUM CORP .

From the New York Times:

The headline in Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when the newspaper served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”

The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/22/nyt-clintons-failed-to-disclose-2-35m-donation-from-russian-owned-uranium-corp/

ccmanuals
04-24-2015, 06:49 PM
Looks like Rons book review is falling apart already. :)

That didn't take long.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/04/24/nbc-news-just-admitted-the-ny-times-story-based/203412

delecta
04-24-2015, 06:59 PM
Looks like Rons book review is falling apart already. :)

That didn't take long.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/04/24/nbc-news-just-admitted-the-ny-times-story-based/203412

Actually no, and with all this smoke the only people that can see clearly are liberals.

RonW
04-24-2015, 08:32 PM
Looks like Rons book review is falling apart already. :)

That didn't take long.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/04/24/nbc-news-just-admitted-the-ny-times-story-based/203412

MEDIA MATTERS PREPARES TO PUSH HILLARY’S CAMPAIGN NARRATIVE
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/29/media-matters-prepares-to-push-hillarys-campaign-narrative/

NYT’S PETERS: MEDIA MATTERS ‘EXISTS’ TO ‘MISDIRECT’ ON HILLARY CRITICISMS
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/23/nyts-peters-media-matters-exists-to-misdirect-on-hillary-criticisms/

LIES AND INTIMIDATION; THE TOOLS OF MEDIA MATTERS
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/09/26/lies-intimidation-media-matters/


I would think twice and do a little research before quoting media matters.......

RonW
04-24-2015, 08:37 PM
PICTURES OF BILL CLINTON GIVING A $500K SPEECH IN MOSCOW

As a Russian state nuclear corporation sought a majority share of Uranium One, a leading Uranium producer with mining rights in the U.S., former President Clinton was invited to Moscow to give a speech to Renaissance Capital.

Renaissance Capital is an investment bank, “with ties to the Kremlin” according to the NY Times. Clinton was paid $500,000 for the one-hour speech.

The speech took place on June 29, 2010. The following pictures of Clinton’s appearance were posted by Renaissance Capital on the company’s website.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/Bill-Clinton-Renaissance-2010-4.png

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/Bill-Clinton-Renaissance-2010-flyer.jpg

RonW
04-24-2015, 08:45 PM
I can hardly wait until Hillary becomes Ron's and delecta's President!:D

Well after 8 years of berry, I can't think of what more damage she could do...........

RonW
04-24-2015, 09:21 PM
Hate to tell you guys this, but right now fox news is doing a hour long special on the corruption of the clintons, and this book is a big part of it..


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/clinton-cash-cover.jpg

Cuyahoga Chuck
04-24-2015, 11:34 PM
Hate to tell you guys this, but right now fox news is doing a hour long special on the corruption of the clintons, and this book is a big part of it..


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/clinton-cash-cover.jpg

We'll be expecting a revue once you have finished your copy.

skuthorp
04-25-2015, 06:18 AM
Hate to tell you guys this, but right now fox news is doing a hour long special on the corruption of the clintons, and this book is a big part of it..


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/clinton-cash-cover.jpg

Fox what? News? Really?

ccmanuals
04-25-2015, 11:26 AM
Hate to tell you Ron but liberals don't read Breitbart or watch Fox News. I would have thought you would know this. We depend upon you to give us a review.

Paul Denison
04-25-2015, 11:44 AM
Justice delayed is justice denied. On the flip side, does anyone else make the connection between huge speaking fees for politicians from all parties and the timing of those payments?

Paul Denison
04-25-2015, 01:06 PM
As in a payment to a politician, irregardless of the timing, can be seen as an ethical dilemma?

RonW
04-26-2015, 08:50 PM
STEPHANOPOULOS FLOORED AS GINGRICH, BLOOMBERG EDITORS DETAIL SERIOUSNESS OF ‘CLINTON CASH’

Stephanopoulos then turned to Gingrich.

“Mr. Speaker, I read that you thought these allegations are starting to reach some kind of critical mass around the foundation that could even force her out of the race?” he asked the former House Speaker.

Gingrich dropped bombs on Stephanopoulos in his response, suggesting he thinks criminal charges—at least an investigation—could be on the way.

“Look, this isn’t a political problem—this is a historical problem,” Gingrich said. “The Constitution of the United States says you cannot take money from foreign governments without explicit permission of the Congress. They wrote that in there because they knew the danger of corrupting our system by foreign money is enormous.

“You had a sitting Secretary of State who radically increased his speech fees and there is a whole series of dots on the wall now where people gave millions of dollars who oh, by the way, happened to get taken care of by the State Department. You raised a good standard.

“And of course, having been on the Watergate Committee, she knew exactly what to do. She erased 33,000 emails. Richard Nixon only erased 18 minutes. So you’re going to have a prima facie case that any jury would look at…”

Stephanopoulos was floored. “You think a jury would look at the case based on—“ he interjected before Gingrich talked back over him.

“I think a jury would look at the totality of this case and say it is clearly against the Constitution,” Gingrich said. “It’s clearly against U.S. law. DoD and [DoS] both have rules saying you can’t take more than $315.”

Brazile jumped in at that point to try to help Stephanopoulos bail out the Clintons.

“It’s a global foundation and they released all of their donors, something that—“ Brazile said, before Stephanopoulos corrected her. “Not all of them, some of them we found out this week,” Stephanopoulos corrected Brazile. “In the aggregate they didn’t, but it was the funding that—“

Gingrich had had enough. “They skipped three years [of filings]—they just found out they skipped three years,” Gingrich said, referring to incomplete tax filings by the Clinton Foundation.

“Look, they’re amending those documents, there’s no legal requirement to do so but—“ Brazile jumped back in.

“A foundation controlled by your husband is the same as money to you—it is clear in federal law,” Gingrich cut across them again. “If it wasn’t Hillary Clinton it would—“

After some more crosstalk between Brazile and Stephanopoulos about whether the Clintons should have sent someone out the Sunday shows like this one to defend themselves—they both agreed the Clintons should have—Gingrich piped up again.

“I think there’s a very simple case here—the Constitution says you can’t take this stuff, we have federal laws that say you can’t take this stuff,” Gingrich said. “If this was any person but Hillary Clinton, they’d be under indictment right now for a clearly straightforward problem.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/26/stephanopoulos-floored-as-gingrich-bloomberg-editors-detail-seriousness-of-clinton-cash/

Chip-skiff
04-26-2015, 10:50 PM
Spittle of a dog! You dare to mock the Khaleesi?

http://content-mcdn.feed.gr/filesystem/images/20150306/engine/newego_LARGE_t_248161_106511558_type12933.jpg

ishmael
04-26-2015, 11:23 PM
Hillary is a phony southern pol, just like her hubby was. How, when are we going to court people of merit again?

skuthorp
04-27-2015, 05:37 AM
How do you determine what constitutes a republican/democrat? Considering you're from afar, you should grasp the concept that we have two major political parties and while the left and right might not lean as far to either extreme as they do in your soon to be China out post, there is a subtle difference.

Calling Hillary a republican is quite silly and you should consider either educating yourself on politics here or not.

Our two majors and lean determinedly to the right, and further to the right. I may have been wrong about the 'China outpost' myself, I suspect they will have their own problems re a bubble economy and population woes soon enough. Australia has been marchin to the US drum since the fall of Singapore, our politicians brown nosing and our foreign policies and foreign 'wars' mirroring the US position as it weathervanes depending on very short term perceived self advantage. From here she seems a better fit to the traditional GOP than the Dems. But of course the 'traditional GOP" no longer exists does it.

S.V. Airlie
04-27-2015, 08:57 AM
Hillary is a phony southern pol, just like her hubby was. How, when are we going to court people of merit again?To start off Ish, she was born in the Chicago area; that's north! If anything, you can call her a carpetbagger!

ishmael
04-27-2015, 09:37 AM
Born in Chicago, but raised in politics right next to Billy in Arkansas. Not that there's anything wrong with being from our fine southern states.

There is an unctuous quality in her.

"I could never learn to like her, except on a raft in the middle of the ocean with no other provisions in sight."

Twain

God, I hope we find some other provisions.

Keith Wilson
04-27-2015, 09:55 AM
I do not much care whether I like the people I vote for. I will almost certainly never even meet them, much less have anything to do with them personally.

I care very much what kind of policies they will implement when in office. That will affect me, and lots of other people as well.

RonW
04-27-2015, 10:35 AM
WILLIE BROWN: ‘CLINTON CASH’ COULD BE ‘FATAL’ TO HILLARY .

On Saturday, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, who warned in the San Francisco Chronicle on March 6 that Hilary Clinton’s early announcement of her 2016 presidential candidacy invited danger, posted another article in which he noted that his warnings had proven accurate because of the Clinton Cash scandal, which he called potentially “fatal.”

Brown wrote:

My prediction that Hillary Rodham Clinton was inviting nothing but trouble by announcing early that she’s running for president is starting to come true. Stories are popping up left and right about the millions of dollars from foreign powers that went to the Clinton Foundation while she was secretary of state. This has the potential of being a bigger liability than the e-mail affair or Benghazi because taking money from a foreign government when you hold a Cabinet job is a potential conflict of interest that everyone can grasp.

Brown did not mince words about how much the scandal could cripple a Clinton candidacy, writing, “It could even be fatal to Clinton’s candidacy, if it balloons into an ongoing story and the Republicans open a congressional investigation.”

After advising Clinton to come clean with a reckoning of “every dime that came into the foundation and every dime that went out, along with as many photos as she can find of the foundation’s work in Haiti and Africa,” Brown warned again, “If she can make the Clinton Foundation look like the Red Cross, she can survive this. If she can’t, look out below.”

Brown has been moving away from Clinton’s candidacy for months. After the beating the Democrats took in last November’s elections, he penned a column in the Chronicle in which he predicted that Clinton “is going to lose” in 2016 “[u]nless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation,” adding, “Hillary Rodham Clinton must be wondering whether she really wants to run for president. Unless there are some serious readjustments to the Democratic operation, she is going to lose.”

As late as July 2013, Brown was ebullient over Clinton’s 2016 chances, asserting, “…[A]ll she has to do is continue to breath[e] and in 2016 she’ll be elected to the presidency of the United States.”

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hillary-clinton-no-teeth-big-smile-ap-640x480.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/04/26/willie-brown-clinton-cash-could-be-fatal-to-hillary/

S.V. Airlie
04-27-2015, 11:23 AM
Another Brainfart! He's a busy dweeb isn't he?

ishmael
04-27-2015, 01:06 PM
If Hillary is elected I'm looking at Brazil.

Kevin T
04-27-2015, 01:08 PM
If Hillary is elected I'm looking at Brazil.

Why? Will they in some way be responsible for her win?:rolleyes:

S.V. Airlie
04-27-2015, 01:09 PM
And you'll stay IF Cruz, Rubio or one of the other idiots wins Ish? Sorry, you need help, you're smarter than that!

RonW
04-27-2015, 01:12 PM
If Hillary is elected I'm looking at Brazil.

I was thinking about argentina, from the pictures that dutch sends it looks pretty nice, lots of nice beaches .........

Chip-skiff
04-27-2015, 11:52 PM
If Hillary is elected I'm looking at Brazil.

Why wait?

RonW
04-28-2015, 09:00 AM
--11 EXPLOSIVE CLINTON CASH FACTS MAINSTREAM MEDIA CONFIRM ARE ACCURATE ..

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a $2.35 Million Foreign Donation from the Head of the Russian Govt’s Uranium Company that Had Business Before Hillary Clinton’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Bagged $500,000 for a Speech in Moscow Paid for by a Kremlin-linked Bank.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Brother Sits on the Board of a Mining Company that Scored an Extremely Rare “Gold Exploitation Permit” in Haiti as Hillary and Bill Clinton Disbursed Billions of U.S. Taxpayer Dollars in Haiti.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a Foreign Donation of 2 Million Shares of Stock by a Mining Executive with Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Approval of the Russian Takeover of Uranium One Transferred 20% of All U.S. Uranium to the Russian Govt.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton was Paid by a For-Profit Education Company Laureate While the Company Benefitted from an Increase in Funding from Hillary’s State Dept.

-CONFIRMED: The Clinton Foundation has Been Forced to Refile at Least 5 Years of Annual Tax Returns and May Audit Other Clinton Foundation Returns.

-CONFIRMED: At Least $26 Million of the Clintons’ Wealth Comes from Speaking Fees by Companies and Organizations that are Also Major Clinton Foundation Donors.

-CONFIRMED: Clinton Cash author, Peter Schweizer, is Currently Conducting a Deep Dive Investigative Report on Republican Presidential Candidate Jeb Bush’s Financial Dealings.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Delivered Numerous Speeches Paid for By Individuals and Corporations with Pending Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Lied about Hosting a Meeting with Frank Giustra and Kazakh Nuclear Officials at Clinton’s Home in Chappaqua, New York.

And for the rest of the story.........http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/26/11-explosive-clinton-cash-facts-mainstream-media-confirm-are-accurate/


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/Hillary-in-washington-640x480.jpg

RonW
04-28-2015, 09:10 AM
REPORT: ONLY 6% CLINTON FOUNDATION EXPENDITURES GO TO CHARITY


--Monday on Fox Business Network’s “The Willis Report,” host Gerri Willis broke down the charitable spending of the Clinton Foundation.

Willis said, “What if you were to analyze the Clinton Foundation like any charitable organization? That is a question that we’re asking tonight. Does the Clinton Foundation wisely spend charitable dollars? Well the experts weighed in. The answer is a resounding no. One expert even called it a slush fund for the Clintons. These are not politicos. These are charity experts.”

“Charity Navigator, who we have on the show all the time, placed the Clinton Foundation on a watch list,” she continued. “They think there are problems with this non-profit.” She added, “Any Democrat—they say what a wonderful charitable organization it is doing to help people in need, people who are hungry, people who have AIDS. Listen, 6 percent of the money it collected in 2013, 6 percent — $9 million, of the $140 million in total it collected, went to help people.”

Washington Free Beacon’s Liz Harrington weighed in saying, “The numbers just don’t add up. One of the biggest offenses of the Clinton Foundation came out yesterday — 88 percentof the their expenditures go directly to their charitable programs. That is just simply not true. As you mentioned, they raked in $140 million. They only spent nine million on direct aid. Most of their money goes towards salaries, bonuses, to close friends, folks tied to the Clinton campaign.”

Willis read the $140 million 2013 spending breakdown from the New York Post, saying, “Here is a list of foundation spending—where the money goes: $30 million on payroll expenses, $9.2 to conferences and meetings, fundraising — $8 million. Nearly $8.5 million on travel.”

She added, “Coming from Charity Navigator. They say, quote, that ‘the Clinton Foundation does not meet their criteria. Does not meet their criteria as a organization that does charitable work.’ You know who else is in that group, my friend? Al Sharpton’s group, Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. They are in good company there.”


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/27/report-only-6-clinton-foundation-expenditures-go-to-charity/




Has anyone seen LBJ.........I know he ain't going to be happy with this report.........he thinks the clinton foundation , oh well maybe he can explain..

RonW
04-28-2015, 09:20 AM
CLINTON FOUNDATION PUT ON WATCH LIST OF SUSPICIOUS ‘CHARITIES’

The New York Post reports that Charity Navigator, which describes itself as “the nation’s largest and most-utilized evaluator of charities,” has added the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation to its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits.

This decision wasn’t made because of the Clinton Foundation’s remarkably lucrative sideline as a uranium superstore for Russian strongmen, but because its finances are opaque and dishonest, and because such a tiny amount of the money it rakes in actually goes to charitable endeavors. “The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid,” notes the New York Post. “The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.”

Good charities are supposed to put at least 75 cents of every dollar collected toward their mission. To put it mildly, the Clinton Foundation’s 6 cents on the dollar is well below that threshold. The Foundation’s “atypical business model,” as Charity Navigator very delicately put it, “doesn’t meet our criteria.”

Therefore, the Clintons ended up on a list of dicey “charities” right next to Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, which is also able to file phony tax paperwork for years on end without much hassle from the Internal Revenue Service. Banana republics where political clout overrides the rule of law are wonderful, provided you’re one of the insiders. The rest of us don’t get to say “whoops, my bad!” and refile years of tax paperwork when the media catches us hiding millions of foreign dollars.

Charity Navigator isn’t the only watchdog organization with its back up. “It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” the Post quotes Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation.

Say this much for Hillary Clinton: she’s shamelessly brazen in her hypocrisy. She wrote an op-ed for the Des Moines Register saying we can “fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all” – at the very same moment her Foundation is refiling the paperwork on all those foreign millions they previously didn’t think were worth mentioning, and the entire nation is fighting its gag reflex over the endless tawdry stories of suspiciously favorable treatment given to big-money interests after they dropped fat wads of cash into the Clintons’ piggy bank.

Of course, when Hillary talks about getting “unaccountable money” out of politics, she’s talking about rewriting the First Amendment to silence critics of the pay-for-play Big Government elite. The Citizens United Supreme Court decision that has become such a favored hate fetish of the Left concerned an unflattering documentary about Hillary Clinton, after all.

But people who give megabucks to Hillary Clinton, using a variety of shady techniques? Those people are super awesome. Their money doesn’t make “our dysfunctional system” worse at all, even when Hillary and her operatives go to extreme lengths to ensure that money is as “unaccountable” as possible.

Clinton apologists are already field testing the “no smoking gun” distraction – as if nothing short of hidden-camera footage that shows Hillary accepting a burlap sack with a dollar sign painted on the side from Vladimir Putin, in exchange for a lead-lined briefcase full of uranium, is enough to qualify the Clintons’ finances as scandalous, or worthy of criminal investigation. Ask Bob McDonnell how the legal standards for “quid pro quo” corruption work, at least for politicians who don’t have the magic “D” after their names.

When that doesn’t work, Clintonworld will fall back on the “everybody does it” defense – and that’s the problem. The standard operating procedure of modern Big Government is a non-stop flood of big money traded for big favors. The only difference between much of what our federal and state governments do, and the nauseating corruption our forefathers would have relentlessly prosecuted as criminal conduct, is a stack of properly-filed paperwork.

Purifying politics by “cleaning up” the money in politics is a fool’s errand, if not a distraction pushed by Big Government acolytes. The problem is the amount of political influence for sale, not the sums of money paid to purchase it. We’ve passed a huge volume of transparency laws, good-government regulations, and campaign finance restrictions over the past few decades, and none of it stopped Hillary Clinton from peddling influence, evading oversight, and destroying subpoenaed documents.

This business of pretending the Clinton Foundation is a “charity” ties into another big problem we have to get past: the fraudulent equation of political graft and wasteful Big Government programs with charity. How many government programs could meet Charity Navigator’s standard of getting 75 percent of their incredibly vast funding to the poor and sick? And yet, we’re supposed to believe this corrupt and wasteful system is the only real method of ensuring social welfare. If you oppose throwing more money into the black hole of a mega-State whose finances bear more than a passing resemblance to those of the Clinton Foundation, you supposedly hate everyone politicians claim they want to help.

Something tells me the Clinton Foundation’s most… energetic donors will not pay much attention to Charity Navigator’s watch list.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/27/clinton-foundation-put-on-watch-list-of-suspicious-charities/

bobbys
04-28-2015, 10:51 AM
--11 EXPLOSIVE CLINTON CASH FACTS MAINSTREAM MEDIA CONFIRM ARE ACCURATE ..

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a $2.35 Million Foreign Donation from the Head of the Russian Govt’s Uranium Company that Had Business Before Hillary Clinton’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Bagged $500,000 for a Speech in Moscow Paid for by a Kremlin-linked Bank.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Brother Sits on the Board of a Mining Company that Scored an Extremely Rare “Gold Exploitation Permit” in Haiti as Hillary and Bill Clinton Disbursed Billions of U.S. Taxpayer Dollars in Haiti.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a Foreign Donation of 2 Million Shares of Stock by a Mining Executive with Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration.

-CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Approval of the Russian Takeover of Uranium One Transferred 20% of All U.S. Uranium to the Russian Govt.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton was Paid by a For-Profit Education Company Laureate While the Company Benefitted from an Increase in Funding from Hillary’s State Dept.

-CONFIRMED: The Clinton Foundation has Been Forced to Refile at Least 5 Years of Annual Tax Returns and May Audit Other Clinton Foundation Returns.

-CONFIRMED: At Least $26 Million of the Clintons’ Wealth Comes from Speaking Fees by Companies and Organizations that are Also Major Clinton Foundation Donors.

-CONFIRMED: Clinton Cash author, Peter Schweizer, is Currently Conducting a Deep Dive Investigative Report on Republican Presidential Candidate Jeb Bush’s Financial Dealings.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Delivered Numerous Speeches Paid for By Individuals and Corporations with Pending Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.

-CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Lied about Hosting a Meeting with Frank Giustra and Kazakh Nuclear Officials at Clinton’s Home in Chappaqua, New York.

And for the rest of the story.........http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/26/11-explosive-clinton-cash-facts-mainstream-media-confirm-are-accurate/


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/Hillary-in-washington-640x480.jpg
.

Is this the best the Democrats can come up with?

Norman Bernstein
04-28-2015, 11:09 AM
.
Is this the best the Democrats can come up with?

When the GOP makes their pick, we'll be asking you the same thing. Why not tell us who your favorite is, so we can trash him with all the false, invented dirt we can find?

bobbys
04-28-2015, 11:48 AM
When the GOP makes their pick, we'll be asking you the same thing. Why not tell us who your favorite is, so we can trash him with all the false, invented dirt we can find?
.

This thread is about HC , please try and stay on topic.

You already started threads about any republican coming out.

Chip-skiff
04-28-2015, 12:55 PM
Ye spawn of Breitbart, who mock the Mother of Dragons, look to the sky.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-6G-NQEex7Ag/VT_H4G_A4YI/AAAAAAAAHwI/NzEvmVPvR_4/s772/khaleesi2.jpg



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/12/article-2625937-1DC3C7BD00000578-995_634x404.jpg

RonW
05-07-2015, 08:58 AM
Shocking revelations show that at least four Clinton Foundation board of directors have either been charged or convicted of financial crimes, including bribery and fraud.

This newest, startling revelation is just one more of many in Peter Schweizer’s bombshell book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, the book that has sent the Hillary Clinton campaign and the media scrambling.

The book shows that there are many problems with the Clinton charity. In fact, the Clinton Foundation is so unlike a real charity that even charity watchdog group Charity Navigator refuses to rate the Clinton Foundation because of its “atypical business model.”

One of those problems is the fact that the Clintons put big donors and close pals on the board for reasons that are hard to fathom. In fact, at least four of these “board members” have either been charged or convicted of serious financial irregularities, crimes including bribery and fraud.

The most well-known of these board members is Vinod Gupta.

“Vinod Gupta, the founder and chairman of the database firm InfoUSA, was a major Clinton financial supporter who served as a foundation trustee,” the book says.

In 2008 he was charged with fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for using company funds to support his luxurious lifestyle. He was alleged to have used more than $9.5 million in corporate funds to pay for personal jet travel, millions for his yacht, personal credit card expenses, and the cost of twenty cars. He settled with the SEC for $4 million.

Gupta also paid Bill Clinton a $3 million “consulting fee,” an act of misuse of corporate funds that brought shareholders to file a suit against him. The company eventually settled with shareholders to the tune of $13 million, Clinton Cash reports.

Another such person involved with financial irregularities is foundation trustee Sant Chatwal, who has convictions for illegal campaign financing, obstruction of justice, and a list of other charges.

Then there is trustee Victor Dahdaleh, who “was charged by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in Great Britain with paying more than 35 million pounds in bribes to executives in Bahrain to win contracts of more than 2 billion pounds,” the book notes.

Clinton Cash goes on to report that Dahdaleh “has worked for the American aluminum company Alcoa as a ‘super-agent.’ (The billionaire had his bail revoked in the case because he contacted prosecution witnesses.) Dahdaleh was found not guilty after the SFO offered no evidence against Dahdaleh because a key witness, Bruce Hall, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to corrupt but refused to testify. Alcoa ended up pleading guilty in the US case arising out of the transaction and settled with the US Justice Department for $384 million. Dahdaleh was not charged in the United States individually.”

Finally, there is current Clinton Foundation board member and trustee Rolando Gonzalez Bunster, who “has been named in a fraud case in the Dominican Republic involving his company InterEnergy. The charges were filed by the Dominican government’s Anti-Corruption Alliance (ADOCCO). In 2013, Bunster was charged along with officials of a government agency concerning alleged ‘ballooned’ fees charged to the government. The company dismisses the charges as ‘baseless allegations.'”

These are just a few of the troubling things that Clinton Cash reveals about the Clinton Foundation.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/bill-and-hillary-clinton-foundation-global-initiative-AFP-640x480.jpg



http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/simgad/16403652877559898032


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/07/revealed-four-clinton-foundation-trustees-charged-or-convicted-of-financial-crimes/

RonW
05-07-2015, 09:15 AM
‘STENCH OF CORRUPTION': ANTI-HILLARY STREET ART HITS L.A. AHEAD OF FUNDRAISERS


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/Stench-of-Corruption-640x480.jpg


Several pieces of artwork critical of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton have appeared around Los Angeles and Beverly Hills ahead of a trio of pricey fundraisers the candidate will attend this week.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/IMG_4345-225x300.jpg


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/IMG_4346-225x300.jpg


Fake, tree-shaped car fresheners with an image of Clinton in the middle have been placed at the corners of Sunset and Amalfi, Sunset and Capri and Sunset and Allenby in the Tony Riviera section of Pacific Palisades, home to Hollywood luminaries like Ben Affleck, J.J. Abrams, Steven Spielberg, and Tom Hanks.

The air freshener’s caption? “Stench of Corruption.”

Clinton is set to attend three high-priced fundraisers on Thursday, May 7. In the morning, Clinton will appear at the Westwood home of Women’s Political Committee member Catherine Unger for a $2,700 per plate women’s breakfast fundraiser, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

In the afternoon, Clinton will attend a $2,700 per plate fundraiser luncheon at the Pacific Palisades home of legendary television producer Steven Bochco and his wife Dayna. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)0%
is reportedly set to attend the fundraiser as a special guest.

Later Thursday, Clinton will head to Beverly Hills for an early-evening $2,700 per plate fundraiser at the home of billionaire entertainment mogul Haim Saban and his wife Cheryl. Saban has been a longtime friend of Clinton, and has donated more than $10 million to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton’s presidential library. Sports agency magnate Casey Wasserman will co-host the event at Saban’s home.

The artwork appears to be a reference to Clinton’s messy corruption scandal, first exposed by Breitbart Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer in his book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

So far, it is unclear who was responsible for putting up the fake air fresheners, however one well-known artist has already plastered anti-Hillary artwork around town this week.

Sabo, a guerilla street artist who has poked fun at Clinton in the past, put up mocking posters of the candidate in Bel Air, Holmby Hills and Pacific Palisades earlier this week. One poster, a parody of the animated film Shrek, calls Clinton “Shrew, a Jeffery Katzenberg Creation,” and another, a parody of the HBO hit Game of Thrones, reads, “All Men Must Die.”

Of course, anti-Hillary street art is nothing new; just last month, an unknown artist posted signs all around Brooklyn that lampooned Clinton supporters for claiming certain words used to describe her were sexist.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/IMG_4345-225x300.jpg

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/05/06/stench-of-corruption-anti-hillary-street-art-hits-l-a-ahead-of-fundraisers/

RonW
05-07-2015, 09:19 AM
On Monday, Hillary Clinton’s presidential team launched its official campaign against Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer’s newly released book, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich (HarperCollins).


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/AP259849654161-e1429768585685-640x480.jpg


The Hillary team dubbed their latest effort—complete with a new “rapid-response” website, videos, memos, and social media campaigns—“The Briefing.”

As part of these unprecedented efforts, Hillary Clinton’s campaign press secretary Brian Fallon raised eyebrows Tuesday when he released a heavily edited, first-person two minute-and-thirty-seven second video awkwardly attacking the mainstream media’s confirmation of newly revealed facts reported in Clinton Cash.

The Clinton campaign’s fear over Clinton Cash is apparent in the opening seconds of the Hillary video, wherein Fallon claims, “the book is being debunked far and wide,” an odd claim that raises an obvious question: “Why, then, does the Hillary campaign feel the need to launch a two-and-a-half minute video on it—as well as a new website to combat it?”

Bizarrely, Fallon then goes on to challenge revelations from the book that national media outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, Bloomberg, and the Wall Street Journal have already confirmed are accurate, verified, and true.

“The author wants you to believe that Hillary tried to reward Clinton Foundation donors by getting our government to approve the sale of a [uranium] mining company to Russia in 2010. That’s just dead wrong,” said Fallon.

“And as for Hillary Clinton herself, she made no recommendation to the committee whatsoever on the sale. Not as Senator. Not as Secretary of State. Not ever!”

However, in a 4,000-word, front-page New York Times article by Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Jo Becker and Mike McIntire, the Times confirmed that, in fact, Hillary’s foundation hid a secret $2.35 million foreign donation from the head of the Russian government’s uranium company, Ian Telfer, as the transfer of 20% of all U.S. uranium to the Russians was pending before then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s department—a direct violation of the memorandum of understanding Sec. Clinton signed with the Obama White House.

Even more damaging is this fact, confirmed by the New York Times and Clinton Cash: Hillary’s foundation received $145 million in donations from nine financiers and investors involved in the uranium deal—and Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 for a single speech in Moscow paid for by a Kremlin-backed bank.

“Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?” asked the New Yorker magazine.

Oddly, the Clinton campaign seems to be suggesting Hillary had zero knowledge that a uranium deal was being considered by the State Dept. even though investors involved in the uranium deal had donated $145 million to Hillary and Bill’s foundation. Apparently Fallon is unfamiliar with this New York Times infographic explaining the money flow during Hillary’s uranium transfer to the Russian government.

Next, Hillary’s spokesman Brian Fallon goes on to claim: “This guy wants you to believe President Clinton made money on a series of speeches he wasn’t personally paid for.”

Again, the Hillary Clinton campaign is apparently unaware that the Washington Post and New Yorker magazine have already confirmed the book’s reporting on Bill Clinton’s windfall speaking fees, and noted how those payments intertwined with Clinton Foundation donors with business before Hillary’s State Dept.

“Bill Clinton was paid at least $26 million in speaking fees by companies and organizations that are also major donors to the foundation he created after leaving the White House, according to a Washington Post analysis of public records and foundation date,” reports the Washington Post.

Next, Fallon’s video shows a video clip of Bill Clinton’s former campaign strategist-turned-ABC News host George Stephanopoulos saying in an interview, “There’s no smoking gun!”

But as myriad political observers have pointed out, Hillary Clinton’s deletion of over 30,000 emails and wiping clean her secret server set up inside her home prevents anyone—especially an author without subpoena power—from accessing Hillary’s communications.

Moreover, ABC News said it conducted its own analysis of the book’s facts and concluded: “Records supported the premise that former President Clinton accepted speaking fees from numerous companies and individuals with interests pending before the State Department.”

The Hillary Clinton campaign video then shows a selectively edited clip showing Bloomberg editor Mark Halperin saying “a lot of the stuff that’s surrounding the book and the New York Times reported yesterday is, I think, ridiculous and silly.” The video does not put Halperin’s comments in context and fails to show the rest of Halperin’s statement.

“Here’s why you know this is serious because any Democrat, almost any Democrat, who is not on the Clinton’s payroll will tell reporters and others that these are serious issues, forget the politics. These are serious issues,” said Halperin on ABC News This Week.

The Bloomberg editor added: “Imagine if an assistant secretary of State had done what Hillary Clinton—we know that she did. They’d be out of the State Department.”

On Tuesday, renowned liberal economist and Columbia University Earth Institute director Jeffrey Sachs tweeted: “The new book Clinton Cash is compelling reading on how Bill and Hillary have mixed personal wealth, power, and influence peddling.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/06/team-hillary-launches-massive-smear-campaign-against-clinton-cash/

jclays
05-07-2015, 10:01 AM
Another fund raiser today to muck up my traffic during my work day and during my ride home.

ccmanuals
05-07-2015, 10:37 AM
Hmm

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/30/twenty-plus-errors-fabrications-and-distortions/203480

Norman Bernstein
05-07-2015, 11:17 AM
There Are Over Twenty Reasons Not To Believe Clinton Cash. A Media Matters analysis of the book found numerous errors, fabrications, and distortions. Media outlets tore apart Schweizer's allegation that Hillary Clinton played a "central role" in approving a Russian uranium deal for Clinton Foundation donors. He made multiple errors in a section alleging Bill Clinton's speaking fees influenced State Department grants in Haiti. He cited as fact a press release that was revealed as a hoax years before. He took a former U.S. ambassador's words "badly out of context," drawing condemnation from the individual. He erred in his conspiracy about Hillary Clinton's vote on an India nuclear deal. He excluded multiple pieces of exculpatory evidence that undermine his claims. He hypocritically attacked the Clintons for engaging in the same behavior that Schweizer's former boss, George W. Bush, did. And he alleged Clinton conspiracies that, in the words of third parties who reviewed his work, have "no evidence," are "circumstantial," and have "no smoking gun."

Schweizer Has A History Of Shoddy Reporting. Prior to Clinton Cash, reporters and fact checkers have excoriated Schweizer for massive factual problems. A Media Matters analysis found at least 10 separate incidents in which media called out Schweizer for botching his reporting. The following is how reporters have described Schweizer's work: "Incorrect," "inaccurate," "bogus," "a fatal shortcoming in Journalism 101," "the facts didn't stand up," "unfair and inaccurate," "specious argument," "there was nothing there," "suspicious," "the facts don't fit," facts "do not check out," sources "do not exist or cannot be tracked down," "confusion and contradiction," "discrepancies," "admitted a mistake," "neither journalism nor history," "a polemic so unchecked ... that we can't tell the fact from the fiction," sources "have clearly used him," and "tacitly conced[ed] he was wrong." [Media Matters, 4/20/15 (http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209#clinton)]

In every election cycle, both sides will generate 'hit books', each a supposed expose' on how the opposing candidate is the devil's spawn. These books are always shoddily written, loaded with innuendo, supposition, and all too often, straightforward lies.

Depending on just how partisan you are, books like these will resonate either weakly, or strongly.

S.V. Airlie
05-07-2015, 11:44 AM
Ron posted it from Brainfart, what do you expect from either one Norman?:)

Vince Brennan
05-07-2015, 11:53 AM
Ye spawn of Breitbart, who mock the Mother of Dragons, look to the sky.





http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/12/article-2625937-1DC3C7BD00000578-995_634x404.jpg


Wow! Chelsea REALLY needs to lay off the Mexican food!!

Chip-skiff
05-07-2015, 03:43 PM
Against the Mother of Dragons, the forces of darkness shall not prevail.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ibKswo4nQVU/VT_H1UPNxjI/AAAAAAAAHwA/o9noaiR3SUU/s1079/khaleesi.jpg

KMacDonald
05-07-2015, 04:33 PM
She is eating at Chipotle? They were caught hiring aliens. Doesn't seem to curb her appetite though. (that's OK, I did well on their stock----real well.)

S.V. Airlie
05-07-2015, 04:34 PM
Maybe some here should post cartoons or unfavorable pics of the Rep idiots who want to be president. Ron's been busy regarding Hillary. Guess it's all Ron can do with Brainfart's help.

KMacDonald
05-07-2015, 05:06 PM
Maybe some here should post cartoons or unfavorable pics of the Rep idiots who want to be president. Ron's been busy regarding Hillary. Guess it's all Ron can do with Brainfart's help.

We expect little to nothing from those on the left but we get a whole lot less.

RonW
05-08-2015, 06:27 AM
SINKING FAST: HILLARY CLINTON TRAILS OR TIED WITH 5 REPUBLICANS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE


DURHAM, N.H. —In five of the last six presidential general elections, including the last three, the Democratic nominee has won New Hampshire’s four electoral votes. That’s not a sure thing for 2016, according to the results of a new WMUR Granite State Poll.

Bush leads Clinton 47 to 41 percent, while Rubio leads her, 47 to 42 percent. Bush holds a strong lead over Clinton among independents, 39 to 22 percent, while independents are split between Clinton and Rubio, with Clinton leading 33 to 31 percent.

The margin of error in the poll is 3.7 percent.

Granite Staters also favor Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul over Clinton, 47 to 43 percent, with independents favoring Paul, 43 to 36 percent. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Clinton are in a dead heat, at 44 percent each, with independents favoring Clinton, 36 to 28 percent.

Voters are also split between Clinton and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, with Clinton leading, .

46 to 45 percent. Independents are split among the two, with 37 percent favoring Clinton and 35 percent favoring Cruz.


http://www.wmur.com/politics/wmur-poll-clinton-trails-or-tied-with-five-top-republicans/32873880

KMacDonald
05-08-2015, 06:52 AM
How much more bad news can they possibly take?

RonW
05-08-2015, 07:06 AM
How much more bad news can they possibly take?

It's looking bleek ain't it..I am actually beginning to feel sorry for them, the next thing you will hear is a bunch of them jumping out of windows, just like in the great depression, but I am willing to bet most of them will use first story windows, it is just their makeup..

Garret
05-08-2015, 07:13 AM
You guys do realize that the election is in 2016, not 2015? A year & 1/2 is a long time.....

However, the idjuts jumping into the races on the Rep side is bad news for our country & that is something I really am having trouble with. Amazes me that there are people stoopid enough to vote for these people. So - glad to see you agree that they are bad news.

PS: "bleek" is a noise cats make. "Bleak" is the future of the US if one of the Rep crazies gets elected. If HRC is elected, it'll still be bleak - just somewhat less so, as she's more Rep than Dem.

RonW
05-08-2015, 07:39 AM
Now Garrett, let's be honest about these bleeking bleaks. Of course if HRC is elected it will be bleaking bad for our country, and the bad thing is we won't know what she will do about anything, since she is now beginning to remind us of mitt romney doing flip flops on issues.

She has already flip flopped on amnesty, illegals, the banks, the economy, outsourcing of jobs. She seems to take a stance once the poll results are in..and then change with the next poll results.

Yep, it is a bleeking mess, we need a leader not a poll watcher. The left seems to be wanting HRC even less then the right wanted mitt romney...08 to be repeated, dark horse.

RonW
05-08-2015, 01:31 PM
SILENT HILL: 26 DAYS INTO CAMPAIGN, NO NATIONAL INTERVIEWS FOR CLINTON


--Friday marks 26 days since Clinton formally announced she is running for president, but she has yet to do a formal interview with national media, extending her own record as the presidential candidate who’s waited longest in modern history.

Clinton’s silence comes as political reporters are buzzing about the book “Clinton Cash,” which details influence peddling by the Clinton Foundation. The book is written by Breitbart News Senior Editor at Large Peter Schweizer.

The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple writes on media organizations, but recently took to his blog to point on the New York Times’ approach to dealing with Hillary Clinton’s silence to reporters.

Wemple said New York Times reporter Amy Chozick has created what he coined “the air question.”

Chozick decided to post questions online that she would like to ask Clinton – that is – if Clinton was taking any media questions.

Her post following Clinton’s comment on immigration Tuesday read:

“President Obama said his executive action on immigration went as far as the law will allow. You say you would go beyond what he did. How could you stretch the law further than the president of your own party and his Justice Department says it can go?”

Wemple wrote The Erik Wemple Blog would continue to report on Chozick’s series of questions “if the Times air-questions Clinton on her sparse Q-and-A availability, which would be a glorious meta-media moment.”


Is hillary going to have a repeat of 2008........close but no cigar.....


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/silent-hillary-clinton-640x481.png




http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/08/mainstream-media-mocks-hillary-clintons-26-day-media-silence/

Chip-skiff
05-08-2015, 01:42 PM
Clinton does have a lot of baggage: a trainload, in fact. I've never been a fan of either Clinton.

But as Secretary of State she proved to be both hardworking and extremely skilled. None of the Republican hopefuls has any experience to rank with that. And most of them seem to have a penchant for partisan mischief, superstition, hysteria, and outright lunacy that appeal to a very small base (with similar characteristics). There is no Republican candidate who can appeal to a majority of the public without turning his back on the base.

Cuyahoga Chuck
05-09-2015, 08:25 PM
RonW has wallpapered this thread with anti-Hillary bile. He must sense the impotance of the Republican presidential machine.

the_gr8t_waldo
05-09-2015, 08:34 PM
Three weeks later and he.s still trying to ressutate this load o crap back into life??!! Ron, the clown car is honking it's horn for you to get back into the car

skuthorp
05-09-2015, 09:49 PM
Three weeks later and he.s still trying to ressutate this load o crap back into life??!! Ron, the clown car is honking it's horn for you to get back into the car
Yes, The GOP needs a viable candidate or two first.
I'll look again in about 3 months…………….

RonW
05-11-2015, 03:56 PM
HILLARY CLINTON EMAIL CASE REOPENED BY FEDERAL JUDGE


A federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails, marking the first time a court has taken action on the email scandal.

Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed Friday to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch, which sued in 2012 to get a look at some of Mrs. Clinton’s documents concerning a public relations push.

Both sides agreed that the revelation that Mrs. Clinton had kept her own email server separate from the government, and exclusively used her own email account created on that server, meant that she had shielded her messages from valid open-records requests.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/03/hillary-shock-AFP-640x480.jpg

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/11/hillary-clinton-email-case-reopened-by-federal-judge/


OR

--“This is the first case that’s been reopened,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said Friday. “It’s a significant development. It points to the fraud by this administration and Mrs. Clinton.”

Judicial Watch has filed a series of open-records requests seeking State Department emails and, when the administration failed to comply, has gone to court to force them. Just last week Judicial Watch filed a new batch of eight lawsuits trying to shake loose some of the secret emails, and said that was just the first round.

Officials didn’t acknowledge that there were missing emails until prodded by the House committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya. After that prod, the department asked Mrs. Clinton to turn over emails that contained government business.

She provided about 30,000 emails, but said she discarded another 32,000 she deemed weren’t government business, and then wiped the server. She has refused requests by the Benghazi inquiry chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Republican, to turn the server over to a neutral third party.

On Friday, Mr. Gowdy released an interim report detailing his first year of investigation, citing “obstacles and frustrations” in dealing with the administration. He said they have talked with new witnesses who hadn’t been interviewed by any other Benghazi probe, and had unearthed documents that haven’t been part of other investigations.

But he said Mrs. Clinton’s emails remain a large question mark, and the State Department still hasn’t turned over emails from her senior staff.

“The State Department has told the committee that it cannot certify that it has turned over all documents responsive to the committee’s request regarding the former secretary’s emails,” Mr. Gowdy said in his report.

Mr. Gowdy also hinted that Congress’s investigative powers may be limited when it comes to trying to force a president and his team to come clean.

“The legislative branch’s constitutional toolbox seems inadequate to uphold our task in seeking the truth,” Mr. Gowdy said, pointing to the administration’s unwillingness to serve subpoenas on itself, neutering much of Congress’s investigative power.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/10/federal-judge-reopens-hillary-clinton-email-case/

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 04:05 PM
Heck, he hasn't gotten used to the fact that LBJ is dead.

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 04:19 PM
Nobody ever said that Troglodytes are quick learners!:)
They sit on the back row with their pencil eraser probing their nose and their brain wandering ever downward!:)
Bless their little hearts!Fixed it for you Glen!

KMacDonald
05-11-2015, 04:32 PM
http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/03/hillary-shock-AFP-640x480.jpg



Do you really want that in the White House? Is that presidential?

RonW
05-11-2015, 04:37 PM
Does anyone have the latest odds from Vegas, as to if ?

A - she will drop out.

B - The DNC will replace her

C - She will have stories and experiences to share with Martha Stewart

D - She will immigrate to Australia and give up her citizenship

E - Her and Bill will cut a deal with the Gov. and pay back millions

F - She will fall and hit her head and have amnesia remembering nothing, including Bill

G - she keeps repeating, what does it matter now...and be confined to a home for the mentally ill.

H - the clinton foundation provides her with high priced lawyers that ties this up in court for now on

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 04:42 PM
Of course you think the Reps running are presidential material.

KMacDonald
05-11-2015, 05:53 PM
I - spend some of that clinton foundation money on a face lift

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 05:58 PM
I haven't ever met you or seen a pic but, I guess I'm not surprised.

PS, are you another Joan Rivers?

KMacDonald
05-11-2015, 06:03 PM
I haven't ever met you or seen a pic but, I guess I'm not surprised.

PS, are you another Joan Rivers?

Green with envy over your looks------see my avatar.

Chip-skiff
05-11-2015, 06:03 PM
There will never be another Republican president.

Get used to it.

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 06:17 PM
All right, another illegal alien. HEY RONW where are you?
Your face lift didn't work or if it did, I suggest you get another by a doc wearing glasses this time!

RonW
05-11-2015, 06:44 PM
All right, another illegal alien. HEY RONW where are you?
Your face lift didn't work or if it did, I suggest you get another by a doc wearing glasses this time!

You know people would respond to you more often if you actually read the posts and knew who you was responding to over what ?

Go ahead, try it and shock everyone .......

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 06:50 PM
And if you posted some worth posting you may get the responses you crave! And I seem to get more than you do. Of course I don't need anyone to respond to mine if they don't want to. Unlike you, I'm not looking for my tummy to be scratched.

RonW
05-11-2015, 06:52 PM
HILLARYCLINTON.NET REDIRECTS TO CARLY FIORINA CAMPAIGN WEBSITE

GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina has launched #DomainGate on Twitter. She is seemingly buying up celebrity domains to push her campaign message. Those going to hillaryclinton.net, for example, find themselves at Fiornia’s campaign Website.

Breitbart News previously reported Fiorina schooled Seth Meyers on his show, Late Night with Seth Meyers by buying SethMeyers.org.

Meyers noted that someone had purchased CarlyFiorina.org using it to bash Fiorina as former CEO of Hewlett Packard.

“Carly Fiorina failed to register this domain. So I’m using it to tell you how many people she laid off at Hewlett-Packard,” read a note on CarlyFiorina.org.

The site displays a page of frowning faces, captioned by: “That’s 30,000 people she laid off. People with families.”

It appears Fiorina didn’t stop with SethMeyers.org. She appeared on Meet The Press Sunday and redirected ChuckTodd.org to her site as well.

If you got to any of the three sites, you are redirected to her campaign site, CarlyforPresident.com.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/ap_ap-photo238-640x474.jpg

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/10/carly-fiorina-launches-domaingate-buys-hillaryclinton-net/







ha, ha, ha, ha,ha,ha,ha,.........hee haw.....

KMacDonald
05-11-2015, 06:56 PM
You know people would respond to you more often if you actually read the posts and knew who you was responding to over what ?

Go ahead, try it and shock everyone .......

That just made my day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 07:00 PM
Boy, that was easy! Doesn't take much to make you happy does it? I'm so glad Ron's sock puppet showed up. Now that made my day, since it's been fairly boring overall.

RonW
05-11-2015, 07:02 PM
That just made my day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well you know the little guy has almost 35,000 posts in 8 years..You talk about putting in a little overtime....

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 07:05 PM
But, not all of mine are political unlike someone else's here! Gee, I wonder who that someone could possibly be? Oh right, the guy with 6,768 political posts.?

RonW
05-11-2015, 07:10 PM
Now, now, let's not get all wound up and forget the main attraction.............

And I give you the next president of the Obama states of america......



http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/03/hillary-shock-AFP-640x480.jpg

KMacDonald
05-11-2015, 07:16 PM
Looks like she just saw Monica.

S.V. Airlie
05-11-2015, 07:30 PM
I think she saw your face lift!

RonW
05-12-2015, 09:26 AM
DAY 30 OF HILLARY CLINTON’S SELF-IMPOSED MEDIA BLACKOUT


It’s now been 30 days since Hillary Rodham Clinton launched her official presidential bid for the White House, yet she still hasn’t done a formal sit down interview with a national reporter. That’s far and away the longest any candidate has waited in the modern era, a fact first reported by Breitbart News.

As CNN notes, “Since her presidential campaign announcement on April 12, Clinton has not held a formal press conference. While on the campaign trail, she has responded – reluctantly at times – to roughly eight questions from journalists.”

The former Secretary of State’s media blackout has allowed her to avoid answering questions about the blockbuster book Clinton Cash by Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer.






http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/ap_hillary-rodham-clinton_ap-photo2-e1430781251238-640x480.jpg

RonW
05-13-2015, 01:26 PM
Lefty Liberal ALAN COLMES says : ‘FBI MIGHT WANT TO LOOK INTO’ CLINTON FOUNDATION

Talk radio host and Fox News Contributor Alan Colmes said that he wants to “see full disclosure and transparency from the Clintons” and that “the FBI might want to look into” the foundation on Wednesday’s “America’s Newsroom.”

Colmes said, “She’s got to answer questions. She’s got to stand up and answer to the press, whether it’s a news conference or an interview. … The FBI might want to look into this” regarding the questions regarding potential conflicts of interest between the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s time as Secretary of State.

He added, “I would like to see her cleared, obviously, but I would like to see full disclosure and transparency. None of this ‘I didn’t inhale’ stuff.” And that he didn’t believe the Clinton Foundation taking money from Moroccan company OCP was acceptable.

Colmes later stated that Hillary has time to answer questions on her financial dealings, and he would prefer she do it sooner rather than later.


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/05/13/alan-colmes-fbi-might-want-to-look-into-clinton-foundation/

ccmanuals
05-13-2015, 01:33 PM
Why should we care about Alan Colmes opinions anymore than we care about your opinions?

RonW
05-13-2015, 01:40 PM
Why should we care about Alan Colmes opinions anymore than we care about your opinions?

Because he is one of yous.........even the lefties on turning on ole hillary.........and you should care about the truth......

S.V. Airlie
05-13-2015, 01:46 PM
ccmanuals...No one responded on RonW's 's thread, on his last posted BS yesterday for hours...he waited and waited and waited, and waited....AND WAITED (for a nibble) feeling worse and worse with each passing minute because no one took the bait.....NO ONE! Out of desperation, he finally posted more BS sometime in the last hour and YOU BIT! WHY keep making his sad life enjoyable by paying attention to him?

RonW
05-13-2015, 01:51 PM
ccmanuals...No one responded on RonW's 's thread, on his last posted BS yesterday for hours...he waited and waited and waited, and waited....AND WAITED (for a nibble) feeling worse and worse with each passing minute because no one took the bait.....NO ONE! Out of desperation, he finally posted more BS sometime in the last hour and YOU BIT! WHY keep making his sad life enjoyable by paying attention to him?

Thanks for posting, I knew you would run your mouth...........unfortunately the left sees this hillary person as a candidate for president, I see her as a candidate for prison.

P.S. I post the information for one and all to see...........so you don't need to bother responding....norm has threads you can put your 2cents worth to...

RonW
05-13-2015, 02:03 PM
DEVASTATING TIMELINE REVEALS THE TRANSFER OF HALF OF U.S. URANIUM OUTPUT TO RUSSIA AS HILLARY CLINTON’S FOUNDATION BAGS $145 MILLION

A newly released GAI timeline depicts the sequence of events leading up to then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s approval of the transfer of half of U.S. Uranium output (20% of all U.S. Uranium) to the Russian government in 2010.

Clinton’s State Department was one of eight agencies to review the deal, but Hillary Clinton was the only agency head whose family foundation bagged $145 million in donations, reports the New York Times and Clinton Cash.

Indeed, the head of the Russian government’s uranium company, Ian Telfer, made a secret $2.35 million foreign donation to the Clinton Foundation, as was confirmed by the New York Times.

Bill Clinton also received a $500,000 speaking fee for a speech in Moscow paid for by a Kremlin-connected bank, reports the New Yorker.

“I’ve gotta pay our bills,” explained Bill Clinton.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/Nuclear-Timeline.jpg



http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/13/devastating-timeline-reveals-the-transfer-of-half-of-u-s-uranium-output-to-russia-as-hillary-clintons-foundation-bags-145-million/

Garret
05-13-2015, 02:29 PM
Even if 100% of everything in this thread is true (& I doubt that), it doesn't hold a candle to what Cheney/Halliburton did & is still doing - and he has not even been to court...

Chip-skiff
05-13-2015, 02:32 PM
When the Mother of Dragons comes, there will be no pit deep enough or shadow dark enough to hide you.

http://bigamericannews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/hillary-clinton-mother-of-dragons-2.jpg

KMacDonald
05-13-2015, 02:36 PM
Even if 100% of everything in this thread is true (& I doubt that), it doesn't hold a candle to what Cheney/Halliburton did & is still doing - and he has not even been to court...

If that's true I'm sure Obama would have exposed it. Lets face it, Obama is not a Cheney fan.

Garret
05-13-2015, 02:40 PM
If that's true I'm sure Obama would have exposed it. Lets face it, Obama is not a Cheney fan.

Nor is anyone who respects the rule of law.

KMacDonald
05-13-2015, 02:42 PM
He's a good American.

RonW
05-13-2015, 03:11 PM
Even if 100% of everything in this thread is true (& I doubt that), it doesn't hold a candle to what Cheney/Halliburton did & is still doing - and he has not even been to court...

Berry ain't gonna do anything about chenney and bush, for the simple reason that it would open the door for the next person to prosecute him over his crimes as well.
There has been too much corruption coming from the oval office, the clintons did their fair share as well, and if they had removed reagan from office for his little Iran Contra deal and put ollie north in prison I think we could have avoided a lot of this.
The only way to stop it is for the american people to pay attention to who's doing what, stop them and prosecute them.

Then elect honest people that will uphold their campaign promises to the american people.

S.V. Airlie
05-13-2015, 03:21 PM
This entire thread needs one of these

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Gas_mask_img_1619.jpg

Garret
05-13-2015, 03:35 PM
Berry ain't gonna do anything about chenney and bush, for the simple reason that it would open the door for the next person to prosecute him over his crimes as well.
There has been too much corruption coming from the oval office, the clintons did their fair share as well, and if they had removed reagan from office for his little Iran Contra deal and put ollie north in prison I think we could have avoided a lot of this.
The only way to stop it is for the american people to pay attention to who's doing what, stop them and prosecute them.

Then elect honest people that will uphold their campaign promises to the american people.

Not saying the President should - just saying that politicians who do shady stuff has a long proud tradition in the US. Love to see 'em all prosecuted.

RonW
05-15-2015, 07:25 AM
STEPHANOPOULOS RECUSES HIMSELF FROM GOP DEBATE

In frantic damage control mode, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos ran to the safe zone of the left-wing Politico to announce the he will recuse himself from ABC’s February GOP debate in New Hampshire. He also admitted that the total amount he contributed to the Clinton Foundation was a whopping $75,000, not the $50,000, as originally reported.

The chief anchor and political correspondent at ABC News now admits he should never have donated money to the Clinton Foundation, and that he should have disclosed his donations to ABC News viewers.

As of now, probably as they gauge the fallout, ABC News stands by Stephanopoulos. He told Politico he intends to go back to business as usual, co-anchoring “Good Morning America” and hosting the Sunday news show ‘This Week.”

Stephanopoulos also said he would continue to cover the 2016 presidential election.

The seediness of everyone’s behavior in this matter — Stephanopoulos and ABC News — goes way beyond what unraveled the career of NBC News anchor Brian Williams.

Williams’s sins primarily involved some sort of pathological need to puff himself up.

While assuming the role of a network news anchor, Stephanopoulos continued a Big Money relationship with the Clintons through their foundation, vigorously (and bizarrely) defended the Clintons after the foundation scandal hit, and lied by way of omission about his $75,000 conflict of interest.

When confronted with the Williams’ scandal, NBC News behaved like adults. The network suspended the anchor for 6 months without pay, and launched an internal investigation.

NBC News also suspended Keith Olbermann for not disclosing a campaign contribution of less than $10,000.

By comparison, instead of disciplining their anchor over his cover-up of a massive conflict of interest, after Stephanopoulos and ABC News were caught by the Washington Free Beacon, like a sleazy unethical politician, they ran to Politico to disguise themselves as being proactive in admitting to the donations.

The cover-ups, the spin, the lies, the ongoing relationship involving Big Money — ABC News and the symbol of its news division have a much bigger credibility problem than NBC News.

As Breitbart News reveals here, the ABC News’ Clinton Protection Racket involves more than just Stephanopoulos.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/6a00d8341c630a53ef01287641a1be970c2-640x480.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/05/14/stephanopoulos-recuses-himself-from-gop-debate/

RonW
05-15-2015, 12:04 PM
It has now been 33 days since Hillary Clinton made her White House bid official, yet she still hasn’t done a formal sit-down interview with national media, setting a record for going the longest of any candidate in recent history without doing so.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/04/hillary-wince-AP-420x315.jpg


Hillary Rodham Clinton is heading to Iowa for the second time since launching her campaign April 12th.

It has now been 33 days since she made her White House bid official, yet she still hasn’t done a formal sit-down interview with national media, setting a record for going the longest of any candidate in recent history without doing so.

Iowa GOP spokesman Charlie Szold said, “What difference does it make if Hillary Clinton is in Iowa or not? She still won’t answer simple questions about her dishonest double-dealings, shady foreign donations, and secret email server. In fact, Hillary Clinton has only answered 13 questions since announcing her run for president.”

According to the Des Moines Register, Clinton’s spokeswoman Lily Adams let reporters know she will be in Iowa Monday and Tuesday, but did not disclose which cities she will visit. She also said Clinton will do similar one-on-one events with voters as to what she did before, to let them ask questions.

“Polls show that Iowans already mistrust Clinton and her actions have only made it worse,” Szold said.

Clinton’s silence comes as Peter Schweizer‘s new book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich debuted this week at number 2 on the New York Times bestseller list.

delecta
05-15-2015, 12:19 PM
Her handlers have advised her well, no one wants to see her or listen to her. If she speaks it will only hurt her campaign, the only chance she has is to not talk, thankfully they have time before the debates for a solution.

RonW
05-15-2015, 12:43 PM
Her handlers have advised her well, no one wants to see her or listen to her. If she speaks it will only hurt her campaign, the only chance she has is to not talk, thankfully they have time before the debates for a solution.

There is no solution, when she starts talking the situation is going to get worse and her approval ratings will cause her to cancel her bid. Problem solved.....

RonW
05-15-2015, 05:20 PM
HILLARY’S UNFAVORABLE NUMBERS RISE IN MORE POLLS

Two new polls have found that Hillary Clinton’s unfavorable score has increased since March, as nearly half of Americans now view her negatively, according to polls conducted by Gallup and Fox News.

A Gallup poll found that Clinton’s unfavorable rating is now up to 46%, up from 39% in March’s Gallup poll, as she has been dogged by questions regarding her private email scandal, shady foreign donations to her family’s Clinton Foundation, and the numerous revelations in Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large and Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

While “nearly nine in 10 Republicans now view her unfavorably, up from 75% in March,” her unfavorable rating even increased three percentage points among independents and Democrats as well in the Gallup poll.

A Fox News poll found that Clinton’s favorability rating is down nine percentage points since last year and two percentage points since March. Currently, 45 percent have a favorable view of Clinton, “down from 47 percent in late March and 54 percent last summer (June 1-3, 2014).” Her “negative rating stands at 49 percent, up from 43 percent last June.” The Fox News poll found that the “downward shift in Clinton’s favorability over the last year comes from a decline in positive views among both independents (-11 points) and Republicans (-15 points).”

Bill Clinton’s favorable score declined as well as 59% of Americans now view him favorably compared to 64% in June of last year, according to the Gallup survey, which was conducted May 6-10 and has a margin of error of +/- four percentage points.

The polls reinforce the numerous national and state polls conducted in recent weeks in which majorities of Americans did not view Hillary Clinton as “honest and trustworthy.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/15/hillarys-unfavorable-numbers-rise-in-more-polls/

RonW
05-20-2015, 07:06 PM
And while senator Rand Paul is filibustering the senate floor over the illegality of the patriot act, we also have this................

EXCLUSIVE – BARNEY FRANK CONFIRMS: NO CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF CLINTON CASH URANIUM DEAL


Retired Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) tells Breitbart News in an exclusive interview that while he served as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Congress exercised no oversight over the activities of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

In 2010, during his tenure as chairman, CFIUS approved the controversial ARMZ-Uranium One transaction that gave the Russian government control of 20 percent of American uranium deposits.

The failure of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to disclose the ties between executives at Uranium One, who benefited financially from the approval of the transaction, is at the center of the conflict of interest scandals outlined in Clinton Cash, the recently released book written by Breitbart News editor-at-large Peter Schweizer.

“There’s no way you’re going to tie me into this,” Frank tells Breitbart News.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/barney_frank_ap-640x480.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/19/exclusive-barney-frank-confirms-no-congressional-oversight-of-clinton-cash-uranium-deal/

Chip-skiff
05-20-2015, 09:23 PM
When the Mother of Dragons is silent, thou art in more danger than when she speaks, for her gaze is fixed upon thee.

And when she smiles, the threat is mortal.

http://images.dailykos.com/images/142208/large/tumblr_nnl4lvs0dN1spyv24o1_500.png?1431035159

RonW
05-21-2015, 07:11 AM
REPORT: PRO-HILLARY SUPER PAC FAILING TO RAISE CLINTON CASH FOR 2016

From the Wall Street Journal:

The super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid is struggling to raise money and now expects to collect only about $15 million through the end of June, people familiar with the matter said Wednesday.

The group, Priorities USA Action, is shaking up its senior staff in hopes of jump-starting a fundraising operation that, five weeks after Mrs. Clinton entered the presidential race, has garnered only about $5 million in hard commitments, two people familiar with events say. A third person said the total was $15 million when counting commitments to be paid through November 2016.



Priorities is led by a number of prominent Democrats, including President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, Jim Messina. Buffy Wicks, who was named executive director of Priorities in January 2014, is likely to leave and take a senior position in the Clinton campaign, based in Brooklyn, N.Y., one Clinton adviser said. Day-to-day leadership of the super PAC has passed to Guy Cecil, who worked on her 2008 presidential campaign.

“There’s some dissatisfaction with the fundraising,” one person familiar with the group’s operations said. “There was some unhappiness with the lack of leadership in the organization.”

Read the rest of the story here.

Looks like no one wants to waste their money on Hillary.........aww gee.........


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/CEZoE0wVAAA6r7E-640x426.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/20/report-pro-hillary-super-pac-failing-to-raise-clinton-cash-for-2016/

RonW
05-26-2015, 11:48 AM
VIDEO: Hillary Clinton in 1990: I’m ‘Proud of Wal-Mart’ .

http://www.truthdig.com/images/made/images/eartothegrounduploads/Screen_Shot_2015-05-25_at_8.00_.40_AM_1_copy__180_127_s_c1.png


“As a shareholder and director of our company, I’m always proud of Wal-Mart and what we do and the way we do it better than anybody else,” current Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said in a speech in 1990, when she was first lady of Arkansas.

The largest grocery retailer in the U.S. and the biggest company in the world by revenue, Wal-Mart has long been criticized for paying its workers poverty wages. Because those workers often require financial assistance from the U.S. government, Wal-Mart effectively receives a subsidy on labor.

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/video_hillary_clinton_in_1990_im_proud_of_walmart_ 20150525

RonW
05-26-2015, 12:02 PM
Hillary Clinton has been talking about economic inequality lately, but there’s a reason Wall Street isn’t worried.

Economic inequality.” “Robber barons.” “Champion for everyday Americans.” “Feminist.” It’s almost as if Hillary Clinton’s campaign team has started believing what Republicans say about her.

As one Wall Street lawyer put it, “If it turns out to be Jeb vs. Hillary, we would love that and either outcome would be fine.”

Indeed, if Clinton talks today about economic inequality while she throws her crown into the ring, she has a long and loyal relationship with money and power. Among the top ten contributors to her 2008 campaign were employees from JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, CitiGroup, Morgan Stanley, and Lehman Brothers — institutions that can all benefit from a few friends in high places.

As secretary of state, she pressured governments to change policies and sign deals that would benefit US corporations like General Electric, Exxon Mobil, Microsoft, and Boeing. She also promoted hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and contracts with US oil companies like Chevron in Poland, Bulgaria, and elsewhere.

But perhaps her most telling corporate relationship is with the union-busting retail giant Walmart. Clinton served on the company’s board of directors from 1986 to 1992, and the law firm she worked for, Rose Law Firm, represented the corporation.

During those years, Clinton sat quietly as Walmart waged a war on workers trying to unionize and fight for basic rights on the job. This fealty to Walmart never wavered. During her three trips to India as secretary of state, she tried to convince the government to reverse its law aimed at keeping out big-box retailers.

Clinton’s newfound populism would be laughable if it weren’t for her actual record — decades’ worth of cruel attacks on workers and the poor. From support for welfare reform and tough-on-crime policies in the 1990s to shilling for US corporations abroad as secretary of state, Clinton has never strayed from the Democratic Party’s aim — protecting corporate America’s bottom line.

During Bill Clinton’s tenure in the White House, Bill, Hillary, and the New Democrats helped shift the party further to the right, regularly stealing Republicans’ rhetoric and making it their own. Bill situated himself in the center between reactionary congressional Republicans and liberal Democrats who were becoming disillusioned with Clinton’s broken promises.

He took office promising to “end welfare as we know it” — as he had in his home state of Arkansas, with the misnamed Family Support Act. The federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act included strict deadlines for how long recipients could receive benefits, as well as stringent new work rules.

Hillary Clinton, with her close relationship to the Children’s Defense Fund, aided the administration’s push for welfare reform. When an agreement was finally reached, after the administration had squabbled with Newt Gingrich and the Republican-led Congress over more punitive measures like eliminating food stamps, Bill claimed it was the best he could do. And then Hillary helped round up the votes.

With her assistance, the Clinton administration managed what no Republican could achieve, shredding a key New Deal program that often served as the only thing standing between poor families and absolute destitution. The whole effort was steeped in the language of “personal responsibility,” getting people to work and off welfare, and “ending a culture of dependency” — as if poverty was the result of moral failings.

Far from regretting the decision to destroy the welfare system, as New York senator in 2002, Clinton joined Republicans like Orrin Hatch in supporting a bill that increased already punitive work requirements imposed on welfare recipients.

Alongside the former president, Hillary Clinton helped the Democratic Party jettison its pro–labor union, pro–civil rights, pro–social spending image, going on the attack against government programs that people had counted on for sixty years — even while they knew they could still count on the people who supported those programs to vote Democratic.

The field of “education reform” gives more examples. Hillary Clinton was there at the ground floor, when Bill Clinton appointed her chair of the Education Standards Committee in Arkansas. The committee supported standardized tests for students, but primarily mandatory testing for teachers. Clinton highlights her own role in passing this attack on teachers in her memoir Living History:

Though this enraged the teachers union, civil rights groups and others who were vital to the Democratic Party in Arkansas, we felt there was no way around the issue. . . . In the midst of this contention, I stepped before a joint session of the Arkansas legislature’s House and Senate and pled our case . . .”

School reform plan was implemented in 1984. “She shepherded it through and was absolutely instrumental in getting it approved through the legislative process and accepted in general by the public,” said Peggy Nabors, president of the state teachers union at the time.


In a speech before police officers in 1994, she lauded the legislation’s plan to put more money into prisons and one hundred thousand additional cops on the street, arguing, “We will be able to say, loudly and clearly, that for repeat, violent, criminal offenders — three strikes and you’re out. We are tired of putting you back in through the revolving door.”

The Clinton crime bill did indeed put more police on the streets, and thousands more black men in prison for petty, nonviolent offenses. More were incarcerated under Clinton than any other president. As The New Jim Crow author Michelle Alexander wrote in 2010:

Clinton was not satisfied with exploding prison populations. He and the “New Democrats” championed legislation banning drug felons from public housing (no matter how minor the offense) and denying them basic public benefits, including food stamps, for life. Discrimination in virtually every aspect of political, economic, and social life is now perfectly legal, if you’ve been labeled a felon.

Take reproductive rights. Clinton is on record supporting women’s right to abortion and access to birth control. But like the much of the Democratic Party leadership, she is also for striking a balance with those who oppose abortion. In a speech to abortion rights supporters on the anniversary of Roe v Wade in 2005, Clinton argued that both sides of he abortion debate could find common ground to reduce the number of abortion, which she called a “sad, even tragic choice to many, many women.”

Hardly the fierce defense of abortion rights that’s necessary to turn back the right-wing attack on women’s reproductive rights.

The truth however, is that more restrictions on abortion rights were enacted during Clinton’s eight years in the Oval Office than the twelve years of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. There may not have been marches, but it wasn’t because we didn’t need them — it was because the forces that should have called them, like NARAL Pro-Choice America, didn’t because a Democrat was in power.

And while Clinton emphasizes the importance of women ascending to positions of power — more women holding government office and sitting on the boards of corporations — she ignores the issues that affect working-class women. In fact, Clinton’s policies have made the lives of the majority of women phenomenally worse. Like the millions of women affected by welfare cuts, the War on Drugs, or the anti-worker policies at Walmart.

Of course, this didn’t stop every Democratic woman in the Senate, including Massachusetts populist Elizabeth Warren, from signing on to a letter in 2013 encouraging Clinton to run. And the endorsements from mainstream women’s organizations are sure to follow.

Not everyone has yet fallen in line behind Clinton yet. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who was Clinton’s campaign manager in her 2000 Senate race, has so far withheld his endorsement, and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders announced that he will be running to the left of Clinton.

But while these politicians argue that they can play a role in pushing Clinton to the left, in the long term, they may end up corralling everyone behind Clinton. Because, if she is in fact the Democratic candidate in 2016, the most persuasive argument the Democratic Party will be making won’t be for Clinton but against whatever Republican is opposing her. All this means that Clinton will be under absolutely no pressure to listen to the Left.

The “mavericks” like Warren and de Blasio — just as Dennis Kucinich and Jesse Jackson before them — will remain loyal Democrats who convince liberal and progressive supporters of the party to set aside their principles and vote for the moderate, “electable” choice. And alongside the liberal Democrats are the organizations whose job it is to line up support by fundraising and sign up voters — like the National Organization for Women, which endorsed Clinton when she ran for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

The problem isn’t just Clinton, but the iron grip the Democratic and Republican parties hold over elections, where independent alternatives to the two corporate parties have few opportunities to break in. The Clinton campaign stands in sharp contrast with the mood of the people who will be strong-armed into voting for her — frustrated with corporate greed, low wages, and police racism, they are beginning to organize for change.

But Hillary Clinton isn’t the candidate of people’s hope and dreams, she is the one shooting those dreams out of the sky.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/05/hillary-clinton-president-walmart-business-feminist/

Chip-skiff
05-26-2015, 12:28 PM
Wow! You guys are getting scared, and desperation is not pretty.

http://religiopoliticaltalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Hillary-Clinton-Money.jpg

But it is pretty funny.

Wear your waders and rubber gloves when you're digging in the rubbish heaps.

Norman Bernstein
05-26-2015, 12:32 PM
Wear your waders and rubber gloves when you're digging in the rubbish heaps.

Might as well get used to it.... it's going to be like this until November of 2016.

In a few months, RonW will run out of specific anti-Hillary topics, so he'll reprise the full set....

...again and again and again :)

George Jung
05-26-2015, 12:35 PM
Put him on 'ignore'.... it's relaxing, and your IQ automatically goes up 20 points.

Norman Bernstein
05-26-2015, 12:35 PM
Put him on 'ignore'.... it's relaxing, and your IQ automatically goes up 20 points.

Nahhh.... desperation (in other people) is sometimes entertaining :)

RonW
05-26-2015, 01:06 PM
Put him on 'ignore'.... it's relaxing, and your IQ automatically goes up 20 points.


Nahhh.... desperation (in other people) is sometimes entertaining :)

Well it looks like Norman Bernstein is correct where on another thread he says the democrats have a empty seat. When are you guys going to realize the good ole hillary is doing a lot of damage to the democrat party and is keeping much more credible, qualified and trust worthy dems from running that might actually have a chance...

--Oh and then we have this directly from the horses mouth so as to speak ...


norman bernstein --Nobody compels you to read my threads. If you were simply annoyed by 'political' threads, you'd ignore them.... but the fact that you feel compelled to post isn't just your aversion to political threads...

....it's your desire to disparage people who DO like to talk politics.

If you don't like politics, don't participate... it's really as simple as that.

Post # 3.....http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?192620-On-Presidential-humility-and-voter-humility-too

S.V. Airlie
05-26-2015, 02:24 PM
Might as well get used to it.... it's going to be like this until November of 2016.

In a few months, RonW will run out of specific anti-Hillary topics, so he'll reprise the full set....

...again and again and again :)In my old computer lingo, RonW is a never ending "do loop"!

RonW
05-26-2015, 03:27 PM
‘Clinton Cash’ by Breitbart News’ Peter Schweizer: #3 NYT Bestseller in Week 2

CLINTON FOUNDATION DONORS GOT WEAPONS DEALS FROM HILLARY CLINTON’S STATE DEPARTMENT

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States’ oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region’s fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/26/ibt-clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-from-hillary-clintons-state-department/


Under Clinton's leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure -- derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) -- represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House.

American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.


http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187


http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2015/05/26/image-473992552.jpg?itok=61UCprzU

Chip-skiff
05-26-2015, 09:10 PM
When you were a kid, did you ever poke an anthill with a stick?

Garret
05-26-2015, 09:25 PM
Poured salt on slugs?

S.V. Airlie
05-26-2015, 09:46 PM
When you were a kid, did you ever poke an anthill with a stick?Probably red ants!

KMacDonald
05-26-2015, 10:22 PM
Probably red ants!

Do you have an ax to grind or what? Partisan obsession?

Garret
05-26-2015, 10:27 PM
Do you have an ax to grind or what? Partisan obsession?

You want to hit an anthill with an ax? Or is it for the slugs?

BTW - the obsession is Ron's with Hilary. I think he lusts after her in his heart.

RonW
05-31-2015, 05:48 PM
http://www.globemagazine.com/sites/globemagazine.com/files/GL23C1A_2015.jpg

Well rumors has it that hillary is writing a tell all book about, well herself of course and receive $25 million for her effort.......

Supposedly she is going to tell that she is a alcoholic, and says Obama is too. She also is suppose to admit to that the rumors of her bi-sexuality is true, and she is going to tell about her son that she gave up long ago......and that is just the beginning........Oh and she met her son for the first time when he was 21 years old........

more to come.....

Garret
05-31-2015, 06:16 PM
Oh - the Globe is now a trusted news source???? Why hasn't she been abducted by aliens?

My goodness you are desperate, aren't you?

S.V. Airlie
05-31-2015, 06:24 PM
Almost as good as Brainfart!

RonW
05-31-2015, 06:26 PM
Oh - the Globe is now a trusted news source???? Why hasn't she been abducted by aliens?

My goodness you are desperate, aren't you?

Oh come on garrett.......I can't go to the grocery store with out holding up the line reading the globe and national enquirer, the only problem is they have more truth then CNN, Fox and MSNBC does all put together........America loves reading about celebrity trashy behavior, and hillary is becoming a big hit........

Garret
05-31-2015, 06:50 PM
Just like "Men in Black" - where the Enquirer has the "real" story?

That was a movie - aka "fiction".

S.V. Airlie
05-31-2015, 07:21 PM
Ya missed one RonW. I'm surprised!

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/12/27/article-2253548-16A97F89000005DC-296_306x389.jpg

RonW
05-31-2015, 07:51 PM
And it seems as if there is no end to the entertainment provided by the clintons........they just keep coming..



---SALON: ‘CLINTON CASH’ DONATIONS FROM 20 FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS THAT HILLARY WON’T ANSWER ..

Editor’s Note: This story first appeared in Salon. We reprint in part here. (edited for certain people who don't read before they respond.)

Among all the rivers of money that have flowed to the Clinton family, one seems to raise the biggest national security questions of all: the stream of cash that came from 20 foreign governments who relied on weapons export approvals from Hillary Clinton’s State Department.

Federal law designates the secretary of state as “responsible for the continuous supervision and general direction of sales” of arms, military hardware and services to foreign countries. In practice, that meant that Clinton was charged with rejecting or approving weapons deals — and when it came to Clinton Foundation donors, Hillary Clinton’s State Department did a whole lot of approving.

While Clinton was secretary of state, her department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to Clinton Foundation donors. That figure from Clinton’s three full fiscal years in office is almost double the value of arms sales to those countries during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

Read the full story.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/hillary-clinton-tight-lipped-reuters-640x481.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/31/salon-clinton-cash-donations-from-20-foreign-governments-that-hillary-wont-answer/

S.V. Airlie
05-31-2015, 07:55 PM
There is nothing like Brainfart's being entertaining either.

RonW
06-02-2015, 02:11 PM
SEN. RAND PAUL SWEEPS POLLS, FARES BEST WITH INDEPENDENTS AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON

--GOP presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)93%
swept the competition in recent polls, which also indicates he is the best Republican candidate to go head to head against likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

In fact, independent voters — often the votes that swing an election one way or the other — overwhelmingly prefer Paul over Clinton, according to a previous Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. “Unlike the other Republicans, Mr. Paul significantly outpolled Mrs. Clinton among independent voters, by 45%-37%, reported The Wall Street Journal.

Not only are polls indicating independents overwhelmingly support Paul, but so do several national surveys comparing him to fellow GOP candidates in key states.

An ABC/Washington Post Poll has Paul tied for first place in the Republican primary with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who is not yet an official candidate but is expected to announce later this summer.

Paul is tied for second with fellow GOP candidate Dr. Ben Carson for the Iowa caucus in a Bloomberg/Des Moines Register Poll.

Paul is faring well in New Hampshire, where the top Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton has spent much of her time campaigning.

Bloomberg Politics/Saint Anselm New Hampshire Poll has Paul in first place for the New Hampshire primary.

“A recent PPP Poll showed Sen. Paul is in first place in the New Hampshire Republican Primary and performs best against Hillary compared to all other candidates,” touted Paul’s campaign in an email to supporters.

Not only is Paul in first place in New Hampshire, but he is also in first in the state of Washington.

Independent voters also have Paul leading Clinton in Arizona, Colorado, Iowa and Pennsylvania.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/Hillary-17ba06-s900-c85-640x480.jpg

S.V. Airlie
06-02-2015, 02:36 PM
Quinnipac Polling, as of 5/28 have Clinton up by 4 against Paul. Glad you found one poll you like RonW today! At this time, polls are worth squat!

The poll has been cited by major news outlets throughout North America and Europe, including The Washington Post (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post),[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-5) Fox News (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News),[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-6) USA Today (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_Today),[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-7) The New York Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times),[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-8) CNN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN),[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-9) and Reuters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters).[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-10) Quinnipiac's Polling Institute receives national recognition for its independent surveys of residents throughout the United States. It conducts public opinion polls on politics and public policy as a public service as well as for academic research.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-lieberman-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-slate101608-3) Andrew S. Tanenbaum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_S._Tanenbaum), the founder of the poll-analysis website Electoral-vote.com (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral-vote.com), compared major pollsters' performances in the 2010 midterm Senate elections (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2010) and concluded that Quinnipiac was the most accurate, with a mean error of 2.0 percent.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinnipiac_University_Polling_Institute#cite_note-11)

RonW
06-04-2015, 06:25 PM
HILLARY STONEWALLED ON TAXES TO AVOID INSIDER TRADING PROSECUTION .

--Thursday on Newsmax TV’s “The Hard Line,” political strategist and author Dick Morris discussed whether or not if Hillary Clinton can get away with her current campaign strategy of not releasing her email server or taking questions from the press and said Hillary has “faith in concealment.”

To prove his point, Morris told the story of the 1994 scandal when then-first lady Hillary Clinton was under fire for investing $1,000, and netting $100,000 through commodity trading.

“I remember one time discussing whether she should release her tax returns and The Washington Times said, ‘Unless you do we are going to push for a special prosecutor on the Whitewater scandal,’ and she refused to,” he said. “And I keep pushing and pushing and she kept refusing, saying it’s none of their business, blah blah blah. Finally I gave up and then a few years later I find out why. She didn’t want the insider trading of her thousand bucks on the commodities market where she made a hundred [thousand] to come to light because the statute of limitations on prosecution of insider trading had not run out yet. And the month it ran out, the month she could no longer be prosecuted, bang, it was released.”

On the email scandal, Morris said, “She is crazy to think this stuff isn’t going to come out. She sent these emails to somebody else. They can be subpoenaed. Their servers can be searched.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/04/morris-hillary-stonewalled-on-taxes-to-avoid-insider-trading-prosecution/

ccmanuals
06-04-2015, 06:35 PM
Newsmax and Dick Morris, now there's a combination.

delecta
06-04-2015, 06:54 PM
A fine display of desperation from the desperate Right!;)

You keep thinking that.....will help you sleep the night everyone realizes, Clinton will not be president.

S.V. Airlie
06-04-2015, 06:56 PM
You keep thinking that.....will help you sleep the night everyone realizes, Clinton will not be president.No, I'd check to see if my passport is STILL valid!

RonW
06-04-2015, 07:02 PM
You keep thinking that.....will help you sleep the night everyone realizes, Clinton will not be president.

That's the shame of it all, there are people that actually would vote for this witch..maybe there should be a test before you vote ..some here would fail it, sad to say..

S.V. Airlie
06-04-2015, 07:03 PM
And, those Reps running are just the cat's meow!

RonW
06-08-2015, 06:30 PM
BERNIE SANDERS PULLS WITHIN 8 POINTS OF HILLARY IN WISCONSIN STRAW POLL

--Eight years later and it is déjà vu all over again for Hillary Clinton. Only this time it isn’t a young, charismatic Barack Obama creeping up on her inevitability; it is old, eccentric Bernie Sanders who came out of nowhere to come within 8 points of Clinton in a weekend Wisconsin straw poll:

Wisconsin Democrats might not be ready for Hillary Clinton, as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) finished just 8 points behind Clinton in a new Badger State straw poll.

Clinton finished with 49 percent of voters at the state party convention, with Sanders in second place with 41 percent of the vote. …

The surprise showing is a boost for Sanders, who regularly polls about 40 percentage points behind Clinton in national poll and rarely finishes within striking distance to Clinton.

The left-wing Nation looked at the crowds Sanders has attracted and called the results of this straw poll “significant“:

Last week, in Minnesota, Sanders attracted thousands to a hastily scheduled town-hall meeting. The size of the crowd certainly suggested that the senator’s economic-populist message is getting through. At the same time, it offered an indication that Sanders has, through decades of work in Washington and travel around the country, forged a connection with the grassroots activists who are especially engaged with the nominating process in a state that will never get the attention accorded the first-caucus state of Iowa and the first-primary state of New Hampshire—but that will send a substantial bloc of delegates to the July 2016 Democratic National Convention. Now, in another state, Wisconsin, Sanders has gained another sign of unexpected and significant support.

It is doubtful Sanders could upset Clinton in a Democrat primary. What is not in doubt is that Democrats are looking for an alternative to Clinton, and are from falling into unified love for their likely nominee.

There is also the matter of the Clinton Foundation scandals, which loom large, even as Hillary successfully dodges a mainstream media that doesn’t appear all that interested in cornering her.

Clinton won’t, however, be able to dodge hundreds of millions of dollars in GOP campaign ads, and Democrats know in their hearts that the scandals are legitimate, easy for the public to understand, and in this age of New Media, out of the hands of Clinton’s allies in the mainstream media.

Democrats are worried, and sending a bat signal that they are open to an alternative .

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2015/06/08/bernie-sanders-pulls-within-8-points-of-hillary-in-wisconsin-straw-poll/


And I give you, Bernie Sanders, the next democrat presidential hopeful..........


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/05/ap_bernie-sanders_ap-photo5-640x427.jpg

Garret
06-08-2015, 06:38 PM
Bernie did not come out of nowhere. Firstly, he came out of Vermont. Second, anyone who's been paying any attention at all to DC knows that he has fought some good fights - to get more disclosure on DoD costs, Fannie & Freddie dealings, veteran care, Wall St, etc. etc. In fact, many conservatives who actually look at his record & can stop thinking about how he's been labeled often find many things they can agree with him on.

Will Bernie win? I strongly doubt it - but any US voter should be happy to hear many of the questions he's asking.

Chip-skiff
06-08-2015, 07:04 PM
That's the shame of it all, there are people that actually would vote for this witch..maybe there should be a test before you vote ..some here would fail it, sad to say..

If it tested spelling, grammar, and reading comprehension, you would fail.

Does your naming Clinton as a witch mean that you're going medieval on us? Stakes and death by fire, and all that great Christian stuff?

RonW
06-08-2015, 07:52 PM
CADDELL: HILLARY’S TROUBLES MAY FORCE BIDEN, WARREN OR EVEN KERRY IN 2016 DEM FIELD

--In an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “Your World” on Monday, Democratic Party pollster Pat Caddell told host Neil Cavuto that a damaged Hillary Clinton may force others into the 2016 presidential field on the Democratic Party’s side if Clinton continues to appear she’s putting her party at risk.

“[W]e’re watching Bernie Sanders get real votes and I think part of it is because he is authentic,” Caddell said. “But he is quite a contrast. He’s drawing huge crowds in Iowa. I’m going to tell you what if this happens, we could get Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)12%
, we could get [Joe] Biden. I would not leave him out of this or even John Kerry. If the Democratic smarties realize what I think they will in a few months because I’ve looked at these things pretty carefully, and they realize that she could be taking them down, and these things are going to continue on, people are going to get in.”



http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/08/caddell-hillarys-troubles-may-force-biden-warren-or-even-kerry-in-2016-dem-field/

S.V. Airlie
06-08-2015, 10:06 PM
I hear several Brainfarts! He really should cut out the prunes or the baked beans.

ccmanuals
06-16-2015, 01:18 PM
Pretty sure no one cares about the crap being made up on Breitbart.

ccmanuals
06-16-2015, 01:29 PM
Are you saying that this story is false and totally fabricated by brietbart news agency......????

I would say that it is disingenuous and falsely misleading.

Chip-skiff
06-16-2015, 01:41 PM
Ronster- nice of you to run this thread showing, by providing a stark contrast, how sane and public-spirited Hillary Clinton would be as president.

Good to have you on the team!

Chip-skiff
06-16-2015, 01:48 PM
Thanks chipster, I will do all that I can to spread the word, for us little people...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX6I2NrguAs

ccmanuals
06-16-2015, 01:56 PM
Thanks chipster, I will do all that I can to spread the word, for us little people.......

CLINTON CAMPAIGN WON’T COMMIT TO RELEASING HILLARY MEDICAL RECORDS

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/06/GettyImages-87847251-640x504.jpg




http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/15/clinton-campaign-wont-commit-to-releasing-hillary-medical-records/

Medical records. You can't be serious.
Dude, you have completely dropped off the deep end.
Sorry, I just don't have the time to even deal with this level of idiocy.

S.V. Airlie
06-16-2015, 02:09 PM
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2010-07-22-dancolor4438.jpg

genglandoh
06-16-2015, 02:32 PM
Medical records. You can't be serious.
Dude, you have completely dropped off the deep end.
Sorry, I just don't have the time to even deal with this level of idiocy.

Don't forget Bill Clinton said it took 6 months for Hillary to get over her concussion.

Bill Clinton reveals it took Hillary 'six months of very serious work to get over' her concussion after accident - so why did State Department claim that she 'fully recovered' a month later
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz31zh5qYYx (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2629288/Bill-Clinton-reveals-took-Hillary-six-months-work-accident.html#ixzz31zh5qYYx)

S.V. Airlie
06-16-2015, 02:37 PM
OKAY 6 months! How long ago was it then?

ccmanuals
06-16-2015, 03:20 PM
You are disappointing me there CC. I thought you knew more about elections...to start with......



http://samuel-warde.com/2012/08/claims-of-sealed-obama-records-proven-false/



http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/covering_candidates_medical_re.php

So, you believe that releasing medical records is the same thing as releasing results from an examination? Think about this a bit before you respond. It might save you some embarrassment.

S.V. Airlie
06-16-2015, 05:02 PM
He apparently doesn't mind being embarrassed!

tomlarkin
06-16-2015, 08:27 PM
I enjoy checking in on this thread every week or so just to see Ron frothing at the mouth.

tomlarkin
06-16-2015, 08:39 PM
Thanks?

Garret
06-16-2015, 10:03 PM
I enjoy checking in on this thread every week or so just to see Ron frothing at the mouth.

I find it a good gauge of just how worried the RWW's are. The more strident the cries, the more they're realizing they are in deep doo doo with the candidates their side is putting up.

It's also good for a laugh or 3.

Corvida
07-06-2015, 11:36 PM
This whole election is a sad showing of our political process. The two front runners, Jeb and Hillary, have so much name recognition that there's really no way for them to gain support. Everyone knows who they are, and either hates them, or not, already. The only thing either of them can do, is hope to not screw up too badly, and lose the support they have, because no one is going to join their cause. So both of our main contenders are flying around trying to say as little as possible, while saying just enough to not lose more support. It's the 'Don't remind anyone why they hate me tour.' All the while, every other candidate in both parties is just trying make enough noise that a reporter will actually talk to them. Hell, even Trump is running with the 'I'm a racist ass' theme as long as it gets him camera time. Can't blame him, it's gotten him more support than anything else he's said, which really says worse things about republicans that it does about Trump.

Glen Longino
07-07-2015, 12:07 AM
This whole election is a sad showing of our political process. The two front runners, Jeb and Hillary, have so much name recognition that there's really no way for them to gain support. Everyone knows who they are, and either hates them, or not, already. The only thing either of them can do, is hope to not screw up too badly, and lose the support they have, because no one is going to join their cause. So both of our main contenders are flying around trying to say as little as possible, while saying just enough to not lose more support. It's the 'Don't remind anyone why they hate me tour.' All the while, every other candidate in both parties is just trying make enough noise that a reporter will actually talk to them. Hell, even Trump is running with the 'I'm a racist ass' theme as long as it gets him camera time. Can't blame him, it's gotten him more support than anything else he's said, which really says worse things about republicans that it does about Trump.

Your view is quite cynical, IMO.
In the first place, the fact that Hillary Clinton is much more qualified to be POTUS than Bush or Trump or anybody else in the clown car, should be obvious to anybody.
Is that her weakness in your opinion? Ha!

RonW
07-07-2015, 06:59 PM
HILLARY ON EMAILS: ‘I DIDN’T HAVE TO TURN OVER ANYTHING’

--Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told CNN’s Brianna Keilar that she had been fully compliant with all relevant laws and regulations regarding her email during her service in the Obama administration, despite using a private email address, maintaining a private server at her New York home, selecting which emails to turn over for archival purposes, and deleting the rest.

“Everything I did was permitted….I didn’t have to turn over anything,” Clinton said in her first national interview of the presidential campaign.

Critics have argued that Clinton’s failure to provide all of her email to the State Department was a violation of the Federal Records Act, and that regulations promulgated by the National Archives cover private emails as well. There is also the matter of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, which would not have targeted Clinton’s personal server, since it was unknown to the public. And as Shannen Coffin notes at the National Review, it is a felony under federal law to remove or destroy official government records.

In addition, State Department policy, which Clinton enforced while in office, discourages the use of personal email accounts for work purposes. Clinton and her defenders have said that she did not share classified or sensitive information on her personal email account, but subsequent revelations about the content of some emails–as well as belated efforts by the State Department to classify some emails–have cast doubt on that claim. Clinton also destroyed her emails despite being asked about them by Congress.

In recent days, contradictions between emails submitted to Congress by Clinton associate Sidney Blumenthal and those submitted by Clinton via the State Department have suggested that she may have edited or obscured the contents of some of the email that she provided to the government. That could also violate a number of federal laws and regulations, as well as department policies.

At the very least, Clinton’s conduct demonstrates a contempt for the Obama administration’s own supposed commitment to transparency.


http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/07/hillaryemail-640x480.jpg


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/hillary-on-emails-i-didnt-have-to-turn-over-anything/

Chip-skiff
07-07-2015, 07:11 PM
Surprised you aren't dizzy from the spin.

Typical junk journalism/propaganda from breitbart.

Corvida
07-07-2015, 09:45 PM
Your view is quite cynical, IMO.
In the first place, the fact that Hillary Clinton is much more qualified to be POTUS than Bush or Trump or anybody else in the clown car, should be obvious to anybody.
Is that her weakness in your opinion? Ha!

If qualified were a requirement, junior would never have been elected. And as I said, Hillary and Jeb have the same weakness, no one is going to join their side. Everyone who is going to, already has. Those that haven't, aren't going to. Until one of them wins a primary.

RonW
07-16-2015, 10:56 AM
Hillary Clinton’s Poll Numbers Collapse


--Despite the best efforts of CNN and Brianna Keiler to give Hillary Clinton a series of softball questions that would allow the Democrat presidential frontrunner to clean up all her scandals and well-publicized ethical lapses, in the latest Associated Press poll, her favorability numbers have actually decreased since their last poll in April.

Clinton’s biggest problem is that just 3-in-10 voters see her as honest.

The mega-scandal around Clinton’s decision to wipe her email server clean after Nixon-ing thousands of emails is dwarfed only by the Clinton Family Foundation’s serial-ethical lapses and apparent corruption revealed by our own Peter Schweizer in “Clinton Cash.”

While the media has done its best to distract from the Clinton scandals with a month-long campaign of Todd Akin-ing Donald Trump, a public that now has access to the truth outside the media’s propaganda bubble through New Media, hasn’t been distracted enough to forget the scandals, or that Clinton has yet to explain them to the satisfaction of anyone with any kind of moral compass.

The honesty issue is trickling down into other crucially important areas for Clinton.

Clinton’s favorability rating is a disastrous 39%, compared to 49% who view her unfavorably. That’s a full 8% increase in Hillary’s unfavorable rating since April.

Among Democrats, Hillary’s favorability dropped 11-points, although it is still over 70%.

A mere 40% of those polled said Clinton is compassionate; a mere 30% described her as honest.

Even on issues of leadership. Clinton slipped. Those who see her as inspiring slipped from 44% to just 37%. This is especially surprising given the historic nature of her candidacy. Other women have run for president but Hillary is the first with a serious shot at winning.

On the issue of decisiveness, Clinton slipped from 56% to 47%.

Clinton also isn’t likable. On the public stage she is brittle, cold and acts like a robot dealing with too much data. Although its wasn’t asked, she is almost certainly upside-down on the all-important question of whether or not you’d want to have a beer with her.

If Vice President Joe Biden stays out of the race it will only be due to the $47 million Clinton has raised for the primary election. Everything else has to be telling him to jump in.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/16/hillary-clintons-poll-numbers-collapse/

S.V. Airlie
07-16-2015, 12:06 PM
Whoopie! Another fart!

bobbys
07-16-2015, 02:37 PM
I'm just catching up with my reading finally getting to the March issue of thee Atlantic. Now I'll be voting for Hillary, but if you want stuff for this thread, check out the article on page 60, "Among the Hillary Haters." Bobbys there's stuff there you'd love, e.g., R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., author of "Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House." Tyrrell says when Hillary arrived in Arkansas she had "baggy clothes and eyebrows so thick they would have collected coal dust in a Welsh mining village."

Just a sample of good ol' hate for ya. Lot's of stuff there, you boys all enjoy now!
.

I never said anything about her psychical looks in fact said she rocks pantsuits and was hot when a republican..

But thanks for saying what I would hate and implying I would like something.

Intresting debate tactic..

LOL

S.V. Airlie
07-16-2015, 02:40 PM
But thanks for saying what I would hate and implying I would like something. It's pretty obvious Boobys

purri
07-16-2015, 07:06 PM
I thought it was a prolapse..
Whoopie! Another fart!

bobbys
07-16-2015, 08:56 PM
But thanks for saying what I would hate and implying I would like something. It's pretty obvious Boobys.

Do you even know who or what you are responding to?

S.V. Airlie
07-16-2015, 08:57 PM
You think I don't?

RonW
07-28-2015, 02:46 PM
Well this is like the , we have to pass it to see what is in it......


Hillary: I Might State My Opinion on Keystone Pipeline After I’m Elected

--Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton responded to a question on the Keystone XL Pipeline with “If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question” on Tuesday.

Hillary was asked if she would sign a bill to allow the pipeline’s construction, she answered, “Well, as you know, I was the secretary of state who started that process. I was the one who put into place the investigation. I have now passed it off — as obvious, because I’m no longer there, to Secretary Kerry. This is President Obama’s decision. And I am not going to second-guess him, because I was in a position to set this in motion, and I do not think that would be the right thing to do. So, I want to wait and see what he and Secretary Kerry decide. If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.”


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/07/28/hillary-i-might-give-state-my-on-keystone-pipeline-after-im-elected/

S.V. Airlie
07-28-2015, 02:51 PM
The process of the investigation into the issues resulting from the development of it or the proposed installation of it? The term, "investigate" should make you "think" about what she's actually saying! Keep digging, the road improvements are shovel ready!

It appears to be a position (pipeline) Clinton wants to go into after the election and when she wins. I don't blame her for not wanting to open a can of worms now! What's the sense? The bill has been nixed already by the current administration already! It's politic for her to wait until she's in office to make a decision now as to where she stands. I think her ad about global warming indicates where she is leaning now.

TomF
07-28-2015, 03:26 PM
Well this is like the , we have to pass it to see what is in it......


Hillary: I Might State My Opinion on Keystone Pipeline After I’m Elected

--Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton responded to a question on the Keystone XL Pipeline with “If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question” on Tuesday...

She's learned something from McCain and Romney, it seems. They never took a firm position while running, preferring instead to lead with "Leadership" rather than "Issues." As a few Reps who were here at the time observed (I still miss High C), that was intentional. The argument ran that any number of unanticipated policy issues arise during a Presidency. The key thing for voters, then, is to elect someone whose thematic approach aligned with yours, who you'd expect to deal with such issues in a way you'd approve.

In contrast, he said that the Dems defeated themselves with Independents by obsessing the minutae of individual policy issues, many of which would prove irrelevant when actually governing. And didn't project leadership strongly enough.

S.V. Airlie
07-28-2015, 04:07 PM
Funny! Learned from Republicans!

RonW
07-28-2015, 04:58 PM
Well this issue of her not answering, but coming up with the dimwit answer of I will tell you when I am elected was the big discussion point on the ed Schultz show which is on right now and the left is very pissed that Hillary is so arrogant as to say such a stupid thing........it and she ain't playing well..

S.V. Airlie
07-28-2015, 05:16 PM
Yep, I guess answer that leaves THE answer to be addressed will happen when she is in office and will not be given before. The ruling on the pipeline is how it is now, no sense opening a can of worms until the issue reappears and needs to be addressed! You'd like her to I realize! Also, if she answered now and changes her mind down the road for some reason, she will be called a "flip flopper" Sound familiar? Mitt perchance!

RonW
07-30-2015, 07:05 AM
August ..22...Hillary....Congressional hearing...Benghazi......

Well like it or not Hillary is scheduled to testify before congress on august 22 concerning her involvement in Benghazi.. and there is no time limit set for the hearing, so it looks like she will be on the hot seat for quite a while, and this B.S. of what does it matter now, ain't gonna cut it.........go trey gowdy........


But wait it gets better, in January coming to a theater near you will be the new movie Benghazi .......gee what timing.......could this be a vast right wing conspiracy ?

S.V. Airlie
07-30-2015, 07:52 AM
Whooopie! She's getting used to it after 18mos of constantly having to go before Congress again and again and AGAIN! Reps must have their jollies!

RonW
07-30-2015, 09:10 AM
Breaking news,
.
Hillary Clinton did her best to hide from the world the fact that she went to an exclusive New York salon for a $600 haircut last week.

--Last Friday, Hillary Clinton blew into New York’s exclusive John Barrett Salon, where the cheapest ‘do is $600. But the visit was a stealth campaign, as team Hillary shut down elevators, arranged secret side entrances, and cleared galleries for her service.

The New York Post reported all the secret arrangements from an inside source who said, “Staff closed off one side of Bergdorf’s so Hillary could come in privately to get her hair done. An elevator bank was shut down so she could ride up alone, and then she was styled in a private area of the salon. Other customers didn’t get a glimpse. Hillary was later seen with a new feathered hairdo.”

The Clintons have a history with expensive hairdos, even though they strain to appear as “regular” Americans.

One might recall that back in 1993, then-President Bill Clinton kicked up a controversy with “Hairgate,” when he drove in a special stylist to Air Force One while the plane idled on the tarmac at Los Angeles International Airport. In an ultimate act of privilege, while the people’s plane was wasting thousands of dollars an hour in fuel as it idled, Clinton brought in Belgian stylist Cristophe Schatteman to give the president a special $200 trim.

Flash-forward to her latest campaign, Hillary has been desperate to be seen as “just like us” while she campaigns for the Democratic nomination for president. In fact, less than a year ago, Hillary was telling audiences that she was “just like” other mothers who have had it hard in life.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/07/ap_hillary-rodham-clinton_ap-photo25-640x427.jpg


This has got to be a vast right wing conspiracy......but then again how can you claim to be one of the little people with a $ 600. haircut, that is more then trump pays.........

S.V. Airlie
07-30-2015, 09:13 AM
Who gives a crap other than you?

RonW
07-30-2015, 09:16 AM
Who gives a crap other than you?

Voters............

and 7,229 views to this thread......

S.V. Airlie
07-30-2015, 09:20 AM
Who are looking at everyone of your posts for entertainment purposes! Nothing more! Some just wait in anticipation for another "RonW" post! Many need a good laugh now and then!

RonW
07-30-2015, 09:38 AM
Who are looking at everyone of your posts for entertainment purposes! Nothing more! Some just wait in anticipation for another "RonW" post! Many need a good laugh now and then!


You are my best customer, I can always count on you to bump the Hillary thread back to the top where it belongs.......

There wouldn't be a bilge without you.......

So who is going to vote for someone who spends $600. on a haircut.........

S.V. Airlie
07-30-2015, 09:46 AM
And it's dumped on pretty regularly when it's bumped!