Nanker Posted June 12, 2016 Author Share Posted June 12, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I like those glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 12, 2016 Author Share Posted June 12, 2016 I'll bet Bill covered his testicles with them and put the bridge over his little Willie. "Quite a schnozz you've got there Bill," said Hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I'll bet Bill covered his testicles with them and put the bridge over his little Willie. "Quite a schnozz you've got there Bill," said Hill. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 12, 2016 Author Share Posted June 12, 2016 Try it sometime. It'll make your lady friend convulse in laughter. Trust me. Oh, and then... great sex! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 (edited) Hillary In '06: Secure Borders, Deport Illegals | Watch as Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2006 sounds a little like Donald Trump discussing the need to secure our borders and deport illegal aliens. (Video at the link) http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/06/12/hillary-06-secure-borders-deport-illegals Gee....................she evolved. . Today was Hillary Clinton's chance to claim the political center with a tough stance on the Islamist threat. She blew it by echoing Obama. . Edited June 13, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Today was Hillary Clinton's chance to claim the political center with a tough stance on the Islamist threat. She blew it by echoing Obama. She has no choice but to echo him if she wants to avoid a criminal prosecution for her email server. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 She has no choice but to echo him if she wants to avoid a criminal prosecution for her email server. Its politics at its worst, but again, when have American lives ever mattered to Hillary's career before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 13, 2016 Author Share Posted June 13, 2016 She has no choice but to echo him if she wants to avoid a criminal prosecution for her email server. On his final day in office, he will issue her a Presidential pardon. I have no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Clinton on Naming the Enemy by Rammesh Ponnuru Hillary Clinton, Nov. 19, 2015: “The obsession in some quarters with a clash of civilization, or repeating the specific words ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ isn’t just a distraction, it gives these criminals, these murderers more standing than they deserve. It actually plays into their hands by alienating partners we need by our side.” Hillary Clinton, today: “From my perspective, it matters what we do, not what we say. . . . To me radical jihadism, radical Islamism–I think they mean the same thing, I’m happy to say either.” I see at least two possible explanations for Clinton’s shift. First: She has changed her mind, or her position. In November, she argued that our terminology had great strategic importance. (At the time I wrote that her argument about why it was better to attack “jihadist” rather than “radical Islamic” terrorism made little sense.) Today, questions of rhetoric are, well, distractions. Second: She thinks that it’s fine to attack either “radical jihadist terrorism” or “radical Islamist terrorism”–that these are interchangeable terms–but a big strategic mistake to attack “radical Islamic terrorism.” That is, we set back the war on terrorism if we use a hard “c” instead of an “st.” That view also reconciles her Nov. 19 speech and an early December interview she gave to George Stephanopoulos. Clinton wants to argue that Trump speaks recklessly about terrorism while she speaks carefully, and sometimes she wants their different rhetorical approaches to matter. But she doesn’t seem to have thought through her own very well. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Hillary Clinton is arguing in a speech today that the Orlando terror attack happened because we're not fast enough at taking away the basic rights of every person under FBI investigation. No. Really. This is her pitch today. Along with explaining that it's high time that Saudi, Qatar and Kuwait...all massive Clinton Foundation donors...stop their citizens from funding terrorists. It's hard to sound more stupid than Trump, and yet here is Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Hillary Clinton is arguing in a speech today that the Orlando terror attack happened because we're not fast enough at taking away the basic rights of every person under FBI investigation. Due process only matters when she's delaying it in her own investigations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Washington ExaminerVerified account @dcexaminer Jun 2 Hillary Clinton: "America stands up to countries that treat women like animals." http://washex.am/1UiSJUZ Gee, If only the Clinton Foundation did.............. Hillary ClintonVerified account @HillaryClinton 2h2 hours ago If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked. I agree..............anyone under FBI investigation is super sketchy. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 13, 2016 Author Share Posted June 13, 2016 Well, to be fair, she does evolve... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Quote Hillary ClintonVerified account @HillaryClinton 2h2 hours ago If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked. if you are under investigation by the FBI, should you have access to the Nuclear Launch Codes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 (edited) Hillary Clinton is arguing in a speech today that the Orlando terror attack happened because we're not fast enough at taking away the basic rights of every person under FBI investigation. No. Really. This is her pitch today. Along with explaining that it's high time that Saudi, Qatar and Kuwait...all massive Clinton Foundation donors...stop their citizens from funding terrorists. It's hard to sound more stupid than Trump, and yet here is Hillary. That's OK. Trump's reaction to this is "You see folks, we need to ban Syrian refugees." That and self-congratulations that this proves he was right somehow about immigration. Those are the choices. Yet Gary Johnson hopes for 3%. Edited June 14, 2016 by Observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 That's OK. Trump's reaction to this is "You see folks, we need to ban Syrian refugees." That and self-congratulations that this proves he was right somehow about immigration. Those are the choices. Yet Gary Johnson hopes for 3%. There's never been a choice in this election. Just theater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 That's OK. Trump's reaction to this is "You see folks, we need to ban Syrian refugees." That and self-congratulations that this proves he was right somehow about immigration. Those are the choices. Yet Gary Johnson hopes for 3%. Why wouldn't we ban Syrian refugees given what little we really know about those coming in? While we're at it, why wouldn't we do a lot more to secure our borders? Why shouldn't we bring all immigration (legal and illegal) down to a trickle until we can improve the process and until a time when our economy and jobs environment is better equipped to absorb higher numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 I have never seen this source before, so fair warning, but if true this would be really entertaining to watch. Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails Reliable intelligence sources in the West have indicated that warnings had been received that the Russian Government could in the near future release the text of email messages intercepted from U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server from the time she was U.S. Secretary of State. The release would, the messaging indicated, prove that Secretary Clinton had, in fact, laid open U.S. secrets to foreign interception by putting highly-classified Government reports onto a private server in violation of U.S. law, and that, as suspected, the server had been targeted and hacked by foreign intelligence services. The reports indicated that the decision as to whether to reveal the intercepts would be made by Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, and it was possible that the release would, if made, be through a third party, such as Wikileaks. http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Russia-Is-Reportedly-Set-To-Release-Intercepted-Messages-From-Clintons-Private.html And, this is from RT (so, no bias whatsoever): Wikileaks will publish ‘enough evidence’ to indict Hillary Clinton, warns Assange Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange warns more information will be published about Hillary Clinton, enough to indict her if the US government is courageous enough to do so, in what he predicts will be “a very big year” for the whistleblowing website. Expressing concerns in an ITV interview about the Democratic presidential candidate, who he claims is monitoring him, Assange described Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump as an “unpredictable phenomenon”, but predictably, given their divergent political views, didn’t say if he preferred the billionaire to be president. https://www.rt.com/usa/346534-wikileaks-clinton-assange-fbi/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 And, this is from RT (so, no bias whatsoever): oh wait, i think greggy's serious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts