Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 CptJake wrote:

 Spinner wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:
Which is better a liar or an idiot as president? Personally I prefer an idiot, easier too keep an eye on.

So you're arguing for the candidate who did something dumb with her emails, rather than the one who repeatedly insists that he didn't say the horrible stuff he keeps saying on camera?

How are people pretending like Trump is a shining beacon of honesty?

There is a bit more to it than she 'did something dumb with her emails'. You may think she will be a great POTUS, or at least a better POTUS than Trump, but at least be honest with yourself. The email issue, or more accurately setting up and using a private server for Gov't business in an attempt to avoid FOIA, is bad, especially when the issue of classified getting out is taken into account. But the Clinton Foundation scandal which seems to be the focus of the current FBI investigation is NOT about 'emails' except in that the emails provide evidence. When you add in the content of the Podesta emails which show collusion between her campaign and the press, as well as other shady dealings, you get a pretty good indication there is more than 'something dumb with her emails' going on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:

I think it's a bit insulting for both sides to compare the US elections to the Brexit result.

Insulting? No.
One can see some parallels.
Here the Brexiteers and Trump voters, people with lower income or unemployed.
There the non-Brexiteers and HC voters, younger people who think that foreclosure is not a good option.

I'm not sure Trump does too well with the unemployed.

You keep on repeating that the private server is to dodge FOIA requests. I haven't really seen evidence of that whereas the simplest answer is that it was done simply for convienence's sake.

 Frazzled wrote:
For you it is. Others it isn't. You're not the judge of what are issues thank you very much. The voters will decide what is an issue and what isn't.

If the voters make late-term abortion an issue then the voters are wrong. If you look at the facts then it's a non-issue, only a very small number of late-term abortions happen at all and they are only a heartbreaking act of mercy when the fetus is doomed to die no matter what anyone does. The only reason late-term abortion becomes an issue is because of the blatant dishonesty of the republican party in presenting it as "murdering babies because they're inconvenient" in an attempt to score easy votes from people who are too ignorant to know they're being manipulated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

 Frazzled wrote:

This is a non-issue.

For you it is. Others it isn't. You're not the judge of what are issues thank you very much. The voters will decide what is an issue and what isn't.

And just leave out the rest of the quote that shows why a rational person would believe that it is a non-issue.

You're welcome to use it as a reason to vote or not vote for a candidate same as you are welcome to use their hair color as a reason. However it says more about you than the candidate when you use it as a reason.

 skyth wrote:
You keep on repeating that the private server is to dodge FOIA requests. I haven't really seen evidence of that whereas the simplest answer is that it was done simply for convienence's sake.

Pfft, I'm voting for HRC and I am 100% confident it was to avoid FOIA requests.

But, let's take her at her word: She did it in emulation of Colin Powell, who of course, did exactly that, for the exact same reason.

The FBI notes state that Clinton contacted Powell on January 23, 2009 via email to ask about his use of a BlackBerry while he was secretary of state. Powell, according to the FBI notes, replied by warning Clinton that "if it became 'public' that Clinton had a Blackberry and she used it to 'do business,' her e-mails could become 'official record[s] and subject to the law.'"

"Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that capture the data," Powell advised.

So, it's a fair inference that she did so for the same reason innumerable other politicians did so, which is of course wrong, and they need to stop doing so, but also means that the unusual scrutiny and focus on hers is a bit bizarre and out of proportion.

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

You must be outraged about the FBI leaking information to Rudy Giuliani, then.

I'm outraged that it got to this point...

Simple fix: Don't nominate a candidate that the FBI is investigating for criminal acts.

I knew I could count on you to ignore wrongdoing by the federal government when it's throwing out a few pitches for your own team, which is why it was doubly amusing to see you earlier in this thread shocked, just shocked, that people were calling you out for what you were.

All the people that were butthurt over allegations that the IRS was investigating conservative groups seem to now be absent when the Trump camp admits the FBI is leaking information to them to use in their campaign, which actually sounds like a pretty textbook Hatch Act violation to me.

But I don't know anything about that :sips tea:

Oh. I'm sorry to tell you that you're gravely mistaken that I'm rooting for Trump.

Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

...lol?

Yes, it's the Democrat's fault that people in the FBI voluntarily engaged in behavior that is wildly unprofessional at best and a violation of the Hatch Act if not investigative procedures and standards at worst.

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

Nothing of sort.

But, keep on defending. You'll be doing that for the next four years at least (possible 8).

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

Nothing of sort.

But, keep on defending. You'll be doing that for the next four years at least (possible 8).

...do you even read your own posts?

You literally blamed the victim, and are trying to pretend that you're not doing so?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

Nothing of sort.

But, keep on defending. You'll be doing that for the next four years at least (possible 8).

...do you even read your own posts?

You literally blamed the victim, and are trying to pretend that you're not doing so?

You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Man... the next 4/8 years is going to be something...eh?

 whembly wrote:
You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Ah yes, the classic "she's a Bad Person so she can't be the victim of this act" excuse.

 whembly wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

Nothing of sort.

But, keep on defending. You'll be doing that for the next four years at least (possible 8).

...do you even read your own posts?

You literally blamed the victim, and are trying to pretend that you're not doing so?

You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Man... the next 4/8 years is going to be something...eh?

Victim of a Hatch Act violation, certainly.

Unless you're trying to put forth a "She's done X, so she deserved Y" argument... which is the kind of nonsense that results in law enforcement officials writing off legitimate cases of murder because the "victim" had a criminal background and they just call it a drug deal gone bad.

So in summation:
Yes, she is a victim in this instance. What makes this so bloody adorable is that we literally have had Trump whining about how Clinton has the government/media/voters/minorities/whatever else he can blame on her "rigged" against him when he and his party are doing everything as sleazy and underhanded as they are trying to equate the Clinton camp to.

If the voters make late-term abortion an issue then the voters are wrong.

God is that you? no, never mind, your opinion means nothing just as mine does then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skyth wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

This is a non-issue.

For you it is. Others it isn't. You're not the judge of what are issues thank you very much. The voters will decide what is an issue and what isn't.

And just leave out the rest of the quote that shows why a rational person would believe that it is a non-issue.

You're welcome to use it as a reason to vote or not vote for a candidate same as you are welcome to use their hair color as a reason. However it says more about you than the candidate when you use it as a reason.

Its says to those who choose that to be an issue that they don't support baby killers yes you are correct. Kaine seems concerned too.
Me...don't care.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Again... if you're mad that the FBI is leaking gak to Clinton's opponent... maybe the Democratic Party shouldn't have nominated Clinton in the first place.

So, blame the victim, as long as it's Clinton because she totally deserves it?

Nothing of sort.

But, keep on defending. You'll be doing that for the next four years at least (possible 8).

...do you even read your own posts?

You literally blamed the victim, and are trying to pretend that you're not doing so?

You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Man... the next 4/8 years is going to be something...eh?

Victim of a Hatch Act violation, certainly.

Unless you're trying to put forth a "She's done X, so she deserved Y" argument... which is the kind of nonsense that results in law enforcement officials writing off legitimate cases of murder because the "victim" had a criminal background and they just call it a drug deal gone bad.

So in summation:
Yes, she is a victim in this instance. What makes this so bloody adorable is that we literally have had Trump whining about how Clinton has the government/media/voters/minorities/whatever else he can blame on her "rigged" against him when he and his party are doing everything as sleazy and underhanded as they are trying to equate the Clinton camp to.

As you may have forgotten, I could give a gak about Trump.

He's not going to win.

All I'm reminding you is that she's a horrible candidate who has done some shady (arguably illegal) things and ya'll are mad that the FBI is pushing back against the obviously political DOJ?

That's what the Democrat party gets for electing her.

EDIT: The GOP doesn't escape my wrath... they nominated fething Cheeto Jesus in an extremely winnable year. Kasich/Rubio/Cruz/Jeb!/Rand/et. el would be leading Clinton now by a healthy margin.

In more victim shaming/blaming news (because it just can't be only whembly and others doing it)

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37857729

In the letter, addressed directly to Mr Comey and published by Buzzfeed, the alleged victim wrote: "I am the 15-year-old (now 16) who was the victim of Anthony Weiner.
"I now add you to the list of people who have victimized me. I told my story originally to protect other young girls that might be a victim of online predators." She went on to say: "I thought your job as FBI Director was to protect me. I thought if I co-operated with your investigation, my identity as a minor would be kept secret. That is no longer the case. My family and I are barraged by reporters' phone calls and emails.
"I have been even been blamed in a newspaper for causing Donald Trump to now be leading in some polls and costing Hillary the election.
"Anthony Weiner is the abuser. Your letter helped that abuse to continue. How can I rebuild my life when you have made finding out my "story" the goal of every reporter?"

 Frazzled wrote:
Its says to those who choose that to be an issue that they don't support baby killers yes you are correct.

And there you go, proving my point. It's not about "baby killers" because the baby is going to die no matter what anyone does. We're talking about situations where the best case scenario is that, thanks to heroic efforts by the doctors, the baby lives for an hour before dying in pain. The only choice involved is whether to have an abortion and reduce the suffering of everyone involved, or to force events to their "natural" conclusion where the mother gets to watch the child she so desperately wanted die a horrible death. And let's not forget the sheer misery of carrying a child that is doomed, getting "happy" comments from strangers about how you'll soon be a parent, etc, knowing that you're just counting down the days until your baby can officially die.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
All I'm reminding you is that she's a horrible candidate who has done some shady (arguably illegal) things and ya'll are mad that the FBI is pushing back against the obviously political DOJ?

Oh good, more victim blaming. "It's ok to violate the Hatch Act because the DOJ is 'obviously political' and deserves it."

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
All I'm reminding you is that she's a horrible candidate who has done some shady (arguably illegal) things and ya'll are mad that the FBI is pushing back against the obviously political DOJ?

Oh good, more victim blaming. "It's ok to violate the Hatch Act because the DOJ is 'obviously political' and deserves it."

Oh goodie, more White Knighting.

Hillary Clinton is an angel.

Carry on.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Its says to those who choose that to be an issue that they don't support baby killers yes you are correct.

We're talking about situations where the best case scenario is that, thanks to heroic efforts by the doctors, the baby lives for an hour before dying in pain. The only choice involved is whether to have an abortion and reduce the suffering of everyone involved, or to force events to their "natural" conclusion where the mother gets to watch the child she so desperately wanted die a horrible death. And let's not forget the sheer misery of carrying a child that is doomed, getting "happy" comments from strangers about how you'll soon be a parent, etc, knowing that you're just counting down the days until your baby can officially die.

And there you go, proving my point. It's not about "baby killers" because the baby is going to die no matter what anyone does.
1. Only under your specific set of circumstances.
2. Otherwise they are just murdering babykilling babykillers*


*you may disagree. Frazzled is just discussing the point and has no personal interest as he is Libertarian and thinks govenrment shouldn't be involved int he first place.

What I really wonder is what will be happening after the election. It's been way too much polarized, and words were said to people who really took them at heart. That can lead to more extreme acts, IMHO.

I mean, when someone is called guilty out of nothing and so heavily condemned by media and people by such a spam of "information" usually based on assumptions than real facts...don't you think someone may take that as to "do something to make things right, no matter what" ?

 Frazzled wrote:
1. Only under your specific set of circumstances.
2. Otherwise they are just murdering babykilling babykillers*

That "specific set of circumstances" is also known as "reality". Late-term abortion for "I just don't want a kid anymore" reasons is already illegal, all legal late-term abortions are done for serious medical reasons. Calling them "murdering babykillers" and acting like people are saying "nah, I changed my mind, get rid of this thing" is blatant lying. There is no way that republican party leadership isn't aware of this fact, but the ignorant voters they're targeting are eager to be manipulated with lies about people slaughtering perfectly healthy babies and laughing their way to the bank with all the profits abortion makes.

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Ah yes, the classic "she's a Bad Person so she can't be the victim of this act" excuse.

Technically, perhaps, but she really is a terrible person and general force for evil in this world so her crashing and burning out due to governmental infighting would be hilarious.

Rosebuddy wrote:
Technically, perhaps, but she really is a terrible person and general force for evil in this world

Also known as "a typical politician".

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
You think she's a "victim"???!?!

Ah yes, the classic "she's a Bad Person so she can't be the victim of this act" excuse.

Technically, perhaps, but she really is a terrible person and general force for evil in this world so her crashing and burning out due to governmental infighting would be hilarious.

I'd kinda rather have a functional government for my country, thanks.

Although it seems like the GOP congress critters would rather continue to cash their paychecks and do nothing if they lose, so there's that. When you threaten to take your ball and go home if you don't get to be team captain, you're actually supposed to go home.

 loki old fart wrote:
Face it neither should get near the white house

Seriously wish there was a "do-over" clause in the constitution. Instead of having to wait 4 years.

It's really sad that this is what we have to choose from in America.


GG

 generalgrog wrote:
It's really sad that this is what we have to choose from in America.

It's really sad that our political parties are so vested in dynasties that actual leaders who relate to the common man can't get nominated. There's no reason Trump should have won the primary except that the Republicans made it damned near impossible for it to be any other way. I just wish Trump had run against Hillary as a Democrat. A Trump vs. Cruz general election would have been hilarious. It would be like watching an angry, drunk, cheeto-colored clown shouting at a constantly yapping poodle that's been pooping in the living room. Hmm... now that I think about it, I'd pay money to see that.

 Breotan wrote:

 generalgrog wrote:
It's really sad that this is what we have to choose from in America.

It's really sad that our political parties are so vested in dynasties that actual leaders who relate to the common man can't get nominated. There's no reason Trump should have won the primary except that the Republicans made it damned near impossible for it to be any other way. I just wish Trump had run against Hillary as a Democrat. A Trump vs. Cruz general election would have been hilarious. It would be like watching an angry, drunk, cheeto-colored clown shouting at a constantly yapping poodle that's been pooping in the living room. Hmm... now that I think about it, I'd pay money to see that.

There is no way that Trump's method of shouting increasingly ridiculous lies would be a path to victory in the DNC.

 Sarouan wrote:
What I really wonder is what will be happening after the election.

Honestly? Not a whole lot. People on both sides have been painting the opposing candidate as the spawn of Satan but I expect you can look at the Clinton and Bush presidencies as your basic guidebook. I don't think Trump will get us into conflicts the way Bush did but he wouldn't stand by and let the Muslim Brotherhood destabilize Middle East nations, either.

I have a theory about Trump's mouth. I'm thinking he's being outrageous mostly to keep himself on the front page of every newspaper and news show. He's working to keep Hillary on the defensive and make her play catch-up. From what the polls show, it seems to be working as he erased a ten point deficit. Look back four years ago where Mitt Romney seemed to disappear from media coverage until the debates. Even trouncing President Obama in that first debate couldn't make up for the weeks on anonymity that preceded it. I think Trump simply isn't willing to let that happen to him. But that's just a theory I've been mulling over and I may very well be wrong.

 feeder wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 generalgrog wrote:
It's really sad that this is what we have to choose from in America.

It's really sad that our political parties are so vested in dynasties that actual leaders who relate to the common man can't get nominated. There's no reason Trump should have won the primary except that the Republicans made it damned near impossible for it to be any other way. I just wish Trump had run against Hillary as a Democrat. A Trump vs. Cruz general election would have been hilarious. It would be like watching an angry, drunk, cheeto-colored clown shouting at a constantly yapping poodle that's been pooping in the living room. Hmm... now that I think about it, I'd pay money to see that.

There is no way that Trump's method of shouting increasingly ridiculous lies would be a path to victory in the DNC.

Don't confuse his performance after he became the Republican nominee with his performance during the primary. If he had ratcheted up the factually challenged rhetoric like this during the primary, we'd have Cruz as our nominee.

 Breotan wrote:
There's no reason Trump should have won the primary except that the Republicans made it damned near impossible for it to be any other way.

No, there are very good reasons why Trump won the primary. The republican party has been pandering to the deplorables for years now, and finally a candidate came along who was willing to stop pandering and embrace the angry mob. And it turns out that a lot more republican voters are concerned with things like "kill all the gay people" and "Mexicans are stealing our jobs" than free-market capitalism and tax cuts for millionaires. This isn't some kind of party-appointed dynasty, it's the people taking control while the leaders watch in horror.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Breotan wrote:
I'm thinking he's being outrageous mostly to keep himself on the front page of every newspaper and news show.

That's exactly what's happening, and what has been happening. Trump is a firm believer in "bad publicity is still publicity", and the media has a clear interest in portraying the election as a close race to generate views (and therefore ad revenue). All he has to do is keep being as loud as possible and the media will do his work for him.

 Breotan wrote:

 feeder wrote:

There is no way that Trump's method of shouting increasingly ridiculous lies would be a path to victory in the DNC.

Don't confuse his performance after he became the Republican nominee with his performance during the primary. If he had ratcheted up the factually challenged rhetoric like this during the primary, we'd have Cruz as our nominee.

"Build that wall", "Most Mexicans are rapists", and "There's no problem" are all from the primary, and are each by themselves stupid enough to be rejected by most Dems.

Perhaps he could have tried to ride the same wave of "Hope & Change" that Obama surfed to victory, but frankly I don't think the Human Septic Field has it in him.

 feeder wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 feeder wrote:

There is no way that Trump's method of shouting increasingly ridiculous lies would be a path to victory in the DNC.

Don't confuse his performance after he became the Republican nominee with his performance during the primary. If he had ratcheted up the factually challenged rhetoric like this during the primary, we'd have Cruz as our nominee.

"Build that wall", "Most Mexicans are rapists", and "There's no problem" are all from the primary, and are each by themselves stupid enough to be rejected by most Dems..

Don't forget the "I like soldiers who weren't captured" and"ban all the Muslims". Really, almost all of his worst rhetoric came out in the primary.

 Breotan wrote:
I don't think Trump will get us into conflicts the way Bush did but he wouldn't stand by and let the Muslim Brotherhood destabilize Middle East nations, either.

So, something a little odd came about at the tail end of the election, both in this thread a little, and on the internet at large: Don't vote for HRC because she will start WWIII over the no-fly zone in Syria.

It's funny, because I've seen that from some of the same people that argued that Mitt Romney was totally right about Russia, and that Obama was totally weak because he wouldn't do anything in Syria or Crimea. Yet, HRC suggests standing against Russian aggression, and it's a reason to vote against her. Consistency really took it in the shorts.

Anyway, I did early voting tonight, so I did my part.

 whembly wrote:
..
Oh. I'm sorry to tell you that you're gravely mistaken that I'm rooting for Trump.

It's just that you've spent the past year going CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS

Trump is just as bad

CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS

CLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILS

Trump is just as bad

BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHA BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHA BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHAZI FOUNDATION BIMBO HELL EMAILSCLINTON IS BAT WINGED BIMBO FROM HELL BENGHAZI EMAILS BENGHAZI EMAILS FOUNDATION BENGHA


So, you know, your coverage of the election just seems a little bit biased.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 TheMeanDM wrote:
Is there discussion of the DAPL in here or is that a separate thread?

IIRC there's a separate thread in the OT for the pipeline protests. You might want to look on the 2nd page as it's been a while since it's been discussed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
No, I am serious.

People should read that article and understand why one of the world's most respected factual magazines has endorsed Trump.

No, I think you should re-read it and see that it endorses HRC.

That's a lie made up by the biased media.