Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on August 10, 2017, 08:59:10 AM
-
What did I say? "They're rattling a hornets nest"
https://www.google.com/amp/freebeacon.com/politics/federal-judge-orders-state-department-search-clintons-benghazi-emails/amp/
If you Libs doubt it. The Consipated News Network is covering as well
-
What did I say? "They're rattling a hornets nest"
https://www.google.com/amp/freebeacon.com/politics/federal-judge-orders-state-department-search-clintons-benghazi-emails/amp/
If you Libs doubt it. The Consipated News Network is covering as well
Let them look all they want
fine with me
I feel the same way about this as a do about Trump investigations
don't you agree?
-
Let them look all they want
fine with me
I feel the same way about this as a do about Trump investigations
don't you agree?
I agree.
-
Judge orders State Dept. to search state.gov accounts for Clinton aides' Benghazi emails
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/10/judge-orders-state-dept-to-search-state-gov-accounts-for-clinton-aides-benghazi-emails.html
-
Let them look all they want
fine with me
I feel the same way about this as a do about Trump investigations
don't you agree?
I'm glad it's fine with you, I was worried it wasn't and no, it's NOTHING like the Trump investigation. Not even remotely
-
More of the same...
"Of course investigations of your candidate—who's clearly un-American and a lying crook—are not politically motivated! It's about justice. And no, you can't possibly compare that to investigations of my candidate—a fine and upstanding American who's doing a tough and thankless job."
-
I'm glad it's fine with you, I was worried it wasn't and no, it's NOTHING like the Trump investigation. Not even remotely
LOL - you so predictiable
Without realizing it you're actually correct
The two are not remotely the same
Republicans did something like 7 investigations of Benghazi over ~ 2 or 3 years and the members of the GOP and even Fox News eventually admitted it was politically motivated.
She was also investigated by the FBI and not charged with any crime
So, yeah you're certainly correct that the two are not remotely the same
-
Her and that kenyan fag ran guns from Lybia to Syria and led to the deaths of our people and you still make excuses for those two twinks - amazing.
LOL - you so predictiable
Without realizing it you're actually correct
The two are not remotely the same
Republicans did something like 7 investigations of Benghazi over ~ 2 or 3 years and the members of the GOP and even Fox News eventually admitted it was politically motivated.
She was also investigated by the FBI and not charged with any crime
So, yeah you're certainly correct that the two are not remotely the same
-
What did I say? "They're rattling a hornets nest"
https://www.google.com/amp/freebeacon.com/politics/federal-judge-orders-state-department-search-clintons-benghazi-emails/amp/
If you Libs doubt it. The Consipated News Network is covering as well
The judge was appointed by Obama and he simply allowed Judicial Watch to waste their name. He knows that the results will be fruitless. ;D
-
Her and that kenyan fag ran guns from Lybia to Syria and led to the deaths of our people and you still make excuses for those two twinks - amazing.
even more amazing would be if you had any proof for the idiotic claim
-
The judge was appointed by Obama and he simply allowed Judicial Watch to waste their name. He knows that the results will be fruitless. ;D
So deleting 33k emails, lying to congress, smashing her blackberry with a hammer, having a server hidden in her bathroom, meetings with Lynch 45min on a grounded private jet just to talk "about grandchildren" isn't obstruction. She has so many freaking possible felonies she's committed any civilian would be put away for life. The only thing I blame liberals like yourself, Strawman and others on here and in this country for who actually believe this bullshit, is flat out not knowing right from wrong
-
even more amazing would be if you had any proof for the idiotic claim
http://www.oann.com/trump-ends-cia-arms-support-for-anti-assad-syria-rebels-u-s-officials/
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438605/hillary-clinton-benghazi-scandal-arming-syrian-rebels
;)
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438605/hillary-clinton-benghazi-scandal-arming-syrian-rebels
;)
swing and a miss
http://www.snopes.com/wikileaks-cofirms-hillary-clinton-sold-weapons-to-isis/
No WikiLeaks e-mails confirm that Hillary Clinton directly and knowingly "sold weapons to ISIS."
-
swing and a miss
http://www.snopes.com/wikileaks-cofirms-hillary-clinton-sold-weapons-to-isis/
No WikiLeaks e-mails confirm that Hillary Clinton directly and knowingly "sold weapons to ISIS."
Snopes? Hahahaha just quote CNN while you're at it. Most of the I think you're just trolling. Hahaha
-
Snopes? Hahahaha just quote CNN while you're at it. Most of the I think you're just trolling. Hahaha
Oh boy... what's the problem with Snopes now? Did talk radio tell you they operate out of a falafel shop in Damascus and have sex with baby goats while looking at Obama's original Kenyan birth certificate, issued by the Republic of Ceylon?
-
So deleting 33k emails, lying to congress, smashing her blackberry with a hammer, having a server hidden in her bathroom, meetings with Lynch 45min on a grounded private jet just to talk "about grandchildren" isn't obstruction. She has so many freaking possible felonies she's committed any civilian would be put away for life. The only thing I blame liberals like yourself, Strawman and others on here and in this country for who actually believe this bullshit, is flat out not knowing right from wrong
Nope, its not obstruction. She has every right to delete personal emails that have nothing to do with official business. The government also destroys computers, phones, and documents to keep confidential information from falling into wrong hands. Her server was not in her bathroom and she never lied to Congress.
Hope that helps but honestly I'm more worried about what Trump is going to do rather than someone who is gone...retired from public life
-
Sure think Vince...
-
Nope, its not obstruction. She has every right to delete personal emails that have nothing to do with official business. The government also destroys computers, phones, and documents to keep confidential information from falling into wrong hands. Her server was not in her bathroom and she never lied to Congress.
Hope that helps but honestly I'm more worried about what Trump is going to do rather than someone who is gone...retired from public life
You should add ", Esquire" after your existing list of bullshit.
-
Nope, its not obstruction. She has every right to delete personal emails that have nothing to do with official business. The government also destroys computers, phones, and documents to keep confidential information from falling into wrong hands. Her server was not in her bathroom and she never lied to Congress.
Hope that helps but honestly I'm more worried about what Trump is going to do rather than someone who is gone...retired from public life
-
Oh boy... what's the problem with Snopes now? Did talk radio tell you they operate out of a falafel shop in Damascus and have sex with baby goats while looking at Obama's original Kenyan birth certificate, issued by the Republic of Ceylon?
Snopes has always been waaaaay left bias and even though they refuse to disclose their financial backers but by most accounts it's Soros. And then there's this...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/guy-of-shutting-down/
-
Snopes has always been waaaaay left bias
LOL... right... left-wing bias. Is it because they don't agree with the viewpoints your taskmasters dictate to you over the TV and the radio every day? Is it because they called "BULLSHIT" on Orly Taitz, Joe Arpaio, Mike Zullo and Jerome Corsi? Is it because they called out the fake birth certificate with the little feetprints? Is it because they hurt your feelings by calling bullshit on the "sweet" lie that you fell for? The one that you couldn't defend on this very forum as I systematically tore it apart over a series of posts.
Left wing bias. That's rich coming from you when you not only can't recognize your own biases but wouldn't know what bias was if it hit you in the head and proceeded to skull-fuck you while yelling "I'M BIAS, BITCH. GOT IT?"
and even though they refuse to disclose their financial backers
By all accounts, their "financial backers" were the ad-networks whose ads they served.
And what's wrong with refusing to disclose one's financial backers anyways? Plenty of entities refuse to do so, many of which are much more blatantly political and involve themselves in the political process much more actively.
but by most accounts it's Soros.
Yes, by most accounts, George Soros paid a couple to start debunking chain e-mails and urban legends over twenty years ago, so that in 2017, they could attack the Donald Trump "agenda".
That's almost as ludicrous as the "Obama was born in Kenya and there's a massive conspiracy to hide that fact and install him as President."
And then there's this...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/guy-of-shutting-down/
Uhm, that's a dead link. But if you're referring to the legal situation that Snopes finds itself embroiled in, it seems to me the sort of garden variety shit that hits the fan everytime a married couple that own a business together get divorced. What's more, the fact that they risk going out of business because, as a result of a contract dispute, their hosting provider is disallowing ads on the site (their primary source of revenue) seems to debunk the statement you just made about the site being funded by Soros.
No wait... let me guess... it's all part of the plan, to go bankrupt to trick us into thinking they aren't being funded by Soros. It's the perfect crime!
::)
-
Oh boy... what's the problem with Snopes now? Did talk radio tell you they operate out of a falafel shop in Damascus and have sex with baby goats while looking at Obama's original Kenyan birth certificate, issued by the Republic of Ceylon?
LOL
-
LOL... right... left-wing bias. Is it because they don't agree with the viewpoints your taskmasters dictate to you over the TV and the radio every day? Is it because they called "BULLSHIT" on Orly Taitz, Joe Arpaio, Mike Zullo and Jerome Corsi? Is it because they called out the fake birth certificate with the little feetprints? Is it because they hurt your feelings by calling bullshit on the "sweet" lie that you fell for? The one that you couldn't defend on this very forum as I systematically tore it apart over a series of posts.
Left wing bias. That's rich coming from you when you not only can't recognize your own biases but wouldn't know what bias was if it hit you in the head and proceeded to skull-fuck you while yelling "I'M BIAS, BITCH. GOT IT?"
By all accounts, their "financial backers" were the ad-networks whose ads they served.
And what's wrong with refusing to disclose one's financial backers anyways? Plenty of entities refuse to do so, many of which are much more blatantly political and involve themselves in the political process much more actively.
Yes, by most accounts, George Soros paid a couple to start debunking chain e-mails and urban legends over twenty years ago, so that in 2017, they could attack the Donald Trump "agenda".
That's almost as ludicrous as the "Obama was born in Kenya and there's a massive conspiracy to hide that fact and install him as President."
Uhm, that's a dead link. But if you're referring to the legal situation that Snopes finds itself embroiled in, it seems to me the sort of garden variety shit that hits the fan everytime a married couple that own a business together get divorced. What's more, the fact that they risk going out of business because, as a result of a contract dispute, their hosting provider is disallowing ads on the site (their primary source of revenue) seems to debunk the statement you just made about the site being funded by Soros.
No wait... let me guess... it's all part of the plan, to go bankrupt to trick us into thinking they aren't being funded by Soros. It's the perfect crime!
::)
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/012/834/manfaceaua.jpg)
-
LOL... right... left-wing bias. Is it because they don't agree with the viewpoints your taskmasters dictate to you over the TV and the radio every day? Is it because they called "BULLSHIT" on Orly Taitz, Joe Arpaio, Mike Zullo and Jerome Corsi? Is it because they called out the fake birth certificate with the little feetprints? Is it because they hurt your feelings by calling bullshit on the "sweet" lie that you fell for? The one that you couldn't defend on this very forum as I systematically tore it apart over a series of posts.
Left wing bias. That's rich coming from you when you not only can't recognize your own biases but wouldn't know what bias was if it hit you in the head and proceeded to skull-fuck you while yelling "I'M BIAS, BITCH. GOT IT?"
By all accounts, their "financial backers" were the ad-networks whose ads they served.
And what's wrong with refusing to disclose one's financial backers anyways? Plenty of entities refuse to do so, many of which are much more blatantly political and involve themselves in the political process much more actively.
Yes, by most accounts, George Soros paid a couple to start debunking chain e-mails and urban legends over twenty years ago, so that in 2017, they could attack the Donald Trump "agenda".
That's almost as ludicrous as the "Obama was born in Kenya and there's a massive conspiracy to hide that fact and install him as President."
Uhm, that's a dead link. But if you're referring to the legal situation that Snopes finds itself embroiled in, it seems to me the sort of garden variety shit that hits the fan everytime a married couple that own a business together get divorced. What's more, the fact that they risk going out of business because, as a result of a contract dispute, their hosting provider is disallowing ads on the site (their primary source of revenue) seems to debunk the statement you just made about the site being funded by Soros.
No wait... let me guess... it's all part of the plan, to go bankrupt to trick us into thinking they aren't being funded by Soros. It's the perfect crime!
::)
I'm going to address the others later but when I posted that link it was a live link. Period.