MoBettle wrote:I don't understand why she would meet with donors or do paid speeches for the 4 years before she knew she was running for freaking president. You're already well off just be Gandhi for a few years.

pacino wrote:there is no 'you guys'. seems like there's a lot of different opinions on this. i'm sure if jh were logged in there'd be more.

Donald Trump bragged Thursday night that he could buy politicians — even the ones sharing the stage with him at a Republican presidential debate.

“You’d better believe it,” Trump said. “If I ask them, if I need them, you know, most of the people on this stage I’ve given to, just so you understand, a lot of money.”

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Serious question:

When did it become okay for conservative politicians to self-identify as victims--whether it's victims of the "liberal" media, the politically correct movement, the "anti-religious" crowd, etc? Isn't that why they generally condemn PC culture or minority groups for doing?

I know that's not an entirely new phenomenon but it definitely seems to have been cranked up a notch or three over the past few years. And now Trump is taking it to a whole other level. His tweet this morning talking about how "everyone" is reporting about how the liberal media is treating him worse than any politician in history is fucking amazing on so many levels.

JFLNYC wrote:Uniformed Republican commenting on donations to Clinton Foundation leading to access to HRC:

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:there is no 'you guys'. seems like there's a lot of different opinions on this. i'm sure if jh were logged in there'd be more.

I've been considering whether to weigh in for the past hour by posting this article from last year - Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - from Breitbart's sister publication, the New York Times. Or to just continue reading the various feeble pro-Hillary spin attempts while quietly looking on.

pacino wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:there is no 'you guys'. seems like there's a lot of different opinions on this. i'm sure if jh were logged in there'd be more.

I've been considering whether to weigh in for the past hour by posting this article from last year - Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - from Breitbart's sister publication, the New York Times. Or to just continue reading the various feeble pro-Hillary spin attempts while quietly looking on.

Like I said, those who view her negatively will say 'ah ha' and those who don't won't. In the article they state that it's 'unknown' if there was a connection. Did the other agencies and government get influenced? Doubtful.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:there is no 'you guys'. seems like there's a lot of different opinions on this. i'm sure if jh were logged in there'd be more.

I've been considering whether to weigh in for the past hour by posting this article from last year - Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - from Breitbart's sister publication, the New York Times. Or to just continue reading the various feeble pro-Hillary spin attempts while quietly looking on.