Do the Democrats have a plan "B"?

Hitlery today, "But I only deleted about 30,000 emails and no.....No independent auditor will be given access to my personal server that I conducted government business on"!

Is anyone really buying this load of horsesh!t ?

Heard part of her " Champaign speech" on the way Home and just the mere sound of her voice started to produce a slow bile in my throat, to which I immediately switched stations!
 
southwind said:
Is anyone really buying this load of horsesh!t ?
Should anyone really care? This all smacks of some sort of ginned up hit piece.


Heard part of her " Champaign speech" on the way Home and just the mere sound of her voice started to produce a slow bile in my throat, to which I immediately switched stations!
Just wait 'till that voice is preceded with "hail to the chief."
 
Kev3188 said:
Should anyone really care? This all smacks of some sort of ginned up hit piece.



Just wait 'till that voice is preceded with "hail to the chief."
that would be a sad day if it ever happened  which it won't
 
Kev3188 said:
Should anyone really care? This all smacks of some sort of ginned up hit piece.



Just wait 'till that voice is preceded with "hail to the chief."
 
I Just don't see it happening.
 
The two wild cards IMO are Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul. BOTH have nearly identical views on everything except domestic spending. If Ralph Nadar is right with his assessment in his book "Unstoppable" things get real interesting real fast. If either gets significant traction, lookout mainstream politicians as this revolution will be televised
 
I don't agree with not getting access to her server. It was her choice to used it for business and private emails and as a civil servant I think she looses the right to privacy when she combined the two. I seriously doubt that there is anything to be found but it is not her right to determine that in my opinion.
 
Ms Tree said:
If someone were to say that your wife/mother/sister..... had cankles would you be OK with it? Would it be OK to say it to their face? I am guessing you would not be OK with either scenario. I know I would not.
I have absolutely no problem telling my wife or sister things like that when they apply. Nor do they with me.
 
I did not ask if you had a problem saying it. I asked if you were OK with someone else like me saying it?

If someone said that to my wife I would be offended and she would go off like a bomb.
 
The entertainment value of Sanders or Paul running would be great while it lasted. Pretty sure their candidacy will be short lived once they start getting uncomfortable questions they do not want to answer.
 
Ms Tree said:
No, not quite. He is a sexist because of terminology that has nothing to do with his dislike for her as a candidate. It is unfortunate that this concept eludes you.
I find it funny that every time someone disagrees with Ms Tree it is because the concept "eludes" them.
 
Ms Tree said:
If someone said that to my wife I would be offended and she would go off like a bomb.
Well, good for you. I personally find it hard to get offended by the truth, even if it is unpleasant.
 
That does not explain why you feel compelled to insult a person because of their looks. It also does not explain why you only insult women and not men. Then there is the fact that their looks have absolutely nothing to do with their job.
 
Ms Tree said:
That does not explain why you feel compelled to insult a person because of their looks. It also does not explain why you only insult women and not men. Then there is the fact that their looks have absolutely nothing to do with their job.
That's simple!
 
She provided us with so much to be critical of that the only thing left is her appearance. I mean you can't assassinate a persons character when they have none?
 
Sure, what ever you say.

Amazing what people will do to justify sexist statements that they would not want said to people they care for.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top