Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The CIA says the Russians hacked the republicans also but didn't release anything about them. If you think that's because the republicans were above board and there was no harmful material to release then you're more ideological than most. If you're ok with that, you're ok with Russia deciding our leaders.
.The CIA says the Russians hacked the republicans also but didn't release anything about them. If you think that's because the republicans were above board and there was no harmful material to release then you're more ideological than most. If you're ok with that, you're ok with Russia deciding our leaders.
Ah...here comes the great twist.
Never believed the Republicans were above board at any time. And the Russians didn't decide our leader. Hillary did when she ran a campaign and career in a manner where the release of the truth damaged her.
That's on her. That doesn't absolve Trump. That's why I didn't vote for him.
Let me put it simply. You have two people....one you suspect of crimes and one that you know is guilty because you have the evidence. The evidence was brought forth by a prosecutor that made public the information on one and sat on the evidence of the other. So...do you exonerate one because the evidence was suppressed on the other? Nope...from my perspective you send the known guilty one to jail, you continue to monitor the suspected one for evidence to indict them and you dislike the prosecutor who only brought out half the evidence.
So...I didn't vote for Hillary, I hold Trump in contempt, and I have a great distrust of Russia and Putin. In no world would I exonerate a known criminal because I don't have the evidence on the other. The only people who would do that are ones who are so blinded by their held beliefs that they believe lack of evidence on one somehow overrides credible evidence on the other.
.Summary, I sat on the sidelines and let a qualified person who was neither charged nor found guilty of a single crime get beat by a person who is unqualified to hold the position. Let me make it plain, your ideology is apparent.
Agree with GK.
The very content of the emails and the whole server issue called into question the idea that she is just so "qualified." They may not have resulted in "guilty of a crime," but they did result in people questioning her qualified label (i.e. No respect for protocol, national security/cyber security issues, colluding with the DNC to bury Bernie, etc).
Of couse you agree, you're a conservative.
And there you go again completely excusing Hillary Clinton for HER actions and the DNC for THEIR actions.There you go again siding with your conservative ideology. It's ok for the Russians to leak one sided information while omitting information on the other. It is you who have nothing, other than an ideology.
And there you go again completely excusing Hillary Clinton for HER actions and the DNC for THEIR actions.
And people that don't identify as "conservative" obviously made the same conclusions about Clinton that I did - either based off emails or not. trump won counties Obama dominated all over the place. Those people just didn't get conservative over night - they got fed up with Clinton.
And there you go siding with the Russians again.
Nobody got conservative overnight nor gradually. They simply believed the lies of trump.
LOL LOL LOL Soon to be one of my fav EG quotes that show me that Liberalism is a disease that slowly eats away at one ability to understand reality and truthSummary, I sat on the sidelines and let a qualified person who was neither charged nor found guilty of a single crime get beat by a person who is unqualified to hold the position. Let me make it plain, your ideology is apparent.
LOL LOL LOL Soon to be one of my fav EG quotes that show me that Liberalism is a disease that slowly eats away at one ability to understand reality and truth
Cool. Then tell us what crime Hillary was charged with, and after you've done that then tell us the qualifications of trump to be president. This will be your reality check...
No, he does not have the same qualifications as anyone else, unless you consider a dog catcher to have the same qualifications as a NASA engineer.
Then NASA should hire a businessman to engineer space flights.
he doesn't meet the requirements i posted above.
he does meet the requirements to be President as i posted above.
I will tell you this he has a whole lot more qualifications than the Marxist community organizer we just hadCool. Then tell us what crime Hillary was charged with, and after you've done that then tell us the qualifications of trump to be president. This will be your reality check...
On Jan 21, 2017 Trump will have infinitely more experience at being President than Hillary.
I will tell you this he has a whole lot more qualifications than the Marxist community organizer we just had