13

The Clinton Foundation Scandal Is "Bigger Than Watergate"

Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 8 months ago to Politics
132 comments | Share | Flag

"Bigger Than Watergate" is what Mayor Rudy Giuliani said about the Clinton Foundation scandal and your friendly neighborhood old dino has been thinking the same thing for a while,
Or as the Bad Hair Day Trumpet would put it, "It is yuge. Yuge, I tell you. YUGE!"

All Comments

  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 7 months ago in reply to this comment.
    More rich socialist scum incapable or appreciating the capitalism core that made them rich, whether they earned, inherited, banksterized or gangsterized their fantastic wealth or not.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by fosterj717 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well! All you have to know is that immediately following the latest Bilderberger conference in Dresden Germany, one of the Rothchilds (Bilderberger member) threw a $100K a plate fundraiser for Hillary. A couple of weeks later, another Bilderberger threw another fundraiser for her to the tune of $100K per couple. Get the picture? Guess who all are calling the shots along with George Soros?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by fosterj717 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The parties are actually constructs of the Establishment who is in fact ruled by the 1/10th of 1% of the oligarchs. That is the reason that what we see coming out of DC makes little if any real sense. It represents an agenda that is not publicized but is in fact in the works thanks to all of the "elected" officials and the bureaucrats that are carrying out the Internationalist's goals and programs. Move along citizen! Nothing to see here either!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I remember when people used to say that women loved him, and I thought, Oh, not if he was the last man on earth! To me he was very childish
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I suddenly recall Rush Limbaugh talking about Bill Clinton visiting a Normandy beach.
    He had someone gather some rocks and carry them out on the beach where there were no rocks at all.
    Then Bill had himself filmed walking along the beach.
    Bill paused upon spying the rocks and assumed a contemplative state.
    Then Bill used the rocks to form a cross and then walked on.
    Rush laughed the whole time he was telling that.
    I never saw such a film but I trust Rush way more than I ever trusted Bill.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by galentol 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The boorish lout, and moreover, a big pantywaist sissy, was Bill Clinton. I remember backing off behind a rope from some perceived danger, just like a school girl.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It was tongue in cheek. 'Some' folks such as the one mentioned are very sensitive and 'might' be offended and intended to support your version which I up thumbed for being accurate. I assumed the boorish lout was Clinton. It wasn't...if it wasn't I'll take tongue out of cheek. But I guess the minus one was our answer.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by galentol 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Can you please help me how scojohnson was personally attacked? Disagreeing with him that Bill Clinton was not charismatic? (or did you have someone else in mind). Thank you.
    galentol
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The word is not in the working vocabulary the left. It speaks of morals,values, ethics, standards. Whats that got to do with Hillary.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But no as the she can hide behind the foundations corporation status personhood which shield stock holders etc. from the acts of the corporate officers and even them if they are stock holders. That's part of the lon long chain that ended so far with money as free speech.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo