What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (6 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
timschochet said:
Well, it appears we will be talking about Juanita Broderrick again...Trump just retweeted her accusing BIll of rape.
Click to expand...
I believe her allegations are true.  But it doesn't matter, nor does anything else because Hillary has been fighting for kids, women and puppies her entire life.  Lean back and let those sun rays hit you!!!!!!

 
cstu said:
The Commish said:
There's the important part of the bold.  That's all it's ever going to be, an opinion, knowing that none of you will agree on what it means to be corrupt.  You're going out on a limb the size of a large redwood.....congrats.
Click to expand...
Then what is the concern about her being 'corrupt' if we can never agree on what it means to be a corrupt President?

Has Obama been corrupt as President?
Click to expand...
Ask those using the term instead of me :shrug:  

 
Arguing Against Bill Clinton is Absolutely Relevant to this Race

KIRA DAVIS // Posted at 8:27 pm on October 08, 2016

 Share

 Tweet

Clinton will ostensibly be the #FirstLady one day. His behavior and how it reflects on his marriage is 100% relevant. Anti-Trump factions have been #####ing for months about Melania’s past as a nude model. Conservatives complained about Michelle Obama’s past as do-nothing board member. Nancy Reagan was shamed mercilessly for her “Just Say No” campaign.

Conversely, Americans have an inexplicably romantic attachment to Jackie Kennedy.

Presidential spouses matter to the “tone” of the presiding administration.

Imagine Michelle Obama was caught propositioning a White House intern tomorrow? That would be a huge deal to a lot of people.

We can debate and disagree about Trump’s comments all day long, but the “Clinton defense” is invalid.

I disagree that Bill Clinton is irrelevant as he could ostensibly be the #FirstLady.

— KiraAynDavis (@RealKiraDavis) October 8, 2016

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Yes, there is. Tim I tell you what, how about you explain what you know about her claim. Because I don't think you know Thing1.
Click to expand...
Why are you afraid to say whether you believe it or not?

As for me, over the years I've read several articles about her claim. I saw her interviewed back in 1999 on NBC and later by Sean Hannity. I'm aware that she made a deposition denying that she was raped, and that now she says she lied under oath during that deposition. I've watched denials by Clinton's people. I've read the accusation of her being threatened by Hillary (which she did not talk about during her first round of interviews.) So yeah, I've tried to follow this as much as I could. And I don't believe her. How about you?

 
timschochet said:
Why are you afraid to say whether you believe it or not?

As for me, over the years I've read several articles about her claim. I saw her interviewed back in 1999 on NBC and later by Sean Hannity. I'm aware that she made a deposition denying that she was raped, and that now she says she lied under oath during that deposition. I've watched denials by Clinton's people. I've read the accusation of her being threatened by Hillary (which she did not talk about during her first round of interviews.) So yeah, I've tried to follow this as much as I could. And I don't believe her. How about you?
Click to expand...
Shocking.  

A little hypocritical to claim to be a pioneer for women but then call someone a liar when they said they were raped because it's benefits your political agenda. 

 
timschochet said:
Why are you afraid to say whether you believe it or not?

As for me, over the years I've read several articles about her claim. I saw her interviewed back in 1999 on NBC and later by Sean Hannity. I'm aware that she made a deposition denying that she was raped, and that now she says she lied under oath during that deposition. I've watched denials by Clinton's people. I've read the accusation of her being threatened by Hillary (which she did not talk about during her first round of interviews.) So yeah, I've tried to follow this as much as I could. And I don't believe her. How about you?
Click to expand...
Tim, statisically women don't make these things up.  And they especially don't spend decades passionately recounting their story if they're lying.  You won't -- but you might want to ask the more likely questions about how the truth has been systemically buried for so long and the atrocities that have occurred to do so.  Then again.... you won't, because, you know, "Yay Hillary!!!11"

 
Last edited:
Mr. Ham said:
Tim, statisically women don't make these things up.  And they especially don't spend decades passionately recounting their story if they're lying.  You won't -- but you might want to ask the more likely questions about how the truth has been systemically buried for so long and the atrocities that have occurred to do so.  Then again.... you won't, because, you know, "Yay Hillary!!!11"
Click to expand...
You're right, statistically women don't make these things up. And statistically most women are not surrounded by Republican operatives when they make their charges. And statistically women are pretty consistent about such accusations, they don't keep revising their stories (like the part about Hillary Clinton threatening her, which was added much later.)

 
James Daulton said:
Will Hilldog win by more than Obama in '08?
Click to expand...
Given the current poll numbers, the best case for Hillary seems to be the exact same map as '08, except a flip for Arizona and Indiana. Would be tough for the margin of victory to get bigger than that, because the remaining Trump states are pretty firmly red - but if Trump goes into full meltdown mode (which is a distinct possibility), the blowout could get bigger. Utah and Georgia briefly became purple-ish after the Dem convention, maybe they're the next two to turn blue after IA/AZ.

On the other hand, this election has been very reactive to news developments, so maybe something happens to Hillary and this race tightens up. Who the hell knows.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
You're right, statistically women don't make these things up. And statistically most women are not surrounded by Republican operatives when they make their charges. And statistically women are pretty consistent about such accusations, they don't keep revising their stories (like the part about Hillary Clinton threatening her, which was added much later.)
Click to expand...
You're wrong.  Her story has remained incredibly consistent for nearly forty years.  In the early years she says she felt as many victims do, guilty for having him back at her room.... confused, exposed.  But she's stuck with it and her story has been incredibly consistent.  Because she was raped.  And then the ambitions of the Clintons kicked in.

 
Last edited:
Mr. Ham said:
You're wrong.  He story has remained incredibly consistent for nearly forty years.  In the early years she says she felt as many victims do, guilty for having him back at her room.... confused, exposed.  But she's stuck with it and her story has been incredibly consistent.  Because she was raped.  And then the ambitions of the Clintons kicked in.
Click to expand...
You know, it might not have been Hillary who threatened her. It could have been the body double!

 
timschochet said:
Why are you afraid to say whether you believe it or not?

As for me, over the years I've read several articles about her claim. I saw her interviewed back in 1999 on NBC and later by Sean Hannity. I'm aware that she made a deposition denying that she was raped, and that now she says she lied under oath during that deposition. I've watched denials by Clinton's people. I've read the accusation of her being threatened by Hillary (which she did not talk about during her first round of interviews.) So yeah, I've tried to follow this as much as I could. And I don't believe her. How about you?
Click to expand...
Ok what I believe:

- met at the nursing home? Yes.

- JB was in a subordinate position to AG soon to be governor Bill? Yes.

- JB looked up to Bill and admired him? Yes.

- Did Bill ask to meet her in her hotel room? Yes, that was his MO.

- Did Bill come on to her? Yes.

- Did they have sex? Yes.

After that it's classic 'he said / she said' but it was enough for her to go on NBC years later and for her to be tweeting about it 40 years later. 

These are things I believe. Do I know she was raped? No, it's possible she was not.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Ok what I believe:

- met at the nursing home? Yes.

- JB was in a subordinate position to AG soon to be governor Bill? Yes.

- JB looked up to Bill and admired him? Yes.

- Did Bill ask to meet her in her hotel room? Yes, that was his MO.

- Did Bill come on to her? Yes.

- Did they have sex? Yes.

After that it's classic 'he said / she said' but it was enough for her to go on NBC years later and for her to be tweeting about it 40 years later. 

These are things I believe. Do I know she was raped? No, it's possible she was not.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with any of that, but I'm 95% sure her claim of rape was a lie.  I'm not an expert at lie detecting or anything, but she came off as a liar in the Dateline(?) interview she did. 

Consider this:

But, if Broaddrick's story sounds familiar, it also sounds fishy--and raises too many questions for me to believe her.

* Broaddrick says she can remember every detail of the rape, except the month and day it occurred. If it scarred her for life, wouldn't she remember the date? Or at least the month?

* Broaddrick says she told her husband, David, what happened. But, at the time, David was not her husband. He was her boyfriend, with whom she was cheating on her first husband. Question: What if Clinton and Broaddrick had consensual sex? If you're cheating on your husband, and then cheat on your boyfriend, do you tell your boyfriend the truth?

* Within one year of the alleged rape, Broaddrick attended a fund-raiser for Clinton and accepted appointment by him to a state advisory board. Why did she still want to support a man who raped her?

* Broaddrick claims Clinton kissed her so hard he left her lip visibly black and blue, and she covered up by telling people she'd had an accident. But her first husband, Gary Hickey, says he remembers no such injury when she returned from Little Rock, nor such a story.

* One year later, Broaddrick filed divorce papers against Hickey, claiming he struck her on the mouth. Was that the only time?

* Broaddrick also told two girlfriends, who are sisters, what happened, which both confirm. But both admit they hate Clinton because he commuted the death sentence of the man who murdered their father. Can they be trusted?

* In 1997, Broaddrick signed an affidavit and gave a deposition in the Jones case, denying twice under oath that Clinton raped her. "These allegations are untrue and there is no truth to these rumors." If Clinton did rape her, 20 years later, why would she still not tell the truth?
 
* Last year (1998), Broaddrick told independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr that her Jones testimony was false, but that she had been under absolutely no pressure from the president or the White House to file a false affidavit. So, did she lie to the Jones team? Or did she lie to Starr? Or is she now lying to NBC? How do we know?
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu said:
I don't disagree with any of that, but I'm 95% her claim of rape was a lie.  I'm not an expert at lie detecting or anything, but she came off as a liar in the Dateline(?) interview she did. 

Consider this:
Click to expand...
Good posting of facts. I'd agree that given all this a consensual encounter was what most likely happened. My guess is being under oath in a national case probably was where she was put to the test and I'd hang my hat on that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Good posting of facts. I'd agree that given all this a consensual encounter was what most likely happened. My guess is being under oath in a national case probably was where she was put to the test and I'd hang my hat on that.
Click to expand...
Glad you agree.  But watch out! Rambling Wreck or Rove might accuse you of being a partisan Hillary supporter.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is an interesting internal memo in which the DNC includes Trump in a trio of Pied Piper candidates.

- This is from 2 months before Trump declared his candidacy.

- The strategy was to 'elevate' them and push the press 'to take them seriously.'
Click to expand...
The DNC hit the nail on the head with the Pied Piper candidates: Trump, Cruz and Carson. The polling showed this throughout the primary race. What could the RNC have done to prevent Trump and the will of the voters? 

 
randall146 said:
I'm still convinced they have a ton on stuff on Trump that they haven't been able to use because he keeps dominating the headlines with his own implosions
Click to expand...
It's actually kind of brilliant.  He kept generating a bunch of little scandals on his own, the kind that didn't really bother his core supporters all that much, never giving his opponents the chance to work in their own material.  And it almost worked, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids.

 
randall146 said:
I'm still convinced they have a ton on stuff on Trump that they haven't been able to use because he keeps dominating the headlines with his own implosions
Click to expand...
Trump wasn't imploding in February. Republicans could have stopped him then if they would have done some research and made a coordinated attack. But they assumed that he would naturally fade away (big mistake). Then they actually fooled themselves into believing that the initial enthusiasm for Trump would be carried over to the general election (bigger mistake). Classic example of smelling your own farts.

 
It's obvious, but still amazing how the Repbulican Party let itself get hijacked. 

If you are a voter that hates Hillary Clinton, I get it. If you are terrified of a Hillary Clinton presidency, then there was one thing you absolutely needed to do......vote for anybody besides Donald ####### Trump. With Dems about the throw out the most vulnerable, hated candidate in a long time, when any completely forgettable candidate for the Republicans was just one Hillary scandal or misstep away from waltzing to the White House, the Republicans rallied around Donald Trump. :lmao:

You just can't make this #### up.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
This stuff would have been irrelevant in the primary IMO.  Think he'd have still lapped the field.
Click to expand...
Something Democrats seem to 'get' is partly evaluating a primary candidate based on how they will do in the general. 2008-16 regular debates centered around the viability of Obama, Hillary and Sanders once they hit the general. I've almost never heard that issue among Republicans.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu said:
How could Republicans have so little on Hillary after decades of research?  Have they even brought anything new this year?
Click to expand...
Nothing to be had. 

They make stuff up all the time that the base eats up and get all lathered up about. Proclaim they can't understand how anyone could vote for her because they lap it up and then they yell Benghazi a couple of times. 

That's all they got...

 
pollardsvision said:
It's obvious, but still amazing how the Repbulican Party let itself get hijacked. 

If you are a voter that hates Hillary Clinton, I get it. If you are terrified of a Hillary Clinton presidency, then there was one thing you absolutely needed to do......vote for anybody besides Donald ####### Trump. With Dems about the throw out the most vulnerable, hated candidate in a long time, when any completely forgettable candidate for the Republicans was just one Hillary scandal or misstep away from waltzing to the White House, the Republicans rallied around Donald Trump. :lmao:

You just can't make this #### up.
Click to expand...
All the exasperation will be worth it when I can thank all of my family/friends who support Trump for putting Hillary in the white house.  We could not have done it without you.

Will be four years, at least, of thank you's.  Each supreme court justice.  Thank you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
2K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
262K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top