She said "what difference does it make at this point" because she had been outed in BS about the real situation.
Nice denial, though.
She said "what difference does it make at this point" because she had been outed in BS about the real situation.
Nice denial, though.
Reg Fields wrote:
Hillary's entire career is just scandal after scandal, the media just buries it for her.
Didn't you hear? She CONTROLS THE MEDIA. Muahahahaa!!!!!
The woman is over qualified for the job. All their campaign needs to do is tread carefully with the Dean of Clown College so as not to generate sympathy for Trump.
The Dean of Clown College will fail all by himself. Happily, too. He's reached his biggest audience ever.
dur dur durrr wrote:
She said "what difference does it make at this point" because she had been outed in BS about the real situation.
Nice denial, though.
Denial of what?
And the hits just keep on coming:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-purple-heart-226565
I've long been a proponent of the CT that Trump is running at Bill Clinton's request. Or at least I tell people that i think that. These last two weeks have provided mounting evidence. He is not this maladroit, I don't think.
You live in denial, breit leit... you live in denial.And you'll just deny that too...
breit leit wrote:
dur dur durrr wrote:She said "what difference does it make at this point" because she had been outed in BS about the real situation.
Nice denial, though.
Denial of what?
get used to it.. wrote:
Wait...you mean Donald has the power to get someone a room at his hotel? Wow...that is just fascinating. That definately means he knows how to get things done. A guy who can get a hotel reservation....why...why...its extraodinary!
Fixed that for you.
Did you see the man's persuasion skills on display when he got that Cruz endorsement? Amazing. I'm ready to vote Trump on that alone.
And it just keeps getting better. From today's so-called 'rally' (correct spelling 'really?!?!')
She wasn't put on the air by some outlets because her words about a meeting with Hillary conflicted with what the other families that were present reported.
dur dur durrr wrote:
You live in denial, breit leit... you live in denial.
And you'll just deny that too...
breit leit wrote:Denial of what?
Do you have anything substantive to add to the conversation? Quality posters only.
Irony so thick, it cuts like butter.deuces
breit leit wrote:
Quality posters only.
Link wrote:
And the hits just keep on coming:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-purple-heart-226565I've long been a proponent of the CT that Trump is running at Bill Clinton's request. Or at least I tell people that i think that. These last two weeks have provided mounting evidence. He is not this maladroit, I don't think.
If so, then Ole Bill must have miscalculated badly, or must really hate his "wife", because the guy he talked into running has energized the republican party in a way not seen since Reagan, and that guy is swinging at Bill and Hillary in ways the other rep. candidates he so handily dispatched would never have dared to do, Lol!
lipstick on a pig wrote:
Link wrote:And the hits just keep on coming:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-purple-heart-226565I've long been a proponent of the CT that Trump is running at Bill Clinton's request. Or at least I tell people that i think that. These last two weeks have provided mounting evidence. He is not this maladroit, I don't think.
If so, then Ole Bill must have miscalculated badly, or must really hate his "wife", because the guy he talked into running has energized the republican party in a way not seen since Reagan, and that guy is swinging at Bill and Hillary in ways the other rep. candidates he so handily dispatched would never have dared to do, Lol!
Energized is an interesting word for what's happening.
No Way wrote:
lipstick on a pig wrote:If so, then Ole Bill must have miscalculated badly, or must really hate his "wife", because the guy he talked into running has energized the republican party in a way not seen since Reagan, and that guy is swinging at Bill and Hillary in ways the other rep. candidates he so handily dispatched would never have dared to do, Lol!
Energized is an interesting word for what's happening.
Energized. As in with the energy of a massive explosion.
lipstick on a pig wrote:
Link wrote:And the hits just keep on coming:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-purple-heart-226565I've long been a proponent of the CT that Trump is running at Bill Clinton's request. Or at least I tell people that i think that. These last two weeks have provided mounting evidence. He is not this maladroit, I don't think.
If so, then Ole Bill must have miscalculated badly, or must really hate his "wife", because the guy he talked into running has energized the republican party in a way not seen since Reagan, and that guy is swinging at Bill and Hillary in ways the other rep. candidates he so handily dispatched would never have dared to do, Lol!
Ha!
And to think, up until now, I wasn't sure whether you were a troll. Too bad. You were doing a good job. Sad!
breit leit wrote:
Reg Fields wrote:In the past Hillary said "what does it matter" when talking about the Benghazi victims was that showing compassion? The media is just looking for opportunities to jump all over Trump and granted his responses give them that but people voting for Trump aren't looking for PC or soft spoken.
All I keep hearing is that Trump isn't presidential but time and time again I've seen Obama go play golf right after a terrorist attack. Is that presidential behavior. The media is certainly biased. Hillary's out for herself and making more money for her Clinton Foundation empire which acts as their slush fund and doesn't care about helping Americans.
If the shoe were on the other foot and Trump had a foundation that was pocketing 90% of its donations the media would be covering it non-stop.
Hillary's entire career is just scandal after scandal, the media just buries it for her.
She didn't say "what does it matter" about the victims - that's being intellectually dishonest. She said "what difference does it make at this point" about the motives of the terrorists. There is a big difference between those two descriptions of her comments, and you are either too dense to see the difference or too dishonest to lay out the facts appropriately. Still, it was a poor choice of words that she was criticized for, and is still criticized for, as you evidence yourself. But that is not certainly not an example of taking shots at the victim or the victim's family. Do you really find it to be comparable to Trump saying that the victim's mother probably wasn't allowed to talk? After Mrs. Smith's speech did Hillary say she was curious why Mr. Smith couldn't be bothered to weigh in?
Getting away from my original point to Gary I suppose.....As for media biases, yeah I'd imagine that different media stations have different slants. I don't make my voting decisions based on what the media's opinion is, so it doesn't really bother me. Are you now against private sector companies being able to voice political opinions and provide donations to candidates?
She at first told the families of the victims that it was a video. I saw another parent on the news this morning say that Hillary told him that they would have the person who created the video arrested. If Trump had said "what difference does it make at this point" the media would be covering it non stop. Outside of Fox News she has gotten off easy on those comments.
As for Mr. Khan, it appears he has ties to the Clinton's and he's also an immigration lawyer who stands a lot to lose if Trump gets elected. He's also said Muslim is a religion of peace when its clear there is a Muslim extremist problem going on right now in the world.
But his anger at Trump is misplaced, Hillary voted for the war so she helped send his son to war and his son was killed by Muslim Extremists. Maybe his anger should be pointed at another direction. This guy was a plant, should Trump maybe have resisted responding to the bait, yes but the media is creating a false narrative much like they did when Trump jokingly said that Russia should release the e-mails if they have them and all of a sudden he became a Russian spy. Meanwhile Hillary put our national security information at risk and she's the own who made a Uranium deal with Russia in return for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. So is it presidential to go around the world and auction off US contracts to the highest bidder in return for speaking fees and donations to a corrupt foundation?
Just like Trump jokingly raped a 13 year old girl. This is your logic. You people are sick.
up your meds wrote:
Just like Trump jokingly raped a 13 year old girl. This is your logic. You people are sick.
Trump didn't rape a 13 year old girl, that is a completely fabricated media story, further proving my point. However Bill has flown in a jet several times with a known pedophile.
But seriously, how do you make fun of a woman at your rally because her baby is crying?
Crying babies are annoying. We all agree on that.
But c'mon, Donald, did you really not think that the media would jump all over that one?
breit leit wrote:
The Democratic presidential candidate did not "trash the mother of the Benghazi victim". The Republican presidential candidate did trash the parents of speaking about their lost son at the DNC. That's the difference.
Trump did not trash the parents for speaking about their lost son. If the parents had left it at just speaking about their son, then that would have been fine. The whole point would have been to show the nation that Muslim citizens are just as patriotic and good as other US citizens.
But the father crossed the line when he decided to public insult Trump in front of hundreds of millions of people and try to convince them to not like Trump. That was uncalled for, inappropriate, and wrong. Should have just stuck with showing how Muslims are good people too.
I'm not supporting Trump firing back at them, but don't act like Trump started it, or that Trump was insulting the son. The son is the one who made the sacrifice, not his parents.
Reg Fields wrote:
She at first told the families of the victims that it was a video. I saw another parent on the news this morning say that Hillary told him that they would have the person who created the video arrested. If Trump had said "what difference does it make at this point" the media would be covering it non stop. Outside of Fox News she has gotten off easy on those comments.
There are differing stories on what was said between Hillary and the families, and you don't know what was said. We know what Trump said to the Khans. Even if what you are claiming was true, Hillary has made it clear that they would go after the terrorists that attacked the embassy and killed 4 Americans. You think that is comparable to Trump's response to the Khans? Did Hillary say, "Yeah okay Mrs. Smith how about we hear from your husband"?
Reg Fields wrote:
As for Mr. Khan, it appears he has ties to the Clinton's and he's also an immigration lawyer who stands a lot to lose if Trump gets elected. He's also said Muslim is a religion of peace when its clear there is a Muslim extremist problem going on right now in the world.
He's pro-immigration and worked at a large law firm that did the Clinton's tax returns, and you think this is surprising and/or noteworthy?
Reg Fields wrote:
But his anger at Trump is misplaced, Hillary voted for the war so she helped send his son to war and his son was killed by Muslim Extremists. Maybe his anger should be pointed at another direction. This guy was a plant, should Trump maybe have resisted responding to the bait, yes but the media is creating a false narrative much like they did when Trump jokingly said that Russia should release the e-mails if they have them and all of a sudden he became a Russian spy.
Yes there was resounding political support for the Iraq war and he should be frustrated with them as well. I say as well because his frustration with Trump is certainly justified, as he wouldn't have been able to enjoy the successes and live the American dream had Trump's policies been in place when Mr. Khan was trying to come to America.
Reg Fields wrote:
Meanwhile Hillary put our national security information at risk and she's the own who made a Uranium deal with Russia in return for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. So is it presidential to go around the world and auction off US contracts to the highest bidder in return for speaking fees and donations to a corrupt foundation?
Spoken like a true Breitbart disciple...well done! Nothing to support the Uranium One approval from the State department was in return for donations to the Clinton Foundation.
Noah Lyles on Pre 10,000s: "Why in the world are we hosting another countries Olympic qualifier?"
Jakob Ingebrigtsen calls Josh Kerr's podcast comments "a coward move"
Let's be real Flo -Jo was as dirty as Ben Johnson in fact name me a clean sprinter from that time
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion