Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today

[charwin95]

Liberal source? CNN is far better than Faux news...... Occasionally h post meaning no more than 3x a month and I don't rely on it.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...

Dude I have lots of lots of interest.....
And who are you again to dictate what I want to read?
I also read these......

 

[francoHFW]

Trump tells more lies in each speech than Clinton has told in 25 years.

Literally. He's one of the most dishonest polticians in history, while Clinton is well above average in honesty.

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...

Dude I have lots of lots of interest.....
And who are you again to dictate what I want to read?
I also read these......

There is one big liar, the New BS GOP Propaganda Machine...and its puppet GOP pols...

 

[FA_Q2]

Again, you can claim whatever you want but it doesn't stack up against the facts. Mr. MOST TRANSPARENT EVER is ANYTHING BUT!

Since when does a Constitutional Scholar violate 70% of ALL FOIA requests? Maybe he was sick and out of class that day when they covered this / adherance to the law...

Obama's knowledge of the constitution has nothing to do with this problem.

First off, FOIA don't go to the president they go directly to various agencies. The fact that agencies now accept electronic submissions of requested have created a mountain of requests. Obama acknowledged that while battles continue over what should and shouldn't be released, federal agencies are struggling to keep up with the requests that are streaming in.

In June Obama signed a new law to improve the sluggest response of the goverment to requests.
Obama signs FOIA reform bill

Aside from the requests for FF information that have been stonewalled (and there is no reasonable reason as to why such a thing would be stonewalled except political cover) Obama has an abysmal record in front of the SCOTUS. It is clear that no matter what constitutional 'study' or 'instruction' he may have had he has a poor understanding of the constitution.

Obama was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago for 12 years. I think he has a pretty clear grasp of Constitutional Law. In fact, it has been suggested that Obama would make an excellent Supreme Court Justice because of his background and understanding of the Constitution.

Obama administration has lost two-thirds of Supreme Court cases

No, Obama has a horrific understanding of the SCOTUS.

That's not what the link said:

By Mr. Winkler’s count, the Obama administration has won 39 percent of the cases in which it has been a party in the litigation, and won 50 percent of the cases in which the government filed a “friend of the court” brief backing one side or the other.

Mr. Winkler said a good portion of the administration’s poor batting average can be traced to ideological differences between the Obama administration and the five conservative-leaning Supreme Court justices.

Sounds like that batting average is about to change.

I see that you are looking forward to packing the court.

In any matter, they can try and spin the results any way they please. It does not change the fact that when Obama brings a case before the high court he loses most of the time. That is most of the time his actions are challenged and he believes them constitutional he is flat out incorrect (and he has lost more than any president for 100 years). Considering that a number of these loses have been unanimous, the court makeup is a lame excuse to hide his abysmal record. Obama's understanding of the constitution is pathetic.

 

[Slashsnake]

Claims that Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar and innately untrustworthy is one the most interesting claims to come out of this election season. Indeed, for a surprisingly large percentage of the electorate, the claim that Hillary is innately dishonest is simply accepted as a given. It is an accusation and conviction so ingrained in the conversation about her that any attempt to even question it is often met with shock. And yet here’s the thing: it’s not actually true. Politifact, the Pulitzer prize-winning fact-checking project, determined for example that Hillary was actually the most truthful candidate (of either Party) in the 2016 election season. And in general Politifact has determined that Hillary is more honest than most (but not all) politicians they have tracked over the years.

In terms of honesty, Hillary is a politician, and like all politicians she is no stranger to “massaging” and exaggerating the truth. And yes on occasion she will let loose a whopper. But is she worse than other politicians? The evidence suggests that she is no worse, and actually better, than most other politicians. Internet videos like the “13 minutes of Hillary lying” appear to be mostly examples of Hillary changing her position over several decades, combined with annoying but typical political behavior. But similar videos of Donald Trump exist showing him doing an even more extreme version of the same thing. Why is he not being accused of this type of mendacity? In fact, there is very little dispute that Trump has been SIGNIFICANTLY less honest on the campaign trail than Hillary. According to Politifact he is in fact the least honest candidate they’ve ever analyzed! So if the issue of honesty is really that important, why are so many people holding Hillary to such an obviously different standard than Trump?

The latest attack on Hillary's honesty concerns the email investigation. Although the Director of FBI testified to the fact that he found no evidence of Hillary lying, her opposition has maintains otherwise claiming Hillary lied to FBI and lied to congress. I think anyone with an once of intelligence would realize that if there were any evidence of Hillary lying under oath, she would be facing charges of contempt of this Republican Congress or arrested for making false statements to the FBI.

Thanks for giving me the biggest laugh of this election season, Flopper.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Claims that Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar and innately untrustworthy is one the most interesting claims to come out of this election season. Indeed, for a surprisingly large percentage of the electorate, the claim that Hillary is innately dishonest is simply accepted as a given. It is an accusation and conviction so ingrained in the conversation about her that any attempt to even question it is often met with shock. And yet here’s the thing: it’s not actually true. Politifact, the Pulitzer prize-winning fact-checking project, determined for example that Hillary was actually the most truthful candidate (of either Party) in the 2016 election season. And in general Politifact has determined that Hillary is more honest than most (but not all) politicians they have tracked over the years.

In terms of honesty, Hillary is a politician, and like all politicians she is no stranger to “massaging” and exaggerating the truth. And yes on occasion she will let loose a whopper. But is she worse than other politicians? The evidence suggests that she is no worse, and actually better, than most other politicians. Internet videos like the “13 minutes of Hillary lying” appear to be mostly examples of Hillary changing her position over several decades, combined with annoying but typical political behavior. But similar videos of Donald Trump exist showing him doing an even more extreme version of the same thing. Why is he not being accused of this type of mendacity? In fact, there is very little dispute that Trump has been SIGNIFICANTLY less honest on the campaign trail than Hillary. According to Politifact he is in fact the least honest candidate they’ve ever analyzed! So if the issue of honesty is really that important, why are so many people holding Hillary to such an obviously different standard than Trump?

The latest attack on Hillary's honesty concerns the email investigation. Although the Director of FBI testified to the fact that he found no evidence of Hillary lying, her opposition has maintains otherwise claiming Hillary lied to FBI and lied to congress. I think anyone with an once of intelligence would realize that if there were any evidence of Hillary lying under oath, she would be facing charges of contempt of this Republican Congress or arrested for making false statements to the FBI.

In hindsight, Flopper, how does it feel knowing you posted one of the most embarrassing threads ever in USMB (that I've seen personally)? What were you thinking?

 

[Mac1958]

Hillary Clinton is the luckiest person on the planet - she gets the nomination just as the GOP is losing its fucking mind.

That said, we'll see if Assange has anything of substance in store for her in October.

Just another reminder that our REAL Best & Brightest know to stay the hell out of politics. Wonderful.
.

 

[Oldstyle]

You don't think CNN is a liberal source? That's amusing...
Why would you use The Huffington Post once a month? For that matter why would you use it once a year? It's liberal propaganda...the flip side of Breitbart.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...

Dude I have lots of lots of interest.....
And who are you again to dictate what I want to read?
I also read these......

Dude, I'm not the one that told you to read about Hugh Hefner...that was YOUR choice! Dictate what you read? Hardly. I will however, LAUGH at you choices!

 

[Oldstyle]

Hillary Clinton is the luckiest person on the planet - she gets the nomination just as the GOP is losing its fucking mind.

That said, we'll see if Assange has anything of substance in store for her in October.

Just another reminder that our REAL Best & Brightest know to stay the hell out of politics. Wonderful.
.

Don't tell me you're a little nervous about what's out there on Hillary, Mac! She's one of the most honest politicians in Washington! How could any leaks POSSIBLY hurt someone like THAT?

 

[Oldstyle]

Trump tells more lies in each speech than Clinton has told in 25 years.

Literally. He's one of the most dishonest polticians in history, while Clinton is well above average in honesty.

CNN is more reliable than faux news. I dont really go into H. Post except only when I read yahoo or Miami, San Diego news then once in a while the source is H post........ There are some interesting topic like Hugh Hefner mansion for sale bought by neighbor................ But I don't really go in and read H. Post.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...

Dude I have lots of lots of interest.....
And who are you again to dictate what I want to read?
I also read these......

There is one big liar, the New BS GOP Propaganda Machine...and its puppet GOP pols...

Ah, hate to mention this, Franco but the head of the DNC and two of it's big wigs just resigned in disgrace because they got caught lying and cheating. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think anyone over at the RNC has had to do that! Duh?

 

[Mac1958]

Hillary Clinton is the luckiest person on the planet - she gets the nomination just as the GOP is losing its fucking mind.

That said, we'll see if Assange has anything of substance in store for her in October.

Just another reminder that our REAL Best & Brightest know to stay the hell out of politics. Wonderful.
.

Don't tell me you're a little nervous about what's out there on Hillary, Mac! She's one of the most honest politicians in Washington! How could any leaks POSSIBLY hurt someone like THAT?

Well, she's obviously pretty dishonest, and sure, pretty much anything could be out there.

I don't have a partisan flank to protect, so I can just be honest about it. Who knows.
.

 

[francoHFW]

Trump tells more lies in each speech than Clinton has told in 25 years.

Literally. He's one of the most dishonest polticians in history, while Clinton is well above average in honesty.

Actually...CNN is more reliably liberal than Fox News.

Here's a hint for ya', Charwin...if the news source you're reading uses The Huffington Post as a source...then they're a pretty shitty news organization! Know what I'm saying?

Do you read yahoo news? ....... Let me repeat it for you...... I don't really read H. Post as a source for my political views or other subject....... Here is a sample of yahoo news this afternoon.

See under Clinton... Business Insider as source...... H. Post once in a while comes up but that depends on the subject if I want to read like Hugh Hefner.

You're one of those "high information" liberal voters...right, Charwin? All the things going on in the world...but YOU want to read about Hugh Hefner? Dude, I hate to break this to you but Hef hasn't been in the mix in about ten years! Just saying...

Dude I have lots of lots of interest.....
And who are you again to dictate what I want to read?
I also read these......

There is one big liar, the New BS GOP Propaganda Machine...and its puppet GOP pols...

Ah, hate to mention this, Franco but the head of the DNC and two of it's big wigs just resigned in disgrace because they got caught lying and cheating. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think anyone over at the RNC has had to do that! Duh?

Staffers BSing? I don't think so....Hell the RNC deleted half a million back when Boooshies were actually doing bad stuff. Dupes!

 

[easyt65]

"Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today"

...was just awarded 1 x 'FALSE', 1 x 'PANTS ON FIRE', & 4 x 'PINOCCHIOS' for REPEATEDLY lying about her LIES.

That's like saying Obama has run the most transparent administration ever ALTHOUGH he has illegally failed to comply with 70% of ALL FOIA requests!

 

[jillian]

"Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today"

...was just awarded 1 x 'FALSE', 1 x 'PANTS ON FIRE', & 4 x 'PINOCCHIOS' for REPEATEDLY lying about her LIES.

That's like saying Obama has run the most transparent administration ever ALTHOUGH he has illegally failed to comply with 70% of ALL FOIA requests!

you know, i wouldn't call her one of the most honest. but she's certainly no worse than average in truth telling by politicians.

now dumb donald?

HE is a compulsive liar.

and apparently mentally unhinged.

 

[Dr Grump]

So China is flooding the Clintons with money in exchange for serious political favors. You don't see a major conflict of interest there? Oh what am I talking about - you can't see. You're a blind partisan hack. Only a jack-ass would say "so what" to something illegal. The Clintons use that foundation to fund their campaigns, stupid.

I repeat. What did China get for its money? Take your time...

 

[Wyatt earp]

"Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today"

...was just awarded 1 x 'FALSE', 1 x 'PANTS ON FIRE', & 4 x 'PINOCCHIOS' for REPEATEDLY lying about her LIES.

That's like saying Obama has run the most transparent administration ever ALTHOUGH he has illegally failed to comply with 70% of ALL FOIA requests!

you know, i wouldn't call her one of the most honest. but she's certainly no worse than average in truth telling by politicians.

now dumb donald?

HE is a compulsive liar.

and apparently mentally unhinged.

I have to agree with you there she is just average on a lying politician..

I think it has to do more with her being manipulative, devious and actions..

White water and her emails showed the same pattern..

Vince foster to bengahzi showed the same devious pattern

Also I don't think trump is a liar, that dude lost his marbles and just nuts.

 

[P@triot]

So China is flooding the Clintons with money in exchange for serious political favors. You don't see a major conflict of interest there? Oh what am I talking about - you can't see. You're a blind partisan hack. Only a jack-ass would say "so what" to something illegal. The Clintons use that foundation to fund their campaigns, stupid.

I repeat. What did China get for its money? Take your time...

The links are posted cupcake. Ask an adult for help...

 

[Dr Grump]

So China is flooding the Clintons with money in exchange for serious political favors. You don't see a major conflict of interest there? Oh what am I talking about - you can't see. You're a blind partisan hack. Only a jack-ass would say "so what" to something illegal. The Clintons use that foundation to fund their campaigns, stupid.

I repeat. What did China get for its money? Take your time...

The links are posted cupcake. Ask an adult for help...

Read the links. Let me give you a clue - when even Bill Clinton says the link between China and the donations to the Clinton foundation should be investigated (which, if you even bothered reading your own links is what he says) that makes me think maybe you are barking up the wrong tree. Remember this is the president that appointed the SP that eventually led to Lewinsky. Unlike Bush Jnr who REFUSED to appoint a SP with regard to WMDs in Iraq. I know who I trust more....

 

[Oldstyle]

"Hillary - One of the Most Honest Politictians in Washington Today"

...was just awarded 1 x 'FALSE', 1 x 'PANTS ON FIRE', & 4 x 'PINOCCHIOS' for REPEATEDLY lying about her LIES.

That's like saying Obama has run the most transparent administration ever ALTHOUGH he has illegally failed to comply with 70% of ALL FOIA requests!

you know, i wouldn't call her one of the most honest. but she's certainly no worse than average in truth telling by politicians.

now dumb donald?

HE is a compulsive liar.

and apparently mentally unhinged.

Just can't bring yourself to admit how pathological Hillary is...can you, Jillian? Average in truth telling? She lies about stupid things...she lies about big things...she lies to shift blame away from herself...she lies to make herself look better than she is. She can't even stop lying when she's been caught red handed lying...she'll look you right in the eye and tell you another lie to cover for the first one. Hillary Clinton has an issue and I think deep down YOU KNOW IT!

 

[Oldstyle]

So China is flooding the Clintons with money in exchange for serious political favors. You don't see a major conflict of interest there? Oh what am I talking about - you can't see. You're a blind partisan hack. Only a jack-ass would say "so what" to something illegal. The Clintons use that foundation to fund their campaigns, stupid.

I repeat. What did China get for its money? Take your time...

The links are posted cupcake. Ask an adult for help...

Read the links. Let me give you a clue - when even Bill Clinton says the link between China and the donations to the Clinton foundation should be investigated (which, if you even bothered reading your own links is what he says) that makes me think maybe you are barking up the wrong tree. Remember this is the president that appointed the SP that eventually led to Lewinsky. Unlike Bush Jnr who REFUSED to appoint a SP with regard to WMDs in Iraq. I know who I trust more....

Let me give YOU a clue, Grump! This is the classic Clinton response to getting caught doing something bad. First of all they declare their complete innocence and blame others for a partisan "witch hunt". Step two is to hamstring any investigation by destroying or withholding any evidence of wrong doing. Step three is to stonewall for as long as possible hoping that something else will come along to attract attention away from what they have done. Step four is to declare that what took place happened long ago and is thus "old news" not worth even looking into. Then for good measure they'll throw in a deep concern about how much the investigations (which they stonewalled) have cost the American people!

You trust the Clinton's? I don't think you trust them at all, Doc! I think you know as well as Jillian does that they both lie habitually and do it without batting an eye. You're just willing to hold your nose to vote for her because it's your only choice after the Clinton's and Debbie Wasserman Schultz subverted the democratic process in the Democratic primaries.

 

[P@triot]

Read the links. Let me give you a clue - when even Bill Clinton says the link between China and the donations to the Clinton foundation should be investigated (which, if you even bothered reading your own links is what he says) that makes me think maybe you are barking up the wrong tree. Remember this is the president that appointed the SP that eventually led to Lewinsky. Unlike Bush Jnr who REFUSED to appoint a SP with regard to WMDs in Iraq. I know who I trust more....

Bwahahahahahaha!!! Holy shit is that hilarious. The irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

You "trust" the man who had dozens and dozens of affairs on his wife, who lied about all of them, who committed perjury about all of it, and who was ultimately forced to admit it once their was DNA evidence.

Damn man....that is freaking hilarious. That really illustrates what a Clinton whore you are.