Mr. "I'm self funding" is now bragging about the campaign donations he's raised...Really?

[Oldstyle]

Oh, Lord, have mercy! Fiction writers could not come up with this stuff.

Who the hell promotes the idea that they won't be beholden to "big money" interests and "Wall St." in politics and then brags about having collected more money than ever before? Trump's cause obtained $15M from one investment management firm. I guess that's not the same thing as "big monied interests." Nope, not at all. Puh-lease!

Look man, They have to believe that he is self funding and not beholden to anyone WHILE believing that he the donations he's getting are from either himself or from people he will not be beholden too.

You have to think about it....They are in multiple threads telling everyone that not paying taxes is a good thing and that Trump never said it.

They are on all sides of all issues

They are on all sides of all issues

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If she owes them nothing, why is she guarding her speeches to them better than if they were State secrets?

Most likely because she signed an NDA with the organizations to whom she delivered the speechs. NDAs are incredibly typical conditions of employment/engagement with all kinds of organizations, but the financial services industry uses them pretty universally with all persons and entities they hire/engage for anything. It would not surprise me that even the cleaning company (and its employees) working at Goldman, for example, do so under an NDA.

• Sample NDA
• NDA Template Sample

Yes, NDA's are sooooo common when you give a speech.

Did you have to sign one the last time you were engaged by a bank?

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Oh, Lord, have mercy! Fiction writers could not come up with this stuff.

Who the hell promotes the idea that they won't be beholden to "big money" interests and "Wall St." in politics and then brags about having collected more money than ever before? Trump's cause obtained $15M from one investment management firm. I guess that's not the same thing as "big monied interests." Nope, not at all. Puh-lease!

Look man, They have to believe that he is self funding and not beholden to anyone WHILE believing that he the donations he's getting are from either himself or from people he will not be beholden too.

You have to think about it....They are in multiple threads telling everyone that not paying taxes is a good thing and that Trump never said it.

They are on all sides of all issues

They are on all sides of all issues

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

You cant be right if you are on two sides of the same issue.

 

[Oldstyle]

Oh, Lord, have mercy! Fiction writers could not come up with this stuff.

Who the hell promotes the idea that they won't be beholden to "big money" interests and "Wall St." in politics and then brags about having collected more money than ever before? Trump's cause obtained $15M from one investment management firm. I guess that's not the same thing as "big monied interests." Nope, not at all. Puh-lease!

Look man, They have to believe that he is self funding and not beholden to anyone WHILE believing that he the donations he's getting are from either himself or from people he will not be beholden too.

You have to think about it....They are in multiple threads telling everyone that not paying taxes is a good thing and that Trump never said it.

They are on all sides of all issues

They are on all sides of all issues

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

You cant be right if you are on two sides of the same issue.

You can be right part of the time! How is that possibly worse than being wrong 100% of the time?

What's laughable about 320's claim is that the Clinton's are probably the two biggest opinion poll watchers in the history of politics! They don't have a political position that they aren't willing to throw under the bus if they think it will win them an election! Yet, he thinks that they "stand" for something? Come on...get real!

 

[Oldstyle]

Most likely because she signed an NDA with the organizations to whom she delivered the speechs. NDAs are incredibly typical conditions of employment/engagement with all kinds of organizations, but the financial services industry uses them pretty universally with all persons and entities they hire/engage for anything. It would not surprise me that even the cleaning company (and its employees) working at Goldman, for example, do so under an NDA.

• Sample NDA
• NDA Template Sample

Yes, NDA's are sooooo common when you give a speech.

Did you have to sign one the last time you were engaged by a bank?

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

He's trying desperately to come up with some reason why Clinton wouldn't want the transcripts of her speeches released...an NDA is a rather pathetic attempt to do so. But then again...what excuse is there? She doesn't want those speeches made public because she doesn't want the public to know how cozy she is with the Wall Street Bankers.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Oh, Lord, have mercy! Fiction writers could not come up with this stuff.

Who the hell promotes the idea that they won't be beholden to "big money" interests and "Wall St." in politics and then brags about having collected more money than ever before? Trump's cause obtained $15M from one investment management firm. I guess that's not the same thing as "big monied interests." Nope, not at all. Puh-lease!

Look man, They have to believe that he is self funding and not beholden to anyone WHILE believing that he the donations he's getting are from either himself or from people he will not be beholden too.

You have to think about it....They are in multiple threads telling everyone that not paying taxes is a good thing and that Trump never said it.

They are on all sides of all issues

They are on all sides of all issues

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

You cant be right if you are on two sides of the same issue.

You can be right part of the time! How is that possibly worse than being wrong 100% of the time?

If you're on both sides you dont only get credit for the right stuff. lol....2+2 = 4 and 7! Yes I was right!

 

[Oldstyle]

Look man, They have to believe that he is self funding and not beholden to anyone WHILE believing that he the donations he's getting are from either himself or from people he will not be beholden too.

You have to think about it....They are in multiple threads telling everyone that not paying taxes is a good thing and that Trump never said it.

They are on all sides of all issues

They are on all sides of all issues

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

You cant be right if you are on two sides of the same issue.

You can be right part of the time! How is that possibly worse than being wrong 100% of the time?

If you're on both sides you dont only get credit for the right stuff. lol....2+2 = 4 and 7! Yes I was right!

So it's better to say 2 + 2 = 7 and stick to that?

 

[Oldstyle]

Someone being wrong all the time is not better than someone who is wrong some of the time because of their "consistency". I'm sorry but that's absurd!

 

[ClosedCaption]

^^ That is the problem! It's not so much that I'm of a mind to ridicule someone for a specific position -- though I will if I think absurd be their position as they present it -- the worst is that one have no clearly defined position or principles. Being all over the place is worse, IMO, than being in the wrong place. That shows a lack of understanding of what one stands for and why. And that is entirely unacceptable to me.

So being all over the place is worse in your opinion than being wrong? Wow, thanks for admitting that...it explains so much about your support for Hillary! You don't care if she's corrupt and dead wrong on the issues...as long as she's consistent in her corruption and being dead wrong?

You cant be right if you are on two sides of the same issue.

You can be right part of the time! How is that possibly worse than being wrong 100% of the time?

If you're on both sides you dont only get credit for the right stuff. lol....2+2 = 4 and 7! Yes I was right!

So it's better to say 2 + 2 = 7 and stick to that?

Youre pretending to be stupid now. You cant be for two different answers and when the right answer is revealed then you ball up your wrong answer and say it doesnt count.

Trump was for the Iraq war then later said he was against it. To you that means if the war went good he can say told you...if it went bad he can say told you.

So not standing for something is best....Mitt Romney must be livid

 

[ClosedCaption]

To answer your question if you think 2+2 = 4 say so

If you think 2+2 = 7 say so.

But you cant ever be correct by saying 2+2 = 4 AND 7

 

[Oldstyle]

To answer your question if you think 2+2 = 4 say so

If you think 2+2 = 7 say so.

But you cant ever be correct by saying 2+2 = 4 AND 7

You've got to be kidding me! If someone says the answer is 7 and then changes their mind and says it's 4...THAT person is inferior to someone who says the answer is 7 and I'm sticking to that answer no matter what you show me?

 

[mudwhistle]

Oh, Lord, have mercy! Fiction writers could not come up with this stuff.

Who the hell promotes the idea that they won't be beholden to "big money" interests and "Wall St." in politics and then brags about having collected more money than ever before? Trump's cause obtained $15M from one investment management firm. I guess that's not the same thing as "big monied interests." Nope, not at all. Puh-lease!

During the nomination process , he was self-funded.

Next

 

[ClosedCaption]

To answer your question if you think 2+2 = 4 say so

If you think 2+2 = 7 say so.

But you cant ever be correct by saying 2+2 = 4 AND 7

You've got to be kidding me! If someone says the answer is 7 and then changes their mind and says it's 4...THAT person is inferior to someone who says the answer is 7 and I'm sticking to that answer no matter what you show me?

Changing your mind? I said you cant say the answer is both 4 AND 7. Not that you cant ever change your mind

 

[Oldstyle]

And Hillary was for the war when it was politically expedient to do so and then she was against it when became politically expedient to have that viewpoint! She has no deeply held convictions because her number one priority is getting elected. She not only would throw her own mother under the bus to get elected...she'd back up and run her over again if that's what it took!

 

[320 Years of History]

Most likely because she signed an NDA with the organizations to whom she delivered the speechs. NDAs are incredibly typical conditions of employment/engagement with all kinds of organizations, but the financial services industry uses them pretty universally with all persons and entities they hire/engage for anything. It would not surprise me that even the cleaning company (and its employees) working at Goldman, for example, do so under an NDA.

• Sample NDA
• NDA Template Sample

Yes, NDA's are sooooo common when you give a speech.

Did you have to sign one the last time you were engaged by a bank?

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

I don't know the nature of what she said or did with GS other than that she delivered a speech.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, NDA's are sooooo common when you give a speech.

Did you have to sign one the last time you were engaged by a bank?

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

I don't know the nature of what she said or did with GS other than that she delivered a speech.

All we know for certain is that she's guarding what was said with greater care than if it were a Classified email. Her careless handling of classified information lead to the assassination of US Asset; her speech to GS, however, is safe.

Sleep well, Mr. Blankfein

Sleep well.

 

[320 Years of History]

Did you have to sign one the last time you were engaged by a bank?

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

I don't know the nature of what she said or did with GS other than that she delivered a speech.

All we know for certain is that she's guarding what was said with greater care than if it were a Classified email. Her careless handling of classified information lead to the assassination of US Asset; her speech to GS, however, is safe.

Sleep well, Mr. Blankfein

Sleep well.

Red:
God, almighty. I have asked you before to stop saying stupid sh*t to me because I can't add you to my ignore list. I'm not even going to explain what's absurd about your "red" sentence. Would you please just put me on your ignore list?

 

[BluesLegend]

Only in the strange world of liberals would self funding a campaign vs Hillary selling herself on a street corner to the highest bidder be viewed as a negative. Trump never said he would self fund the general election, just the primary.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The only time I have ever had to sign a NDA is when I was being GIVEN sensitive material by a corporation I was working for. People who are giving a speech have no need to sign an NDA because they aren't being exposed to sensitive material.

I must say the contortions you are going through to try and rationalize her criminal behavior are truly amazing to watch. You should join a circus.

Okay, well you don't have much experience with NDAs. That explains why you think what you've written above in your most recent reply to me.

PROMISES OF SILENCE: CONTRACT LAW AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Wait. Are you saying that GS entrusted Hillary with some financial or proprietary secrets, hence the NDA?

I don't know the nature of what she said or did with GS other than that she delivered a speech.

All we know for certain is that she's guarding what was said with greater care than if it were a Classified email. Her careless handling of classified information lead to the assassination of US Asset; her speech to GS, however, is safe.

Sleep well, Mr. Blankfein

Sleep well.

Red:
God, almighty. I have asked you before to stop saying stupid sh*t to me because I can't add you to my ignore list. I'm not even going to explain what's absurd about your "red" sentence. Would you please just put me on your ignore list?

I have no one on my ignore list; no one.

That you might not like something I say does not make it stupid, snowflake.

Her careless handling of classified information got a US asset killed

 

[hjmick]

I have come to the opinion that Dump's goal is to become the first nominee to run for the office of President and turn a profit.


This could explain why he has spent virtually nothing on television...