Roughly 10% of Trump's campaign spending went right back into his pocket via his businesses.

I "explained" it pages ago lol but like ravenous vultures most posters her are in too big a hurry to pick a fight rather than read further into the thread. Thus the same fucking questions get asked over & over & over & over &.......well I'm sure you get the point.
Dude, if so, then why not say so in the first place instead of going the derail, insult demeaning route?

Is it because you assume anyone who disagrees with you is an enemy and deserves to be attacked?
 
I "explained" it pages ago lol but like ravenous vultures most posters her are in too big a hurry to pick a fight rather than read further into the thread. Thus the same fucking questions get asked over & over & over & over &.......well I'm sure you get the point.
Dude, if so, then why not say so in the first place instead of going the derail, insult demeaning route?

Is it because you assume anyone who disagrees with you is an enemy and deserves to be attacked?
It didn't need explained. This is the politics forum. If you are not up to date on current political events why does it fall on me to give a detailed synopsis? I'm not your secretary ffs
 
And we are done here. This conversation is pointless
Like the thread? Agreed. Pointless to only point fingers at one side.

Example; starting a thread on Clinton corruption cannot be fully understood without the context of how most politicians in Washington are corrupt. It's a matter of perspective. Those who only want to look at one side of things are fucking morons...or liars.
 
and you offer nothing to debunk what I posted ...

NEXT shit eating Trumpbot.

I made a statement and you assumed that Trump didn't speak about money donations at his press conference a few days ago. In the Q&A Trump did address the media's question about soliciting and taking money and thus I made comment that apparently you didn't watch the conference but were only taking in what the media was feeding you. Next if I recall right, you posted a story about Trump taking donations to pay Christie's debts which sot of confirms what Trump said in Scotland. What is there to debunk? You seem confused.
 
Why would liberals care about that when Democrats hire their own family members into positions they aren't qualified to hold.
 
and you offer nothing to debunk what I posted ...

NEXT shit eating Trumpbot.

I made a statement and you assumed that Trump didn't speak about money donations at his press conference a few days ago. In the Q&A Trump did address the media's question about soliciting and taking money and thus I made comment that apparently you didn't watch the conference but were only taking in what the media was feeding you. Next if I recall right, you posted a story about Trump taking donations to pay Christie's debts which sot of confirms what Trump said in Scotland. What is there to debunk? You seem confused.

nope, I didnt see a press conferennce from Sat or Sun or today, but as long as you were able to see one whenever and what he said made your ears feel better thats good. Props for watching Donnie on a weekend.
 
And we are done here. This conversation is pointless
Like the thread? Agreed. Pointless to only point fingers at one side.

Example; starting a thread on Clinton corruption cannot be fully understood without the context of how most politicians in Washington are corrupt. It's a matter of perspective. Those who only want to look at one side of things are fucking morons...or liars.

The Clinton Cabal has set a new level of depravity for theft, corruption and fraud.
 
Probably the most senseless thread here in a while.

In order to COMPLY WITH ELECTION LAW, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THE GOING RATE FOR HOTELS AND OTHER FACILITIES THEY USE.

IF they did not pay, if the Donald Trump organization used the rooms without charge, the campaign would be in violation of the law.
 
And we are done here. This conversation is pointless
Like the thread? Agreed. Pointless to only point fingers at one side.

Example; starting a thread on Clinton corruption cannot be fully understood without the context of how most politicians in Washington are corrupt. It's a matter of perspective. Those who only want to look at one side of things are fucking morons...or liars.
And those who have no knowledge of my posting history make ASSumptions about me that only serve to make them look foolish. And you look incredibly foolish right now.
Both sides suck. Congrats on stating the obvious. Now either post on topic of bug off little child.
 
The Clinton Cabal has set a new level of depravity for theft, corruption and fraud.
Agreed, but like an iceberg being 90% underwater, they're only the 10% of the corruption showing. The Clintons may be the most powerful and corrupt, but they certainly aren't alone.
 
Probably the most senseless thread here in a while.

In order to COMPLY WITH ELECTION LAW, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THE GOING RATE FOR HOTELS AND OTHER FACILITIES THEY USE.

IF they did not pay, if the Donald Trump organization used the rooms without charge, the campaign would be in violation of the law.
A perfect example of missing the point entirely.

Derp
 
And those who have no knowledge of my posting history make ASSumptions about me that only serve to make them look foolish. And you look incredibly foolish right now.
Both sides suck. Congrats on stating the obvious. Now either post on topic of bug off little child.
Dude, I asked a question and you went apeshit on me. Accuse all you like. Live in your dream world. The fact remains you shit all over someone who asked a question. Deny it. Lie about it. Do whatever you please, but don't expect anyone to overlook your comments.
 
You know what's funny. When an article on any website, TV show, news paper or radio does an investigation or report on the activity of ANY political candidate they don't spend half the article talking about candidates unrelated to the topic of the report.
And article that seeks to draw comparisons between candidates does that but when looking in depth at a particular activity of any candidate an honest unbiased person can reflect on that subject without pointing elsewhere as if it's some kind of excuse or permission slip to obfuscate. That is the realm of hacks and those who for whatever reason are incapable of self reflection.

This thread is a perfect example. It is about one specific topic in which one candidate is involved in activity that I considered shady. If I wanted to be a hack I could have explained it away by pointing at the Clinton Foundation because it is certainly a VERY SHADY affair. But see here's the rub. I believe in self accountability. Being able to look at an issue without predetermined prejudices. This thread being about Trump has literally nothing to do with what I think of Hillary. As a grown up in am able to separate the issues & remove any emotions.
Most of the responses in this thread are Hillary this or the law that. No real desire to speak to the image it gives. Or the ammo it gives Hillary in her campaign.
If you can't call out your own for things then you have no business bitching about the opposition. Family>Country>Personal Ideology>Party.
 
And those who have no knowledge of my posting history make ASSumptions about me that only serve to make them look foolish. And you look incredibly foolish right now.
Both sides suck. Congrats on stating the obvious. Now either post on topic of bug off little child.
Dude, I asked a question and you went apeshit on me. Accuse all you like. Live in your dream world. The fact remains you shit all over someone who asked a question. Deny it. Lie about it. Do whatever you please, but don't expect anyone to overlook your comments.
I don't deny it. You're an idiot who completely missed the point of a post. I ripped you for it. I'm an asshole. Grab a tissue & get over it.
 
Roughly 10% of Trump's campaign spending went right back into his pocket via his businesses
This is not a scandal
 

Forum List

Back
Top