apodino wrote:With all due respect there is more to the Clintons than just the emails or Bill screwing Monica. One issue at hand is the Clintons raised a ton of money that was supposed to go help the people of Haiti, yet much of this money was never received in Haiti which has a lot of people wondering where it ended up.
Unless you can provide some substance to this accusation by innuendo, that's a big nothing. A zero.
apodino wrote:Another issue is a purported Uranium deal with Russia that was negotiated and then later on a lot of Russian Money ended up being donated to the Clinton Foundation. Fact checkers have reached different conclusions on this so I am not sure what the truth is.
Another empty accusation by innuendo. You don't even know what you're accusing her of. The "uranium deal" was an above board business transaction of no great consequence. The uranium remains in the Canadian uranium mining areas where it always was. The controlling shares of the company which owns the land came into Russian hands. Uranium is a commodity, this is no big deal. Unless you have some rational and specific complaint, which is something that I have never encountered.
apodino wrote:There is also the entire DWS deal with the Democratic Primary, and later on Hillary being fed debate questions by Donna Brazille.
That is in the running for the most trivial national politics fraud story ever, a tempest in a teacup. Wow, a politician looked over somebody's shoulder to get the questions to an exam. Do you have even a slight clue about how actual politics work in everyday life in this country or anywhere else, from the school board up? Apparently not: it's either that or you're just trying to convince everyone that you've never been out of your mom's basement and have no clue.
apodino wrote:One other question I have is why was the Clinton Foundation disbanded after the election? If they were doing good work, why not keep it going and allow them to do their good work and make a difference without needing to hold office. There is no definitive proof, but the only logical explaination is that the Clinton Foundation was a front for something else.
Another baseless accusation by innuendo. Maybe they lost interest in the people who were attending those board meetings. Or more likely, after losing the election, the Clintons lost their clout to extract money from a bunch of rich tightwads. Your wild reasoning is unwarranted and unethical unless you have something to back it up.
apodino wrote:And the tarmac meeting Bill had with Loretta Lynch still makes no sense to me at all and I don't buy their explanation of it.
Another big nothing. Bill and Loretta are friends that go way back; they are political allies. Bill's contacting her is not illegal or immoral in any way. Without the Clinton witch hunt, it would have been quite unremarkable. It only has legs via innuendo which seems to be your specialty.
apodino wrote:There are other right wing conspiracies out there like the one that supposedly a lot of people that have had relationships with the Clintons have all turned up dead for some reason. There is no evidence of foul play in any of these deaths and for this card to be played is just as wrong as the whole Obama birther card.
You gave up on that one eh?
apodino wrote:I will say this though. I believe Obama did more harm to Liberalism and Progressivism than good.....
Just exactly how relevant do you think your right wing analysis is to the progressive community? What a vapid tack for you to take! All this does is to illuminate how biased and slandering you are. That snotty little bit makes me wonder how you managed to type that with your hands on your hips.
apodino wrote:But Democrats have lost a lot of seats at all levels of government since he was elected.
We have a lot of morons in this country that think Fox news is actual news. That and the garden variety Trump supporter's xenophobia and racism.
apodino wrote:He had an awful relationship with congress, and yes I include Pelosi and Reid in that as well as he did not work well with them either even when Democrats had the majority.
Awww, they didn't work well with the Republicans? Should you pay a little attention to what's going on right now, you may notice that the Republicans don't get along very well with Republicans either.
apodino wrote:He speaks very well and can make things sound good, but he also presents it in an elitist way that does not win detractors over.
I'm sorry that your education never got beyond the 7th grade. But others in this country appreciate the break from the G. Bush kind of down home bullshit. And who are you to critique Obama's professional political demeanor? How many offices have you been elected to?
apodino wrote: I also believe that the best thing that could have happened for the Liberal Cause would have been for Romney to be elected president. I say this because had Romney been elected, there is no way Trump runs and wins this year. Although Romney is a nice guy he is also a very wealthy guy and he would have had trouble relating to middle America. The democratic party would have had motivation to go out and develop new leaders and we would have had some fresh blood last election. Instead Obama upset a lot of people with some of his policies and the establishment continued to corrupt Washington and he made enough people angry that we elected Donald Trump, who is one of the worst people we could have ever elected president and with all the other talent that the GOP ran this year, to say this is the cream of that crop insults my intelligence. My choices were so bad this year I was forced to write in my choice for president. I have zero regrets and would do it again in a heartbeat.
As if you care about "the liberal cause".