Bill Clinton's mistress's code name: the Energizer

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,805
8,391
136
I posted about such earlier. He often went to Jeffrey Epstein's private island, where he raped the women held captive there.

Christopher Hitchens also held interviews with three women who were raped by him.

Coincidentally, Prince Andrew of the British royal family did the same, between the years 2000 to 2005.

A quick google search will promptly yield the information.

K. thx :thumbsup:

Sounds interesting enuf tuh take a sniff at.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
You are aware that he's a rapist, right?

You apparently aren't aware that's bullshit.

Couples have the right to set their own boundaries, strictly between the two of them. If they can't do that to mutual satisfaction, they divorce, at least in modern America. Just because those boundaries differ from my own doesn't grant me any moral superiority.

It is, in truth, none of my business or anybody else's.

As my wife said about Bill- "I knew he was a skirt-chasin' bubba the first time I voted for him."

As our European cousins put it- "And, uhh, so what?"

Until Obama came along, I ranked him as the best Repub president since Eisenhower.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
America: Where Americans will vote for the most stupid fuck in existence.

Hint, it's happened more than once.

man-ironing.jpg
 

MongGrel

Lifer
Dec 3, 2013
38,466
3,067
121
You left out all the *good* stuff: Vince Foster, Mena, Web Hubbell is Chelsea's father, Janet Reno was Hillary's lover, 30 or so murders, Whitewater, Rose Law firm.

Wake up sheeple!!!!

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:biggrin:

Mucho funny.
 
Last edited:

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,805
8,391
136
Looks like they merely feel sympathy for the poor bastard (Bill).

I personally don't feel sorry for Bill because he is living his life exactly the way he sees fit.

He is free of any and all of those encumbrances that shackled him while POTUS. He's now either sitting in the cock's roost or free ranging his way around the political spectrum picking fights or avoiding them at his leisure.

I can easily imagine him having a blast of a time with Trump just as easily as he would chum up with Dubyuh on the down low.

He left office head held as high as his celebrity status. Compare that with how Bush/Cheney left office.

Not saying I admire the guy, scumbag politician that he is, but I have to give him creds for how he managed to squirrel his way out scandal after scandal and still come out of it with the status he now possesses. ;)
 

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,387
465
126
At least it's an adult this time right? Beats the teenage girls he was banging on Epstein's island :-D
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Bill Clinton is revered by many Dems and vilified by many Repubs -- his actual performance in the Oval Office was somewhere in between.

On the plus side he was infinitely more fiscally responsible than any president in 50 years and if you recall, he actually ran a surplus by the late 90's.

On the minus side he gave big business something they'd been wanting for many years but had been blocked by Dems -- trade deals that sold out the American middle class.

In the long run he will be regarded as a bad president for his middle class killing trade deals and for turning the Democratic party into the Republican party with a few differences on social issues.

Brian
Couple things here. First, Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming into fiscal responsibility by the Republican Congress. Check his spending vetoes, they were only to demand higher spending. Second, I don't know we can read too much into Clinton's trade deals. I too very much dislike them, but no electable Pubby those cycles would have done differently. If something is the prevailing wisdom among both parties, I don't know that the winner deserves much more blame than the opposing party, which in this case might have done worse. I won't pretend I think they were wise, but they might well have been the lesser evil unless he was willing to sacrifice his second term.

He can't be a rapist, Trump told us Mexicans were the rapists! Did Trump lie?
OMG Bill Clinton is obviously an illegal alien.

I posted about such earlier. He often went to Jeffrey Epstein's private island, where he raped the women held captive there.

Christopher Hitchens also held interviews with three women who were raped by him.

Coincidentally, Prince Andrew of the British royal family did the same, between the years 2000 to 2005.

A quick google search will promptly yield the information.
I don't want to question Hitchens' integrity (not least because I'm not convinced it exists) but calling Clinton a rapist based on interviewing three random women is weak sauce. Epstein is a sleaze merchant, but not every flight is necessarily about rape or children.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
First, Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming into fiscal responsibility by the Republican Congress.

Yeh, that's why they squeezed a tax cut out of him in 1997- to balance the budget, right?

And that's why they tried valiantly to maintain military spending at cold war levels after the cold war was over, I suppose- to save money.
 
Last edited:

John Connor

Lifer
Nov 30, 2012
22,757
619
121
Then why aren't you running for office? Seems to me you're more than qualified, given the quoted statement above. Heck, you might even qualify to be the "Most stupid fuck in existence" standard bearer.


My platform would be that of common sense. But most stupid asses such as yourself would give two fucks so bite me.
 
Last edited:

Brian Stirling

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,964
2
0
Couple things here. First, Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming into fiscal responsibility by the Republican Congress. Check his spending vetoes, they were only to demand higher spending. Second, I don't know we can read too much into Clinton's trade deals. I too very much dislike them, but no electable Pubby those cycles would have done differently. If something is the prevailing wisdom among both parties, I don't know that the winner deserves much more blame than the opposing party, which in this case might have done worse. I won't pretend I think they were wise, but they might well have been the lesser evil unless he was willing to sacrifice his second term.

Second point first ... the trade deals Clinton signed into law were deals that multinationals had been pushing for for years by Reagan/Bush but were blocked by Dems that argued the deals would hurt the middle class (workers).

During this time and into the 90's the Dems were in the wilderness in DC and being crushed by Repubs by being outspent in elections 2X, 3X, 4X and more -- the Dems could not compete at the national level. Clinton was part of a Democratic review team to understand how they could get back into the game and become relevant and he found the answer -- become Republicans and support business deals favored by the wealthy.

So, Clinton promised the wealthy that he'd be there guy and he was and they gave him the money needed to be relevant -- and he won -- twice.

And now for the first point ... Clinton raised taxes a bit and balanced the budget while the Repubs fought him tooth and nail all the way. In fact, the last three years of the Clinton admin they actually paid down the debt by about $400B. Bush/Cheney had DC all to themselves but never came close to balancing the budget. Reagan before him tripled the national debt. Obama inherited the banking and housing market crisis that cost the nation many trillions of dollars. In addition, millions of Americans lost there jobs as a consequence of the fuckup Bush/Cheney created and dug a hole so deep it took years for Obama to get us out of it.

Put simply ... the last thing you want running the economy is a Republican, sadly, the Dems are now a light version of them.


Brian
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
He only signed the famed balanced budget during his last term that a GOP lead Congress and Senate (I.e., in the wake of the electoral wins in 1994 dubbed the "Republican Revolution") crafted and sent to him. Of which he didn't have much of a choice but to sign said budget. In other words he was only "fiscally responsible" because he had no choice but to go along with a GOP dominated House of Representatives budget planning agenda.
 
Last edited: