• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Did the Saudi's fund 20% of Hillary's campaign

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
LegendKiller said:
Yeah, people voting for a corrupt whore in control of foreign governments is pathetic.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you realize that trump is a whore (Is there anything he won't put his name on), but I didn't realize trump controlled a foreign government. Would that be Mexico? Is that how he will be able to make Mexico pay for the wall?

At least you are past the stage of denial.
 
JEDIYoda said:
nickqt said:
I don't know if Saudia Arabia is financing 20% of Hitlery's campaign, but I do know for sure that Huma Abedin's ISIS contacts are funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars directly into Hitlery's campaign, mostly through terrorists funded by Hitlery working out of Benghazi. Additionally, it's come to all truthseekers' attentions that time-travelling Vincent Foster is in fact running this program. Some of you may remember Vincent Foster as the man obviously murdered by Hitlery Clinton in the 1990s. Well, it turns out that Vincent Foster wasn't really murdered, and in fact travels through time in order to act as a political hitman, both for FutureObama, who was actually born in Kenya in 2172, and for Hitlery Clinton, who is actively working with ISIS, Agenda21, and central American hispanic preteens with calves the size of canteloupes to enact Sharia Law, in the US, by taking over Texas Walmarts.

After their plan succeeds, they will then force all conservatives to board trains that will take them to FEMA re-education camps, where they will be forced to gay marry their uncles, and then wage a never-ending war against Christmas by telling people Happy Holidays in response to greetings from TrueAmericans™ who say Merry Christmas. They'll have no choice, because obviously FutureObama will be confiscating everyone's guns just as soon as he takes office in January of 2009.

Wake up sheeple!

Also: Whitewater.
Click to expand...
Credible link?? or are you just blowing smoke??
Click to expand...
I'm not sure where he found that... probably Breitbart or RT. 😛 The OP must have overlooked it.
 
This has about as much evidence as the claim that Trump went to that rich guys private island to rape underage girls.
Not that I don't think PAC money shouldn't be audited more.
 
Are you seriously linking Russia Today?

You know, I've been on my share of losing arguments on the Interwebs, and I've recognized that a sure sign of it is when I start reading ever more obscure sites looking for supporting information. That's where you're at, dude. Breitbart and RT are not credible (not that they can't sometimes be right, but don't use them for sole sourcing).
 
Last edited:
yllus said:
Are you seriously linking Russia Today?

You know, I've been on my share of losing arguments on the Interwebs, and I've recognized that a sure sign of it is when I start reading ever more obscure sites looking for supporting information. That's where you're at, dude. Breitbart and RT are not credible (not that they can't sometimes be right, but don't use them for sole sourcing).
Click to expand...

+1, good reply
 
yllus said:
Are you seriously linking Russia Today?

You know, I've been on my share of losing arguments on the Interwebs, and I've recognized that a sure sign of it is when I start reading ever more obscure sites looking for supporting information. That's where you're at, dude. Breitbart and RT are not credible (not that they can't sometimes be right, but don't use them for sole sourcing).
Click to expand...

some rock solid advice, just like I don't lean on heavily leaning left news sources as a singular resource, you may want to branch out a bit beyond the brietbart/rt bubble
 
Russia loves conspiracy theories about American politics, while completely ignoring their own absolutely staggering corruption, which is eating them alive.
 
yllus said:
Are you seriously linking Russia Today?

You know, I've been on my share of losing arguments on the Interwebs, and I've recognized that a sure sign of it is when I start reading ever more obscure sites looking for supporting information. That's where you're at, dude. Breitbart and RT are not credible (not that they can't sometimes be right, but don't use them for sole sourcing).
Click to expand...

lol - like CNN and NBC are reliable.

So what do you think is a "reliable" news source?
 
buckshot24 said:
Assuming the Saudis have funded her campaign, would it matter to any of you Hillary supporters?
Click to expand...

Of course not. You could get a God to certify that she is the daughter of satan and will lead the world to hell and they'd still vote for her. Why? Because she is a liberal and she has a vagina.

Fuck, 71% of libtards say they'd vote for her even if she were indicted. That tells you all you need to know.
 
LegendKiller said:
lol - like CNN and NBC are reliable.

So what do you think is a "reliable" news source?
Click to expand...

OP, really....seriously really. I can understand not liking cnn/nbc but come on Russian Times. Assuming its the same place read here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)

RT has been called a propaganda outlet for the Russian government[10][11][12] and its foreign policy[10][12][13][14] by news reporters,[15] including former RT reporters.[16][17][18] RT has also been accused of spreading disinformation.[19][20][21][22] The United Kingdom media regulator, Ofcom, has repeatedly found RT to have breached rules on impartiality, and of broadcasting "materially misleading" content.[23][24][25] RT states that it offers a Russian perspective on global events.
Click to expand...

Come on just admit you got excited,posted and got snookered its happened to everyone at some point.
 
Last edited:
buckshot24 said:
Assuming the Saudis have funded her campaign, would it matter to any of you Hillary supporters?
Click to expand...

If its some loony billionaire looking for oil rights or something nefarious, yes it would bother me if its some billionaire gave some guy who works for him in America a few bucks to give to a US citizen to then donate to Hillary. No it wouldn't bother me.
*I'd need concrete unquestionable evidence*
This is my fear with PACs & Super PACs there is no way to tell where the money comes from and what happens to it after the election. I don't doubt that some foreign money has made it into just about every PAC.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
If its some loony billionaire looking for oil rights or something nefarious, yes it would bother me if its some billionaire gave some guy who works for him in America a few bucks to give to a US citizen to then donate to Hillary. No it wouldn't bother me.
Click to expand...
What is the difference?
 
Fanatical Meat said:
To me the difference in scenario #2 is less money and no quid pro quo.
Click to expand...
Oh, so some Santa Claus billionaire just wanting to be a nice guy? C'mon Somebody gives millions they expect favorable outcomes from the one they paid.

Would you withhold your vote if scenario 1 was true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top