• 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.

Trump has fired Tillerson

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
unseenmorbidity said:
The fact that HRC is the worst SOS of all time should be self evident to anyone even remotely informed. and neutral.

The only person that would deny that is an extreme partisan hack that would ignore any evidence you gave them anyway.
Click to expand...

the fact? based on what? None of you have the balls to even support a claim. what pathetic little imbeciles you twats are.
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Yah, I knew you were fishing for that.... too obvious. I gave it to you out of pity.

Sorry, it's not debunked.

Washing post is bought by Bezos and has a huge deal with the CIA. It's a shitrag.

The facts of the matter is that HRC got 145 million in donations funneled into the TCF, and Bill Clinton got another 0.5 million for a "speech" to a Russian bank.

Those facts remain. What was supposed debunked is was the 20% uranium claim, and the claim that HRC made this decision by herself. However, these aren't really important. The amount of power the Clintons wield is immense! So the claim that HRC couldn't make the decision herself, while true, isn't particularly compelling. What the money was for? Who knows, who cares?

PS: I notice you didn't talk about the $ from Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...

Textbook denial.

  • No supporting facts do your opinion
  • Proclaim bias and conspiracy when presented with facts that contradict your opinion
  • Followed by moving goal posts to another unsupported opinion.
BTW the Clinton foundation was a well run non-profit that dispersed its funds appropriately.
 
Paratus said:
Textbook denial.

  • No supporting facts do your opinion
  • Proclaim bias and conspiracy when presented with facts that contradict your opinion
  • Followed by moving goal posts to another unsupported opinion.
BTW the Clinton foundation was a well run non-profit that dispersed its funds appropriately.
Click to expand...
Even in the so called debunked articles, the facts I listed are not denied. All they claim is that HRC couldn't have agreed to it on her own, thus incorrectly insinuating that the other votes weren't manipulated.

The FACT that they got the money was never debunked, because it's a fact. And that's really the ONLY thing that matters. A foreign govt paid our SOS's husband 0.5 million dollars, and their "charity" another 145 million.

Russiagate is the conspiracy theory here.

Never moved the goal posts... Russiagate is a prime example of moving goal posts.

Yah, ask Haiti about how great the clinton foundation is....
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Even in the so called debunked articles, the facts I listed are not denied. All they claim is that HRC couldn't have agreed to it on her own, thus incorrectly insinuating that the other votes weren't manipulated.
Click to expand...

That would be the Kenyan voodoo time warp mind control, right?
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Even in the so called debunked articles, the facts I listed are not denied. All they claim is that HRC couldn't have agreed to it on her own, thus incorrectly insinuating that the other votes weren't manipulated.

The FACT that they got the money was never debunked, because it's a fact. And that's really the ONLY thing that matters. A foreign govt paid our SOS's husband 0.5 million dollars, and their "charity" another 145 million.
Click to expand...
Quick question. Do you know when those donations came to the Clinton foundation? Do you know how much of that number came before she was asked to be SoS? Do you know that the one person who donated he bulk to the foundation had no association with U1 at the time he donated?

If you want to talk facts let’s talk facts.
 
Jhhnn said:
That would be the Kenyan voodoo time warp mind control, right?
Click to expand...
Do you people ever make real arguments or do you just throw out red herrings when backed into a corner?

Quite sad and pathetic really.

MomentsofSanity said:
Quick question. Do you know when those donations came to the Clinton foundation? Do you know how much of that number came before she was asked to be SoS? Do you know that the one person who donated he bulk to the foundation had no association with U1 at the time he donated?

If you want to talk facts let’s talk facts.
Click to expand...

He was like 1 year removed or something iirc. Get real...

Besides, the money is what matters the most. It reeks of corruption.
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Do you people ever make real arguments or do you just throw out red herrings when backed into a corner?

Quite sad and pathetic really.



He was like 1 year removed or something iirc. Get real...

Besides, the money is what matters the most. It reeks of corruption.
Click to expand...
And what was her position when it was donated?
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Do you people ever make real arguments or do you just throw out red herrings when backed into a corner?

Quite sad and pathetic really.



He was like 1 year removed or something iirc. Get real...

Besides, the money is what matters the most. It reeks of corruption.
Click to expand...

It's just a conspiracy theory I thought you'd enjoy as much as the one about Uranium One...
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Even in the so called debunked articles, the facts I listed are not denied. All they claim is that HRC couldn't have agreed to it on her own, thus incorrectly insinuating that the other votes weren't manipulated.

The FACT that they got the money was never debunked, because it's a fact. And that's really the ONLY thing that matters. A foreign govt paid our SOS's husband 0.5 million dollars, and their "charity" another 145 million.

Russiagate is the conspiracy theory here.

Never moved the goal posts... Russiagate is a prime example of moving goal posts.

Yah, ask Haiti about how great the clinton foundation is....
Click to expand...

So you're insinuating the other votes were manipulated. What proof do you have of that?

Also if there was some ethical conflict or crime in play why haven't the GOP led congress and GOP led department of justice done anything to bring her to justice? Or the obama correlates of these groups because what you're concerned about goes so far back? I think the answer is quite clear. Either they are all too busy and don't care (which I find hard to believe. There is nothing that is more politically powerful than to be someone who brought down big crime. Just look at Doug Jones in alabama. His claim to fame was prosecuting criminal racists. In addition there are countless journalists who would sell their family for a chance to bring down a secretary of state) or there is simply nothing there.

I can't disprove to you that aliens exist; I can only show you that its highly unlikely they exist. If you keep wanting to believe in ghosts and rumors that have little to no plausibility in reality, go on ahead. You can lead a horse to water but can't make him drink.


And why are we talking about hillary anyway?
 
unseenmorbidity said:
Do you people ever make real arguments or do you just throw out red herrings when backed into a corner?

Quite sad and pathetic really.



He was like 1 year removed or something iirc. Get real...

Besides, the money is what matters the most. It reeks of corruption.
Click to expand...
Oh and to clarify it was three years earlier he had sold his holdings. But that’s a minor detail.
 
Sunburn74 said:
So you're insinuating the other votes were manipulated. What proof do you have of that?
Also if there was some ethical conflict or crime in play why haven't the GOP led congress and GOP led department of justice done anything to bring her to justice? Or the obama corrolates of these groups because what you're concerned about goes so far back?

And why are we talking about hillary anyway?
Click to expand...

I am saying that the article tries to insinuate that HRC isn't guilty, because she couldn't have passed it through by herself. However, that's ignoring the immense power of the Clintons. It's POSSIBLE that she could have manipulated the other votes to get what she wanted. Thus the ASSUMPTION in the article that this fact debunks the U1 scandal is weak at best.

The article also completely ignores all the money. They weren't buying favors from the clintons, they were just giving them shitloads of money for "reasons".

idk, because someone said that HRC was the worst SOS, and someone else disagreed.
 
Last edited:
Jhhnn said:
The mere mention of Hillary sets them to howling at the moon. It's Pavlovian & they seem to enjoy it, simple minded creatures that they are.
Click to expand...
You are just mad, because you didn't vote for Bernie sanders, and gave us Trump with a majority in congress. I get it. I understand, and I forgive you. It's time to forgive yourself.
 
unseenmorbidity said:
I am saying that the article tries to insinuate that HRC isn't guilty, because she couldn't have passed it through by herself. However, that's ignoring the immense power of the Clintons. It's POSSIBLE that she could have manipulated the other votes to get what she wanted. Thus the ASSUMPTION in the article that this fact debunks the U1 scandal is weak at best.

The article also completely ignores all the money. They weren't buying favors from the clintons, they were just giving them shitloads of money for "reasons".

idk, because someone said that HRC was the worst SOS, and someone else disagreed.
Click to expand...

Lol, you guys didn’t consider the VAST MAGICAL POWERS of the Clintons.
 
fskimospy said:
You realize uranium one is a conspiracy theory that’s been debunked by multiple sources, right? It’s fever swamp nonsense.

What specifically about the Benghazi attack makes her the worst SoS of all time?
Click to expand...

The trolls are doing a group Gish gallop...
 
unseenmorbidity said:
I am saying that the article tries to insinuate that HRC isn't guilty, because she couldn't have passed it through by herself. However, that's ignoring the immense power of the Clintons. It's POSSIBLE that she could have manipulated the other votes to get what she wanted. Thus the ASSUMPTION in the article that this fact debunks the U1 scandal is weak at best.

The article also completely ignores all the money. They weren't buying favors from the clintons, they were just giving them shitloads of money for "reasons".

idk, because someone said that HRC was the worst SOS, and someone else disagreed.
Click to expand...

The way logic operates is by default things are not assumed to exist but have to be shown to exist. We have to assume the votes were not corrupted until proven otherwise. What proof do you have that all those other votes and agencies were also corrupted?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top