Obama: Trump ‘woefully unfit’ to be President

[StevieH]

1 minute ago, keemapoot said:

 

If you watched the debate, Hillary Clinton was hammering this point home continually, and one has to assume that she has long-standing contacts with security sources. She may have proof of this, but is waiting to release it just before the election or something. 

 

So far she hasn't pushed the nuke button, but you get a feeling she has one to push.

 

yeah you're right, you kind of do don't you? he's literally putin's mouthpiece now. the republican nominee for president is reading out talking points fed to him by the kremlin. you couldn't script this stuff, it's too far out there. 

 

i'll wait for the next wingnut to wail about hillary's emails now and how she should be in jail as a defence to their guy committing treason and being vladimir putin's little bitch.

[thaihome]

Trump and the Nuclear Keys

 

A former missle launch control officer discusses Trump and his potential control of the nuclear codes.

TH 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/opinion/trump-and-the-nuclear-keys.html?ribbon-ad-idx=1&rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=context&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article

[Andaman Al]

So after flatly denying he had ever forced himself on women at the second debate re 'pussygate', here is the 5th woman to come forward and what a tale!  I guess he is just being one of the lads eh? A bit of locker room behaviour?

 

Here a journalist called Natasha Stoynoff details the assault on her at the hands of Trump . Read the full article in the link below.

http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-attacked-people-writer/

 

 

And here is Trump at his best worst, instead of Presidentially ignoring it so it will die a death, he goes head on and once again shows what he is made of.

 

 

[Publicus]

Putin is the long standing preference of the Republican party over Barack Obama -- and of course Hillary Clinton. Putin, Trump, the Republican Party, have an open and shameless relationship of mentor and learner-admirer.

 

Some time after the vast majority of voters give Trump the Bum's Rush on Nov. 8th, it would be no surprise for Putin to give Trump a tv show in Moscow. Or carry the new Trump-Bannon et al rightwhingenut tv network on Russian tv. 

 

There's a notorious precedent of it as Putin had given Assange a tv talk show in Moscow to include broadcasting it all the way out to the Pacific. Assange had his own anti-American program on Russian tv at the same time Sweden issued a warrant against him. As Assange had been in London at the time Swedish authorities issued their warrant, Julian of Wikileaks dove into the Equador embassy where he's been holed up several years now.

 

The statute of limitations on the Sweden law occurs in 2020. Maybe in that year the Republican National Committee can give Assange refuge in their building in Washington where Assange can better represent Putin and be the RNC's Putin direct line liaison agent.

 

Trump's statute of limitations for improper advances against the U.S. Constitution is November 8th, 2016. As for the Trump-Putin Republican party, we'll see, won't we. Trump is indeed unfit to be Potus and the Republican Party is unfit to be a major political party in the USA. In Russia, yes -- in USA, no. Not any longer.

 

RIP the post November 8th Putin-Assange-Trump GOP.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Publicus

[Publicus]

On 10/11/2016 at 0:23 PM, keemapoot said:

 

If you watched the debate, Hillary Clinton was hammering this point home continually, and one has to assume that she has long-standing contacts with security sources. She may have proof of this, but is waiting to release it just before the election or something. 

 

So far she hasn't pushed the toilet flush lever, but you get a feeling she has one to push and that she may soon take a Trump Dump.

 

Have that same feeling.

 

And when I get a feeling....

 

“In the final weeks of a dizzying presidential campaign, Donald Trump is suddenly embracing an unlikely ally: The document-spilling group WikiLeaks, which Republicans denounced when it published classified State Department cables and Pentagon secrets about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the New York Times reports.

 

“The Trump campaign’s willingness to use WikiLeaks is an extraordinary turnabout after years of bipartisan criticism of the organization and its leader, Julian Assange, for past disclosures of American national security intelligence and other confidential information.”

 

“The accusation that Russian agents are now playing an almost-daily role in helping fuel Mr. Trump’s latest political attacks on Mrs. Clinton raises far greater concerns, though, about foreign interference in a presidential election.”   (emphasis added)

 

 

The question might be how to nuke Trump and his fellow travellers on this. The Clinton campaign can't be putting out privileged U.S. national intelligence and security stuff even though the campaign has people who have it normally anyway. The Obama Administration has to walk a line on this one too. I'm thinking a biggie retired intelligence and national security figure -- former NSA director Michael Hayden comes immediately to mind -- or someone like him. The retired 3-star USAF General Hayden has already made statements that Trump is irresponsible and reckless in a proliferation of ways, to include Trump being chief ISIS recruiter residing in the USA.

 

Trump and the Republican Party are the "useful idiot" of America's every enemy or antagonist globally. It's developing in to a major issue leading up to November 8th. I'm sure HRC feels the need to address this and to deal with it. It would be her natural instinct to come right down like a hawk on this sort of thing.

[Publicus]

Trump and the Republican Party have easily, willingly, enthusiastically become Vladimir Putin's "useful idiots." Trump and The Despicables may in fact be more than that.

 

 

Rick Hasen: “As CNN noted, the [Russian] hacks have already caused people to be suspicious about the election. And this feeds exactly into Donald Trump’s irresponsible statements that the vote will be rigged or stolen. In a close race, it is possible that Trump won’t concede and will instead create turmoil and threaten what we take for granted: the peaceful transition of political power between presidencies.”

 

“In short, the Russian hacking of our elections should be seen for what it is: an attempt to manipulate and destabilize the U.S., with an unwitting assist from an irresponsible presidential candidate spewing unsupported claims about rigged elections.”

 

 

Trump and his campaign are organising what they call poll "watchers" on polling day. Given that Trump is a raving lunatic and most of his supporters are anarchists or nihilists, this is beginning to look like how fascism comes to America.

 

 

“Donald Trump issued a breathtaking call to arms Thursday as he emphatically denied allegations that he groped and kissed multiple women without their consent, charging that his accusers were part of a global conspiracy to extinguish his outsider movement,” the Washington Post reports.

 

“Scrambling to turn around his floundering campaign, Trump declared war on the media and multinational corporations, alleging they are colluding with Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton to orchestrate “the single greatest pile-on in history” and undermine his campaign, which he said was an ‘existential threat’ to the global establishment.”

 

 

President Obama's credible insights into Trump and the racist movement in the USA provide Americans with the stability we need at this increasingly uncertain time.

[Publicus]

On 10/8/2016 at 11:18 AM, ClutchClark said:

 

Most of us here know that this is just a forum to banter and sling some BS and most of us our good natured guys regardless whether we wear red or blue shirts.

 

And then there are some members who are just poison. 

 

Some posters have suggested it is the same guy posting under various monikers. I hope that is true because I feel bad for people who suffer through life with hate.

 

If you have a real concern you might consider asking the people who run things here to check it out. They keep precisely close tabs on exactly what you and a handful of others are driveling about.

 

All in a good nature of course. In contrast to being poisonous.

[Strange]

10 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

If you have a real concern you might consider asking the people who run things here to check it out. They keep precisely close tabs on exactly what you and a handful of others are driveling about.

 

All in a good nature of course. In contrast to being poisonous.

 

Good nature is one thing, but the venom and poison from some is the extreme left. Most people are somewhere in the middle and when being forced to decide between 2 candidates, the extreme left loses their shit when someone goes right and the insulting name calling that follows is really off-putting. 

 

Maintaining objectivity during a debate should be the highest priority. Otherwise the subject of the debate gets lost and people suffer. 

[Publicus]

Just now, Strange said:

 

Good nature is one thing, but the venom and poison from some is the extreme left. Most people are somewhere in the middle and when being forced to decide between 2 candidates, the extreme left loses their shit when someone goes right and the insulting name calling that follows is really off-putting. 

 

Maintaining objectivity during a debate should be the highest priority. Otherwise the subject of the debate gets lost and people suffer. 

 

You need to talk to Donald Trump.

 

Absolutely.

[Strange]

Just now, Publicus said:

 

You need to talk to Donald Trump.

 

Absolutely.

 

Yeah man but you know its just as bad from the left. Just as bad from "Hill". 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎07‎.‎10‎.‎2016 at 2:31 PM, Andaman Al said:

 

I find it funny how and when Trump supporters choose to take the moral high ground.

 

I am not sure how much cash HRC takes from such countries as you mention, but I am not sure how much sweeter revenge could be. One thing for sure the money in that foundation is spent on correct charitable causes. Last I heard the Clintons had a licence, they have accounts and tax records, you know EVERYBODY that has donated (if you wish to find out) and the Clintons have not bought any portraits of themselves or used the money covering private legal fees. The money has been spent to help thousands of people suffering from HIV amongst other good causes. If HRC gives a few meetings (no political advantage has ever been shown to have been given) and takes money off countries who persecute LBGT's and gives it back to assisting those suffering HIV, what is there not to like and praise about this foundation.

 

On the other hand, you will readily defend a man who has never given anything to his own foundation since 2008, and so far no expenditure on charities has been found, conversely money spent on ego rubbing ridiculous purchases - portraits for example. Using other peoples money donated for charitable causes to pay for answering personal and business law suits, AND the fund has no licence to operate and is now under investigation for fraud and misappropriation of funds. What is there to like? I am sure Trump supporter surrogates on TV can find a way of defending by saying - but but emails and health etc etc. Yeah whatever. Normal people are waking up.

I have never hidden my distaste for HRC. you think I'm going to praise her for anything? LOL.

As for charities, those people could have contributed directly to HIV charities if HRC asked them to, but she took the money- why?

 

I don't care about Trump's charity. if people give money to a billionaire they must want something in return. They're all exploiting the situation, her and Trump both. I don't care anyway. I only care about Trump winning to keep her out of the W H.

I don't care about Trump at all- never watched his silly tv shows, didn't watch miss universe, never followed him at all.

I'd have preferred the Bern to him, but after the Dems backstabbed Bernie, Trump is all that is left between that awful woman and the presidency.

[Jingthing]

Yes, woefully unfit. 

Even many important CONSERVATIVES  get that. The man is an EXISTENTIAL THREAT to American democracy. It's gratifying that so many people, all on political spectrums get that now. Because we're going to CRUSH him and he so totally DESERVES it. 

 

Quote

 

Trump's chilling ‘lock her up’ threat: It's far more worrisome than the 'locker room' talk

This election is not just about placing the nuclear codes in Trump’s hands. It’s also about handing him the instruments of civilian coercion, such as the IRS, the FBI, the FCC, the SEC. Think of what he could do to enforce the “fairness” he demands. Imagine giving over the vast power of the modern state to a man who says in advance that he will punish his critics and jail his opponent.

 

 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/trump-chilling-lock-threat-article-1.2829857

[Pinot]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I have never hidden my distaste for HRC. you think I'm going to praise her for anything? LOL.

As for charities, those people could have contributed directly to HIV charities if HRC asked them to, but she took the money- why?

 

I don't care about Trump's charity. if people give money to a billionaire they must want something in return. They're all exploiting the situation, her and Trump both. I don't care anyway. I only care about Trump winning to keep her out of the W H.

I don't care about Trump at all- never watched his silly tv shows, didn't watch miss universe, never followed him at all.

I'd have preferred the Bern to him, but after the Dems backstabbed Bernie, Trump is all that is left between that awful woman and the presidency.

 

She took the money? HRC never took any money from her charity. The charity has been examined by independent organizations and found to be spotlessly clean.

 

You're all over the place. For Bern but now for Trump because HRC burned him. You realize that Bern is now a big supporter of HRC? 

 

Now you're for Trump because you hate Hillary. Ye gods, man. You realize there are no former Bernie supporters now supporting Trump? You have no ideological direction other than stopping HRC for the usual wingnut conspiracy  reasons. 

 

Like so many other Trump supporter, you grasp the lies to support a guy completely unqualified to be POTUS. Keep her out of the WH? "  I only care about Trump winning to keep her out of the W H"

 

That's weak. It's pure misogyny. 

 

You just hate, like the others. Sorry, hate ain't enough to stop the avalanche. It's over and you're on the wrong side. Hate always is. 

Edited October 14, 2016 by Pinot

[Andaman Al]

I had a good laugh at this! Now we know who is a 'horrible horrible liar' about his net worth and his tax!

 

 

[Andaman Al]

Just one of Trumps bright ideas, that came out his mouth with no thought (a bit like every child will get an iPad!)

 

 

[Publicus]

 

Putin's "useful idiot" Donald Trump was hammered yesterday by three retired national security officials (1) CIA former acting director Mike Morell, (2) former head of the National Counterterrorism Center Matt Olsen, and (3) Hillary for America Senior Media Advisor for National Security Affairs Jamie Rubin who is former assistant secretary of state.

 

The principal criticism is that Trump will not criticise Putin for Putins's hacks but, worse, Trump is reading from Putin's script to include Putin's publicity arm Wikileaks...

 

 

National Security Officials Denounce Trump’s Relationship with Putin and Refusal to Condemn Russia’s Purported Role in Hacks

 

“This is a huge, huge deal.  The thing that I'm sure about is that Trump is cozying up to Putin because Putin has played him like a fiddle. Putin has figured out what makes Donald Trump tick and he's playing to it.” 

 

– Mike Morell

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ex-cia-director-no-doubt-putin-views-trump-unwitting-agent-n624786

 

 

 

“Rather than condemn these efforts, the Republican nominee has actually cheered them on, supported them.” – Matt Olsen

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/07/here-are-all-former-national-security-officials-blasting-trumps-russian-hacking-com

 

 

 

"One of the things that I find fascinating is Donald Trump's absolute refusal to acknowledge Russia's role here. In my mind, he's actually cheering it on. He's reading from WikiLeaks material at his rally to the point of parroting now-debunked disinformation....He's encouraging people to read the hacked materials. He is encouraging his attack on our democracy, and I just find that amazing and shocking."  - Mike Morell 

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/289457-former-cia-director-questions-trumps-loyalty-to-us-report

 

 

“So when somebody running for president, and again aside from -- the extent to which the Trump people knew or didn't know -- refuses to acknowledge this kind of threat to the United States of America, not only refusing to acknowledge the threat but refusing to even condemn it, that suggests that Mr. Trump does not understand what it takes to defend the United States and what is involved in defending the United States and the American people.” 

 

– Jamie Rubin

 

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/updates/2016/10/14/national-security-officials-denounce-trumps-relationship-with-putin-and-refusal-to-condemn-russias-purported-role-in-hacks/

 

 

Donald Trump is in fact an aspiring Putin wannabe and the Republican Party run by the right wing sector of U.S. politics and government has always loved it. This is not your grandfather's Republican Party. Neither is Donald Trump Ronald Reagan. Donald Trump is not even Barry Goldwater who always stood up against the Russians.

 

If this is the new face of conservatism in the USA then it's time to actively assist the Republican Party which is the seat of conservatism to self destruct. We don't necessarily need to do much more than to vote, but let's not just do nothing except watch.

[JLCrab]

My favorite comment so far from a letter put out by members of the GOP national security leaders last March 2016:

 

(Trump's) vision of American influence and power in the world is wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle. He swings from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence.

 

http://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

 

 

[thaihome]

Trump's Barrage of Heated Rhetoric has Little Precedent 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/us/politics/trump-speech-highlights.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

TH 

[Olonstake]

I completely agree with Obama statement. Trump is not yet ready to server as an American President. 

[Publicus]

Worry not because Donald Trump will never be the American president.

 

 

We see why Putin's rootin' for him however. 

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, Pinot said:

 

She took the money? HRC never took any money from her charity. The charity has been examined by independent organizations and found to be spotlessly clean.

 

You're all over the place. For Bern but now for Trump because HRC burned him. You realize that Bern is now a big supporter of HRC? 

 

Now you're for Trump because you hate Hillary. Ye gods, man. You realize there are no former Bernie supporters now supporting Trump? You have no ideological direction other than stopping HRC for the usual wingnut conspiracy  reasons. 

 

Like so many other Trump supporter, you grasp the lies to support a guy completely unqualified to be POTUS. Keep her out of the WH? "  I only care about Trump winning to keep her out of the W H"

 

That's weak. It's pure misogyny. 

 

You just hate, like the others. Sorry, hate ain't enough to stop the avalanche. It's over and you're on the wrong side. Hate always is. 

LOL. I never cared for Trump the man, only as a means to stopping the worst woman in American politics from becoming Potus.

I never knew about Bernie till I saw something about him on TV, so I researched him and saw that I liked his policies of sticking it to the rich people ( like Trump ). When Clinton backstabbed him, I went back to Trump, as there is no one else that can stop that awful woman. I'd support the donkey in Shrek for POTUS before I'd vote for her, if I could.

 

I suggest you look up the definition of misogyny. It doesn't mention HRC. What you just did is typical Clinton smear tactics. Just keep accusing anyone that doesn't support her of being a bad person, and hoping enough gullible people believe the lies.

I hope Trump runs amok between now and the 8th November, and exposes every lie the Clinton campaign is parroting. Nothing to stop him now.

 

You realize that Bern is now a big supporter of HRC? 

Yes, I realise that he is a gutless waste of space that folded like a rag doll when she offered him a few policy crumbs. His once supporters will never again trust him. Don't assume that they will vote for her. More likely to stay home or vote independent. They probably dislike HRC as much as I.

 

Unless Wiki comes up with something extraordinary, I guess she does win, but it will be a sad day for us all in the world, not just the US.

Then, after he is a private citizen again, I hope he sues every one of those women that are accusing him of whatever, and destroys them all in court. He has no choice about that, or everyone will assume he is guilty, and he has to do it for the sake of his family.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 hours ago, JLCrab said:

My favorite comment so far from a letter put out by members of the GOP national security leaders last March 2016:

 

(Trump's) vision of American influence and power in the world is wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle. He swings from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence.

 

http://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

 

 

Here's one I like.

 

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/may/19/ron-johnson/hillary-clintons-state-department-reduced-security/

[Publicus]

On 10/9/2016 at 4:30 AM, ClutchClark said:

 

Great clip.

 

Classic DeNiro.

 

"He's a punk. He's a dog."

 

A little over the top with, "Well I would like to punch him in the face!"

 

Too bad HE is not running for President. 

 

But I have never looked to actors for my politics. As much as I enjoy their movies, they are typically very liberal in their politics. it works for them in their industry and no doubt alot more entertainers were invited to the WH under obama than under GWB but I prefer the Republic platform. 

 

Its too bad Trump is the candidate but it beats the libersl agenda and when it comes to a class act--the Clintons do not win an Oscar either.

 

 

 

But I have never looked to actors for my politics.

 

Good for you Clutch, however, virtually no one does. If that tidbit of knowledge might be a news bulletin to you then so be it.

 

Actors get publicity because as with Donald Trump (for decades) they and he have celebrity. So no one with a brain gets their politics from Hollywood or from Trump Tower. 

 

The list of which actors support which candidate makes curious reading at best, however, I don't know anyone who decides their policy positions or their vote based on it. Not even remotely connected to it.

 

In 2012 the Republican National Committee did an autopsy of their defeat in the election of the Potus. This time it will be a cremation. So much for the Republican Party Platform eh.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Pinot said:

 

She took the money? HRC never took any money from her charity. The charity has been examined by independent organizations and found to be spotlessly clean.

 

 

http://www.dailywire.com/news/8561/7-things-you-need-know-about-clinton-foundation-aaron-bandler

 

Indeed, Form 990 shows that the Clintons used the money raised by the foundation to pay for their travel expenses, which included "travel by charter or in first class."

[Publicus]

 

As of today...

 

Here are the latest round of state polls from the presidential race:

 

New Hampshire: Clinton 41%, Trump 38%, Johnson 11% (WBUR)  

New Hampshire: Clinton 45%, Trump 39%, Johnson 9% (UMass Lowell)  

NH is a blue state.

 

Texas: Trump 47%, Clinton 43%, Johnson 3% (SurveyUSA)  

GW won TX by 21 points but Trump and HRC are within the margin of error. In Texas.

 

Indiana: Trump 45%, Clinton 41%, Johnson 9% (Monmouth)  

Indiana: Trump 45%, Clinton 36%, Johnson 10% (Lucid)

 

Arizona: Clinton 43%, Trump 42%, Johnson 5% (Data Orbital)  

Bill and Hillary won AZ in 1996. Until then, AZ hadn't voted a Democrat for Potus since Harry Truman in 1948. This is a solid red state, but it may not be not any more. 

 

Pennsylvania: Clinton 45%, Trump 39%, Johnson 7% (Lucid)

PA has voted D for Potus every time since 1992. Each time by a greater margin. PA started this election cycle as Clinton's firewall and it is now the frosting on the cake. Trump doesn't win PA he's 100% the goner. He ain't gonna win it.

 

Iowa: Clinton 42%, Trump 36%, Johnson 10% (Lucid)  

Trump's long term lead has evaporated.

 

Ohio: Clinton 44%, Trump 39%, Johnson 7% (Lucid)  

This would be the third consecutive election the Democrat for Potus would win in OH. Looks like Trump is turning blue in the face in Ohio. 

 

Florida: Clinton 46%, Trump 42%, Johnson 5% (PPP)  

This would be the third consecutive election the Democrat for Potus would win in FL. Trump is turning blue in the face here too. Republicans are feeling very blue.

However, it ain't over till Trump insults the fat lady too. 

[dutchisaan]

11 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. I never cared for Trump the man, only as a means to stopping the worst woman in American politics from becoming Potus.

I never knew about Bernie till I saw something about him on TV, so I researched him and saw that I liked his policies of sticking it to the rich people ( like Trump ). When Clinton backstabbed him, I went back to Trump, as there is no one else that can stop that awful woman. I'd support the donkey in Shrek for POTUS before I'd vote for her, if I could.

 

I suggest you look up the definition of misogyny. It doesn't mention HRC. What you just did is typical Clinton smear tactics. Just keep accusing anyone that doesn't support her of being a bad person, and hoping enough gullible people believe the lies.

I hope Trump runs amok between now and the 8th November, and exposes every lie the Clinton campaign is parroting. Nothing to stop him now.

 

You realize that Bern is now a big supporter of HRC? 

Yes, I realise that he is a gutless waste of space that folded like a rag doll when she offered him a few policy crumbs. His once supporters will never again trust him. Don't assume that they will vote for her. More likely to stay home or vote independent. They probably dislike HRC as much as I.

 

Unless Wiki comes up with something extraordinary, I guess she does win, but it will be a sad day for us all in the world, not just the US.

Then, after he is a private citizen again, I hope he sues every one of those women that are accusing him of whatever, and destroys them all in court. He has no choice about that, or everyone will assume he is guilty, and he has to do it for the sake of his family.

You realy go out of your way as a non Trump supporter to defend him all the time.  You say, that Trump is sticking it to the rich people, yah right!

But you will support the donkey in Shrek. Well, you are supporting a donkey.  The only one that attacks people when they don't support, is Trump.  Than you go on by hoping that Trump will run amok and go after everybody that is accusing him, and even say that he has to destroy them!!!

 

And you are still saying that you are not a Trump supporter?  I'm not American, but I lived and worked in the USA for more than 15 years. I love this country and I hate it when people are willing to bring it down, because they are full of hate.   You don't have to vote for HRC, but if you vote for Trump, because you hate her so much, than I feel sorry for you.

 

[JLCrab]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Here's one I like.

 

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/may/19/ron-johnson/hillary-clintons-state-department-reduced-security/

I was just putting up a quote from a long list of GOP security experts. As for Senator Johnson -- who seems to have no direct national security expertise -- others wrote this: Senator Ron Johnson Lies About Hillary Clinton to Accuse Her of Dishonesty on Benghazi

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/20/accuse-hillary-clinton-dishonesty-benghazi-senator-ron-johnson-lies/

 

 

[Publicus]

20 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I was just putting up a quote from a long list of GOP security experts. As for Senator Johnson -- who seems to have no direct national security expertise -- others wrote this: Senator Ron Johnson Lies About Hillary Clinton to Accuse Her of Dishonesty on Benghazi

https://theintercept.com/2016/07/20/accuse-hillary-clinton-dishonesty-benghazi-senator-ron-johnson-lies/

 

 

 

Indeed the poster you address, thaibeachlovers, was quoting a Republican senator in his first term and in the manic Republican and right wing failed obsession with Ben Ghazi.

 

I was going to pursue the poster's reference, however, your post makes the point more than adequately, at least I'd say so if I might do that.

[Skywalker69]

While Demolishing Trump, MSNBC’s Steve Schmidt Declares Hillary Next President.

 

 

 

[Skywalker69]

New Video Just Surfaced Of Trump Admitting HE IS Putin’s Friend.