Actually, it seems, that left-wingers' lives are hard-wired about rallying around more "ex post facto" excuses and other such 'excuses' to protect their savior, whatever the cost. Taking the fifth, constantly changing stories, lie after lie, she and her camp will do whatever, and I mean whatever, to protect their syndicate that they believe is above the law. Yet, left wingers will believe that when they got on their knees before they went to bed and prayed to Obama and the Federal Government, that their prayers would be answered and that they would wake up to a totally exonerated Hillary Clinton, crown and all. Their pre-school hissy-fits are truly comical. They're supposed to get their way. Otherwise, it's not fair. It's truly funny that anyone would actually vote for the disgusting see word. They are selling their souls if they do. Their nervous feelings that control their lives? It's perfectly normal when you know that your "Queen" in the hole is about to get Trumped.
Taking the fifth is obviously in his best interests, but it suggests that he is hiding something that could cause him or the Clinton Family Crime Syndicate great problems. If Congress or the FBI really want to know what Pagliano knows, they could offer him immunity from using his testimony against him in prosecution. More than likely, however, is the fact the Pagliano is a small fish in a cesspool of bottom-feeding criminals who will take the fifth and escape the seine of the law.
Sorry, but the"ex post facto" rational is also a lie, and has been proven so. In fact, many of the e-mails that contain classified material were e-mails that Hillary originated and distributed. The e-mails to and from Tony Blair (then Prime Minister) and other foreign dignitaries concerning negotiations between Palestine and Israel and other classified matters were a direct violation of Obama's 2009 Executive Order #13526. They were in violation of parts 1.4(B) and 1.4(D) of said executive order, and as such Hillary is subject any and all Federal sanctions provided for by law. Even Hillary has given up on the "ex post facto" defense. It's just another of Her Inevitableness's outright lies.
He is obsessed - obsessed with Hillary Clinton. She is his political and sexual goddess. The sexual part goes back to his childhood, I believe. I think Freud called it an Oedipus something or other. The more lies she tells, the more he wants her.
Really? Here's the original quote:
"There is no more neutrality in the world. You either have to be part of the solution, or you’re going to be part of the problem.’ ~ Eldridge Cleaver
So, like a good fascist (o con noi, o contro di noi) you're either with us or against us. Divide everyone into two camps, claim that your camp is part of the solution, and deem the opposing camp as part of the problem, because they don't agree with you. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is the enemy, and needs to be re-educated or corrected, even with government force, if necessary. One of the problems with that type of myopic, fascist thinking is that (especially in this case with your fictitious war on women) is that not everyone agrees that a problem exists, i.e., they don't buy into your propaganda. And in this case, that is exactly what it is, propaganda constantly being repeated ad nauseam in the hope that it will become universally believed.
Even if I may believe that a problem exists, I am still at liberty (for how long in this country, I don't know) to be ambivalent about the problem if I choose to be. That does not make me part of the problem. Your solutions to a problem that simply doesn't exist are without merit. Realizing this, you seek to give them validity, by attacking those that disagree with you, publicly shaming and labeling them. It's an old trick commonly used by con men and dictators.
You still can not provide any rational justification for the double standard that exists in the determination of what is or is not a hate crime. Nor can you provide any rational justification that exists for the way the MSM covers racially motivated crimes.
Race was a factor in both incidents, but the underlying common denominator was mental illness. You seem to think that when looking at the two crimes you can assign a degree of racism, a ranking if you will that seems to exonerate Flanagan by degree. Racism is racism, be it black on white or white on black. You can't provide justification why white on black violent crime is blatant racism, and why black on white violent crime is not presented as such by the media or amongst left wing ideologues. You believe there is justification for the double standards that exist, yet you fail to provide us with that justification. What's the matter? Is the weight of your white guilty too heavy to bear?
And what is your opinion of the cowardly, cold blooded murder of Houston, TX Deputy Darren Goforth, a white, ten year veteran and family man, by Shannon Miles, a black man who in this case killed him simply because he was a white police officer? I'm sure that you can find justification for that, and that by degree it really shouldn't be covered by the media, because it pales in comparison to Roof's crime. Blacks already have found that justification, deeming it a retaliation murder, which I have little doubt that you disagree with them.
He said that the words "swinging" and "field" were racisssst. Obviously, you agree with him. That's how far you will go to give up your liberties for a totalitarian society... Time for your two minutes of hate. I can't solve your problem with your love/hate affair with Pam Bondi... Deal with it Master Tank... You ninth ward moron...
Inherent Resolve is the official name for the Obama administration's campaign against ISIS. The campaign was not named until it was a few months old, which is highly unusual. Why the delay? Well, when a President names it, then it is his, he owns it, and frankly, this is a war that Obama wants no part of for a number of reasons. First, he doesn't want to do anything that would tarnish his legacy as a closer of wars. Further, Obama clearly has a problem with taking on Islam no matter how atrocious their crimes against humanity. He obviously has the intention of leaving his mess for the next President to clean up.
His tepid attempts to defeat ISIS have now come into question, and the Pentagon Inspector General has started an investigation into the United States Central Command amid allegations that they are providing intel that clearly views the war through rose colored lenses, questionably under orders that come from the very top. The war began on 8-7-14. In the first 361 days the U.S. has flown 3837 strike sorties, or on average 11 per day, dropping 43 bombs per day on average. Compare that to Bill Clinton's war in Kosovo where, in the 77 days of strikes there were 14,112 strike sorties or 183 per day and an average of 364 bombs per day. ISIS is hardly on the run. In fact, they made inroads into Libya, filling the vacuum that Obama created in his seven month war against Ghadaffi, which he had no plan as to what to do after Ghadaffis's death. Thousands of Libyans are fleeing the country and gambling their lives in unsafe boats, crossing the Mediterranean and seeking refuge in Europe. ISIS is gaining footholds in other North African countries as well, expanding their recruiting base, as well as their realm of terror. While Obama waits and hopes that the Iraqis and others will take care of his little problem, ISIS has moved within 5 miles of Camp Taji where a portion of Obama's 3400 U.S. troops are training Iraqi soldiers. Clearly, Obama's resolve is lacking.
Do, please, offer some rational justification for the obvious double standard. TIA, again, Mr. Green Jeans.
Perhaps, since you are the "brain" you can explain to us why there is a double standard on obvious racial murders. In this case, Vester Flanagan admitted in his manifesto that the killings were racially motivated.
Why is it that when a black murders a couple of white people simply because they are white, the majority of news organizations downplay the racial aspect of the murders, yet when a white kills a couple of blacks the racial aspect becomes a front and center issue in the killings. The press automatically screams hate crime in the latter instance, while remaining mysteriously quiet in the former. So, why the double standard? I realize that to liberals, the Rule of Law means absolutely nothing, because some animals are more equal than others, and their lives matter more. But, do please, offer some rational justification for the obvious double standard. TIA
Today, Hillary Rotten Clinton, in an effort to ramp up her faux "War on Women," simply to garner votes from females willing to vote upon gender, accused her Republican opponents of treating women as terrorist do.
"Now, extreme views about women, we expect that from some of the terrorist groups, we expect that from people who don't want to live in the modern world, but it's a little hard to take from Republicans who want to be the president of the United States. Yet they espouse out of date, out of touch policies. They are dead wrong for 21st century America. We are going forward, we are not going back," she said.
Those wascally Weepublican candidates are always running around advocating the mutilation of female genitalia, holding them hostage and passing them around as sex slaves, stoning them, cutting off their noses, forbidding them to drive or vote, using them as human shields and shooting them in the head if they say that women have a right to education. Those weelentless Weepublicans are always trying to eradicate women and beat them over the head with clubs and drag them back to their man-caves. You see it one hundred fold. Every. Single. Day.
Which Republican candidate(s) is she referring to? Probably Jeb Bush or Scott Walker or, no wait, it has to be Carly Fiorina. Yeah, that's it. Carly is probably guilty of all the above. I wonder how she gets away with it?
Yes, Hillary. FORWARD!!!!!! to Glorious Next Tuesday (tm), the culmination of the Great Women's' Revolution!!!!.... O con noi, O contro di noi!!!!
Ostensibly, because he was fired from the television news team that he felt had committed micro-aggressions against him. So he shot two white people that worked for the station and killed them, and then cowardly shot in the back, the white lady that was being interviewed who had nothing to do with his dismissal. The shooting of that lady makes it a hate crime; there can be little doubt. She was totally harmless and innocent of having committed a micro-aggression against him. Yet, he fired a hollow point bullet into her back because he HATED white people. If that is not a hate crime what is? Oh, I forgot, only white people commit hate crimes.
Will white people riot, loot, and burn police cars in Virginia tonight? Probably not. #White Lives Don't Matter to black folks. Will Obozo claim that if he had a son he would have looked like Vester? Perhaps. Should the gay pride flag be taken down and relegated to museums? Perhaps. I'm pretty sure that I saw and heard Alison Parker and Adam Ward put their hands up and said "Hands up, don't shoot!" We'll have to wait until the Obama Injustice Department gets to the bottom of this.
I should be able to thumbs-down this post again....
There are those that support his Iran deal, then there are "the crazies." Apparently, he is referring to the roughly two thirds of Americans that don't support his "deal". In a recent Quinnipiac poll in the swing states of FL, OH and PA, respondents were against his deal by a margin of 61-25, 58-24 and 61-26 respectively.
Apparently, in Obama's world, yes, the same world where he has elevated the U.S. from the third most respected nation to the most respected status, there is no such thing as legitimate, intelligent and principled objection to whatever he says or does. Gotta give him one thing though; he promised his deal would have "unprecedented verification", and what with Iran collecting their own samples for the IAEA, he is certainly right about that.
That's a pretty lame attempt to misdirect the the intent and message of the original post. The original post was meant to point out the hypocrisy of the left concerning their attempt to make the term 'anchor babies' a politically incorrect term, going so far as to call them "tiny humans to be cherished and valued," all the while casting a blind eye towards the tiny humans to be cherished and valued that Planned Parenthood chops up in pie pans, and then sells for a profit, which is against Federal law. (Dr. Mary Gatter was recorded negotiating market prices for human body parts.) The fetus of a Consuelo, that comes across the border illegally, is apparently more highly valued by the politically correct left, than the fetus of a U.S. citizen.
Indeed, when the term 'human being' is attached to a fetus by anti-abortion people, they are accused of attempting to "anthropomorphize a clump of cells." The left's double standard is hypocritical, and you obviously agree, because you can't argue that point. All you can do is attempt to change the subject and misdirect. The post is not about pro or anti-abortion. Personally, I could not care less. What bothers me, beyond your hypocrisy, is the blatant law breaking by Planned Parenthood, of selling human body parts for a profit, and using taxpayer money to aide and abet their law breaking while the government looks the other way. So much for the rule of law under the current administration. Okay, I'm done. Now come back and whine to us about what George Bush and Richard Cheney did 7 or 8 years ago. That's pretty much all you ever do.
Why would you have bought bank stocks in 2004? I don't know. People on this board were warning you, telling you that you were insane, and that you had a mental illness, yet you persisted and bought. Why? SMH.... I guess that's why this board still believes that you're insane, over and above your tardism, of course.
Just last March, Hillary Clinton said: " "I'm certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material." This morning she tweeted : “Our ridiculous classification rules are the real problem". Poor Hillary. Her lies keep getting more pathetic by the day, and her excuses flimsier by the tweet. As William Saffire wrote 20 years ago : "Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady is a congenital liar." She had that reputation long before Saffire's quote. A leopard doesn't change his/her spots. The laws are made for us little people, not for Hillary and Bill. She used her own server to conceal all of her activities from the public because, well, because the public is not entitled to know what she says or does. Be it selling favors in exchange for donations to the Clinton Slush Fund, or knowingly lying about the Benghazi travesty, she intended from day one of her job #$%$.O.S. to conceal everything from all eyes. Indeed she is a congenital, pathological liar, and it truly stretches the imagination that otherwise semi-intelligent people would vote to put this elitist pig in the White House. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others, at least in Hillary's book.
The Great Recession Killer, Barry Obozo has seemingly lost his magical touch. HIS market is down roughly 1052 points over the last three DAYS, and we are still in a recession. You, on the other hand must be whimpering in the fetal position because your idol has failed you. After you bought Citi stock back in January of 2004 at $408.71 per share, you have stubbornly clung to your shares with iron fists assuring everyone on this board that Obama would escalate Citi's share price back to, and above, your buy in price. How long are you going to hold on to that nearly empty bag?
You are truly pathetic. When the market climbs ever higher you come on the message board touting the brilliance of the Obama Stock Market, as if he was somehow responsible for its gains. Now, when the house of cards you call the Obama Stock Market starts teetering and threatening to come crashing down you are trigger happy to blame Republicans and absolve your false idol. Pray tell, just how have the Republicans destroyed the market in such a short period of time, even though King Obama still reigns? I know, it's the dirty little email scandal, part of the 'billion dollar propaganda campaign' against Hillary Clinton, that has investor confidence shaken, as opposed to the realization that the Obama Economic Recovery was nothing more than a 'billion dollar propaganda campaign' to legitimatize that which (and he who) is illegitimate. So, you still believe in the following maxim: Anything positive that happens, credit the Democrats. Anything negative that happens, do what ever you can to find a way, even if it is utter BS, to blame the Republicans. Nice strategy.