theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
When you say that Hillary is "correct", do you mean that you think Gabbard is a co-conspirator with Putin and his agents?she is correct.
Does hubris age well? I can't decide./thread closed
When you say that Hillary is "correct", do you mean that you think Gabbard is a co-conspirator with Putin and his agents?she is correct.
Does hubris age well? I can't decide./thread closed
When you say that Hillary is "correct", do you mean that you think Gabbard is a co-conspirator with Putin and his agents?
It's probably more accurate to describe her and Stein as unwitting accomplices.
useful idiot:
(Originally) a citizen of a non-communist country sympathetic to communism who is regarded (by communists) as naive and susceptible to manipulation for propaganda or other purposes; (more widely) any person similarly manipulable for political purposes.
Assets:
"persons within organizations or countries being spied upon who provide information for an outside spy."
Those are not even remotely close to synonymous.
By the way, since you might need help here:
synonymous:
(of a word or phrase) having the same or nearly the same meaning as another word or phrase in the same language.
Who cares? Dou you know what the person meant? That is all that counts.
These silly arguments over dictionary definitions bores me to tears. The anal retented makes me roll my eyes.![]()
I think you can get a sense of what folks mean here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12865822&postcount=373
Even in the face of repeated examples of her clearly not in alignment with said person or having made repeated repudiations.
I doubt Gabbard is an actual Russian asset, wittingly or not. I don't know where Clinton's accusation came from but I can guess.
I get a sense of what acbytesla means. I think it would be a mistake to extrapolate from that what "folks" mean.
My knee-jerk reaction was crab mentality. Hillary will never be the first woman president*, so nobody else can be either. But if that were true, she'd be going after Warren, not Gabbard.
---
*I won't rehash the whole "Barack Obama was the first woman president" joke here.
My knee-jerk reaction was crab mentality. Hillary will never be the first woman president*, so nobody else can be either. But if that were true, she'd be going after Warren, not Gabbard.
---
*I won't rehash the whole "Barack Obama was the first woman president" joke here.
Seems just like spite for Gabbard's earlier endorsements. If so that's damned petty and thin-skinned by someone who should be a hardened political critter.
You're so hung up on the "toilet server" and Benghazi stuff that you completely missed the point of my post.It would be easy to see her doing that. With all the baggage over her oh so very true Toilet Server and all the Bengazi nonsense she would never be queen, but she'll keep anyone one else to. Classic "if I can't have it, noone can" mentality.
It would be easy to see her doing that. With all the baggage over her oh so very true Toilet Server and all the Bengazi nonsense she would never be queen, but she'll keep anyone one else to. Classic "if I can't have it, noone can" mentality.
You're so hung up on the "toilet server" and Benghazi stuff that you completely missed the point of my post.
Gabbard is not even close to becoming president. If Hillary's motive is to stop others from getting what she didn't, she'd be going after Elizabeth Warren. You need to reread and rethink.
Oh, maybe you didn't hear: all of those e-mail and benghazi investigations turned up negative, and Clinton was cleared.
Sorry about that.
Only if you believe the MSM