Once again, the classic liberal mis-direct and personal attack. This is all they have. They are on the wrong side of issues so they knee-jerk.We are sure that you do not understand. No need to argue that one.![]()
Once again, the classic liberal mis-direct and personal attack. This is all they have. They are on the wrong side of issues so they knee-jerk.We are sure that you do not understand. No need to argue that one.![]()
I'm still waiting, patiently, for a truthful statement from you about pretty much anything. What are the odds?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/warren.asp
No corruption. Fabricated scandal. What we do know is that Clinton can work on both sides of the aisle and that Trump has a hissy fit whenever anyone even looks at him the wrong way. You really think his hypothetical presidency would be one of meaningful cooperation for the benefit of anyone but himself? His first executive order would be for his name to be a larger font on his official stationary.What we do know is the outcome of a Clinton presidency. More corruption. More scandal. A government in total gridlock.
Granted Trump is an unknown and I imagine there will be pain. More often than not real change requires some pain.
I'm guessing English isn't your first language.My statement was factual and the snopes entry basically concedes that.
I'm guessing English isn't your first language.
Better yet, why don't you actually read it first.Why don't you post the relevant passages from snopes if it is so clearcut?
I'm guessing English isn't your first language.
I'm guessing that you missed the part that makes the whole thing a non-issue. And the part that you guys find contentious? Nonexistent.I'm guessing you did not fully read the summary at Snopes... and just selectively pursued the few lines that fit your preconceived viewpoint.
What we do know is the outcome of a Clinton presidency.