Liberal Forum

Well, looks like Manchester got blown up. Maybe we do need the big A bomb to settle this once and for all.

crimsongulf » 22 May 2017 8:05 pm » wrote:Well, looks like Manchester got blown up. Maybe we do need the big A bomb to settle this once and for all.

Horrible.
Ariana Grande's fans tend to be very young.

Wish there was a bomb that could bomb their asses out of the 14th Century.

Misty » 22 May 2017 3:05 pm » wrote: Okay, so I thought about this since you posted it.

I'm assuming that you buy into that whole Clinton kill list thing.
I see varying accounts of how many people they are supposed to have murdered.
Anywhere from 33 to 90.

So my questions are, 1) how did they do this, and 2) how have they gotten away with it?

That's not an honest question by any legitimate measure.

You JUST NOW WATCHED the top guy in the FBI give immunity to Hillary's top two underlings, in an investigation which HE, HIMSELF said showed criminal wrong-doing by the target of the investigation.

However, for the first time in the history of criminal investigations, three things happened:

1. The immunity was not contingent upon cooperation; therefore, instead of putting heat on the target, if took heat OFF the target by trashing the lead investigator's leverage;
2. The two key witnesses/accomplices to the crime were interviewed in the presence of the investigation's target;
3. The lead investigator agreed to publicly take the heat for his boss not doing her by pursuing criminal charges.

Now, then. Given that you JUST WATCHED THE MACHINE IN ACTION, pretending not to know how the machine works is either not very honest, or an admission of incompetence to understand the world around you.

Those three bullet points DID happen, did they not? They ARE unprecedented, are they not? They DID lead to a crime being exposed, but not punished - did they not?

So, what part of the Clinton-Bush crime family being untouchable are you having trouble with?

Huey » 22 May 2017 12:54 pm » wrote: Is the last sentence an original? That's a keeper. Can't give you a greenie though.

Mensches on benches isn't - the rest of it is.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 12:04 am » wrote:So, what part of the Clinton-Bush crime family being untouchable are you having trouble with?

The 90 murder part.
No one is that untouchable.

Misty » 23 May 2017 1:38 am » wrote: The 90 murder part.
No one is that untouchable.

You're the one bringing 90 - maybe that number is easier to scoff at, as a means of distracting yourself and others from the three points I made and you ignored (and thereby agreed to)?

All I said is that folks who inconvenience the Clintons tend to wind up dead. And that's an historical fact, not an hysterical tactic.

As I said (and backed with facts): Clintons are untouchable - that's an on-the-record fact. Perjury? Not a problem. Whitewater? Water under the bridge. Mena? What's Mena?

Criminal mishandling of classified information? Not a crime if you're a Clinton. Multiple credible accusations of rape, including a rape case settled out of court? That's not proof - it's only a CIVIL case, and a bunch of lying whores. Everyone knows that when women accuse men of rape, they're probably lying. Right? At least if the allegation is against Bill Clinton.

Hey, you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park, and there's no telling how may of Bubba's rape victims dems pretend didn't get brutalized. I wonder why powerful men usually target underclass women, instead of conveniently raping Leona Helmsely?

Misty » 22 May 2017 7:07 pm » wrote: I know.
The mountain of evidence was in David Schipper's many boxes and boxes.

Why do you keep blabbering about the evidence being in boxes, psycho?

Had a full, fair trial been held, Clinton easily would have been removed from office.
Instead, he's a liberal icon.

So what did Larry Flynt have on the Senators?
Were they all schtooping interns too?

It doesn't have to be an intern to ruin a career, Dim, and Flynt blackmailed the entire Senate, especially Repubs, as the corrupt liberal MSM watched with glee.

That's a felony, not that MSM journalists, the corrupt Clinton Injustice Dept or Democrats cared one bit.

Misty » 22 May 2017 2:09 pm » wrote: So I guess since you jumped in here you agree with him that the Clinton Foundation (not the CGI) has closed down and that the Clintons pocketed 90% of the money.

He has been unable to offer any proof of that, so maybe you can help him.



The Clinton Global Initiative is an offshoot of the Clinton Foundation.
That is the 'second' foundation that Bill Clinton controlled and the part that has been downsizing since last year with the intent to close it down completely.

Now Bilko seems to have changed his story and says it's the other foundation (which Bill Clinton did not control).

Since you decided that Bilko was right and I am 'not well' maybe you can sort it out by proving that the 'Clinton Foundation' was....

1. Controlled by Bill Clinton
2. It shut down just before it was about to be audited
3. The Clintons pocketed 90% of the funds

Here's a few links that might help you.

I await your reply.

Oh, helluva a try there, Miss T. My position is that I'll leave the foundation fiasco to further investigation if it ever comes about. However, I know for a fact that the **** whore compromised Top Secret information without one **** care about that and she therefore belongs in prison - just like anyone else who pulled that ****. I also know that you never have one **** thing to say about THAT, which means you're as bad as she when it comes to protecting classified documents. Hell, you voted for the bitch that, without a care, exposed classified documents.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 2:29 am » wrote: You're the one bringing 90 - maybe that number is easier to scoff at, as a means of distracting yourself and others from the three points I made and you ignored (and thereby agreed to)?

All I said is that folks who inconvenience the Clintons tend to wind up dead. And that's an historical fact, not an hysterical tactic.

Witnesses like James and Susan McDougal and Webb Hubbel were clearly terrified of crossing the Clinton's.

James McDougal held out for a long time, but once he started cooperating with Starr, he was immediately indicted in Arkansas.

Once convicted and sentenced, his heart medicine was taken away, and he died out crying pitifully for guards to get it back.

Did the corrupt liberal MSM pick up on this? Not one word nationally.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 2:29 am » wrote:You're the one bringing 90 - maybe that number is easier to scoff at, as a means of distracting yourself and others from the three points I made and you ignored (and thereby agreed to)?

All I said is that folks who inconvenience the Clintons tend to wind up dead. And that's an historical fact, not an hysterical tactic.

As I said (and backed with facts): Clintons are untouchable - that's an on-the-record fact. Perjury? Not a problem. Whitewater? Water under the bridge. Mena? What's Mena?

Criminal mishandling of classified information? Not a crime if you're a Clinton. Multiple credible accusations of rape, including a rape case settled out of court? That's not proof - it's only a CIVIL case, and a bunch of lying whores. Everyone knows that when women accuse men of rape, they're probably lying. Right? At least if the allegation is against Bill Clinton.

Hey, you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park, and there's no telling how may of Bubba's rape victims dems pretend didn't get brutalized. I wonder why powerful men usually target underclass women, instead of conveniently raping Leona Helmsely?

As it applies to today's news and events there is credible circumstantial evidence, just as much if not more as in the Trump Russia Front, to investigate the Seth Rich Murder. But since it involves the DNC, the Clintons, and election influencing in a primary it will be silenced

Misty » 22 May 2017 2:09 pm » wrote: So I guess since you jumped in here you agree with him that the Clinton Foundation (not the CGI) has closed down and that the Clintons pocketed 90% of the money.

He has been unable to offer any proof of that, so maybe you can help him.



The Clinton Global Initiative is an offshoot of the Clinton Foundation.
That is the 'second' foundation that Bill Clinton controlled and the part that has been downsizing since last year with the intent to close it down completely.

Now Bilko seems to have changed his story and says it's the other foundation (which Bill Clinton did not control).

Since you decided that Bilko was right and I am 'not well' maybe you can sort it out by proving that the 'Clinton Foundation' was....

1. Controlled by Bill Clinton
2. It shut down just before it was about to be audited
3. The Clintons pocketed 90% of the funds

Here's a few links that might help you.

I await your reply.

At least two people that I know of understand - for a fact - that the clintons are criminal scoundrels, and their foundation is a scam.

One of those people is me, and one of those people is you.

And one of us is willing to speak the truth about that.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 11:03 am » wrote:At least two people that I know of understand - for a fact - that the clintons are criminal scoundrels, and their foundation is a scam.

One of those people is me, and one of those people is you.

And one of us is willing to speak the truth about that.

Uh oh. Yet another person has spoken Truth to the psycho.

larryc12 » 23 May 2017 6:43 am » wrote:Oh, helluva a try there, Miss T. My position is that I'll leave the foundation fiasco to further investigation if it ever comes about.

But your previous position was that Bilko was right, and I was 'not well.'

Now that you can't prove that he was right, you've decided to leave all that foundation stuff to further investigation.

Helluva try there Mr.Larry.
Next time you think about reflexively jumping in to defend someone, you might want to do a little research first.

Bilko hasn't offered one shred of proof to show that what he said was true.
He just keeps repeating it over and over as if that will make it true.
And you say I'm the one whose 'not well.'

Huey » 23 May 2017 6:55 am » wrote:As it applies to today's news and events there is credible circumstantial evidence, just as much if not more as in the Trump Russia Front, to investigate the Seth Rich Murder. But since it involves the DNC, the Clintons, and election influencing in a primary it will be silenced

Prove it.
Post that 'credible circumstantial' evidence.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 2:29 am » wrote:You're the one bringing 90 - maybe that number is easier to scoff at, as a means of distracting yourself and others from the three points I made and you ignored (and thereby agreed to)?

I didn't make up that 90 number.
It comes from right wing websites.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2017 2:29 am » wrote:All I said is that folks who inconvenience the Clintons tend to wind up dead. And that's an historical fact, not an hysterical tactic.

Here's another historical fact, people die all the time. It's part of life.
I know many people who have died throughout the course of my life.
Some of them may even have inconvenienced me.
Does that mean that I killed them?

I get that you hate the Clintons, and there is good reason for that, but these wacky conspiracy theories don't help you make your case.

Misty » 23 May 2017 1:59 pm » wrote: Prove it.
Post that 'credible circumstantial' evidence.

Come on, you're kidding, right?

A reasonably credible hacker has said that the victim was involved with Wikleaks.

You have zero evidence of Trump-Russia collaboration.

Misty » 23 May 2017 2:05 pm » wrote: Here's another historical fact, people die all the time. It's part of life.
I know many people who have died throughout the course of my life.
Some of them may even have inconvenienced me.
Does that mean that I killed them?

I get that you hate the Clintons, and there is good reason for that, but these wacky conspiracy theories don't help you make your case.

We're not talking about natural deaths, Dim.


Why don't you respond to my point about how James Mcdougal died?

About Clinton growing up in the home city of the Dixie Mafia?

Answer; you're too busy stonewalling.

Termin8tor » 23 May 2017 2:08 pm » wrote:We're not talking about natural deaths, Dim.
Why don't you respond to my point about how James Mcdougal died?
About Clinton growing up in the home city of the Dixie Mafia?
Answer; you're too busy stonewalling.

So you believe that they had 90 people murdered in all kinds of different ways?
That's some vast conspiracy, with all kinds of people being involved including coroners, and law enforcement agencies.
Wow! They are even more powerful than I thought.

The Dixie Mafia sounds like a country western band.

Termin8tor » 23 May 2017 2:06 pm » wrote:Come on, you're kidding, right?

A reasonably credible hacker has said that the victim was involved with Wikleaks.

A reasonably credible hacker?
You know hackers are criminals right?

That's like saying a plausible con-artist.

Name that 'reasonably credible' hacker Puss.

Misty » 23 May 2017 2:31 pm » wrote: So you believe that they had 90 people murdered in all kinds of different ways?
That's some vast conspiracy, with all kinds of people being involved including coroners, and law enforcement agencies.

Wow! They are even more powerful than I thought.

Where did I claim they were all murdered, moonbat?

I haven't sorted them out, but certainly a lot look very suspicious.
Why didn't you answer my questio,n hack?

Why don't you respond to my point about how James Mcdougal died?

The Dixie Mafia sounds like a country western band.

From what I've read, they engaged in violence that makes the Northern mob look tame, and Hot Springs was their summer home town.

Figures you'd try to turn that into a joke.