• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Please tell me

Tam

Well-known member
Hillary Clinton has not said whether she will run for president in 2016, but House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is praying she decides to give it a go.


"I pray that Hillary Clinton decides to run for president of the United States," Pelosi said during a panel discussion at the Clinton School of Public Service in Little Rock, Ark., according to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.


"Let's set aside for a moment the fact that she's a woman," said Pelosi, who has previously urged Clinton to seek the presidency in 2016. "As a person, she would be the most qualified person to enter the White House in modern history."

"Now, that she happens to be a woman - that is a spectacular thing," she added.

Pelosi says Hillary would be the most qualified in Modern History. So can any of the liberals hiding behind the curtain of shame explain to me what Hillary did as Senator that qualified her? I know she was a Senator longer that Obama but look how his Presidency is working out. And please don't tell me she dodged sniper fire while in a foreign country so that gives her battle field experience enough to be Commander and Chief as we all know that was a LIE. Oh and wasn't she a Senator when she was LYING about Saddam having WMD?

"In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad. In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002



Yes she was the Sec of State but please explain what she did as the Sec. of State that would erase the fact she denied additional security for an Ambassador and allowed him to be the first in over 20 years to be killed and LIED about it saying people under her denied the security when evidence shows she signed the denial.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, testifying in January 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations committee, said "...what difference at this point does it make?" Clinton was speaking about the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans.


Well, Hillary, it does make a difference, as we are now finding out. A report of findings of a Republican led committee accuses Clinton of "...seeking to cover up failures by the State Department that could have contributed to the attack last year that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans."

But why was the attack successful? Why was there not adequate security at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya? As it turns out, it was Hillary Clinton who denied adequate security. Page 2 of the report has:

Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the Department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel.

On page 5 of the report is this little nugget of information: "Prior to the Benghazi attacks, State Department officials in Libya made repeated requests for additional security that were denied in Washington despite ample documentation of the threat posed by violent extremist militias."

We get, on page 7 of the report, this: "...in a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi."

The report also makes this point:

Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including highest levels of the State Department, up to and including Secretary Clinton. This fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013



Explain what she did that excused the fact she LIED to the American public about what caused the TERRORIST ATTACK that killed the Ambassador. As we all now know it was not a little seen video and we know she knew that from within minutes of the attack but she still spent 3 weeks pushing a LIE to protect her butt.

Please Explain what she did to excuse her comment about "What does it matter at this point why it happened" talking about the death of the Ambassador and three others that relied on HER to keep them safe or at least send help when the TERRORIST ATTACK happened in a TERRORIST ridden country that everyone with half a brain had already pulled their people out of. But she had not pulled her personel because it would not feed into the LIE she and Obama were pushing about having the terrorists on the run after killing Osama.

Oh and if being the first lady is her qualifications might we remember that she didn't have enough self respect to dump her publicly CHEATING dirtbag of a President husband when he was caught lying about his disgusting behavior with White House interns.

YEP Hillary is the most qualified in modern history just like Pelosi knew nothing about waterboarding until after it was carried out. :roll: One Liar promoting another LIAR, GOD HELP THE USA. :roll:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
She can run, but I don't see her getting elected. Her age is against her, as is all the scandal from Vince Foster and Whitewater, the Rose Law Firm, etc., all the way up to Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans that she was less than truthful about, not to mention her true sexual orientation. :shock:

Just because Bill would screw anything that could walk or crawl doesn't give her a clear path to the White House. The DNC threw her under the bus in 2008 for a jug eared, unvetted mulatto, and look where that got us. The DNC could do it to her again in 2016.

Should that happen to her again, we all know it would be Bush's fault. :wink:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
The most qualified to occupy the White House blah blah blah.......like The King is the most intelligent to ever hold the office. :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
She can run, but I don't see her getting elected. Her age is against her, as is all the scandal from Vince Foster and Whitewater, the Rose Law Firm, etc., all the way up to Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans that she was less than truthful about, not to mention her true sexual orientation. :shock:

Just because Bill would screw anything that could walk or crawl doesn't give her a clear path to the White House. The DNC threw her under the bus in 2008 for a jug eared, unvetted mulatto, and look where that got us. The DNC could do it to her again in 2016.

Should that happen to her again, we all know it would be Bush's fault. :wink:

Don't underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter these days. Afterall, we're on term number 2 of the empty suit.

Having said that, she'd have made a better president than the current atrosity-in-chief.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
I recall how a lot of us talked about how bad it would be if Hillary was elected president. How little did we know---the libs found someone WORSE!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Faster horses said:
I recall how a lot of us talked about how bad it would be if Hillary was elected president. How little did we know---the libs found someone WORSE!

After her handling of Benghazi and all the lying she has done to cover her azz in that I'm still convinced she would be bad. Maybe not as bad but BAD never the less. :wink:

But don't put it passed the Dems to be stupid enough to vote for her as it would MAKE HISTORY just like voting for Obama MADE HISTORY. It friggin doesn't matter to them if the person would do a good job only that their election MAKES HISTORY. :roll:
 

Traveler

Well-known member
"Let's set aside for a moment the fact that she's a woman," said Pelosi, who has previously urged Clinton to seek the presidency in 2016. "As a person, she would be the most qualified person to enter the White House in modern history."

As a Democrat, and a woman of sorts, she can lie and spin with the best of them, which is the most important qualification. The fact that she's one mean bit.. is important as well.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Traveler said:
"Let's set aside for a moment the fact that she's a woman," said Pelosi, who has previously urged Clinton to seek the presidency in 2016. "As a person, she would be the most qualified person to enter the White House in modern history."

As a Democrat, and a woman of sorts, she can lie and spin with the best of them, which is the most important qualification. The fact that she's one mean bit.. is important as well.

You can guarantee that the fact she is a woman will be pushed and pushed HARD as the Dems MADE HISTORY by electing the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT and the next HISTORY MAKING VOTE GIMMICK will be electing the FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT.

The Dems proved they don't care about true qualifications when they elected Obama (an incompetent junior BLACK senator) and they will prove it again if they elect this lying FEMALE skank.

Saying she is the most qualified in modern history proves the media will turn a blind eye while the Dems sweep Benghazi under a huge filth filled rug and give her a pass as that is what the Liberal Bias Media does BEST.
True Investigative Reporting died with the election of Obama UNLESS you are Sarah Palin then no rock gets unturned or email unread.

If Hillary was a Conservative Republican you can bet the liberal bias media would be all over the Benghazi LIES but she is a Liberal Democrat so she will be given a pass right to the Oval Office. :mad:
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
Whitewing wrote, " The DNC threw her under the bus in 2008 for a jug eared, unvetted mulatto, and look where that got us. The DNC could do it to her again in 2016. "


OH MY GOD !! There's another one ??????? :shock:
 

S.S.A.P.

Well-known member
gmacbeef said:
Whitewing wrote, " The DNC threw her under the bus in 2008 for a jug eared, unvetted mulatto, and look where that got us. The DNC could do it to her again in 2016. "


OH MY GOD !! There's another one ??????? :shock:

I laughed out loud at that one ... good one! We could sure send you our Justin Trudeau if needed.
 

Tam

Well-known member
S.S.A.P. said:
gmacbeef said:
Whitewing wrote, " The DNC threw her under the bus in 2008 for a jug eared, unvetted mulatto, and look where that got us. The DNC could do it to her again in 2016. "


OH MY GOD !! There's another one ??????? :shock:

I laughed out loud at that one ... good one! We could sure send you our Justin Trudeau if needed.

CAN WE CAN WE PLEASE. :twisted: He would fit right in down there he is inexperience enough to think Canada should have MORE ENGAGEMENT with Iran, I'm sure the Dems would love him. :wink:
 

MoGal

Well-known member
I think you have to look at what Pelosi promotes....

socialism to the hilt
abortion on demand at any time
gay rights
immigration/combining of North American Union
terrorism provided by our own government
no sovereignty of the USA and promotion of a one world government
no freedom of the people in the USA
No guns to be had by the people of the USA
free trade which exports jobs
she believes the water should be controlled by the government
immorality, dishonesty and uncharacteristic

I'm sure I've missed much more.... but if those are your goals as listed above, Hillary would be perfect for the job, because she has no morals, character or integrity either.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
MoGal said:
I think you have to look at what Pelosi promotes....

socialism to the hilt
abortion on demand at any time
gay rights
immigration/combining of North American Union
terrorism provided by our own government
no sovereignty of the USA and promotion of a one world government
no freedom of the people in the USA
No guns to be had by the people of the USA
free trade which exports jobs
she believes the water should be controlled by the government
immorality, dishonesty and uncharacteristic

I'm sure I've missed much more.... but if those are your goals as listed above, Hillary would be perfect for the job, because she has no morals, character or integrity either.

You could have saved yourself a bunch of typing.

She's a liberal progressive, nuf said.
 
Top