The EU debate - Part III

The FBI Director, James Comey, had been receiving payments through Lockheed martin, a Clinton Foundation donor, and Comey's former employer between 2010 and 2013, plus over a dozen private contract approvals from Hillary's state department.

 

When he talks about it these days, he tends to refer to events and actions of Trumps father's time, or chucks in comments about birthers or miss quotes about immigration that ignore Hillary saying the same.

As Jackson introduced Michelle to Obama as she was living with him, and they needed a more family feel to Obama's political bid, there's little wonder he's rephrasing his comments now and trying to ignore the clear video evidence of his views when there was no conflict with his protege.

 

I didn't avoid it, I answered earlier. If it's wrong, it should be investigated, No iffs or buts, just as the clear wrong doing by the Clinton's is being investigated now. Perhaps Bush exerted the same influence on the system that the Clintons have been doing.

The Bush family history is at least as tainted as the Clinton's. There's far more than the emails both sets should be dragged through the Courts for.

 

I don't follow American politics so can't comment. In fact it's time I bailed out of this particular conversation as I'm out of my depth when it comes to politicians and charitable foundations.
My view of the election is still that voters want change. For better or worse, the likes of Trump and Farage have provided that hope for change.
The fact that both leave a bitter taste in many's mouth is the perceived price to pay, for the change they have promoted.

 

James Comey, who basically cost Clinton the election with his bias towards Trump?
The same bloke that publicly refused to talk about any connections to Russia, while spouting off about the emails?
This story that Breitbart ran? The same Breitbart that were part of Trump's campaign?

That's an absolutely ludicrous alt-right story: http://www.snopes.com/comey-clinton-foundation/
As conspiracy theories go, it's not one of the better ones, is it? It's mental.

 

It's already been investigated and they've found nothing, again.
They set up an insecure server, just as the previous administration had.
It was negligent, but not criminally so.

Trump's self-confessed corruption, though? How about an investigation into that.
He's admitted it on camera, yet you think he's fit for the office of President.

 

It's misleading to say they found nothing as they checked a limited number for specific reasons. The others were and are contributing to the on going FBI investigation.

 

I rather suspect it is subsequent actions and comments made by Trump himself that have changed the Revs mind.

Trump is very obviously a pretty shallow individual who blows which ever way gets him attention.

 

Can't say I really care what Hillary is. She isn't the next president. Same would be true of trump if he lost.

 

Christ, you didnt just link Snopes did you?
****ing hell.
I noticed Snopes just glossed over the Private contract awards from the State department.
Again, you are being incredibly naive. This isn't a smoking gun, no. But your insistence on requiring absolute proof of their corruption is ridiculous.
Billionaire politicians don't go to jail mate. They grease the right palms and pull enough political strings to keep that from happening.
If there was unequivocal proof of their corruption, they would be in jail and she wouldn't be running for President and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
You think the only corrupt politicians in world history were the ones who were caught?

 

Which goes full circle to what you decide to use to inform a decision of which of the two evils is the lesser.

 

Exactly.!

Trump is going to be the next president, and that scares me, as I believe it should most people.

Apart from his glaring personal deficits, which are all too apparent, he has zero experience at any level of Gvt.

He's the loosest of loose cannons, which is dangerous.

Despite what Bod thinks, I really cannot believe that amongst some 300mill people, the best either side could do was come up with these two unpalatable characters! Pathetic!

 

What do you mean, I said exactly the same.
It's ridiculous.
Dodgy as ****, corrupt devil bitch on one side and a clueless ****ing machismo pandering, bigoted ****** on the other.
The GOP and DNC should be ashamed of themselves.

 

Not sure I agree with him about Sanders losing, but the rest of it is excellent in my opinion.

 

I think you said Trump was the best pick, if I remember correctly? If not, my fault.

I disagree, as much as the name may prove unpalatable to many, Jed Bush was the most palatable republican. If there is such a thing.

 

I did, but I am in two minds to be honest.
I think probably yes he was.
But if Trump is best pick of any choice, you are scraping a really ****ing bottomed out barrell.

 

On that we can certainly agree!...

 

No it doesn't scare me. Trump will play the statesman now he has won and wallow on the limelight of the attention he recieves.

What really concerns me is some of the advisors he has chosen and the impact of someone with a nationalist agenda winning the presidency will have on the upcoming European elections.

There is already plenty of evidence that this result will ripple through the Dutch, German and French elections plus the five star movement in Italy are pushing for a referendum to leave the Euro.

 

We can only hope

please log in to view this image

Why do you care , we wont be in the EU any way?