ADVERTISEMENT

Syster...CNN sez "Slow your roll...."

This will be the usual waste of time, but sure...

This one is just some speech money Slick Willy made from foreign governments while Hilliary was SOS. Note Russia and China are on the list.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...hecking-clinton-cash-author-claim-about-bill/

This one is a collection regarding the Clintons and the Chinese from the 90s. Notice the familiar pattern of a Democratic appointed AG not bothering with a special counsel even though many people felt one should have been appointed. I wonder why Democrats hate objectivity when it concerns them...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/background.htm

There's plenty more out there. Now, your turn. Show me the proof. A few links will be fine. haha lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
This will be the usual waste of time, but sure...

This one is just some speech money Slick Willy made from foreign governments while Hilliary was SOS. Note Russia and China are on the list.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...hecking-clinton-cash-author-claim-about-bill/

This one is a collection regarding the Clintons and the Chinese from the 90s. Notice the familiar pattern of a Democratic appointed AG not bothering with a special counsel even though many people felt one should have been appointed. I wonder why Democrats hate objectivity when it concerns them...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/background.htm

There's plenty more out there. Now, your turn. Show me the proof. A few links will be fine. haha lol

From your second article...”After thousands of hours of investigation, Reno said, there was no reasonable basis to believe Clinton or Gore violated a century-old law against campaign fund-raising on federal property. Although both officials made calls from the White House, Reno said the law did not apply because the calls either were made from residential areas, did not involve specific solicitations or did not raise actual campaign money.

Reno also said there was no evidence to support allegations that former energy secretary Hazel R. O'Leary had solicited contributions for a private charity in return for meeting with a Chinese businessman. Reno said that although the case did not implicate O'Leary, the Justice Department will continue to investigate the $25,000 contribution that was ultimately made by Johnny Chung, a California businessman and prolific Democratic fund-raiser.”
 
From your second article...”After thousands of hours of investigation, Reno said, there was no reasonable basis to believe Clinton or Gore violated a century-old law against campaign fund-raising on federal property. Although both officials made calls from the White House, Reno said the law did not apply because the calls either were made from residential areas, did not involve specific solicitations or did not raise actual campaign money.

Reno also said there was no evidence to support allegations that former energy secretary Hazel R. O'Leary had solicited contributions for a private charity in return for meeting with a Chinese businessman. Reno said that although the case did not implicate O'Leary, the Justice Department will continue to investigate the $25,000 contribution that was ultimately made by Johnny Chung, a California businessman and prolific Democratic fund-raiser.”
Uh huh. You're trying to scratch something that isn't itching. There's plenty more in those links. Take your time digesting them. It's good stuff.

Now, you owe me some links. Don't bitch out A-GAIN.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Uh huh. You're trying to scratch something that isn't itching. There's plenty more in those links. Take your time digesting them. It's good stuff.

Now, you owe me some links. Don't bitch out A-GAIN.

You’re equating speaking fees with quid pro quo deals lol...you understand the lengths you’re stretching things here?
 
Yeah I just made that up lol. You got me good!
You make up a bunch of shit. How do I know where to draw the line? I just assume the most logical conclusion. You're always full of crap until you prove otherwise. You're so predictable that if I could bet money on you in Vegas, I'd own the casino.
 
You make up a bunch of shit. How do I know where to draw the line? I just assume the most logical conclusion. You're always full of crap until you prove otherwise. You're so predictable that if I could bet money on you in Vegas, I'd own the casino.

You’re just that stupid lol...no hope saving you from it.
 
images
 
Trump has taken money from Russian banks because he’s such a great businessman he couldn’t get American bank loans anymore. He has no choice but to suck off Putin and co.

Conspiracy theory? Prove me wrong.
Still not a single link, @CSCOTTOSUPOKES. And apparently it's never going to happen. Now I know how your parents feel about your prospects of moving out of their house again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBradSmith
Failure is your first, middle, and last name.

Nope, not a single thing in that link about what you claimed, Captain Disappointment. Maybe do something that your parents will never see you do regarding moving the eff out and try again.

You’re an idiot lol...read closer and use that thing in between your ears - no matter how much prescription pills have damaged it haha
 
You’re an idiot lol...read closer and use that thing in between your ears - no matter how much prescription pills have damaged it haha
Nope, still not going to pass as anything backing up your claim. Losing is so natural for you.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT