Does Hillary have the health/energy to stand up for an entire debate?
This will be an important tell for her. If her campaign has her sitting, and if it lobbies for a short debate, then it will be a signal of underlying weakness that will be seen by many who are curious/suspicious.
Being president is physically stressful, and requires energy. We have all seen the toll it takes on each president physically.
Hillary needs to show even her own supporters that they are not voting for Huma.
Replies to: Does Hillary have the health/energy to stand up for an entire debate?
With those saddlebags?
(no message)
They should probably administer drug tests and blood doping tests to the candidates.
(no message)
...and hook them up to lie detectors during debates.
That would be Must See TV...
That would be lots of fun to watch.
Except you can beat a lie detector by squeezing your a-hole. I learned that on Penn and Teller's show.
They would both be electrocuted.
(no message)
Depends!
(no message)
Are there any crackpot right-wing Clinton conspiracies that you don't believe?
Do your sources ever go too far for you, or will you swallow absolutely everything they feed you?
You need to re-read my post - this time with comprehension.
(no message)
So you dont bellieve she is corrupt and sold out her country for money?
No one could be that naive. Not caring, well there are a ton of those types in the electorate.
No. In fact i think that is absurd on its face.
Then again, I'm an evidence pussy.
Speaking of which, here is an independent rating of the Clinton Foundation. 88% of its funds went toward programs.
Link: https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
I guess with all these accusations she'll not have enough energy to combat them all
in a single debate if Trump has actually agreed to any of them and will actually show up for.
It would take months to defend all the conspiracies the Right Wing has produced.
She clearly sold access. She's corrupt, but how did she sell out the country?
(no message)
Putting classified information on a private server in violation of State Dept guidelines
Just to be able to hide her corruption. Selling State Department approval for the Uranium deal with Russia for $2.85 million dollars. Need I continue?
That is not selling out anything
Hillary has a disturbing mania for control, and distrust of the press. She sees it as the enemy, and does not think that she has to do much outreach (like press conferences) to win. She sees politics as a battle.
That's why she had a private server.
And the idea that a deal on uranium was affected by contributions to charity is - I will say again - the dumbest "scandal" of this election season. That's simply not how it works, people.
That's the way things work, String.
You gave me that cash and I sprinkled it around Washington and got you that Federal light bulb concession, right? That's just the start, man!
That's my pal, Isiah Whitlock in the photo.
Good guy. Known him a very long time.
PS: we're both from SB.
Nice reference
Uranium issues might be a bit more serious than lightbulbs. But great reference, still.
Yeah, well Stringer Bell didn't pay as much $$$ as Frank Giustra did
$2.35mm! String's lucky he even got the damn light bulbs.
That is exactly how it works
$2.35 million to the Clinton criminal slush fund and $500,000 direct payment to Bill Clinton for a favorable State Department recommendation that jeopardizes the US long term national security.
You do know there were other agencies that had a say in this?
I don't doubt that she pushed these guys because they were donors. She's corrupt and sells access.
But if it was a true threat to national security no way it gets through DOD or DOE.
Yes but they were acting at Obama's direction- Clinton was acting for herself
I have no idea whether the other agencies were corrupt or just Obama's lap dogs. With Hillary, we know the answer.
My point is those agencies would not approve it if there was a true national security threat.
I have little doubt she pushed for her donors; it's what she does.
But the other agencies also need to approve and they wouldn't if there was a Nat security issue.
LOL you are so wrong.
(no message)
You reckon the DOD and DOE take orders from the Secretary of State?
And that Bob Gates would have signed off on something regarding uranium because he wanted the donations to the Clinton Foundation to keep flowing?
Good point on Gates. She's an access seller but not a traitor.
(no message)
You have no idea what you are talking about. No offense.
You fill in the gaps in your knowledge with partisan assumptions. And bullshit.
She will demand a short debate and only 2
There would be no upside to her for anything else. She probably hopes for Trump to come up with some lame brained excuse to have no debates. Even now she refuses to do legitimate press conferences. What does she have to win in a debate? She is already a proven criminal and treasonous corrupt individual and yet still has an almost insurmountable electoral college lead, if polls are to be believed. Maybe against any candidate except Trump she would be worried. As it is, she would have to die of a stroke to not be elected and even then she would still have a chance.
She wants that anyway...as she needs to limit America's exposure to her shrill and grating voice.
The majority of the country will be saying WTF did we do...by Groundhog Day.
2 breaks per debate if she needs to pee or drop a ty in the bowl.
(no message)
...or suck the blood of a young virgin.
(no message)
That's reserved for before Huma night.
(no message)
They will tighten her screws and oil her gears. It's what happened in NH:
(no message)
She'll muddle through. They'll have Huma kneeling behind the podium massaging her thighs and...
cankles to help prop her up.
Once elected...she'll rule from a wheelchair like some bizarre combination of FDR and Dr. Strangelove....