Law School Discussion

POTUS

Re: POTUS
« Reply #720 on: March 28, 2017, 05:41:13 AM »
98654...

So, the Washington post, the new York times have abandoned honest news coverage.

The "intrigue" of Russian spies and soviet union covert operations, and James bond stories are fun to read but as far as holding relevant serious political or legal value anything beyond entertainment would be a foolish surmise.

These stories about Russia are fun and actually great smokescreens for trump to keep pushing through his agenda of draining the swamp and slicing massive steak cuts from the federal government.

Reagan couldn't do it.... Obama added goose fat and Trump is melting the bloat...



Hillary Clinton lost the election big time and will try to gain her favorable rating back so she can possible rub again in 2020. But i am almost positive that she lost an election margin of victory with the defection of democrats to trump.

She will NEVER get those votes back and could never ever win a national election.

Why? She is not a person of action.  She is an obvious corrupt politician who lacks simple integrity and compassion...

Too many Americans know that she let Americans die in Libya and she is a vicious warmonger...."crowing about the murder of the despot, QuDafi."

So, allow the Times and Post their spy stories to capture your imagination because that is about all these fluffy stories will affect.

Wake up! Trump will be in office for another 4 years.  And if Hillary tries to run again....Trump has already won that election by what he has accomplished in 2 months...

Reality check.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #721 on: April 02, 2017, 09:16:40 PM »
So, how many fools think clinton could legitimately win the nomination for her party again?

We know that trolls like Loki will be bullshitting about probability models when he predicted nothing correct....especially the criminal investigation into hillarys gross negligence with regard to classified compartmentalized information...
That troll still doesn't know who Jim Comey is.  Nah, jim Comey and the FBI affected hillarys campaign very little if you ask dummdums like Lol.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #722 on: April 02, 2017, 09:21:32 PM »
Hopefully the trolls are gone.  That speech from hilllary the other day about policy was so effective.... She managed to put an entire row of young college students to sleep....all the yawning....what a phoenomena

She is more boring than my undergrad physics professor.

Maybe if she sends out enough tweets and talks about trump enough she can still beat him.   Or maybe she'll get him impeached and then she can take his place.


Hahahahahahaahahahahahahahaah ahahahahahahaahahah.

Witch is dead.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #723 on: April 02, 2017, 09:23:23 PM »
...99294 and one troll ;)...caught him looking....ha!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #724 on: April 03, 2017, 05:28:30 AM »
Susan Bordo, a self described feminist was crying black tears that her "idol" Hillary Clinton lost to trump.

The whining is not effective and unbecoming....

Face it "little Suzie"----Hillary (haha autocorrect spells it this way) lost.  She will never hold a national office of importance....again--ding ding the witch is dead.

Hillary Clinton is not a progressive, nor is she a feminist---she is an underhanded opportunist.

Little suzes article falls flat when she attempts to write down hiliarys AccomPlishMents---affordable care act, really?  Is that something of an accomplishment for her??? Equal pay for women, really? That award goes to Hillary? Then its "children" ok? C.h.i.p.? Was that all Hillary too?

So, what else?....nothing
You know what? The only real accomplishment Hillary has is Assisting in getting the "Q" line akin 2nd avenue in Manhattan.....maybe? If you leave out all the planning and Mayor Giuliani and Mayor Bloomberg.

So little suze--your writing pedestrians a green pathway of apologizing for American culture not understanding that Hillary is a saint and is not now an out of touch rich European American....who was caught many times lying about trivial and dire matters.  And is an unscrupulous money grubbing shill- who benefits that she stayed married to a proven cheater and abuser of women...is that feminism? Little size?
Little suze is an idiot to think most people can't smell 👃 hillarys stink to" stand by her man"

I dont think that Hillary is anything feminist at all....most of America who are even in her own party wont buy that crap and I Suze still sells it---hopefully less students will attend her seemingly misguided ideology.
She should probably retire from teaching and writing fluff-- like her article in" the guildian."

Hillarys accomplishments are akin to James Buchanan...at least he made it to the presidency

How bad does hiliary look that she lost to trump?

...nobodys buying it little suze....and Clinton is a part of the democratic elite--- nose up asss corporate warmongering political class.

Good riddance.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #725 on: April 03, 2017, 05:42:47 AM »
Omg...

Suze B didn't even mention hillarys shining feminist chops regarding defending a rapist and laughing about it.  How she easily stole justice from a 12 year old girl.

That 12 year olds life was ruined....is that protecting women? Is that standing up for children?

Hillarys laughing voice was caught on tape admitting to this sick crime.

So ms. Suze forgive me if I gag a little on your stinking foul article that is light on reality and heavy on base ignorance.

....thats right Read it!!!!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #726 on: April 04, 2017, 04:59:17 AM »
Amy Chozik a new York times shill....and Bennet and Barnes wrote this article today about one of the worst politicians in history.

They think perhaps that this politician STILL is running for president so they wanted to onec again

Sell us some rotting dead animal meat....stinking old feces...
I'm laughing hard because AMERICANS dont eat this crap....

TOO LATE to the table the morons at the new York times are recycling a tired old hack of a politicians early career to show how great this shills career was.

It's bullshite

Here is there article



James Buchanan, Jr. was born in a log cabin in Cove Gap, Pennsylvania (now Buchanan's Birthplace State Park), in Franklin County, on April 23, 1791, to James Buchanan, Sr. (17611821), a businessman, merchant, and farmer, and Elizabeth Speer, an educated woman (17671833).[4] His parents were both of Ulster Scots descent, the father having emigrated from Milford, County Donegal, Ireland, in 1783. One of eleven siblings, Buchanan was the oldest child in the family to survive infancy. Shortly after Buchanan's birth the family moved to a farm near Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, and in 1794 the family moved to Mercersburg itself. Buchanan's father became the wealthiest person in town, becoming a prosperous merchant and investing in real estate.[5] The family home in Mercersburg was later turned into the James Buchanan Hotel.[6]

Buchanan attended the village academy (Old Stone Academy) and, starting in 1807, Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.[7] Though he was nearly expelled at one point for poor behavior, he pleaded for a second chance and subsequently graduated with honors on September 19, 1809.[8] Later that year, he moved to Lancaster, which, at the time, was the capital of Pennsylvania. James Hopkins, the most prominent lawyer in Lancaster, accepted Buchanan as a student, and in 1812 Buchanan was admitted to the bar after an oral exam. Though many other lawyers moved to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania after it became the capital of the Pennsylvania in 1812, Lancaster would remain Buchanan's home town for the rest of his life. Buchanan's income quickly rose after he established his own practice, and by 1821 he was earning over $11,000 per year (equivalent to $197,918 in 2016). Buchanan handled various types of cases, including a high-profile impeachment trial in which he successfully defended Pennsylvania Judge Walter Franklin.[9]

Buchanan began his political career in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives (181416) as a member of the Federalist Party.[10] The legislature met for only three months a year, and Buchanan's notoriety as a legislator helped him earn clients for his legal practice.[11] Like his father, Buchanan believed in federally-funded internal improvements, a high tariff, and a national bank. He emerged as a strong critic of the leadership of Democratic-Republican President James Madison during the War of 1812.[12] When the British invaded neighboring Maryland in 1814, he enlisted as a private in Henry Shippen's Company, 1st Brigade, 4th Division, Pennsylvania Militia, a unit of light dragoons, and served in the defense of Baltimore.[11][13] Buchanan is the only president with military experience who did not, at some point, serve as an officer.[14

Re: POTUS
« Reply #727 on: April 04, 2017, 05:09:06 AM »
99596..

James Buchanan was a disaster.  And his early career mirrors Hillary Clinton's in that they both struggled as lawyers and then tried to con everybody that they "evolved" or told people what they thought folks wanted to hear....

And ultimately failed to accomplish anything of any merit.

Buchanon brought us The Civil War.
Hiliary brought Lybias Civil War and Benghazi deaths.

TWO ineffectual lazy Fuchs.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #728 on: April 15, 2017, 07:56:15 AM »
....100940

I knew hiliary Clinton was never going to be elected President.

It is NO shock to me that she lost.

At ALL!!!!

I never believed all of the state polls.
If you were shocked, you might stop drinking koolaide.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #729 on: April 15, 2017, 05:22:47 PM »
101002...

David Mascriota, who writes for Salon had a beautifully written article full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing.

Why? Because he doesn't want to write about the obvious base lies of Hillary Clinton.

I'll just write about two of them--
First, Hillary claimed that she and Chelsea arrived in former Yugoslavia under a hail of gunfire--and had to duck and run...
Then video emerged that in reality she arrived smiling, walking slowly and waving when she and Chelsea landed there.

A lie, small?  It's a major problem when a politician openly speaks about a serious event to draw sympathy and then we find out it was not factual---hypocritical and base.

Then, same politician borrows a line of rebuttal and chastisement from someone else--you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts--and then makes up her own facts--again, but reinforced hypotitical nature.

Then, same politician stands over the dead bodies of people-- knowing full well how their deaths occurred through a militarily planned guerrilla attack--but chooses instead to belittle, simplify and remove the dignity which they deserve by blaming a video...

So, David wrote an article without examining any of the reasons why people would never put this woman in a position of governing.

There is also a great deal more of Hillary Clinton's failures--but David blames sexism...

This is laughable!

There are many brilliant women in politics today--Hillary is not one of them.

Her shrill, voice was the least of her problems.

Her marriage of convenience to bill Clinton and her  enabling her husbands dalliances shows that she deeply doesn't really care about the women bill hurt...
How is that fighting for women? In any way?

Hillary is a half baked Peron...sent into this world scarcely made up...
Blame God for why she lost. It's a more solid argument, David.

Lmfao!!!

This dude is a very late to the game apologist...