Clinton paid herself 250K in campaign funds

I believe the distinction is that he is paying companies he owns, instead of himself.

I will agree that isn't really any better, but does Clinton really want to measure herself by Donald Trump?
I don't really care was just confused by that statement
 
Jay: Dude, I think he's doing the dice thing too much.

Jonah: That's really all he's got.


Knocked Up (The Movie) quotes
hqdefault.jpg

That's my boy. Live and let die

Ps: I overstepped earlier do forgive for I was rude.
 
I also have to wonder why someone who is so staunchly liberal, is frequenting a far right news site that seems dedicated to pushing the Republican establishment.

I am not a liberal, I am a economic progressive, and social libertarian.

Yahoo, finds stories on topics you clicked on before. I click on Clinton stories, and yahoo finds them for me.
 
You cant talk bad and Hillary on here or one of the mods will call you stupid and childish and..................runs off to find what else he called me.
 
I don't understand this part;

No other candidate running for president recorded payments to themselves,FEC files show. Donald Trump reimbursed $410,000 to himself and other Trump entities for payroll expenses, rent, hotel, and restaurant bills in December, according to reports.

Getting reimbursed is different than being part of the payroll.

Donald is saying spent money from his own pocket, and the campaign payed him back.
Hilary is recording this money as payroll, not reimbursments. Which means it is just going to her bank account, not necessarily paying her back for anything she personally spent.
 
This thing should be over after March 15th... Michigan goes March 8th - a health margin for Hills should be a good propeller heading into the 15th. Of course Louisiana is today and that promises to be 60% or more in her favor... but really, it's the Florida, NC, Illinois, Ohio day that should end this thing. Bernie can't stick around hoping for some sort of wave in Cali in June.
 
Getting reimbursed is different than being part of the payroll.

Donald is saying spent money from his own pocket, and the campaign payed him back.
Hilary is recording this money as payroll, not reimbursments. Which means it is just going to her bank account, not necessarily paying her back for anything she personally spent.

I thought trump was funding his own campaign why would he pay himself anything back
 
Getting reimbursed is different than being part of the payroll.

Donald is saying spent money from his own pocket, and the campaign payed him back.
Hilary is recording this money as payroll, not reimbursments. Which means it is just going to her bank account, not necessarily paying her back for anything she personally spent.
It's reimbursements for payroll that she paid. Read the second post of the thread.
 
I thought trump was funding his own campaign why would he pay himself anything back

A couple things.

1. Him funding is own campaign is mostly false. He has given several loans to his campaign out of his own money. He could pay himself back at any time. Its misleading.

2. Funding the campaign, and then paying more expenses out of pocket is double funding. Lets say I say "Hey, I'll pay for our trip this weekend. I've set up an account and put $100 in it". Then we go out to eat on our trip, and I say "Oh, I only brought cash with me. Here, I'll pay the $20 dinner out of my own pocket, and remimburse myself later". Then later, I go withdraw $20 from the account I had previously set up to replenish the extra cash I spent.
 
This thing should be over after March 15th... Michigan goes March 8th - a health margin for Hills should be a good propeller heading into the 15th. Of course Louisiana is today and that promises to be 60% or more in her favor... but really, it's the Florida, NC, Illinois, Ohio day that should end this thing. Bernie can't stick around hoping for some sort of wave in Cali in June.

The primary campaign will be over soon. Attempts by the right to dishonestly present everything she does as some kind of scandal (and gullible lefties buying it) will be going on for another five years, at least.
 
The primary campaign will be over soon. Attempts by the right to dishonestly present everything she does as some kind of scandal (and gullible lefties buying it) will be going on for another five years, at least.

But what about Benghazi? What about Whitewater? What about the email scandal? They actually call the email investigation a scandal because you know, where there's smoke there's fire. No proof or explanation needed. Forget about her politics and record, I just get a bad feeling about scandal.
 
But what about Benghazi? What about Whitewater? What about the email scandal? They actually call the email investigation a scandal because you know, where there's smoke there's fire. No proof or explanation needed. Forget about her politics and record, I just get a bad feeling about scandal.

You guys keep saying this, but won't touch my spy agency report thread with a 10 foot poll.
 
this thread ended in the first response. you can keep trying to double talk and use your impressive powers of deduction all day, doesn't change the fact this is a garbage and only a fucking sucker would have taken the bait.

But what about Benghazi? What about Whitewater? What about the email scandal? They actually call the email investigation a scandal because you know, where there's smoke there's fire. No proof or explanation needed. Forget about her politics and record, I just get a bad feeling about scandal.

actually when there's smoke, it's usually b/c some fat fuck conservative like rush limbaugh ate 3 sausage and garlic pizzas then slept on his stomach with his ass in the air.
 
this thread ended in the first response. you can keep trying to double talk and use your impressive powers of deduction all day, doesn't change the fact this is a garbage and only a fucking sucker would have taken the bait.



actually when there's smoke, it's usually b/c some fat fuck conservative like rush limbaugh ate 3 sausage and garlic pizzas then slept on his stomach with his ass in the air.

My post has never been discounted. No one will touch my thread with the spy agency report, and no one commented once on how wise it is for Clinton to engage in this, when trustworthiness is a big issue for her campaign.

It doesn't matter if there was any wrongdoing here. My post from the jump has been about her judgement in making this decision.

BTW, you seen the Washington Post story saying Clinton sent classified info herself in over 100 E-mails?
 
My post has never been discounted. No one will touch my thread with the spy agency report, and no one commented once on how wise it is for Clinton to engage in this, when trustworthiness is a big issue for her campaign.

It doesn't matter if there was any wrongdoing here. My post from the jump has been about her judgement in making this decision.

BTW, you seen the Washington Post story saying Clinton sent classified info herself in over 100 E-mails?

i don't go digging for these stories, b/c they are always shit reporting. the washington post in particular has been doing a lot of hit jobs on clinton and most of them have been complete dogshit. if anything in those emails was that serious, it'd be all over every news agency right now.

but nobody except idjits and obviously partisan hillary haters buy into these stupid stories. you are literally trying to tell me there's a scandal here and there isn't one. i'm not some stupid 12 year old, i'm an adult and i know what's important and what isn't. and so far, this email debacle has been one giant pile of dogshit from the outset.

at this point, it's been such a long and tiresome witch hunt that even if they do find something, you've lost all credibility anyway. that's what happens when you keep trying to force feed shit down everyone's mouth - eventually, people think everything you make is shit.
 
i don't go digging for these stories, b/c they are always shit reporting. the washington post in particular has been doing a lot of hit jobs on clinton and most of them have been complete dogshit. if anything in those emails was that serious, it'd be all over every news agency right now.

but nobody except idjits and obviously partisan hillary haters buy into these stupid stories. you are literally trying to tell me there's a scandal here and there isn't one. i'm not some stupid 12 year old, i'm an adult and i know what's important and what isn't. and so far, this email debacle has been one giant pile of dogshit from the outset.

at this point, it's been such a long and tiresome witch hunt that even if they do find something, you've lost all credibility anyway. that's what happens when you keep trying to force feed shit down everyone's mouth - eventually, people think everything you make is shit.


LOL, 4 different sources, citing spy agency reports, say Clinton had Spy satellite info, CIA informants, and Human sources in her unsecure server she had set up.

You don't dispute anything that is being reported, you just wave it away.

You have childish logic here, and you know it. Every single media source in this country has reported on Clinton's E-mails.
 
LOL, 4 different sources, citing spy agency reports, say Clinton had Spy satellite info, CIA informants, and Human sources

so legit that all the news agencies are picking up on this breaking story.

oh no wait...wait...they aren't. b/c there's nothing fucking there.

you are trying way too hard, b/c you want something to be there so you take any source you think is even remotely legit. but even the shitty shit news hasn't gone that awful, b/c it would ruin their reputation to make such a claim without the proper sources to back it up.

that's just common fucking sense. you can have all the condescending LOLs you want, but the hard truth is you are a fucking hack and you are no better than conspiracy theorists that roam around here calling mass shootings false flag operations, or that the earth is actually flat b/c of a giant international government conspiracy.

the only person w/ childish logic is you, b/c you obviously are not old enough yet to understand how you do things legitimately. you are a product of tabloid social media news, and you don't know how to judge the credibility of your sources yet.
 
so legit that all the news agencies are picking up on this breaking story.

oh no wait...wait...they aren't. b/c there's nothing fucking there.

you are trying way too hard, b/c you want something to be there so you take any source you think is even remotely legit. but even the shitty shit news hasn't gone that awful, b/c it would ruin their reputation to make such a claim without the proper sources to back it up.

that's just common fucking sense. you can have all the condescending LOLs you want, but the hard truth is you are a fucking hack and you are no better than conspiracy theorists that roam around here calling mass shootings false flag operations, or that the earth is actually flat b/c of a giant international government conspiracy.

the only person w/ childish logic is you, b/c you obviously are not old enough yet to understand how you do things legitimately. you are a product of tabloid social media news, and you don't know how to judge the credibility of your sources yet.

Nice fucking strawman, you just switch back and forth between arguments like an idiot guy.

You have nothing to say, you don't dispute anything.

I say over and over what my point is, and you show how intentionally dishonest, or stupid you are in not understanding.

I mean all you have is name calling, conspiracy theorist, idiot, ect.

You don't dispute that Rueters reported spy satellite info, CIA sources, human intelligence, but at the same time its all just a conspiracy theory, and anyone who listens is stupid, and yet again, you don't dispute it, because you can't.
 
I am not a liberal, I am a economic progressive, and social libertarian.

Yahoo, finds stories on topics you clicked on before. I click on Clinton stories, and yahoo finds them for me.
Well stop letting a Yahoo find stories for you, quite likely they won't be reliable .
 
Back
Top