You're (intentionally, I think) missing my point. 

 If he genuinely thought at the time that she was emboldening terrorists as 
secretary of state, then complimenting her on doing a great job was putting 
"good business practice" above the safety and well-being of the American 
people. Has nothing to do with what she might or might not have done in 
response.
 

 Of course, he could be lying today when he says that's what she was doing. He 
may not believe that at all.
 

 As to the email situation, once again you're not telling the straight story. 
If somebody had sent her server to the Russians or the Chinese or whoever, they 
would have had less information than they could have found in the New York 
Times. It's been a great big nothingburger from the word go.
 

 

 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
 So she would have done things differently had he been critical?
  No, he was paying a complement, whether it was sincere or not, to keep in 
good favor of someone who could affect his business opportunities.

 That's just a good business practice. People pat Obama on the back all the 
time that really hate his guts, just to stay on his good side.
 But you want a president that is irresponsible with classified information, 
deletes 33, 000 e-mails that had been subpoenaed by congress and lies about it.
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump
 
 
   So he cared more about his business interests than he did about the safety 
and well-being of the American people, right?
 

 And that's what we want in a president?
 

 

 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
 He's now saying that when she was secretary of state, she was so awful at her 
job that the terrorists were emboldened. So back when he was, as you say, 
blowing smoke up her ass, he was doing so and saying she was doing a great job 
even though he really believed she was emboldening terrorists?
 

  Yes, exactly!  He wasn't in politics. He was a businessman doing business. He 
does the same with Putin.


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Nope, not a liar, not a crook. If you had any ability to think critically, 
you'd realize that all the various stories of her supposed malfeasance are only 
insinuations. They've never come up with any smoking guns, ever, from the Rose 
Law Firm and Whitewater all the way through Benghazi and the emails and the 
Clinton Foundation.
 

 With Trump, OTOH, there's reams and reams of documentary evidence of his lying 
and cheating.
 

 Yes, Trump did make a big (for him) donation to the Clinton Foundation--more 
than $100,000.
 

 
 

 Oooooooopsie...
 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 Yeah... She's a liar and a crook. She actually makes Nixon look like a saint.
 Trump blew smoke up every politicians ass that he wanted something from. 
Wonder if he made any donations to The Clinton Foundation.

 He knows the games politicians play.
 


 From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:41 PM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Hillary is not a liar or a crook. Trump is both.
 

 It's hard to believe the amount of utter horse manure the right wing has 
dumped on Hillary. Even harder to believe the chumps swallow it right down and 
smack their lips.
 

 You're aware that when Hillary was secretary of state, Trump praised her 
repeatedly, right? Said she was doing a terrific job.
 

 

 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 
 Pretty close feste37. The fact is that about 66% of the country believes and 
has believed for years now, that the country is headed in the wrong direction. 
Hillary is a continuation of the current direction the country is headed in.
 Evangelicals will vote for Trump *not* because he's a man and that  women 
should be submissive to men but because Hillary is another leftist liberal, a 
liar and a crook. She's been in government, public service, for nearly thirty 
years and what has she accomplished? The *reset Button* stopped a missile 
defense shield for Europe,got Georgia invaded, and the Crimea taken from the 
Ukraine and other parts of the Ukraine were lost to the Russians as well as 
well as Russian involvement in protecting Assad from Obama's *red line*. She 
threw Mubarak under the bus, allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control 
of Egypt, increasing it's involvement in Radical Terrorism. Libya was a 
disaster and now a den of vipers. Weapons given to rebels now associated with 
ISIS. Lost the fragile peace in Iraq and now we have the biggest surge in 
refugees the world has seen poring into Europe and she wants to invite 600,000 
of them to live here.... maybe even more, along with 11+million(probably closer 
to 30 million) Illegals from south of the border given legal status along with 
all the rights of citizens.
 She is a proponent of the New World Order hoping to please the rest of the 
world . 
 Trump is a more of a nationalist, protecting our own interests first. 
Evangelicals are not under the illusion that Trump is any kind of saint. They 
just know that we, as a nation, we are at a fork in the road and going down the 
one we are on right now is unacceptable. Nothing Trump can say can compare to 
Hillary's record of failure.


 From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:33 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The case against Donald Trump

 
   Obviously, Trump cannot win a debate against Hillary. He has neither the 
knowledge nor experience. But here is what will happen: Hillary will win the 
debate but Trump—surprise, surprise—will continue his uptick in the polls. Not 
by much, but it will be there. There will also be a growth in the number of 
"secret Trumpists," that is, people who plan to vote for Trump but will not 
admit it. This could give Trump a bigger margin of victory on Election Day. 
Ultimately, America will prefer a man to a woman. That's what it comes down to, 
I think. The evangelicals in particular will vote for Trump, not because they 
think he is a shining example of anything they profess to admire, but because 
St. Paul thinks that men should rule over women. 

As you can see, my Trump Anxiety is growing by the day. This is a virus that is 
affecting liberals all over the country, and it is contagious. I was just on 
the phone to a friend in another small town in Iowa (not Fairfield) and 
explained my beliefs about how the election would turn out. Now she has Trump 
Anxiety too. It's contagious! Not only that, it may well be long-lasting -- it 
could be four years or even eight before we get over it! 



 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote :

 (Only three presidential debates, Ollie.)
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

 The article shared has in it the further seeds of Trump's destruction - He has 
nothing to substantiate, or further define himself, for the upcoming debates. 
He doesn't even want to prepare for them, believing that the "terrible twos" 
OCD act that worked so well in the Primaries will see him through again. Should 
make a grand incoherent ranting fool of himself, and Clinton probably has a few 
baited hooks with which to further stump the Trump. 

By the fourth debate he will be shouting himself hoarse that the debates are 
rigged, but with numbers plummeting, no one will be listening. Believing the 
blizzard of BS and his patient army of ass-kissers, he is seriously 
underestimating Clinton's knowledge and experience, and her ability to clearly 
call out his absolute lack of both, on stage. Can't wait, and pass the popcorn. 
:-)
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote :

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :

 Well written, and factual.

http://theweek.com/articles/648712/case-against-donald-trump 
http://theweek.com/articles/648712/case-against-donald-trump
 

 Very much worth the read. I know/realize all this and more - the man is a 
complete menace to all decency and what we hold dear in this country, in our 
lives. What is maddening is when you get these idiot radicals blowing up things 
in the US or abroad and it becomes instant fodder for Trump to spew more of his 
"I told you so" and "Only I can keep you safe from the Muslim threat". This is 
not good timing and I curse these terrorist imbeciles every time they do 
something because it only furthers Trumps rhetoric in the eyes of the gullible, 
shallow-thinking supporters he seems to draw to himself.










 


 















 


 














 















 


 











Reply via email to