• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Hillary's 'there was no quid pro quo' a good defense?

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Asking someone to substantiate his charges of wrongdoing is not "quibbling." It seems the safest assumption is that your claims are without substance.
You may proclaim victory now, saving me the
trouble of delaying it by trying to converse
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
With Hillary, I think you would probably get another person like Obama who won't raise a finger against Planned Parenthood sweeping sex trafficking and statutory rape under the rug, But I would say the ethical imeritive is the other way but don't be surprised if Hillary can't manage her self made scandals and pulls out of the election eventually.

After all unborn people are made in the image of God and many abortion procedures subject them to inhuman pain
And of course she opposes choise in education regarding curiculems discussing criticisms of origins theories like evolution no matter how poor and unscientific they are... but she is a lawyer not a scientist

The law of Moses comes to mind: 'you shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk'
clearly an outstanding call to be pro life, a baby should not be brought to harm in what is meant to bring it nuture

I think the Donald is the lesser bad choice
 
Last edited:

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
I'm wondering if anyone else noticed that part of the FBI's defence of Hillary not recalling instructions on how to propperly secure information was a blot clot/brain infury related to her fall post Begazi... not sure that someon who can't remmember briefings due to a brain injury is the best choice for president It is at least the sort of issue that should be set before the people and not concealed.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN11829I
 

esmith

Veteran Member
I'm wondering if anyone else noticed that part of the FBI's defence of Hillary not recalling instructions on how to propperly secure information was a blot clot/brain infury related to her fall post Begazi... not sure that someon who can't remmember briefings due to a brain injury is the best choice for president It is at least the sort of issue that should be set before the people and not concealed.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN11829I
Hillary could come out and admit that everything she has been saying about emails, Clinton Foundation, Benghazi have all been fabrications brought on by stress and her supporters would defend her to the death.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Hillary could come out and admit that everything she has been saying about emails, Clinton Foundation, Benghazi have all been fabrications brought on by stress and her supporters would defend her to the death.
Are you suggesting that Hillary could shoot someone in the middle of 5th avenue and not lose any voters?
 
Top