Donald Trump
- Thread starter MrStickyScissors
- Start date
- Status
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
Have you ever had a test done to see who your daddy is? TRUMP!
Cezarkush
Well-Known Member
Doesn't work like your self.
Ghostriding it off a cliff is probably the best thing he can do, for it and himself.
HEKTOS
Well-Known Member
You and CK need to jump in front of a fast moving train.
see4
Well-Known Member
It's a nationally recognized poll, you fucking moron. It's not what UB thinks, it's a national recognized poll. Stop being so fucking stupid. Please.
see4
Well-Known Member
President Bush bought that idea. Bought a prosperous country and turned it to shit. Thank god Obama was there to make it prosperous again. Hopefully we don't get another shit stain to turn it to shit again.
see4
Well-Known Member
You are a fucking child. And your tiny dick is tiny. You should strongly consider hanging yourself.
8 posts in a row? Really dude? Are you that butthurt? Jeeeesus.
Ace Yonder
Well-Known Member
Just found this article, pretty much the best thing I've read in a little while.
"Donald Trump's Greatest Self Contradictions"
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869
"Donald Trump's Greatest Self Contradictions"
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-contradictions-213869
coloradolivin
Well-Known Member
http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/
OUCH. you know you got destroyed when even snopes is calling you out on your bullshit. didn't bother to do any fact checking chesus?
coloradolivin
Well-Known Member
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
What percentage of douche bags participated in this poll??
I always hear about polls just never been asked to take one.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
You said snopes was innacurate before
SpiderDude
Well-Known Member
( RICO ) ~ 2016 ( Book It, bye bye hillary )
New York Times " Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal "
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=1
At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One. Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton. As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well. Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. The path to a Russian acquisition of American uranium deposits began in 2005 in Kazakhstan, where the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra orchestrated his first big uranium deal, with Mr. Clinton at his side.
The two men had flown aboard Mr. Giustra’s private jet to Almaty, Kazakhstan, where they dined with the authoritarian president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Mr. Clinton handed the Kazakh president a propaganda coup when he expressed support for Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid to head an international elections monitoring group, undercutting American foreign policy and criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, his wife, then a senator.
Within days of the visit, Mr. Giustra’s fledgling company, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a preliminary deal giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by the state-run uranium agency Kazatomprom. If the Kazakh deal was a major victory, UrAsia did not wait long before resuming the hunt. In 2007, it merged with Uranium One, a South African company with assets in Africa and Australia, in what was described as a $3.5 billion transaction. The new company, which kept the Uranium One name, was controlled by UrAsia investors including Ian Telfer, a Canadian who became chairman. Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Giustra, whose personal stake in the deal was estimated at about $45 million, said he sold his stake in 2007. Soon, Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States. In April 2007, it announced the purchase of a uranium mill in Utah and more than 38,000 acres of uranium exploration properties in four Western states, followed quickly by the acquisition of the Energy Metals Corporation and its uranium holdings in Wyoming, Texas and Utah. That deal made clear that Uranium One was intent on becoming “a powerhouse in the United States uranium sector with the potential to become the domestic supplier of choice for U.S. utilities,” the company declared. His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.
The Clinton campaign left it to the foundation to reply to questions about the Fernwood donations; the foundation did not provide a response.
Mr. Telfer’s undisclosed donations came in addition to between $1.3 million and $5.6 million in contributions, which were reported, from a constellation of people with ties to Uranium One or UrAsia, the company that originally acquired Uranium One’s most valuable asset: the Kazakh mines. Without those assets, the Russians would have had no interest in the deal: “It wasn’t the goal to buy the Wyoming mines. The goal was to acquire the Kazakh assets, which are very good,” Mr. Novikov, the Rosatom spokesman, said in an interview. Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One. The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences.
New York Times " Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal "
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=1
At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One. Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton. As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well. Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. The path to a Russian acquisition of American uranium deposits began in 2005 in Kazakhstan, where the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra orchestrated his first big uranium deal, with Mr. Clinton at his side.
The two men had flown aboard Mr. Giustra’s private jet to Almaty, Kazakhstan, where they dined with the authoritarian president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Mr. Clinton handed the Kazakh president a propaganda coup when he expressed support for Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid to head an international elections monitoring group, undercutting American foreign policy and criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, his wife, then a senator.
Within days of the visit, Mr. Giustra’s fledgling company, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a preliminary deal giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by the state-run uranium agency Kazatomprom. If the Kazakh deal was a major victory, UrAsia did not wait long before resuming the hunt. In 2007, it merged with Uranium One, a South African company with assets in Africa and Australia, in what was described as a $3.5 billion transaction. The new company, which kept the Uranium One name, was controlled by UrAsia investors including Ian Telfer, a Canadian who became chairman. Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Giustra, whose personal stake in the deal was estimated at about $45 million, said he sold his stake in 2007. Soon, Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States. In April 2007, it announced the purchase of a uranium mill in Utah and more than 38,000 acres of uranium exploration properties in four Western states, followed quickly by the acquisition of the Energy Metals Corporation and its uranium holdings in Wyoming, Texas and Utah. That deal made clear that Uranium One was intent on becoming “a powerhouse in the United States uranium sector with the potential to become the domestic supplier of choice for U.S. utilities,” the company declared. His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.
The Clinton campaign left it to the foundation to reply to questions about the Fernwood donations; the foundation did not provide a response.
Mr. Telfer’s undisclosed donations came in addition to between $1.3 million and $5.6 million in contributions, which were reported, from a constellation of people with ties to Uranium One or UrAsia, the company that originally acquired Uranium One’s most valuable asset: the Kazakh mines. Without those assets, the Russians would have had no interest in the deal: “It wasn’t the goal to buy the Wyoming mines. The goal was to acquire the Kazakh assets, which are very good,” Mr. Novikov, the Rosatom spokesman, said in an interview. Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One. The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences.
Last edited:
SpiderDude
Well-Known Member
The Huffington Post has removed an article on its website Sunday, claiming that the FBI plans to indict Hillary Clinton on federal racketeering charges.
As Breitbart first reported, HuffPo freelance contributor Frank Huguenard, a scientist and public speaker, posted an article on the site’s blog entitled "Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges." Huguenard wrote:
" Activity considered to be racketeering may include bribery, counterfeiting, money laundering, embezzlement, illegal gambling, kidnapping, murder, drug trafficking, slavery, and a host of other nefarious business practices.
James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic. "
If accurate, this could be a terminal hit to Hillary's presidential chances, and it is obvious why a left-leaning medium, and audience, would be disturbed by its content.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-31/huffington-post-removes-article-claiming-hillary-will-be-indicted-federal-racketeeri
SpiderDude
Well-Known Member
Go ahead and imagine what Hillary Clinton might have told Wall Street executives behind closed doors during her big-bucks days on the speaking circuit.
Clinton was in the speechmaking business for about two years. Business was good, as it has been for her husband, former President Bill Clinton. He has earned more than $100 million on the lecture circuit since leaving office, The Washington Post reported in 2014. Hillary Clinton earned $21.7 million from about 100 speaking engagements after her tenure as secretary of state, according to The Wall Street Journal.
She spoke to many business groups. Of all the paid gigs, one trio garners most of the attention: three appearances she made at Goldman Sachs client conferences, for which the firm paid her a reported $675,000. What did Clinton tell Goldman Sachs? Well, let's assume the firm didn't pay $225,000 per session to get a dressing-down. Politico quoted one attendee saying Clinton praised the firm for its role in the economy: "It's so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director."
Clinton has been dogged by Sanders over the Wall Street connection because of the theme central to his campaign: that he's for the little guy and gal, while she stands with the big money boys and girls who nearly destroyed the economy.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-86955412/
Clinton was in the speechmaking business for about two years. Business was good, as it has been for her husband, former President Bill Clinton. He has earned more than $100 million on the lecture circuit since leaving office, The Washington Post reported in 2014. Hillary Clinton earned $21.7 million from about 100 speaking engagements after her tenure as secretary of state, according to The Wall Street Journal.
She spoke to many business groups. Of all the paid gigs, one trio garners most of the attention: three appearances she made at Goldman Sachs client conferences, for which the firm paid her a reported $675,000. What did Clinton tell Goldman Sachs? Well, let's assume the firm didn't pay $225,000 per session to get a dressing-down. Politico quoted one attendee saying Clinton praised the firm for its role in the economy: "It's so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director."
Clinton has been dogged by Sanders over the Wall Street connection because of the theme central to his campaign: that he's for the little guy and gal, while she stands with the big money boys and girls who nearly destroyed the economy.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-86955412/
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
Didn't you mention along with poopy pants and the poll people that Trump wouldn't win the primary? And Now the same people that think they are smart fuckers don't look to fucking smart to me. Good luck with the crooked bitch. TRUMP!
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
TRUMP PRESS CONFERENCE ALERT! TRUMP!
http://rsbn.tv/live-stream-donald-trump-holds-press-conference-at-trump-tower/
http://rsbn.tv/live-stream-donald-trump-holds-press-conference-at-trump-tower/
londonfog
Well-Known Member
How did you decide whether to call your sperm donor "Dad" or "Uncle" ? How many brothers did your mother have anyway ?
see4
Well-Known Member
Cool story bro.
- Status