"Clinton Uranium Deal Looks Dirtier Than Michael Moore At An
All-You-Can-Eat Fudge Bar"

I didn't even read the story. I was laughing to hard.
There was no way the story was going to be better than the
headline


http://conservativehideout.com/2015/...eat-fudge-bar/

On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 12:54:42 AM UTC-4, ChairMan wrote:
"Clinton Uranium Deal Looks Dirtier Than Michael Moore At An
All-You-Can-Eat Fudge Bar"

I didn't even read the story. I was laughing to hard.
There was no way the story was going to be better than the
headline


http://conservativehideout.com/2015/...eat-fudge-bar/

Yes, that's a good one. And to carry the analogy one step further,
Michael Moore would be yelling "There is no evidence that's really
fudge on me. You can't prove it's fudge!"

The whole thing is quite a spectacle. If someone was before a local
zoning board, or the town council for a variance or business contract,
etc, what would a council member with any similar connection to that party
have to do? They would state their conflict of interest and abstain from
involvement with the decision. I would think beyond ethics, it's probably
required by law in many states.

Also, I'd like someone to explain why Senator Menendez is under indictment,
while Hillary isn't for remarkably similar behavior.

On Sat, 2 May 2015 04:45:20 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 12:54:42 AM UTC-4, ChairMan wrote:
"Clinton Uranium Deal Looks Dirtier Than Michael Moore At An
All-You-Can-Eat Fudge Bar"

I didn't even read the story. I was laughing to hard.
There was no way the story was going to be better than the
headline


http://conservativehideout.com/2015/...eat-fudge-bar/

Yes, that's a good one. And to carry the analogy one step further,
Michael Moore would be yelling "There is no evidence that's really
fudge on me. You can't prove it's fudge!"

The whole thing is quite a spectacle. If someone was before a local
zoning board, or the town council for a variance or business contract,
etc, what would a council member with any similar connection to that party
have to do? They would state their conflict of interest and abstain from
involvement with the decision. I would think beyond ethics, it's probably
required by law in many states.

Also, I'd like someone to explain why Senator Menendez is under indictment,
while Hillary isn't for remarkably similar behavior.

You get three guesses and the first two don't count!

Maybe they haven't invented a white pant-suit with black strips?
--
"Woman up, stand your ground, and fight like a girl!" -- Sarah Palin

On 5/2/2015 11:49 AM, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 2 May 2015 04:45:20 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 12:54:42 AM UTC-4, ChairMan wrote:
"Clinton Uranium Deal Looks Dirtier Than Michael Moore At An
All-You-Can-Eat Fudge Bar"

I didn't even read the story. I was laughing to hard.
There was no way the story was going to be better than the
headline


http://conservativehideout.com/2015/...eat-fudge-bar/

Yes, that's a good one. And to carry the analogy one step further,
Michael Moore would be yelling "There is no evidence that's really
fudge on me. You can't prove it's fudge!"

The whole thing is quite a spectacle. If someone was before a local
zoning board, or the town council for a variance or business contract,
etc, what would a council member with any similar connection to that party
have to do? They would state their conflict of interest and abstain from
involvement with the decision. I would think beyond ethics, it's probably
required by law in many states.

Also, I'd like someone to explain why Senator Menendez is under indictment,
while Hillary isn't for remarkably similar behavior.

You get three guesses and the first two don't count!

Maybe they haven't invented a white pant-suit with black strips?


The woman belongs in jail but may end up as leader of the free world.
Only in America.

On Sat, 02 May 2015 13:29:24 -0400, Frank "frank
wrote:


Also, I'd like someone to explain why Senator Menendez is under indictment,
while Hillary isn't for remarkably similar behavior.

You get three guesses and the first two don't count!

Maybe they haven't invented a white pant-suit with black strips?


The woman belongs in jail but may end up as leader of the free world.
Only in America.

You have to consider, she won't go to jail because no reasonable
correctional officer wants to strip search her and inspect orifices.
--
'bout to show me a city slicker how to kick it in the sticks with the critters - Brantley Gilbert

Oren posted for all of us...



On Sat, 02 May 2015 13:29:24 -0400, Frank "frank
wrote:


Also, I'd like someone to explain why Senator Menendez is under indictment,
while Hillary isn't for remarkably similar behavior.

You get three guesses and the first two don't count!

Maybe they haven't invented a white pant-suit with black strips?


The woman belongs in jail but may end up as leader of the free world.
Only in America.

You have to consider, she won't go to jail because no reasonable
correctional officer wants to strip search her and inspect orifices.

Maybe on of Col Jerks "girlfriend" he / shes will don a hazmat suit and do
it. PLEASE, no film at 11.

--
Tekkie *Please post a follow-up*