avclub-125c0e943c73bb8a0840ab524fdcbd08--disqus
Lemur
avclub-125c0e943c73bb8a0840ab524fdcbd08--disqus

It really is a race to the bottom, isn't it?

Has he signed on for the new Sharknado movie/are they writing another Sharknado movie specifically for him?

No, I just don't view a "voter engagement campaign" as active politics. I see it as the sort of vanity project someone who is still bitter about the lose engages in half-heartedly.

Not at all. Unless Lynch is on the record saying "I did it to help Hillary", it's still supposition or analysis on your part. And since Clinton lost and she did not actually help Clinton by her actions, it's poor analysis at that.

Well, unless she dropped off the voting rolls, by your argument she never left, you fuckwit.

Unless she TOLD YOU DIRECTLY or you HAVE IT IN PRINT DIRECTLY FROM HER that's why she did it, no. Still your opinion and not a fact. Seriously, did no one cover the difference between facts and opinions in your formal education? You seem to be terribly deficient in this area.

Yeah, no shit. I think I already pointed that out three times, dingus. But hey, you keep worrying about Clinton. It's not like voters have rejected a third term of the Clinton presidency three times now.

Not really. It's a broad-overstatement of what it is she's actually doing. She's not directly engaging in the political process as a candidate. She is creating a PAC or political engagement entity. Two very different things, running a PAC and running for office.

Neither you nor I can speak to her motives. It's YOUR OPINION. Christ, why is this concept so difficult for you to wrap your head around? I'm not saying it's not a valid opinion. And I'm not saying it doesn't have facts to speak to it. But it is still just an opinion.

Nope, NYC's not that lucky.

Receive the occasional grape fruit in the mail … it's the simple things …

Stop confusing your analysis with facts.

No, she did not. She did what she did. She did not intervene on Clinton's behalf. That's your OPINION of what she did. It's not a factual statement of what she did.

Missed where he said "Loretta Lynch was intervening on Clinton's behalf"? Yes, I did. Because it didn't happen. Again, you're confusing your (or rather FNC's opinion) for actual facts.

Stop acting like that's even remotely the same thing. Do you also believe that George Soros is the Great Satan?

"Now we know for a fact …"

She's not running for anything. And she won't run for anything.

She's started a citizen engagement group (essentially, a PAC). She's not running for office.

You forgot The Conjuring: The Revenge.

I keep hoping that cycle got broken when they brought Hextall in from LA.