It's funny, in a way ...

[NurseJackie]

... that they're STILL posting photos of Hillary and Donald (at a wedding?) and Hillary and Henry Kissinger (at some event?)

Everyone's seen them, and obviously none of these photos had the desired effect ... yet they continue to post them as if it's some damning evidence that's just been discovered. Interesting how they crow about it as if it's some equivalent of Romney's "47% moment".

Won't it be great when all this is over and when it will be safe to come out of our safe-room?

[tonyt53]

1. They really do not have anything else.

[TwilightZone]

2. There's one guy who posts the same video in nearly every post he makes, regardless of the topic.

If it didn't work the first 500 times, maybe it'll work the 501st?

[puffy socks]

5. Lol!

And,
how many times has the ultra edited, devoid of any history video, of "Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight" been posted on here?

[NurseJackie]

8. That's a classic!

[Squinch]

9. I actually did watch that one once. I didn't really see any lies in it. But they were so proud of

it, I didn't want to break their bubble.

[puffy socks]

12. Honestly I've only seen the first couple of minutes and I'd had enough of the baloney

And you're right the "lies" aren't even lies.

Anderson Cooper in the very first scene asks a question that covers so much ground she couldn't possibly have enough time in a debate setting to explain for each category.
Maybe she just needs to remind him that intelligent people change positions as new information becomes available or as they see something from a different perspective due to the people and places you've experienced.

I'm glad she doesn't just stay the course regardless of new discoveries, that's the whole point of having experience and using the information wisely, is it not?

[caquillo]

3. Today

A BernieBro posted this supposedly damning video:

Hillary Clinton wears $12K Armani jacket for income inequality...
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000523764&play=1

Seriously? A wealthy woman constantly in the glare of the public spotlight owns some expensive threads. That's what you're grasping at when we're about to cross the finish line in this primary?

And shame on CNBC for perpetrating it.

[NurseJackie]

4. She's rich! Rich-rich-rich! Good for her!

She's earned it. She deserves it. She also pays her fair share of taxes, she gives more to charities, and she's accomplished much more than any other candidate seeking the presidency.

Edit: Never mind about my embedded video advice. I see now that it's not a youtube video.

[puffy socks]

13. Right I'm tired of the jealousy over her earned income

and the fallacy that wealthy people can't fight for the rights of the middle class and poor. Then, hilariously, they point to FDR and Kennedy as great examples of Democrats who have fought for the middle class!

It just kills me!

[charlyvi]

6. I wonder what they would have done with FDR

Filthy rich, yet the New Deal they are so fond of touting was fashioned by FDR. Wealth doesn't mean squat; it's the person inside that matters.

[puffy socks]

14. lol holy cow, I should have read your post before I posted!

you my friend, are brilliant! just brilliant!

[LoveMyCali]

10. Are these the same people

who were mocking her for wearing a multi-colored jacket not long ago? They need to make up their minds, should she be going for high fashion or not so much?

[spooky3]

11. That's rich. CNBC is the channel that promotes capitalism

Above all. Why should a famous person's wearing designer clothes have to do with anything, especially if s/he has not condemned others for spending their own money as they wish?

Watch the panel on Shark Tank talking about their custom suits sometime.

[Walk away]

7. It get's their blood up. Otherwise, they gave themselves heart & soul to a cranky loser.

They have to keep getting that high they got from (to put it mildly) total allegiance to an Emperor Wearing No Clothes!

&list=RD0n3OepDn5GU#t=0