Clinton Says She Was Wrong to Call Half of Trump Supporters ‘Deplorables’

Please post a citation where anyone running for President said 'half of immigrants are rapists'.....Who said that?

 

More leftist pretend time? Except Trump didn't say this Hillary did. Try joining reality, this pig insulted a large part of America, shes not a leader and never will be, same as Obama. Like Obama she is nothing but an embarrassment to the United States.

 

She's got brass to talk about temperament. She just could not pass it up.

 

The problem is what she said is correct and true.
Half of Trump supporters fall into one of those categories Clinton listed.
Remember America has over 320 million people. So it's easy to see 20 million people fall into one of those categories.

Yea Trump will get around 40 million votes.

So she was correct.

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk

 

I think it was a pretty intelligent move on her part. Demonize trump supporters and the various special interest groups that want her to win will be all "yeah, yeah, yeah! Them trump supporters suck!"

anything to change the conversation from her health, her lies, emails, clinton foundation is a good thing. So she says something that her supporters all agree with, and the media pick it up by changing a subject she's genuinely sick of. Plus, it's not like she said anything that hasn't been said before by her own supporters. And that's who she is losing.

 

She is fueled with Saudi Money and filled with hate. I'm unsurprised that vile within her twisted soul vomited out over and splattered all over her fat cankles.

Bloomberg Tries To Explain Why Allowing 9/11 Victims To Sue Saudis Is Un-American

Given the Obama administration's vehment dissent over The House and The Senate's unequivocal confirmation of a bill allowing 9/11 victims' families to sue Saudi Arabia, and the fact that Hillary and her corrupt foundation are filled with filthy Saudi funding, the mainstream media has been unleashed to change the narrative.

CNN's Wolf Blitzer, with a straight face, claimed the bill could create economic collapse in America; and now Bloomberg's Editorial Board suggest it will "allow anti-American sentiment to flourish," potentially expose state secrets and "potential monetary costs," and "leave the U.S. vulnerable to on the global stage."

Obama has lobbied fiercely against the bill, and has hinted strongly it will veto the measure. The mainstream media has been unleashed to ensure the ignorant public is brainwashed when Obama vetos the bill.

This is what passes for journalism in America today:
~

Sen. Rand Paul’s expression of opposition to a $1.1 billion U.S. arms sale to Saudi Arabia — which has been brutally bombing civilian targets in Yemen using U.S.-made weapons for more than a year now — alarmed CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday afternoon.

Blitzer’s concern: That stopping the sale could result in fewer jobs for arms manufacturers.

“So for you this is a moral issue,” he told Paul during the Kentucky Republican’s appearance on CNN. “Because you know, there’s a lot of jobs at stake. Certainly if a lot of these defense contractors stop selling war planes, other sophisticated equipment to Saudi Arabia, there’s gonna be a significant loss of jobs, of revenue here in the United States. That’s secondary from your standpoint?”

Paul stayed on message. “Well not only is it a moral question, its a Constitutional question,” Paul said. “Our founding fathers very directly and specifically did not give the president the power to go to war. They gave it to Congress. So Congress needs to step up and this is what I’m doing.”

Saudi Arabia began bombing Yemen in March 2015, and has since been responsible for the majority of the 10,000 deaths in the war so far. The U.S.-backed bombing coalition has been accused of intentionally targeting civilians, hospitals, factories, markets, schools, and homes. The situation is so bad that the Red Cross has started donating morgue units to Yemeni hospitals.

The Obama administration has sold more weapons to the Saudis than any other administration, pledging more than $115 billion worth of small arms, tanks, helicopters, missiles, and aircraft.
~
https://theintercept.com/2016/09/09...l-lose-jobs-if-u-s-stops-arming-saudi-arabia/

Who are the Saudis? They’re just one of the most barbaric, inhumane terrorist supporting (and Clinton Supporting) states on planet earth.

Now Bloomberg's Editorial Board explains why anyone who votes for the bill is unpatriotic and if it is allowed to become law, why the entire US economy will come crumbling down!
~

It was hardly a surprise that the House unanimously passed a bill supported by the families of Sept. 11 victims just before the 15th anniversary of the attack. Unfortunately, law is more likely to make the U.S. vulnerable to unlimited lawsuits by its enemies. President Barack Obama should stick to his promise to reject it, and ideally Congress will come to its senses and not try to override the veto.

While the bill doesn’t mention any nation specifically, its purpose is clearly to allow U.S. citizens to sue Saudi Arabia for its alleged involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. The Saudis have long been sponsors of extremist Islam, but evidence tying them to actual perpetrators of the 2001 attacks is circumstantial at best. The release of the so-called “28 pages” from the congressional investigation of Sept. 11 disappointed those certain it contained proof of Saudi involvement.

It’s not even clear that the act would be much help in any lawsuits: It contains a provision giving the executive branch the power to stay any proceeding so long as it “is engaged in good faith discussions with the foreign state defendant concerning the resolution of the claims against the foreign state.”

It is abundantly clear, by contrast, that the bill would undermine the longstanding principle of sovereign immunity, under which such disputes are resolved between nations, not in courts. The unraveling of this doctrine makes any nation vulnerable to suits by the citizens of another -- and no state will be more vulnerable than the U.S.

If this principle is abandoned, it’s a good bet that anti-American lawsuits will flourish not just in hostile states like Iran -- where, in fact, the U.S. has been found guilty many times in judgments not enforceable under sovereign immunity -- but almost certainly in Pakistan, Syria, Yemen and other countries where U.S. counter-terrorism efforts have mistakenly killed civilians. Moreover, in addition to the potential monetary costs, parties in civil suits are often given wide powers of discovery, potentially allowing them access to state secrets.

The Sept. 11 victims and their families deserve everlasting support and compassion, and they are admirable in their dogged pursuit of justice. But members of Congress might also want to consider the sort of “justice” this bill would leave the U.S. vulnerable to on the global stage.
~
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-09/u-s-could-pay-a-high-price-for-suing-the-saudis

Will Obama veto a bill that every single member of Congress voted for? How will the Saudis, generous donors of the Clinton Foundation respond if the law goes into effect?

The Saudi Crown Prince already admitted that Saudi Arabia has funded 20% of Hillary's presidential campaign.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...esidential-campaign-saudi-crown-prince-claims

What will Saudi vengeance look like if generous Clinton donor's think they were not be obeyed?

Maybe this is why Hillary has been so unstable lately?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...y-allowing-911-victims-sue-saudis-un-american

 

The framers would be disappointed to know a president of the United States would veto a law, any law because of the potential actions of a foreign nation. When the Barbary wars came to our shores, Thomas Jefferson took decisive action to protect the country. We cannot expect that patriotism from the Democratic Party today.

 

that is something Trump would never do, apologize for something he said that offended some people

 

Donald Trump has in the past said much worse than "half". He implied that nearly all of them are rapists, "supposing" that some are good people.

 

Trump was referring to illegal aliens not immigrants.

- - - Updated - - -

Like I explained Trump is not a career politician so he gets a pass. Hillary is a seasoned politician so she made a really bad move. I know that is a double standard but it is the situation.

 

she wasn't wrong, she was incorrect.

its more like 75%

 

of course Trump gets a pass, Republicans will always come up with excuses to give their guy a pass

they are the do as we say not as we do party

.

 

Step out of your partisan world for a sec and take an honest look. Hillary's "basket of deplorables" comment is worse than Romney's "binders full of women". Hillary screwed up politically. Just admit it already.

 

Ahh, no quote, no citation...Just a bunch of B.S.

 

she mad a mistake in using the word half..... the rest was true

 

Beak, she has a beak.

- - - Updated - - -

You are right, she is mad, a mistake, thinking everyone is Stupid.

 

Hillary tweeted last week, “The last thing we need is a president who brings more name-calling and temper tantrums to Washington.”

To paraphrase sage philosopher George Constanza, a Hillary divided against herself cannot stand!

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/243558/

 

Pot, meet kettle.

 

So? Romney made a mistake with 47%, how did that work out?

 

If by that, you're referring to Hillary Clinton, just be aware that I am not a Clinton supporter either. But I'd have to agree that Clinton is a much better pick than Trump. If Clinton is elected, you'll get some combination of the leadership that the US had under Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. With Donald Trump, America becomes a train wreck waiting to happen. Bernie Sanders is out of the race and it's too late for him. Minimize the damage to America by choosing someone who's at least half-decent for the role of president, namely Hillary Clinton.

 

Like that old joke goes, "Who do you believe, me or your lyin' eyes."

 

No, that's a Trump move.

Actually, Trump would deny it even if there was video, and his bobble headed fans would give him a pass, just as they do on every other aspect of his lack of character, integrity, civility or competence.

 

Would it make you feel better if he blamed it on an Internet video?

 

You dont remember the Hilary Vs Obama primaries then...

 

This is hilarious coming from a Clintoncrat.