Farewell Reck. ELE bet settled.

[TheGreatYacht]

These WikiLeaks have shown nothing so far tbh

Havent seen something so vanilla since Ben Carson ran for president

[TheSanityAnnex]

Your lack of understanding is scary.

You're angling and you're doing it wrong. I said directly on Hillary. What's so difficult to understand?

how did wikileaks get this information? Was it lifted from John Podesta or Hillary?

Answer the questions and then ask yourself if that meets the terms agreed.

"directly on Hillary"

yes. Assange did.


Anything else you say is irrelevant welcher.

[Splits]

o'keefe said he's also got a Hillary Clinton saying niggger video coming out Monday. He's kept his word up until now.

https://mobile.twitter.com/0HOUR1__/...10776733626368

Conspiracy theory bookmarked.

[Reck]

"directly on Hillary"

yes. Assange did.


Anything else you say is irrelevant welcher.

Ay ay ay.

Is that why you tried to stick me with that bull Hillary non-leaked leaked transcripts that weren't even that? After all, that's how you started your ty premature thread after all.

You're at the point where your swinging all over the place to get me to leave.

Oh yeah..

how did wikileaks get this information? Was it lifted from John Podesta or Hillary?

[Reck]

Conspiracy theory bookmarked.

This got balls. Here he is calling me stupid and he posts some far reaching conspiracy .

What a whack job.

[Winehole23]

I don't gaf about a bet but the wiki leaks thus far have been a total dud and everyone knows it.

The donation from Qatar to the Clinton Foundation strained propriety to say the least. Also notable for me were her statements about a hemispheric common market with open borders, having private and public stances on policy, and Donna Brazile being fed questions at primary debates.

In any normal election cycle, these might be effective points of attack. Against a self-immolating Donald Trump, few people seem to be paying attention.

[Th'Pusher]

The donation from Qatar to the Clinton Foundation strained propriety to say the least. Also notable for me were her statements about a hemispheric common market with open borders, having private and public stances on policy, and Donna Brazile being fed questions at primary debates.

In any normal election cycle, these might be effective points of attack. Against a self-immolating Donald Trump, few people seem to be paying attention.

That's fair. I still don't think any of these revelations are anywhere near as devastating as Romney's 47% comment...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The donation from Qatar to the Clinton Foundation strained propriety to say the least. Also notable for me were her statements about a hemispheric common market with open borders, having private and public stances on policy, and Donna Brazile being fed questions at primary debates.

In any normal election cycle, these might be effective points of attack. Against a self-immolating Donald Trump, few people seem to be paying attention.

People haven't cared about policy since Willie Horton.

[hater]

Are you stupid or something?

This is from John Podesta and there is nothing in there that is grabbing. It's an email between two people.

What don't you understand about direct?

Assange has to have imformation partaining to Hillary..from Hillary.

Wreck

bye bye got




WikiLeaks releases transcripts of Clinton Goldman Sachs speeches

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/15/politi...hes/index.html

[pgardn]

These WikiLeaks have shown nothing so far tbh

Havent seen something so vanilla since Ben Carson ran for president

We apparently now have some of the talks Hillary gave to Goldman-Sachs.
Could be interesting.

But it would take a nuke to change the obvious results.

Edit oops:

Hateraide strikes first.

So what did they say hater? Salient info, tell us what it means?
And... You are now taking info from the mouthpiece of the CIA? Why now?

You actually get valid news from CNN?
...

[Will Hunting]

I have firsthand knowledge of what she said during those Goldman speeches and those transcripts don't look complete, some of the stuff she said is a lot more damning. Specifically about how Wall Street was unfairly blamed for the financial crisis.

[Reck]

Wreck

bye bye got




WikiLeaks releases transcripts of Clinton Goldman Sachs speeches

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/15/politi...hes/index.html

Unverified, unaunthenticated and incomplete?

[DMC]

Reck has no intention of honoring a bet. He's going to call every revelation a DNC hack. He's going to deny it's pertaining to Hillary as he's moved the goal posts from "directly on Hillary" to "directly from Hillary". If someone forwards your email of you saying confidential things, giving your opinion on issues you want kept on the DL, then the recipient has something directly on you. It doesn't have to be about you giving an opinion of yourself. It can be anything from you saying women shouldn't be allowed to vote to saying Saudi Arabia is back door financing ISIL.

[DMC]

We apparently now have some of the talks Hillary gave to Goldman-Sachs.
Could be interesting.

But it would take a nuke to change the obvious results.

Edit oops:

Hateraide strikes first.

So what did they say hater? Salient info, tell us what it means?
And... You are now taking info from the mouthpiece of the CIA? Why now?

You actually get valid news from CNN?
...

Yeah you can't rely on CNN. They will pretend to run the story then show a video bashing Trump beneath the headlines, and then have 2 or 3 positive spin articles related to their cherry picked items from the emails.

[Reck]

Reck has no intention of honoring a bet. He's going to call every revelation a DNC hack. He's going to deny it's pertaining to Hillary as he's moved the goal posts from "directly on Hillary" to "directly from Hillary". If someone forwards your email of you saying confidential things, giving your opinion on issues you want kept on the DL, then the recipient has something directly on you. It doesn't have to be about you giving an opinion of yourself. It can be anything from you saying women shouldn't be allowed to vote to saying Saudi Arabia is back door financing ISIL.

I have always maintained the Directly on Hillary.

The only reason wikileaks has had imformation on Hillary is because of John Podesta. These emails were lifted from one of her people. Fact.

[hater]

I have always maintained the Directly on Hillary.

The only reason wikileaks has had imformation on Hillary is because of John Podesta. These emails were lifted from one of her people. Fact.

They just released her leaked speeches moron. If thats not direct to you then u are a biggest dumbo than previously thought

[Reck]

They just released her leaked speeches moron. If thats not direct to you then u are a biggest dumbo than previously thought

First of all, it's unverified information gotten through a third party.

[Will Hunting]

I have always maintained the Directly on Hillary.

The only reason wikileaks has had imformation on Hillary is because of John Podesta. These emails were lifted from one of her people. Fact.

So you're admitting they have direct information on Hilary?

[Reck]

So you're admitting they have direct information on Hilary?

If they did, certainly they wouldn't need a middle man, would they?

[DMC]

So you're admitting they have direct information on Hilary?

What's what I saw as well.

It doesn't matter how they got it. What matters is that they released it.

Don't ELE bet if you have no intention of leaving, and he had none.

[DMC]

If they did, certainly they wouldn't need a middle man, would they?

Says who? Don't you think the Trump tape came from someone besides Trump?

[Will Hunting]

If they did, certainly they wouldn't need a middle man, would they?

Who's they? What middleman do they need?

[DMC]

I have always maintained the Directly on Hillary.

The only reason wikileaks has had imformation on Hillary is because of John Podesta. These emails were lifted from one of her people. Fact.

You're arguing the "directly from" angle though, thus the "middle man" comment. Her speech is on her, just as her comments regarding military tactics and strategic dealings with other ME nations is on her. Just because it was on Podesta's computer doesn't mean it's not on Hillary. , it would be on TSA's computer if he copied the link, would he be the next middle man or does TSA need to contact Hillary and have Hillary contact you? Stop being a got.

[Reck]

What's what I saw as well.

It doesn't matter how they got it. What matters is that they released it.

Don't ELE bet if you have no intention of leaving, and he had none.

It matters when the point of the bet was that infomation needed to come directly out of Hillary. If Podesta doesn't get hacked=no emails.

[DMC]

It matters when the point of the bet was that infomation needed to come directly out of Hillary. If Podesta doesn't get hacked=no emails.

Here's you moving the goalposts from "on Hillary' to "from Hillary" again. Podesta's email was just a thread, like this one. What Reck says in this thread was said by Reck, even if I quote it. It doesn't mean it didn't come from you.

You've tried the "unverified" angle (if it's not qualified as "on Hillary", why does it matter?), the "middle man" angle, and now the "from" instead of "on" angle. You're still losing.