[quote=njtosd]
She’s not squeaky clean. She’s a scrapper and frankly, does have a lot of “stamina.” But that doesn’t make her a girl scout. In my opinion, the cattle futures trading issue was HIGHLY unlikely to have been legit. She made the equivalent of $330,000 in 2016 dollars in *10 months* on a $3000 (in 2016 dollars) investment. Many of the investment laws and regs were not scrupulously followed, although that was not terribly unusual at the time. From wikipedia: “The editor of the Journal of Futures Markets said in April 1994, “This is like buying ice skates one day and entering the Olympics a day later. She took some extraordinary risks.”
You seem to have an emotional attachment to Hillary that keeps you from seeing her “warts and all” as the saying goes. There are no politicians out there that are worth quoting Elton John over. They have their goals, and we vote for the ones whose goals come closest to ours. But that doesn’t make any of them Mother Theresa.[/quote]
It’s funny, I don’t actually have any kind of emotional attachment to her. 18 months ago I was hoping it would be almost anyone but her. Almost any Dem would have supported the political issues I care about most. She adapted her platform sufficiently to become acceptable to me.
The cattle futures thing was a long time ago. She made no claims that she did it by herself, she was getting advice from a professional. It wasn’t overnight, it was 10 months and dozens and dozens of trades. The only accusations of wrong doing was that profitable trades were made and then subsequently put into her account. Except there was no evidence this ever happened, and quite a bit of evidence that in some of her most profitable trades, it couldn’t have happened. And that she had some margin concessions that weren’t given to everyone. Investigations found no wrongdoing. Like every single investigation into her and her husband, no finding of wrongdoing, with the exception of a blow job.
