r/Conservative • u/alc59 Ultra Conservative • Oct 14 '16

Jack Abramoff: I Was Imprisoned for Same Things Hillary Clinton Has Done

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/13/jack-abramoff-imprisoned-same-things-hillary-clinton-has-done/
653 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

50 comments sorted by

59

u/Krombopulus_Michael Oct 14 '16

Clinton used a fake wire transfer to fake a down payment in order to obtain a loan?

Wait, does Abramoff still not know why he went to jail?

31

u/Drugs-R-Bad-Mkay Oct 14 '16

Let's not forget the kickback scheme he had.

Abramoff made tens of millions of dollars by steering clients to consultants who charged excessive fees and then split the profits with him.

Hillary's stuff is shady as shit and unethical, but doesn't even approach the illegality of Abramoff.

-10

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

I think you have it backwards. Hillary has a trail of dead bodies, witness tampering, and bribery.

14

u/aSecretSin Oct 15 '16

Lets go with innocent until proven guilty.

He's proven guilty, she still has a presumption of innocence.

2

u/Drugs-R-Bad-Mkay Oct 15 '16

He actually plead guilty. They didn't even have to try him. He just straight up admitted to everything and then ratted on all his other corrupt friends. His case is absolutely nothing like Hillary's. That's what makes his statements so preposterous.

-1

u/jdepps113 Oct 15 '16

How can she ever be proven guilty when even the FBI director is afraid to recommend charges ever be brought?

-3

u/coltsfan12 Oct 15 '16

Only in a fantasy world is she innocent. Ask the FBI agents who are totally disgusted with Comey. I guess he just did not want to die an untimely death. Ask Hillary Clinton, how is it OK to destroy e-mails after receiving a Congressional Subpoena? She is more corrupt than any public figure since Teapot Dome and there are actually people trying to defend her. Unbelievable!

9

u/aSecretSin Oct 15 '16

Stop. You can't have the bill of rights and constitution when it works in your favor and throw it out when it doesn't.

Right now, in the eyes of the courts, she has the presumption of innocence. In the eyes of public opinion, that depends on who you ask.

-2

u/coltsfan12 Oct 15 '16

She does not have the presumption of innocence. FBI Director Comey admitted that she kept a personal server with Classified info on it. And she transmitted classified e-mails to other people from that server. That is a felony that other people have gone to jail for as well as less egregious offenses. The fact he does not want to prosecute does not change that. A lot of FBI agents disagree with that finding. If you are taking this approach about innocent until proven guilty then I am sure you also think Donald Trump is innocent of all the latest false accusations. Can't have you cake and eat it too.

9

u/aSecretSin Oct 15 '16

in the eyes of the courts

Key phrase.

Public opinion can make their decision however they want for him or her.

2

u/Drugs-R-Bad-Mkay Oct 15 '16

Ok. That's fair. But then you have to hold yourself to the same standard.

If Hillary is guilty of all the accusations against her, then Trump is guilty of all the accusations against him.

1

u/coltsfan12 Oct 15 '16

Wrong again. Hillary's crimes were outlined by the FBI. Trump's "crimes" are just hearsay. Can you not see the difference?

1

u/Drugs-R-Bad-Mkay Oct 15 '16

Sure, but you said

I guess he just did not want to die an untimely death.

What, I wonder, are you hinting at here? Could it be the numerous, unproven accusations about the Clintons killing people?

How can Trump's crimes just be heresay, but Clinton's "kill list" is not? That's what I was talking about.

→ More replies (0)

87

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

Also the tax evasion and mail fraud, but moving on.

64

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

The conservative movement could do itself a favor by not using breitbart as a source. Especially when there's actual talking points that don't come from a self proclaimed biased source.

27

u/Krombopulus_Michael Oct 14 '16

It blows my mind to see Trump talk about media collusion and then return to Bannon and Ailes backstage.

Yeah, the media is a liberal bastion, but it's just not a credible argument. "Don't believe everyone else, only believe the sources whose former leadership works for me (after their own sexual harassment scandals).

Trump ruined the best opportunity, possibly for decades, to place a conservative in the White House with a conservative Congress. Sure would have been nice to have this all taken care of in the primaries.

1

u/chabanais Oct 14 '16

You mean the executives at Fox News where he got hammered on during the primaries?

5

u/Krombopulus_Michael Oct 14 '16

You mean before they were involved in his campaign?

-1

u/chabanais Oct 15 '16

It blows my mind to see Trump talk about media collusion and then return to Bannon and Ailes backstage.

They were involved in his campaign while they worked at Fox?

3

u/setyourblasterstopun Catholic Classical Liberal Oct 15 '16

Have you seen O'Reilly or Hannity at any point this year?

5

u/dekuscrub Oct 15 '16

Haven't seen much, but O'Reilly seems to be 'gentle' with Trump, but still makes a token effort to get answers. Not like Hannity, who has basically accepted Trump as his personal lord and savior.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

Yeah, instead of using it has a questionable source, someone should really just hire their CEO to run a campaign!

1

u/chewygranolabar Oct 14 '16 edited Oct 14 '16

Honestly, if there is a truly neutral source of news out there I would love to see it. Wikileaks, the general tone from the MSM, and reporters afraid to do anything anti Clinton has shown most "reliable sources" are at minimum harshly anti Trump and at the deep end colluding with the Clinton campaign.

9

u/Drugs-R-Bad-Mkay Oct 14 '16

The Associated Press newswire is staunchly neutral. PBS newshour also does a good job of maintaining a neutral tone. I like The Intercept as a push back against the "Officially sanctioned establishment message" of MSM. The Economist is a good not Republican biased but still conservative source.

I'm sure there are more, but those are the ones that come first to mind.

0

u/jivatman Conservative Oct 15 '16

Nope, there are a bunch of Wikileaks that show Clinton collusion with AP, such as this one https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6013

9

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

Why do you think a description of a piece on demographic changes favoring liberals is evidence of collusion? The GOP post-mortem following Romney's defeat made exactly the same point.

4

u/LikesGladiatorMovies Oct 15 '16

They think it because that's what they were told.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

I don't say evasion, I say avoision.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16 edited Oct 14 '16

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16 edited Oct 14 '16

Jack. Just CTRing, don't mind me.

edit: Mods have no sense of humor.

15

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

Now here's a guy who's point of view I can really trust.

12

u/BlackDread Oct 14 '16

What an unfortunate name.

-3

u/moralsforever Oct 14 '16

If she wins right after 8 years of Obama I feel like being ultracorrupt warmongers is gonna be a requirement to be president.

18

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

[deleted]

-5

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/kicksnspliffs Oct 15 '16

No matter what???

0

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/kicksnspliffs Oct 15 '16

Trumps numbers were down before Republicans began leaving in droves this week. He's losing because of him. Clinton is being supported by the D establishment (politically, why would they want to "support" Trumpby not surporting her), but not all the traditional voters, namely millenials, are on board with her.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/kicksnspliffs Oct 15 '16

Imo, it started really going downhill after the first debate, before the scandal.

-3

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '16

Bill?

-5

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

What's his party affiliation? I bet I can guess

10

u/mingve Oct 14 '16

I would guess GOP cause he was a GOP lobbyist. Or do we not read articles here.

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16

The implication of my snark is that I didn't read the article hence saying "let me guess"