The Real Hillary
- Thread starter Robo
- Start date
This is from a former UNIFORMED agent who by his very rank was allowed nowhere near the first lady and president. According to the secret service he would have been prevented doing so by the presiden's personal guard.. He also thought it so important that he waited 20 years, during an election sycle to write his fantasy. Some patriot!
For sheer accuracy I reccomend DC comics over this idiot.
Sucker!
Legion Troll
A fine upstanding poster
Robo
Verified User
If that's true, why didn't President Clinton have him removed from White House service all together? Do you have a rational answer for that?
Robo
Verified User
Rumor has it Hillary would lick your Tampax holder in a heart beat. Would you enjoy it Madam?
I heard these same stories during the Bill Clinton administration years from a friend who had a friend working that detail. Yeah it's hearsay but it confirms this.
What type of logic leads you to believe that he is telling the truth now because Bill didn't have a minor agent removed from WH service 20 years before he started blabbing? Bill obviously didn't even know the dude. I hope you have a rational answer for that.
Robo
Verified User
So you agree he was a "WHITE HOUSE AGENT. Define anywhere near the First Lady or the President. Could he see them? Were they often in his general vicinity? Could he have heard a domestic argument between the Clinton's? Could he have heard through the grapevine at the White House that Hillary broke a vase in Slick's eye. Could he have seen Slick's black eye? Could he have seen Monica Lewinski flip up her dress in a hallway to show Slick Willy her panties? Can you rationally explain why he couldn't have heard and seen those things?
Logic. Pure logic. You posted- "If that's true, why didn't President Clinton have him removed from White House service all together? Do you have a rational answer for that?"
I was arguing against why your assumption that his story is true because Bill would have had him removed, is bullshit. Nothing more, nothing less. I gave you a rational answer, and you responded with 'well, tell me why it isn't possible'. That is not rational. I did not claim that his story wasn't even possible, I only pointed out that your logic is faulty. It is the same crap found on any conspiracy site. If it is remotely possible, then 'this person' is surely guilty. Hogwash.
I was arguing against why your assumption that his story is true because Bill would have had him removed, is bullshit. Nothing more, nothing less. I gave you a rational answer, and you responded with 'well, tell me why it isn't possible'. That is not rational. I did not claim that his story wasn't even possible, I only pointed out that your logic is faulty. It is the same crap found on any conspiracy site. If it is remotely possible, then 'this person' is surely guilty. Hogwash.
Legion Troll
A fine upstanding poster
Poor Bobo.
Legionthecat
Double Platinum Catroll
Poor Lil' Bobo.
Robo
Verified User
The answer for that is simply that the agent was closer than he was allowed by White House agent rules, (according to you), and should have been sent packing by the President Of The United States. The proof that he was "too close, " is the fact of what he was seeing and hearing. Accusations you cannot discount with any evidence in opposition. Nor can you, or have you defined "too close." You make statements you cannot back up with any real rational evidence let alone proof.
Your argument was never "rational" You failed to define "too close."
If you want to make a "rational" argument opposed to the topic of the thread, produce some evidence in opposition to the agent's accusations. I'll understand if you can't!
