Soros $$ tolRyan,McCain, Rubio, Graham,Bush and Kasich in 2016

[Hoji]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...hn-mccain-john-kasich-lindsey-graham-in-2016/

This explains a lot.

 

[Davetex]

Yes, yes it does. I always wondered why Ryan made such an abrupt pivot. Now I know.

 

[Dawico]

There must be more to it though. I seriously doubt these people are being bought with just a few grand. Seems like a low amount to me.

 

[boomgoesthedynamite]

The article says it was employee contributions. I could see 1 or 2 donating. I would bet that you could probably find some people that donated to Hilary who work at conservative companies...

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[Hoji]

The article says it was employee contributions. I could see 1 or 2 donating. I would bet that you could probably find some people that donated to Hilary who work at conservative companies...

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

The fact that they refuse to comment on it is telling. I suspect that this is the tip of an iceberg.

 

[ed308]

And maybe this is attempt to disrupt the Republican party unity.

 

[Hoji]

And maybe this is attempt to disrupt the Republican party unity.

Well, the named republicans do have a staff that monitors who gives them money, and could have refused to accept it if it comes from a source that is non compatible with their beliefs.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

Disinformation - but go ahead and believe if you want.

 

[grasshopperglock]

I give it serious weight. McCain is a lying, war mongering POS. Ryan is a pasty stooge. The rest are garden variety sale outs.

All are RINOs and this is coming from a libertarian. Even I can pick these douches out. They are Soros butt buddies. The whole lot.

 

[Hoji]

Disinformation - but go ahead and believe if you want.

Please name which source in the article is lying.

 

[Younggun]

So the article is saying that some people employed by Soros have different political views than Soros?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

I think folks write-print lies and they're immediately glommed onto by conspiracy fans as it confirms their own political agenda or what have you..

Just because it's in a link, or in a newspaper, or on T.V. doesn't confer credibility.

How about all the lying crap printed, posted, or comes out on T.V about Trump?

Let's say a person hates him for his own reasons, he'll jump onto any lie about him and exclaim -- See! See! I toad ya!!

Don't buy into conspiracy crapola.

But, if such b.s. comforts you-enjoy.

 

[grasshopperglock]

I think folks write-print lies and they're immediately glommed onto by conspiracy fans as it confirms their own political agenda or what have you..

Just because it's in a link, or in a newspaper, or on T.V. doesn't confer credibility.

How about all the lying crap printed, posted, or comes out on T.V about Trump?

Let's say a person hates him for his own reasons, he'll jump onto any lie about him and exclaim -- See! See! I toad ya!!

Don't buy into conspiracy crapola.

But, if such b.s. comforts you-enjoy.

Ill ask too. Can you cite the information for which you're drawing that conclusion? Calling it an conspiracy is an excuse to avoid showing the long math. What have you been reading? Who published it?

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

You have an agenda.

I don't.

Prove what you're saying.

If you care to believe the crap you're consuming, be my guest.

I don't think any of the accusations proffered contain merit. When people insult and criticize and then find blather they assume fits their agenda, they lap it up and declare it "the truth".

If you enjoy believing what you read because it fits your angry assertions, I don't care.

The world is full of the gullible.

 

[Hoji]

You have an agenda.

I don't.

Prove what you're saying.

If you care to believe the crap you're consuming, be my guest.

I don't think any of the accusations proffered contain merit. When people insult and criticize and then find blather they assume fits their agenda, they lap it up and declare it "the truth".

If you enjoy believing what you read because it fits your angry assertions, I don't care.

The world is full of the gullible.

Would you like to know how I know that you did not read the article or click on the links with the evidence in the article?

 

[grasshopperglock]

I'd enjoy knowing what my agenda was....

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

Occasionally, I enjoy a good bicker, it's often great fun, but I'm just plain not interested..

Please, feel free to squabble amongst yourselves.

 

[TAZ]

Well, the named republicans do have a staff that monitors who gives them money, and could have refused to accept it if it comes from a source that is non compatible with their beliefs.

Why?? If I were running for office and Hillary offered to give me $1M I'd take it. I'd take all of Soros' money too. If elected I'd still vote my conscience and stand against them wherever possible. I wouldn't even loose a second of sleep over it. At least until they had me killed.

It's not the $$ or its source. It's how these kinds of limp noodles act once they get into office.

 

[Younggun]

So the article is saying that some people employed by Soros have different political views than Soros?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Felt this was worth repeating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gmofftarki]

Frankly, even if they were doing it as "damage-control" should the right win the eventual election, I find that less objectionable than the ridiculous behavior of the media during the GOP primary process in a concerted effort to make Donny the nominee, under the theory that "He'll be the easiest to defeat in the general election".

They're saying "This is the candidate I like best", which is honest, regardless of the party to whom they swear fealty. Good for them.