HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » "The lobbyists who love B...

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:15 AM

"The lobbyists who love Bernie Sanders"

Nearly two-dozen professional influencers have donated to anti-lobbyist candidate

Sanders has painted himself as a different kind of politician, running a different kind of campaign.

When he launched his presidential bid last May, he proclaimed: “Today, we stand here and say loudly and clearly that enough is enough. This great nation and its government belong to all of the people, and not to a handful of billionaires, their super PACs and their lobbyists.”

It’s a theme Sanders has revisited time and again — on the campaign trail, in advertisements and during debates against front-runner Hillary Clinton.

But unlike President Barack Obama, who refused campaign contributions from registered lobbyists, Sanders’ campaign confirmed it does not ban lobbyists from making contributions — even as Sanders has called on the Democratic Party to maintain a ban, implemented by Obama, on lobbyists giving to the Democratic National Committee.


https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/03/09/19405/lobbyists-who-love-bernie-sanders

51 replies, 4268 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 51 replies Author Time Post
Reply "The lobbyists who love Bernie Sanders" (Original post)
BainsBane Mar 2016 OP
Jarqui Mar 2016 #1
RiverLover Mar 2016 #2
noretreatnosurrender Mar 2016 #3
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #21
riversedge Mar 2016 #40
BainsBane Mar 2016 #4
Jarqui Mar 2016 #9
cosmicone Mar 2016 #12
Jarqui Mar 2016 #13
Jarqui Mar 2016 #23
frylock Mar 2016 #18
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #20
global1 Mar 2016 #5
nc4bo Mar 2016 #6
99Forever Mar 2016 #7
RiverLover Mar 2016 #8
GreenPartyVoter Mar 2016 #10
wendylaroux Mar 2016 #30
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #38
Avalon Sparks Mar 2016 #44
nc4bo Mar 2016 #48
Uponthegears Mar 2016 #11
Thinkingabout Mar 2016 #14
Avalon Sparks Mar 2016 #45
Thinkingabout Mar 2016 #49
Cha Mar 2016 #15
mcar Mar 2016 #16
Uponthegears Mar 2016 #17
Jarqui Mar 2016 #19
LexVegas Mar 2016 #22
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #24
LexVegas Mar 2016 #25
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #27
LexVegas Mar 2016 #32
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #37
Post removed Mar 2016 #39
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #41
Post removed Mar 2016 #42
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #43
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #26
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #28
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #29
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #31
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #33
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #34
hrmjustin Mar 2016 #36
bobbobbins01 Mar 2016 #35
LineNew Reply k
riversedge Mar 2016 #46
Jefferson23 Mar 2016 #47
whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #50
Herman4747 Mar 2016 #51

Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:19 AM

1. Did you read the article?:

"To be sure, lobbyist donations — about $3,200 overall"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:27 AM

2. !!! The Hillary campaign is embarassingly corrupt. BS hit piece.

Its bad enough our "frontrunner" is currently under criminal investigation, but her campaign is being run by some deviously underhanded & corrupt people. Reflective of their candidate.

Trying to deflect the million$ given to the ultimate Wall Street, MIC candidate.


Not proud to be a Democrat with this crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:35 AM

3. I agree

it's positively laughable to talk about the "tone" of the Bernie campaign when every day we see a new low from the Clinton campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:52 PM

21. They really don't see the hypocrisy, do they? How embarrassing.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:38 PM

40. You rag on the Hillary camp wchich has nothing to do with the OP. Stay focused on the OP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:38 AM

4. Yes, I read the article

So we'll assume the lobbyists funds weren't part of the $23 million in illegal contributions the FEC cited the Sanders campaign and affiliated PACS for, but considering people here assumed that Hillary Clinton had bought the Human Rights Council for a $5K donation, $3200 is enough to buy influence under that same criteria.

It's also $3200 more than Obama took.

And then we have Bernie's superpac: http://time.com/4261350/bernie-sanders-super-pac-alaska-millenials/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:45 AM

9. Did you read this?

http://time.com/4261350/bernie-sanders-super-pac-alaska-millenials/
This no a big money PAc - it's a handful of folks registering people to vote.

This isn't the tens of millions funneled by bundlers for Hillary buying positions on legislation. Neither is the $3,200 from lobbyists spread over several people.

What the article more likely is: a contracted Clinton piece for suckers of false equivalence who can't join enough brain cells together to get past the headline.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #9)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:06 AM

12. A superPAC is a superPAC is a superPAC at the end of the day

 

If one says "I will not rob banks", the act of robbing is forbidden. Saying, "but ... but ... I only took $5 from the teller" doesn't count.

Great OP exposing Sanders' hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #12)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:29 AM

13. False equivalence is false equivalence too, you know?

In one case, we're talking about a tiny PAC in Alaska that hopes to register a few Sanders voters for the general election independent of his campaign.

In the other case, were talking about lobbyists and corporate donors buying influence with candidates like Hillary with millions of dollars to their (Clinton) Foundation or their campaign to get them to flip-flop on free trade, fracking, etc.

Those of us who can join more than two brain cells together at the same time can figure out the difference. Unfortunately, there are some who cannot do that who fall prey to false equivalencies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:11 PM

23. You have a real problem with math, don't you?

You make a big deal about a bunch of lobbyists giving $500 or so donations to total $3,200 for all lobbyists and then try to equate that to what Hillary collects from lobbyists:

Hillary Clinton Leads in Fund-Raising From Lobbyists

they report $2.2 mil as of Feb 1, 2016 so she's way past that now.


Then you whine about the kids Alaska Voter Registration Super PAC that raised $1,400.

Hillary's seven Super PACS
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/candidate.php?id=N00000019

have pulled in $62,676,002 ... just a wee bit more than the kids in Alaska



Then you make the bogus claim : "the $23 million in illegal contributions the FEC cited"

that's BS. The letter asked the Sanders campaign to amend their report providing voter details on some of the $23 million where cumulative contributions for the donors exceeded $200.
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/988/201602110300034988/201602110300034988.pdf

That is NOT "$23 million in illegal contributions"

As the NY Times reported on these kinds of letters "Such glitches are common in political campaigns"

Nothing sinister is going on with the Sanders campaign here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:36 PM

18. Mrs. Clinton wouldn't even cross the street for that paltry sum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:51 PM

20. ZOMGWTFBBQ??? $3200???


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:38 AM

5. I Have To Come Clean - I Am A Lobbyist For Us 99%er's And I .....

lobbied for Bernie by donating $27 a couple of times and phone banking for him. And yes I have to admit - I Love Bernie Sanders!!!

Go Bernie!!!

Feel the Bern!!!!

Can't wait to 'Feel The Bern' of Bernie's Fireside Chats when he becomes our President!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:38 AM

6. BERNIE SANDERS' LOBBYISTS

[IMG][/IMG]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:40 AM

7. *boom*

nc4bo drops the mic and receives a standing ovation.

BB slinks away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:40 AM

8. Rec this post!! ^^^ Love it! We the People are the Lobbyists!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:47 AM

10. Exactly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:23 PM

30. Ahhh Hell Yes!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:32 PM

38. Bravo!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nc4bo (Reply #6)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:49 PM

44. Excellent...

I will bookmark this post because of your amazing montage. Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalon Sparks (Reply #44)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:50 PM

48. I can't take credit for it Avalon!

I did however take my time to find just the right rebuttal to this asinine OP and this fit the bill, perfectly!

We ARE his lobbyists, End. STOP.

Senator Sanders is bought and paid for by his supporters in a way HRH, her rabidest supporters and failed fourth estate will never understand.

#FeelTheBern, I know I am!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:54 AM

11. I guess we know why

 

Hillary supporters try to stay away from REAL ISSUES and stick with "inevitability," "Bernie so white," "Bernie violated the party loyalty oath," and "Look at the (barely a roomful of) great people who love Hillary, you should love her too."

Talking issues just doesn't work for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:44 AM

14. We know there is interaction between lobbyists and congressional members,

know it and acknowledge it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #14)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:50 PM

45. I wonder whether you really do....

Not from what I've seen...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalon Sparks (Reply #45)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:42 PM

49. Guess you missed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:57 AM

15. Thank you for this, BB..

But unlike President Barack Obama, who refused campaign contributions from registered lobbyists, Sanders’ campaign confirmed it does not ban lobbyists from making contributions — even as Sanders has called on the Democratic Party to maintain a ban, implemented by Obama, on lobbyists giving to the Democratic National Committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:21 AM

16. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:30 AM

17. Yes, thank you BB

 

Without this discussion, how would we have known that Hillary supporters are trying to claim that the $3200 Senator Sanders has received from lobbyist donors is, IN THEIR MINDS, the moral (practical, whatever) equivalent of the MILLIONS of dollars from lobbyists received by Hillary's campaign and lobbyists' heavy presence among her super delegates? How would we have known what Hillary supporters mean when they try to claim that Hillary is a "progressive?"

You are truly a font of information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:49 PM

19. Oh and let's not forget to look at the big money this PAC pulled in

Open Secrets records for America's Youth PAC
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2016&strID=C00574475

Sit down ok, ... so you don't hurt yourself ...


... Total Receipts $1,494!!!!!!!


That buys you about 30 seconds at a Clooney-Clinton fundraiser!!!

The lobbyist contributions get you about 60 seconds at a Clooney-Clinton fundraiser!!!



Wow!!! You really got Bernie with this nonsense!!

Make sure to tweet the thread to all your friends to show them how smart you are!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:53 PM

22. Gun lobbyists want some of that. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:15 PM

24. You mean the one raising money for Annie Oakley?

NRA Lobbyist Will Co-Host Hillary Clinton Fundraiser

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has called her support for gun control laws a key differentiator from her opponent Bernie Sanders, who she claims isn’t tough enough on the industry. But in mid-March, a Clinton campaign fundraiser will be co-hosted by a lobbyist whose clients have included the National Rifle Association (NRA).

As David Sirota reported Monday in the International Business Times, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is a co-host and the guest of honor at a fundraising lunch in the nation’s capital on March 21.

One of the other co-hosts is Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate.

Forbes has represented the NRA since 2009 and as of the last quarter of 2015 was still registered to lobby for the organization. On his lobbying disclosure, Forbes wrote that he was signed up to lobby for “Issues related to 2nd Amendment rights, regulation and gun control, and tax and appropriations related to same; issues related to corporate tax reform.”

During the 2013 push for universal background checks, Forbes was one of a phalanx of Democratic Party lobbyists employed by the NRA to kill that legislation.

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/01/nra-lobbyist-will-co-host-clinton-fundraiser/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #24)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:16 PM

25. Ol' Blood and Bullets loves him some semiauto weapons. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #25)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:17 PM

27. The ones he's voted to ban for decades? You're not very good at this:

Sanders voted against the pro-gun-control Brady Bill, writing that he believes states, not the federal government, can handle waiting periods for handguns. In 1994, he voted yes on an assault weapons ban. He has voted to ban some lawsuits against gun manufacturers and for the Manchin-Toomey legislation expanding federal background checks.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm


Bernie Sanders’ critics misfire: The Vermont senator’s gun record is better than it looks

....However, the Nation and the other reports like it don’t shed real light on where Sanders is coming from. They don’t explain why he supports some gun controls but not others. Nor do they ask if there’s a consistency to Sanders’ positions and votes over the years? They simply suggest that Bernie’s position is muddled and makes a good target for Hillary.

Yet there is an explanation. It’s consistent and simpler than many pundits think. And it’s in Bernie’s own words dating back to the campaign where he was first elected to the U.S. House—in 1990—where he was endorsed by the NRA, even after Sanders told them that he would ban assault rifles. That year, Bernie faced Republican incumbent Peter Smith, who beat him by less than 4 percentage points in a three-way race two years before.

In that 1988 race, Bernie told Vermont sportsmen that he backed an assault weapons ban. Smith told the same sportsmen’s groups that he opposed it, but midway through his first term he changed his mind and co-sponsored an assault rifle ban—even bringing an AK-47 to his press conference. That about-face was seen as a betrayal and is the background to a June 1990 debate sponsored by the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs.

I was at that debate with Smith and three other candidates—as the Sanders’ campaign press secretary—and recorded it. Bernie spoke at length three times and much of what he said is relevant today, and anticipates his congressional record on gun control ever since. Look at how Bernie describes what being a sportsperson is in a rural state, where he is quick to draw the line with weapons that threaten police and have no legitimate use in hunting—he previously was mayor of Vermont’s biggest city, and his record of being very clear with the gun lobby and rural people about where he stands. His approach, despite the Nation’s characterization, isn’t “open-minded.”

As you can see, Bernie—who moved to rural northeastern Vermont in the late 1960s—has an appreciation and feeling for where hunting and fishing fit into the lives of lower income rural people. He’s not a hunter or a fisherman. When he grew up in Brooklyn, he was a nerdy jock—being captivated by ideas and a high school miler who hoped for a track scholarship for college. But like many people who settled in Vermont for generations, he was drawn to its freer and greener pastures and respected its local culture.

“I went before the sportsmen of Vermont and said that I have concerns about certain types of assault weapons that have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in hunting. I will not support any legislation that limits the rights of Vermonters or any other hunters to practice what they have enjoyed for decades. I do have concerns about certain types of assault weapons.”

That was not the end of his remarks. But it is worth noting that his separating the rights of traditional hunters from the concerns of police chiefs has been a constant thread in many subsequent votes he would take in Congress. It’s also noteworthy that Bernie consistently has opposed assault weapons from the late 1980s—before he was in Congress—which he reiterated to the moderator.

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/10/what_bernies_gun_control_critics_get_wrong_partner/


Sanders Votes for Background Checks, Assault Weapons Ban

WASHINGTON, April 17 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today voted for expanded background checks on gun buyers and for a ban on assault weapons but the Senate rejected those central planks of legislation inspired by the shootings of 20 first-grade students and six teachers in Newtown, Conn.

“Nobody believes that gun control by itself is going to end the horrors we have seen in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., Tucson, Ariz. and other American communities,” Sanders said. “There is a growing consensus, however, in Vermont and across America that we have got to do as much as we can to end the cold-blooded, mass murders of innocent people. I believe very strongly that we also have got to address the mental health crisis in our country and make certain that help is available for people who may be a danger to themselves and others,” Sanders added.

The amendment on expanded background checks needed 60 votes to pass but only 54 senators voted for it. “To my mind it makes common sense to keep these weapons out of the hands of people with criminal records or mental health histories,” Sanders said.

Under current federal law, background checks are not performed for tens of thousands of sales – up to 40 percent of all gun transfers – at gun shows or over the Internet. The amendment would have required background checks for all gun sales in commercial settings regardless of whether the seller is a licensed dealer. The compromise proposal would have exempted sales between “family, friends, and neighbors.”

In a separate roll call, the Senate rejected a proposal to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. That proposal was defeated by a vote of 60 to 40.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban


Bernie Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill because it included the Violence against Women Act and assault weapons ban:

In 1994, however, Sanders voted in favor of the final version of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, a bill that expanded the federal death penalty. Sanders had voted for an amendment to the bill that would have replaced all federal death sentences with life in prison. Even though the amendment failed, Sanders still voted for the larger crime bill.

A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons."

Sanders reiterated his opposition to capital punishment in 2015. "I just don’t think the state itself, whether it’s the state government or federal government, should be in the business of killing people," he said on a radio show.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/02/viral-image/where-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-stand-/


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #27)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:26 PM

32. Voted against the Brady Bill 5 times. Voted to allow guns in national parks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #32)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:31 PM

37. And yet the NRA gave him F grades 5 years in a row and a lifetime D minus rating.

Like I said, you're not very good at this, I doubt Brock would even want you helping him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #37)


Response to Post removed (Reply #39)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:41 PM

41. The bill Obama signed into law?

That year, Sanders also voted for a bill to allow licensed gun owners to bring firearms into national parks. President Obama eventually signed that bill into law, too.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fact-checking-hillary-clintons-claims-about-bernie-sanders-gun-record/


Did you miss this the first time I posted it?

Sanders voted against the pro-gun-control Brady Bill, writing that he believes states, not the federal government, can handle waiting periods for handguns. In 1994, he voted yes on an assault weapons ban. He has voted to ban some lawsuits against gun manufacturers and for the Manchin-Toomey legislation expanding federal background checks.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm


I wouldn't quit your day job, Politfact would have a field day with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #41)


Response to Post removed (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:46 PM

43. And yet you're the one who just brought up the bill he signed into law. Oops.

And I'm not a bro but don't stop now, you're not done making a fool out of yourself yet.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:17 PM

26. I saw the NRA defended him on twiiter a few weeks back.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #26)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:20 PM

28. Was it the same one Hillary's cozing up to so she can raise money?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #28)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:22 PM

29. No it was the NRA twitter account.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #29)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:24 PM

31. Oh. Well maybe they're waiting for her to flip flop again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #31)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:27 PM

33. Keep telling yourself that to make yourself feel better.

 

As much as you would love to go a 1,000 rounds I don't. Cheers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:29 PM

34. I don't need to, it's a matter of record:




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:30 PM

36. As is your candidates positions. Good bye Bmus.

 

Get the lSt word if you need to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:29 PM

35. With all that money, he might be able to upgrade to first class!

On one flight, one way...as long as its under 500 miles and he promises not to order the hot meal or use the bathroom. He's totally in their pocket now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:02 PM

46. k

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:03 PM

47. lol

And they are all in it for results of influence that go against the public good. HA HA

This is too funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 06:44 PM

50. Embarrassing

The OP that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 07:08 PM

51. The Banker who loves Hillary:

 



"And remember, my love, any secrets we have we're honor-bound to keep"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread