To: GnuThere
Maybe they’re trying to keep on the good side of the Clinton’s on the off chance that Chelsea gets into Congress. That’s the only reason I can think of for an 87% reduction, instead of 100%.
17 posted on
11/19/2016 4:04:28 PM PST by
EvilCapitalist
(At least Richard Nixon had the decency to resign when caught in wrong doing.)
To: EvilCapitalist
Maybe they’re trying to keep on the good side of the Clinton’s on the off chance that Chelsea gets into Congress. That’s the only reason I can think of for an 87% reduction, instead of 100%.Perhaps the Clintons made it clear that 13% was the minimum it takes to keep them from fingering certain Norwegian politicians or organizations.
Mr. niteowl77
23 posted on
11/19/2016 4:10:37 PM PST by
niteowl77
(Don't need no Bushes. Don't need no Clintons. Don't need no fooling around.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson