It feeds, Scully ... It must FEED! Welp, it looks like the lid is just about to be blown off Hillary Clinton's involvement with a known child trafficker, thanks to a partnership between Wikileaks and the brave detectives of a rabid pro-Donald Trump group on Reddit. Seriously, they've really got the goods on Clinton this time. The evidence is indisputable, at least if you're a complete idiot.
Did you say "Missionaries?" One might take a closer look at Trump's teabagging evangelical nincompoops: http://www.politico.com/sto...
...and their hand in Third World child abduction/child trafficking:
2013: Mother Jones: "Orphan Fever: The Evangelical Movement's Adoption Obsession - When devout Christian families made it their mission to save children from war-torn countries, the match was often far from heavenly."http://www.motherjones.com/...
One look at Tea Party (dot) org pretty much demonstrates what's behind the right-wing stupid: http://www.teaparty.org/det...
None of this, of course, has anything to do with SoS Clinton :) It's yet another case of projection, to put it mildly. Some might even refer to it as "Lying for Jesus": http://religionnews.com/201...
Once again, Dok, I told ya so. Ya'll were duped by the Paultards and I told you often enough to tell the truth about Greenwald and his BFF Ron Paul: http://dneiwert.blogspot.co...
The red flags you continue to ignore: "Electronic Frontier Foundation Praises the Tea Party, FreedomWorks and Birther Larry Klayman"http://thedailybanter.com/2...
I would also be nice if you read international news. The Aussies outed Assange years ago:
Australian Wikileaks Party outed as fascist friendly (2013): "When a party which espouses human rights and social justice appears to be in cahoots with gun nuts and neo-fascists, that’s not a good look. When it loses a star candidate two weeks before an election, that’s careless. And when the same party, supposedly synonymous with democracy and transparency, is accused by its own members of secretive decision-making, that could spell electoral oblivion.http://www.independent.co.u...
All those e-mails that supposedly showed these horrid crimes turned out to be e-mails the FBI had already reviewed. But I'm the fool, yet you were the one who fell for completely baseless nonsense. Don't you guys ever get sick of being so wrong and so pathetic all the time?
"Hillary raised some big ass money. She says she's going to work on getting big ass money out of politics."
You are operating on misinformation. Hillary raised a lot of money, under the FALSE auspices that it was for "down ballot Democrats," while simultaneously criticizing Sanders. In reality, Hillary and the DNC only gave "down ballot Democrats" about 1%, and kept the rest. People that donated that money for "down ballot Democrats" got ripped off.
Hillary relied on corporate and celebrity donations at the max levels, which are associated with the Democratic Party. Even the money that Hillary raised for the DNC, would have remained in the party had Bernie been the nominee. However, Bernie brought record amounts of individuals contributions from ordinary people of all working classes. Hillary has continually struggled with those demographics, and only relies on big money contributors that give money to the Democrats no matter what. The DNC faces a serious fundraising challenge because of Hillary.
"Did she have a private e-mail server? Yes, just like other Secretaries of State have."
Again, this is misinformation. Other Sec. of States USED a private email ADDRESS at some points, but ONLY Hillary had her own private server maintained for this purpose.
Nevertheless, I believe what they did was also wrong, and just because they seem to have gotten away with a similar offense doesn't mean every person thereafter is absolved of guilt. Hillary made a statement saying her "predecessors did the same thing," and Politifact determined that statement to be "Mostly False."
"Do I trust Wikileaks? Hell fucking no. I'm concerned about who is giving them their shit, I'm concerned about their leader, I'm concerned about their agenda in fucking with our election, I do not trust Assange as far as I could throw him, and I have chicken arms."
It has nothing to do with "trust" for Wikileaks. The information remains valid and authentic until disproved whether you want to 'shoot the messenger' or not. CNN forced Donna Brazile to resign.
The Hillary campaign collaborated with the media to "elevate" the worst of the Republicans (Cruz, Trump, and Carson), putting us more at risk that any of them could win, and now Trump still could. We all wondered how Trump made it so far, when no one thought he would and it comes down to them sitting on a video from 2005 that would have undoubtedly stopped him in the Primary, and using it this late was less effective.
They intentionally contributed to Trump getting this close to the presidency, and it's borderline Stockholm syndrome to vote for Hillary to stop Trump. Nevertheless, if I were taken hostage and given the choice between my captive and a rabid dog I might submit as well. What I wouldn't do is be loyal, and I'd be looking for the first chance to get away.
"She's not an evil corrupt monster. She's made fuckups, just like a lot of people who are currently holding extremely powerful government positions, and a lot of them were worse. Like the guy who got elected WHILE IN PRISON FOR KNOCKING UP A 15 YEAR OLD, and who's wife (the same girl who got him arrested) is stumping for him to get elected again, right now, while he's sexually harrassing prospective legal clients."
This is exactly what I was expressing I am most concerned about. It is counterproductive to take this 'logic' with anything but regret and a grain of salt. It's sensationalist, and comes very near to comparing Hillary to a convict that knocked up a "15 YEAR OLD" as though the depths of another person's actions somehow are a defense of Hillary. The perpetuated idea that the people should ignore, deny and overlook Hillary's smear campaigns, untrue statements, secrecy and ethics violations is not progress. It is NOT fighting against the injustice; it is becoming it.
You've supported your stance with more than one false premise, and defense for Hillary. It remains the reality that the people will have to keep pressure on Hillary or Trump, whomever the 'winner' may be, and they should do that by communicating with their elected leaders and expressing their concern. They should do so by NOT making false excuses and not becoming apologist/sympathizers for the type of things we wish to remain credible on when criticizing and standing against our political opponents.
The truth is that we are going to be up against a lot of very difficult challenges whether Hillary or Trump is elected, and the worst thing either side can do is pretend that their party's candidate won't betray them for political expedience. We cannot trust either one of them, and yes, because I agree with you that Hillary is "just like a lot of people who are currently holding extremely powerful government positions."
We must never stand for corruption as the norm, and always push back against it, even if that means holding our own self-proclaimed defenders accountable for their actions, as well. Admitting the flaws of our representatives does not give the other side some points of value; it establishes our own credibility and allows for more opportunity to rational discussion. By refusing to accept the facts about either candidate, both sides are simply yelling into the air and not understanding that we are all people, and all have different concerns in mind. In this election, we are weighing consequences. We must face the reality that the current political environment is the result of partisan hypocrisy and we must overcome it.
Those voting for Trump and Hillary will be deciding the next President. I will be voting third party, as Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are the only candidates I personally consider "viable." All people should vote for the person they prefer to win; not just cast a vote against the person they don't. We can't keep repeating this; that is a worse fate than either of these candidates winning.
I thought you got bored with me and wandered off to find someone more challenging. I actually don't care about arguing with you anymore, to be honest. I'm voting for the person I prefer to win. I trust her. I don't know anything about Johnson, and what I do know about Stein, I don't like. You're gonna do what you want, fine. But the 3rd parties aren't going to win until they can break in at the bottom of politics and spread all the way up to the top, and actually get more than 8% of the population to take them seriously. And you already know that neither Johnson or Stein is going to win, at all, so you actually really are throwing your vote away at this point. Go ahead, it's your right.
You must be talking about the libtards. They have not been able to let one day go by since they lost that they have not been paying rioters to punch, kick, assault, push down, shut down and whine about anyone that opposes their worthless narrative.I have never in my life seen such promoters of hate trying to couch it behind their so called love. We see you now. Let's not pretend anymore.
What candidate went to convicted child sex offender jeffrey epstein's lolita express to fantasy island in the bahamas . Oh yes, that was killary. She went there on six separate occasions. Oh my god. Well, she was trying to catch up with her husband billy boy who had gone there 20 times. Oh trump went there once and left abruptly, no party for him.
I am completely satisfied with the way I voted. I would have regretted voting for Trump or Hillary, and Jill Stein didn't make it on the ballot in my state, so I went for Gary Johnson.
As it turns out, Johnson needed my help, and my vote actually did go toward making a difference. Hillary didn't have a chance in my state, so a vote for her would have been throwing my vote away. If more people had voted third party it would have made a different, but the tiny numbers we got wouldn't have made a different for Hillary or Trump.
The reason third parties invest so much in national elections, is because it's the only way to get national recognition. I agree they should focus on lower level races and build, but not enough candidates step up to run for the positions, so the party has to run for President to keep awareness up.
You really can't say, "I don't know anything about Johnson," and then criticize with validity. The main thing holding third parties back is that people don't accept their civic duty to find out about the candidates. I don't know what you think you heard about Jill Stein, but Hillary ran a smear campaign against her, like they did Bernie. Most of the propaganda against Stein was another Hillary campaign lie. She is not anti-vax, nor does she think Wifi causes cancer, and her VP is NOT a Nazi sympathizer, or whatever the most recent Hillary campaign propaganda you heard said.
Frankly, I don't care what you think about Stein, or any other candidate. The number one problem is that people aren't educated, and are too lazy to get out in this amazing world with endless information at their finger tips, and FIND OUT, LOOK IT UP, and KNOW.
Find something better to defend the criminal hillary. She had about 6 people killed the summer of 2016 at the time of the election. Obama also has a stream of dead body's around his elections, and now you want to sell the story to me that killary rushed down to haiti because it was her job as secretary of state to get americans off in other countries. Sorry, that is just false on the face of it. We can do nothing of the sort. We do not have the power to impact on the laws of any other country. It just doesn't happen. if it's true, post the law or policy. You are dead wrong. Anyways hillary never did anything for anyone in her life without a pay off. We all know her too well by now. She would never rush down there for anyone and to be associated with a perv, that just wouldn't happen except for the fact that all her close connections are pervs. Birds of a feather. If you want to see weird just take a look at podesta, weiner, her husband, epstein,hollyweed, the spirit cooking, it just goes on an on. They're all a bunch o pervs, with their art, their rituals, their pictures of children, their emails. She's in with all the rest of them and all their so called agencies thatare helping poor children. Bull shit.
Did you say "Missionaries?" One might take a closer look at Trump's teabagging evangelical nincompoops: http://www.politico.com/sto...
...and their hand in Third World child abduction/child trafficking:
2013: Mother Jones: "Orphan Fever: The Evangelical Movement's Adoption Obsession - When devout Christian families made it their mission to save children from war-torn countries, the match was often far from heavenly."http://www.motherjones.com/...
Tea Party nutters are feeding this idiocy to Wikileaks and Paultard Assange: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs...
... is more than happy to spread it for them: http://www.politicalresearc...
One look at Tea Party (dot) org pretty much demonstrates what's behind the right-wing stupid: http://www.teaparty.org/det...
None of this, of course, has anything to do with SoS Clinton :) It's yet another case of projection, to put it mildly. Some might even refer to it as "Lying for Jesus": http://religionnews.com/201...
Once again, Dok, I told ya so. Ya'll were duped by the Paultards and I told you often enough to tell the truth about Greenwald and his BFF Ron Paul: http://dneiwert.blogspot.co...
The red flags you continue to ignore: "Electronic Frontier Foundation Praises the Tea Party, FreedomWorks and Birther Larry Klayman"http://thedailybanter.com/2...
I would also be nice if you read international news. The Aussies outed Assange years ago:
Australian Wikileaks Party outed as fascist friendly (2013): "When a party which espouses human rights and social justice appears to be in cahoots with gun nuts and neo-fascists, that’s not a good look. When it loses a star candidate two weeks before an election, that’s careless. And when the same party, supposedly synonymous with democracy and transparency, is accused by its own members of secretive decision-making, that could spell electoral oblivion.http://www.independent.co.u...
http://www.huffingtonpost.c...
All those e-mails that supposedly showed these horrid crimes turned out to be e-mails the FBI had already reviewed. But I'm the fool, yet you were the one who fell for completely baseless nonsense. Don't you guys ever get sick of being so wrong and so pathetic all the time?
"Hillary raised some big ass money. She says she's going to work on getting big ass money out of politics."
You are operating on misinformation. Hillary raised a lot of money, under the FALSE auspices that it was for "down ballot Democrats," while simultaneously criticizing Sanders. In reality, Hillary and the DNC only gave "down ballot Democrats" about 1%, and kept the rest. People that donated that money for "down ballot Democrats" got ripped off.
http://www.politico.com/sto...
Hillary relied on corporate and celebrity donations at the max levels, which are associated with the Democratic Party. Even the money that Hillary raised for the DNC, would have remained in the party had Bernie been the nominee. However, Bernie brought record amounts of individuals contributions from ordinary people of all working classes. Hillary has continually struggled with those demographics, and only relies on big money contributors that give money to the Democrats no matter what. The DNC faces a serious fundraising challenge because of Hillary.
"Did she have a private e-mail server? Yes, just like other Secretaries of State have."
Again, this is misinformation. Other Sec. of States USED a private email ADDRESS at some points, but ONLY Hillary had her own private server maintained for this purpose.
Nevertheless, I believe what they did was also wrong, and just because they seem to have gotten away with a similar offense doesn't mean every person thereafter is absolved of guilt. Hillary made a statement saying her "predecessors did the same thing," and Politifact determined that statement to be "Mostly False."
http://www.politifact.com/t...
"Do I trust Wikileaks? Hell fucking no. I'm concerned about who is giving them their shit, I'm concerned about their leader, I'm concerned about their agenda in fucking with our election, I do not trust Assange as far as I could throw him, and I have chicken arms."
It has nothing to do with "trust" for Wikileaks. The information remains valid and authentic until disproved whether you want to 'shoot the messenger' or not. CNN forced Donna Brazile to resign.
http://www.politico.com/mag...
Hillary is surrounded by scandal and dirty political tricks that endanger the very issues she claims to champion.
The Hillary campaign and the DNC lied about and smeared Bernie Sanders.
https://wikileaks.org/podes...
http://www.huffingtonpost.c...
The Hillary campaign collaborated with the media to "elevate" the worst of the Republicans (Cruz, Trump, and Carson), putting us more at risk that any of them could win, and now Trump still could. We all wondered how Trump made it so far, when no one thought he would and it comes down to them sitting on a video from 2005 that would have undoubtedly stopped him in the Primary, and using it this late was less effective.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...
They intentionally contributed to Trump getting this close to the presidency, and it's borderline Stockholm syndrome to vote for Hillary to stop Trump. Nevertheless, if I were taken hostage and given the choice between my captive and a rabid dog I might submit as well. What I wouldn't do is be loyal, and I'd be looking for the first chance to get away.
"She's not an evil corrupt monster. She's made fuckups, just like a lot of people who are currently holding extremely powerful government positions, and a lot of them were worse. Like the guy who got elected WHILE IN PRISON FOR KNOCKING UP A 15 YEAR OLD, and who's wife (the same girl who got him arrested) is stumping for him to get elected again, right now, while he's sexually harrassing prospective legal clients."
This is exactly what I was expressing I am most concerned about. It is counterproductive to take this 'logic' with anything but regret and a grain of salt. It's sensationalist, and comes very near to comparing Hillary to a convict that knocked up a "15 YEAR OLD" as though the depths of another person's actions somehow are a defense of Hillary. The perpetuated idea that the people should ignore, deny and overlook Hillary's smear campaigns, untrue statements, secrecy and ethics violations is not progress. It is NOT fighting against the injustice; it is becoming it.
You've supported your stance with more than one false premise, and defense for Hillary. It remains the reality that the people will have to keep pressure on Hillary or Trump, whomever the 'winner' may be, and they should do that by communicating with their elected leaders and expressing their concern. They should do so by NOT making false excuses and not becoming apologist/sympathizers for the type of things we wish to remain credible on when criticizing and standing against our political opponents.
The truth is that we are going to be up against a lot of very difficult challenges whether Hillary or Trump is elected, and the worst thing either side can do is pretend that their party's candidate won't betray them for political expedience. We cannot trust either one of them, and yes, because I agree with you that Hillary is "just like a lot of people who are currently holding extremely powerful government positions."
We must never stand for corruption as the norm, and always push back against it, even if that means holding our own self-proclaimed defenders accountable for their actions, as well. Admitting the flaws of our representatives does not give the other side some points of value; it establishes our own credibility and allows for more opportunity to rational discussion. By refusing to accept the facts about either candidate, both sides are simply yelling into the air and not understanding that we are all people, and all have different concerns in mind. In this election, we are weighing consequences. We must face the reality that the current political environment is the result of partisan hypocrisy and we must overcome it.
Those voting for Trump and Hillary will be deciding the next President. I will be voting third party, as Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are the only candidates I personally consider "viable." All people should vote for the person they prefer to win; not just cast a vote against the person they don't. We can't keep repeating this; that is a worse fate than either of these candidates winning.
I thought you got bored with me and wandered off to find someone more challenging. I actually don't care about arguing with you anymore, to be honest. I'm voting for the person I prefer to win. I trust her. I don't know anything about Johnson, and what I do know about Stein, I don't like. You're gonna do what you want, fine. But the 3rd parties aren't going to win until they can break in at the bottom of politics and spread all the way up to the top, and actually get more than 8% of the population to take them seriously. And you already know that neither Johnson or Stein is going to win, at all, so you actually really are throwing your vote away at this point. Go ahead, it's your right.
Funny how the actual NYPD has denied the story. The wingnut blogs that have written about this made-up story cite no sources whatsoever.
Also, if you are really, really familiar with code words for child sex trafficking, we're gonna have to ask you to leave.
-- Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
Thanks! We find that pointing out the complete lack of real evidence helps a lot. Enjoy your banhammer.
-- Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
You should also go check your dictionary. Did you know it doesn't contain the word "gullible"?
-- Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
You must be talking about the libtards. They have not been able to let one day go by since they lost that they have not been paying rioters to punch, kick, assault, push down, shut down and whine about anyone that opposes their worthless narrative.I have never in my life seen such promoters of hate trying to couch it behind their so called love. We see you now. Let's not pretend anymore.
What candidate went to convicted child sex offender jeffrey epstein's lolita express to fantasy island in the bahamas . Oh yes, that was killary. She went there on six separate occasions. Oh my god. Well, she was trying to catch up with her husband billy boy who had gone there 20 times. Oh trump went there once and left abruptly, no party for him.
I am completely satisfied with the way I voted. I would have regretted voting for Trump or Hillary, and Jill Stein didn't make it on the ballot in my state, so I went for Gary Johnson.
As it turns out, Johnson needed my help, and my vote actually did go toward making a difference. Hillary didn't have a chance in my state, so a vote for her would have been throwing my vote away. If more people had voted third party it would have made a different, but the tiny numbers we got wouldn't have made a different for Hillary or Trump.
The reason third parties invest so much in national elections, is because it's the only way to get national recognition. I agree they should focus on lower level races and build, but not enough candidates step up to run for the positions, so the party has to run for President to keep awareness up.
You really can't say, "I don't know anything about Johnson," and then criticize with validity. The main thing holding third parties back is that people don't accept their civic duty to find out about the candidates. I don't know what you think you heard about Jill Stein, but Hillary ran a smear campaign against her, like they did Bernie. Most of the propaganda against Stein was another Hillary campaign lie. She is not anti-vax, nor does she think Wifi causes cancer, and her VP is NOT a Nazi sympathizer, or whatever the most recent Hillary campaign propaganda you heard said.
Frankly, I don't care what you think about Stein, or any other candidate. The number one problem is that people aren't educated, and are too lazy to get out in this amazing world with endless information at their finger tips, and FIND OUT, LOOK IT UP, and KNOW.
One question. How did voting for Johnson make a difference?
It made as much difference as it would have had I cast it for Hillary or Trump.
So none. Good job. I don't care anymore, we've all got bigger problems to worry about now. Hope you find a way to actually make a difference.
It made all the difference to me.
Your ignorance is second only to your stupidity.
Have a great day!
Find something better to defend the criminal hillary. She had about 6 people killed the summer of 2016 at the time of the election. Obama also has a stream of dead body's around his elections, and now you want to sell the story to me that killary rushed down to haiti because it was her job as secretary of state to get americans off in other countries. Sorry, that is just false on the face of it. We can do nothing of the sort. We do not have the power to impact on the laws of any other country. It just doesn't happen. if it's true, post the law or policy. You are dead wrong. Anyways hillary never did anything for anyone in her life without a pay off. We all know her too well by now. She would never rush down there for anyone and to be associated with a perv, that just wouldn't happen except for the fact that all her close connections are pervs. Birds of a feather. If you want to see weird just take a look at podesta, weiner, her husband, epstein,hollyweed, the spirit cooking, it just goes on an on. They're all a bunch o pervs, with their art, their rituals, their pictures of children, their emails. She's in with all the rest of them and all their so called agencies thatare helping poor children. Bull shit.