Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (3 Viewers)

[David Dodds]

People are not bothered by us just handing weapons to random Middle east rebels?  

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/14068

These are Hillary's exact words to John Podesta (in 2014):

In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Maybe if you  understood words such "allege" and "appears" you would stop promoting speculation to the status of fact.  Probably not!

If you look at the projects on their site right now it's pretty obvious what they do. Pick any current project. They take corporate partners and governmental actors, round up private funding and/or public funding which goes into private enterprise with an ostensibly public purpose. But at this point it's basically a pr firm which often links up private actors who generate profit. Sometimes US aid money gets cycled back into the CF after they obtained it for these governmental/private entities. And sometimes it's just plain pr like their partnership with McDonald's. It's a long convo which I know you're up for but I've got some work to do so maybe we can tackle it another time.

I wouldn't mind your looking at this one when you get a chance though. Seems the Hillaryites weren't as too, too eager to debunk as usual.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

People are not bothered by us just handing weapons to random Middle east rebels?  

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/14068

These are Hillary's exact words to John Podesta (in 2014):

In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

I have never seen Hillary ever write anything remotely that long. That's unbelievable. Why is she writing this stuff to Podesta?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

People are not bothered by us just handing weapons to random Middle east rebels?  

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/14068

These are Hillary's exact words to John Podesta (in 2014):

In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

On Aug 17, 2014 3:50 PM, "H" <hrod17@clintonemail.com<mailto:hrod17@clintonemail.com>> wrote:

Note: Sources include Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region.

...

What the HELL? She's emailing this stuff on a private server to her political advisor who is on gmail.

 

[David Dodds]

I have never seen Hillary ever write anything remotely that long. That's unbelievable. Why is she writing this stuff to Podesta?




 

She is mapping out the whole plan.  Who knows maybe Citi bank wrote it and Hillary sent it.  But the email came from Hillary.

That one email reads straight out of the War Hawk's Guide to Meddling Everywhere.  There is a reason all of the terrorists in the Middle East have US Weapons.  People like Hillary think giving these to the "good guys" will work out.  It has never worked out.  The good / bad guys change with the wind.  Remember when we gave IRAQ weapons to fight the bad Iranians only to realize damn...these guys might be worse.  Get the Hell out of these countries.  

But that can't happen, because that would stop the money laundering into the Clinton Cabal.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Haven't seen it in MSM yet, doesn't exist

I've always been a fan, but I don't get this Tea Partyish conspiracy theory shtick from you.  

 

[Slapdash]

Haven't seen it in MSM yet, doesn't exist

I've always been a fan, but I don't get this Tea Partyish conspiracy theory shtick from you.  

From here

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

She is mapping out the whole plan.  Who knows maybe Citi bank wrote it and Hillary sent it.  But the email came from Hillary.

That one email reads straight out of the War Hawk's Guide to Meddling Everywhere.  There is a reason all of the terrorists in the Middle East have US Weapons.  People like Hillary think giving these to the "good guys" will work out.  It has never worked out.  The good / bad guys change with the wind.  Remember when we gave IRAQ weapons to fight the bad Iranians only to realize damn...these guys might be worse.  Get the Hell out of these countries.  

But that can't happen, because that would stop the money laundering into the Clinton Cabal.

There is no way Mrs. "Pls Print" wrote that. That is a c/p job and it might very well be classified, i'm guessing almost certainly.

As far as your comments, yeah I agree, and what gets me on top of that is the cavalier attitude at the end, 'enough of this war talk, be sure to kiss the baby for me!'

 

[David Dodds]

The ToddandClare.com stuff is straight out of the House of Cards.  It needs to be a screenplay.  These dominoes are going to be fun to watch.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

7. (Note: A source in Tripoli stated in confidence that when the U.S. Embassy was evacuated, the presence of two U.S. Navy jet fighters over the city brought all fighting to a halt for several hours, as Islamist forces were not certain that these aircraft would not also provide close ground support for moderate government forces.

- Hillary

1. Almost certainly classified.

2. Amazing how that works.

 

[BassNBrew]

7. (Note: A source in Tripoli stated in confidence that when the U.S. Embassy was evacuated, the presence of two U.S. Navy jet fighters over the city brought all fighting to a halt for several hours, as Islamist forces were not certain that these aircraft would not also provide close ground support for moderate government forces.

- Hillary

1. Almost certainly classified.

2. Amazing how that works.

Corrupt, criminal, and stupid.  No wonder Tim supports her.

 

[BassNBrew]

Hillary's 100 day honeymoon should be 100 days of testimony.  I hope Kaine is a decent guy.

 

[BassNBrew]

People are not bothered by us just handing weapons to random Middle east rebels?  

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/14068

These are Hillary's exact words to John Podesta (in 2014):

In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Nope.  She has a D after her name and is running against an orange haired clown.  

There was a chance we wouldn't be subject to 5 decades of this crap but Bernie folded like a house of cards to the Clinton machine.

 

[tommyGunZ]

If he were eligible and decided to switch parties, Obama would have gotten less than 2% of Republican primary votes but would have probably beaten Hillary in the general. My point isn't that Kasich would have beaten Hillary in the general. My point is that Kasich's failure in the Republican primary is rather poor evidence that he wouldn't have beaten Hillary in the general. I would use a different argument to support that position.

That's fair. 

 

[BassNBrew]

If he were eligible and decided to switch parties, Obama would have gotten less than 2% of Republican primary votes but would have probably beaten Hillary in the general. My point isn't that Kasich would have beaten Hillary in the general. My point is that Kasich's failure in the Republican primary is rather poor evidence that he wouldn't have beaten Hillary in the general. I would use a different argument to support that position.

That's fair. 

Thanks for passing the bong and chilling for a couple of minutes.

 

[Guest]

I guess Dodds had all of his political aliases banned.

 

[BassNBrew]

LOL...the Dem big money PACs are working on the local Rep bashing him for taking industry contributions and using his connections to create personal wealth.  The hierocracy amazes me.

 

[David Dodds]

a good piece on Obama and Hillary's association with Bob Creamer (the guy talking about rigging elections in the video who has since resigned):

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-20/dnc-leaks-bob-creamer

 

[msommer]

Not sure the Peshmerga qualifies for the "random Middle East rebels" moniker

 

[cobalt_27]

Go get`em, Loretta!

 

[Zerp]

Corrupt, criminal, and stupid.  No wonder Tim supports her.

Careful. You could throw out your back stooping so low.  

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

There will only be one party after this election.

Amnesty for all the illegals ensures the Democrats win everything going forward.  These new citizens are going to vote for the people that gave them US citizenship.  

It does not matter what candidate (or even Party) opposes the Democrats.  The Dem's Criminal Enterprise control the media, all branches of the government, NSA, and the Oval office.  We are officially a one-party system that uses a giant bloc of Super Delegates to ensure the correct puppet always gets selected.

Wow

 

[knowledge dropper]

With mountains of evidence on HRC's corruption piling up how can anyone support her?

This election has exposed our system and media. If we elect her, are we even the "good guys" anymore?

 

[timschochet]

Corrupt, criminal, and stupid.  No wonder Tim supports her.

You have me pegged.

My favorite character from The Godfather was Paulie Gatto. I always wished I could be that guy. I also liked the cop who punched Michael in the jaw. And Carlo. 

 

[LittlePhatty]

There will only be one party after this election.

Amnesty for all the illegals ensures the Democrats win everything going forward.  These new citizens are going to vote for the people that gave them US citizenship.  

It does not matter what candidate (or even Party) opposes the Democrats.  The Dem's Criminal Enterprise control the media, all branches of the government, NSA, and the Oval office.  We are officially a one-party system that uses a giant bloc of Super Delegates to ensure the correct puppet always gets selected.

As an independent I disagree. The Republican party should view this as an opportunity to fast-forward their stance on a few progressive issues (or at the very least set them aside) so their focus is strictly on bigger economic issues. They don't need to pander so directly to single-issue voters who would never have voted for a Democrat anyway, no matter who it was.

As for your view of the future, I humbly suggest you stop watching the news or listening to talk radio, and enjoy life instead. It's not going to be anywhere near as bad as what those angry flap-jaws say.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

tim's far more open minded than most on this forum.  His views have evolved over the years.  Have yours?

Wow.  This coming from the most arrogant, close-minded, troll in these threads.  

 

[cobalt_27]

Wow.  This coming from the most arrogant, close-minded, troll in these threads.  

Tommy's posting style is conspicuously similar to LHUCKS.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Tommy's posting style is conspicuously similar to LHUCKS.

Has he mentioned Matt Leinart as a write-in candidate for president?

 

[TobiasFunke]

If the posts in this thread over the last 12 hours are a preview of a Hillary Clinton presidency, I can't wait. This is hilarious.

 

[Boston]

An important footnote in this campaign...it looks like the mantra of "it's Bush's fault" has finally been retired and now has been replaced by "it's Putin's fault"...from an entertainment standpoint he should be a much bigger villain...brings a little more James Bond intrigue into the mix...

 

[Riversco]

And while I support the pro-business wing, I firmly believe the progressive wing is going to eventually win out.

I'm sure people thought that in the 1960s.  They probably thought the counterculture movement would win out and the nation would be very progressive by the 1980s.  Instead, the counterculture movement became the yuppies and fully embraced the business world.  What probably happens is people grow up, get commitments (a career, a family, a house, money) and suddenly there are a LOT of reasons to work with the system and seek stability instead of being "progressive".

 

[Riversco]

And its very unlikely Hillary is winning in 2020.  She would have lost this election against almost any other republican.  Its not difficult to find a republican candidate that will beat Hillary in favorability ratings or likability.  Huntsman, Kasich, Ryan, Romney, and several others who I porbably can't think of off the top of my head.

 

[Riversco]

Hillary won the schoalstic vote in a landslide 52%-35%.

http://election.scholastic.com/vote/

 

[The Commish]

So much for....."this election is all about Trump"....

I said when Trump won the primary that #1, I was shocked he made it that far and #2 all Hillary had to do was wait him out.

Perspective is lost really quickly around here eh?  

 

[TobiasFunke]

And its very unlikely Hillary is winning in 2020.  She would have lost this election against almost any other republican.  Its not difficult to find a republican candidate that will beat Hillary in favorability ratings or likability.  Huntsman, Kasich, Ryan, Romney, and several others who I porbably can't think of off the top of my head.

If you think a sane person is going to win the GOP nomination in 2020 after four years of Clinton hysteria you haven't been watching the same election cycle I've been watching.  They'll be lucky if they get Ted Cruz.  David Duke is more likely than Jon Huntsman.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

If you look at the projects on their site right now it's pretty obvious what they do. Pick any current project. They take corporate partners and governmental actors, round up private funding and/or public funding which goes into private enterprise with an ostensibly public purpose. But at this point it's basically a pr firm which often links up private actors who generate profit. Sometimes US aid money gets cycled back into the CF after they obtained it for these governmental/private entities. And sometimes it's just plain pr like their partnership with McDonald's. It's a long convo which I know you're up for but I've got some work to do so maybe we can tackle it another time.

I wouldn't mind your looking at this one when you get a chance though. Seems the Hillaryites weren't as too, too eager to debunk as usual.

Not interested!   You challenged the statement that millions have had their lives saved by the work of the Clinton Foundation.   The corporate dealings that made AIDS treatments affordable in poor nations alone is enough to make you look ridiculously foolish challenging that statement.   Add in vaccines, clean water, etc.   No amount of "yah but what about this"  will change these facts.  No level of corruption or criminal activity or simply questionable projects or whatever that may possibly be clearly demonstrated sometime in the future would make these people any less real.    I defended one simple, easy to grasp, easy to verify claim concerning the foundation not the entire "kitchen sink" of accusations.   Especially not trying to sound informed by pretending to completely understand a single email with very little context.   

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If the posts in this thread over the last 12 hours are a preview of a Hillary Clinton presidency, I can't wait. This is hilarious.

Yep probably a preview of the next 4 years. Definitely one of the points about them.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Not interested!   You challenged the statement that millions have had their lives saved by the work of the Clinton Foundation.   The corporate dealings that made AIDS treatments affordable in poor nations alone is enough to make you look ridiculously foolish challenging that statement.   Add in vaccines, clean water, etc.   No amount of "yah but what about this"  will change these facts.  No level of corruption or criminal activity or simply questionable projects or whatever that may possibly be clearly demonstrated sometime in the future would make these people any less real.    I defended one simple, easy to grasp, easy to verify claim concerning the foundation not the entire "kitchen sink" of accusations.   Especially not trying to sound informed by pretending to completely understand a single email with very little context.   

You responded to a post I made to Tommy about the CF saving millions of lives, which I think is a bs claim. I'm glad to talk about the CF as a whole, and I was interested in your take in that one example, but if you want to get back to THE original point, ok no you did not back up Tommy's original claim.

 

[timschochet]

Yep probably a preview of the next 4 years.

That's largely up to you Saints. Are you going to continue breathlessly reporting every Clinton rumor and/or potential scandal, detail by detail? Or will we start fresh and look at her Presidency as a new chapter in our history, without looking backwards?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

That's largely up to you Saints. Are you going to continue breathlessly reporting every Clinton rumor and/or potential scandal, detail by detail? Or will we start fresh and look at her Presidency as a new chapter in our history, without looking backwards?

It was one of the first points made here. The Clintons first time around brought dysfunctionalim and drama with them. If it does or doesn't happen again that's up to them.

They also brought some policies which might have been the most conservative since Reagan, but then those things are not unrelated the GOP Congress often used this stuff against them for leverage or tried to, again it's up to them.

 

[RCon]

That's largely up to you Saints. Are you going to continue breathlessly reporting every Clinton rumor and/or potential scandal, detail by detail? Or will we start fresh and look at her Presidency as a new chapter in our history, without looking backwards?

Fresh and new. Should have done the same in '72.  Once the ejection was over, all previous actions should have been out of bounds.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

a single email with very little context.   

Eh three news links from the time of the email is very much putting things in context IMO.

And the language is extremely plain, it's not a confusing email at all.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Heh. Yeah millions of lives.

Facts

Let's try this again, though I made this point previously: is there anything in this article supporting 'saving millions of lives' which comes from any source other than the Foundation itself?

 

[maxwelledison]

This is an easy comment to make in 2016, after nearly 80 years of economic and political stability in Germany and Japan. But (and I base this on history books, because I wasn't there) if you were traveling in one of those countries in 1945, you might very well come to the conclusion that Germany and Japan were in fact much WORSE off than any middle eastern country- virtually all industry was destroyed, starvation and disease was rampant, and all societal rule had completely broken down. That is much worse, for example, than Iraq was after we removed Saddam Hussein in 2003- Iraq's industries and societal structure was largely intact.

Now there are other differences as well- both Germany and Japan had more literate cultures. Both countries were more homogeneous than Iraq, (which is basically not a nation at all but 3 nations merged together by Winston Churchill for political purposes after World War I), and there are plenty of other cultural and societal differences as well. But the main point is not a nation's readiness for stability, but our commitment to providing it. In the case of Germany and Japan, this nation overcame many obstacles and built up both societies. In the case of Iraq, we barely tried.

Case in point- in Germany we oversaw the creation of their new political parties, helped them get established, carefully weeded out Nazi influences, instituted a new judicial and education system- all of this took years, and was crucial to the stability of the modern German state. In Iraq, we quickly arranged an election without any guidance, with predictable results: the Shia majority voted themselves into power and immediately started persecuting Sunnis and Kurds while we watched, refusing to lift a finger. We let Iraq form their own justice and education (both of which are a corrupt joke) and we watched, refusing to lift a finger. And then we left as quickly as we could skedaddle out of there.

Tim, I think you mean well but in this case it is completely obvious you have no clue what you are talking about.  Germany and Japan bounced back from complete devastation because those countries possess fundamental qualities that over hundreds (or in Japan's case thousands) of years have served them very well.  It has little and likely nothing to do with "our commitment to providing (stability)".  Indeed, the fact that you think their ability to rebuild and maintain stable government and civilization is because of the US shows how comprehensively you misunderstand the issue. 

 

[timschochet]

Fresh and new. Should have done the same in '72.  Once the ejection was over, all previous actions should have been out of bounds.

Lol. If Hillary is caught covering up a  break in of Republican headquarters that ought to be followed up. 

 

[cobalt_27]

If you think a sane person is going to win the GOP nomination in 2020 after four years of Clinton hysteria you haven't been watching the same election cycle I've been watching.  They'll be lucky if they get Ted Cruz.  David Duke is more likely than Jon Huntsman.

This is a really good point.  I can already see the foam coming out of their mouths.

 

[RCon]

Lol. If Hillary is caught covering up a  break in of Republican headquarters that ought to be followed up. 

She's done far worse than that, IMO.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If you think a sane person is going to win the GOP nomination in 2020 after four years of Clinton hysteria you haven't been watching the same election cycle I've been watching.  They'll be lucky if they get Ted Cruz.  David Duke is more likely than Jon Huntsman.

Well what could possibly go wrong. 2000 after 8 years of the Clintons we got George Bush, because you know let's restore decency to the White House.

But we have jumped back into the cycle now haven't we.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Seriously, this is faith based.  It is not grounded in reality.     There is not much difference between "Hillary is only winning because her opponent must be weak" than "Trump is only behind because the contest is rigged".   But of course everyone else is delusional.

Her opponent really is weak.  He's the worst candidate in my lifetime, and it is not close.  I don't mean "the person I disagree with the most."  I mean "the person least capable of mounting a successful campaign."  By that metric, he's probably the worst candidate ever in American history, but maybe there's some now-anonymous guy out there that I'm overlooking.  Beating him is not a harbinger of great political acumen.  

 

[BassNBrew]

If you think a sane person is going to win the GOP nomination in 2020 after four years of Clinton hysteria you haven't been watching the same election cycle I've been watching.  They'll be lucky if they get Ted Cruz.  David Duke is more likely than Jon Huntsman.

You'll get a Bush and like it. - The Establishment