2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by trixstar

I have not read the emails myself. I have read right leaning sites and left leaning sites who have broken down what the emails contain. I'm not going to go through every word of 20,000 emails. I have read opinions from /r/The_Donald and I've read opinions from /r/politics. My statement still stands. She will NEVER see one day inside jail for this, she is going to be President and there's nothing Wikileaks or Donald Trump are going to produce that's going to change that.

Why is it you keep making statements on stuff you literally don't read into? My guess is you're also just listening to what the media is telling you, even with all the evidence they are literally corrupt and in the tank for Hillary.

The reason Hillary has a chance to win and not go to jail is because her, Obama, Lynch and Comey are all in on covering up a big scandal. If that info gets suppressed she will slide. If it comes out it's game over. That's just my informed opinion with a little bit of my own foresight added in.

[Timmay]

The Press Buries Hillary Clinton?s Sins - WSJ

If average voters turned on the TV for five minutes this week, chances are they know that Donald Trump made lewd remarks a decade ago and now stands accused of groping women.

But even if average voters had the TV on 24/7, they still probably haven’t heard the news about Hillary Clinton: That the nation now has proof of pretty much everything she has been accused of.

It comes from hacked emails dumped by WikiLeaks, documents released under the Freedom of Information Act, and accounts from FBI insiders. The media has almost uniformly ignored the flurry of bombshells, preferring to devote its front pages to the Trump story. So let’s review what amounts to a devastating case against a Clinton presidency.

Start with a June 2015 email to Clinton staffers from Erika Rottenberg, the former general counsel of LinkedIn. Ms. Rottenberg wrote that none of the attorneys in her circle of friends “can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents AND why further Hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents.” She added: “It smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing I’ve either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc.”
Opinion Journal Video
0:00 / 0:00
Former Foreign Service Officer James Roberts on how the State Department rewarded Clinton Foundation donors in Haiti. Photo credit: Getty Images.

A few months later, in a September 2015 email, a Clinton confidante fretted that Mrs. Clinton was too bullheaded to acknowledge she’d done wrong. “Everyone wants her to apologize,” wrote Neera Tanden, president of the liberal Center for American Progress. “And she should. Apologies are like her Achilles’ heel.”

Clinton staffers debated how to evade a congressional subpoena of Mrs. Clinton’s emails—three weeks before a technician deleted them. The campaign later employed a focus group to see if it could fool Americans into thinking the email scandal was part of the Benghazi investigation (they are separate) and lay it all off as a Republican plot.

A senior FBI official involved with the Clinton investigation told Fox News this week that the “vast majority” of career agents and prosecutors working the case “felt she should be prosecuted” and that giving her a pass was “a top-down decision.”

The Obama administration—the federal government, supported by tax dollars—was working as an extension of the Clinton campaign. The State Department coordinated with her staff in responding to the email scandal, and the Justice Department kept her team informed about developments in the court case.

Worse, Mrs. Clinton’s State Department, as documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show, took special care of donors to the Clinton Foundation. In a series of 2010 emails, a senior aide to Mrs. Clinton asked a foundation official to let her know which groups offering assistance with the Haitian earthquake relief were “FOB” (Friends of Bill) or “WJC VIPs” (William Jefferson Clinton VIPs). Those who made the cut appear to have been teed up for contracts. Those who weren’t? Routed to a standard government website.

The leaks show that the foundation was indeed the nexus of influence and money. The head of the Clinton Health Access Initiative, Ira Magaziner, suggested in a 2011 email that Bill Clinton call Sheikh Mohammed of Saudi Arabia to thank him for offering the use of a plane. In response, a top Clinton Foundation official wrote: “Unless Sheikh Mo has sent us a $6 million check, this sounds crazy to do.”

The entire progressive apparatus—the Clinton campaign and boosters at the Center for American Progress—appears to view voters as stupid and tiresome, segregated into groups that must either be cajoled into support or demeaned into silence. We read that Republicans are attracted to Catholicism’s “severely backwards gender relations” and only join the faith to “sound sophisticated”; that Democratic leaders such as Bill Richardson are “needy Latinos”; that Bernie Sanders supporters are “self-righteous”; that the only people who watch Miss America “are from the confederacy”; and that New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is “a terrorist.”

The leaks also show that the press is in Mrs. Clinton’s pocket. Donna Brazile, a former Clinton staffer and a TV pundit, sent the exact wording of a coming CNN town hall question to the campaign in advance of the event. Other media allowed the Clinton camp to veto which quotes they used from interviews, worked to maximize her press events and offered campaign advice.

Mrs. Clinton has been exposed to have no core, to be someone who constantly changes her position to maximize political gain. Leaked speeches prove that she has two positions (public and private) on banks; two positions on the wealthy; two positions on borders; two positions on energy. Her team had endless discussions about what positions she should adopt to appease “the Red Army”—i.e. “the base of the Democratic Party.”

Voters might not know any of this, because while both presidential candidates have plenty to answer for, the press has focused solely on taking out Mr. Trump. And the press is doing a diligent job of it.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by tke1600

My guess is you're also just listening to what the media is telling you, even with all the evidence they are literally corrupt and in the tank for Hillary.

The reason Hillary has a chance to win and not go to jail is because her, Obama, Lynch and Comey are all in on covering up a big scandal.

Can you please specify who "the media" is?
Can you please specify what the "big scandal" is?

As in, what exactly is going on and how exactly is that hundreds of media outlets with thousands on staff are all protecting this deep dark secret?

[oldgoldy97]

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Can you please specify who "the media" is?
Can you please specify what the "big scandal" is?

As in, what exactly is going on and how exactly is that hundreds of media outlets with thousands on staff are all protecting this deep dark secret?

Puppet government.

[oldgoldy97]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Can you please specify who "the media" is?
Can you please specify what the "big scandal" is?

As in, what exactly is going on and how exactly is that hundreds of media outlets with thousands on staff are all protecting this deep dark secret?

1) The media: anyone that doesn't subscribe to my way of thinking.
2) The big scandal: Hillary is going to sell the US to Russia because she is the anti-Christ.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by oldgoldy97

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Puppet government.

I'm sorry? Could you be more specific?

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Can you please specify who "the media" is?
Can you please specify what the "big scandal" is?

As in, what exactly is going on and how exactly is that hundreds of media outlets with thousands on staff are all protecting this deep dark secret?

Main Stream Media.

My guess on the scandal, which is still a "conspiracy" at this point, is tied to the reason Hillary ordered bleach bit on 33K emails, lied under Oath, worked secretly with the state deptartment during the email investigation, including Bill meeting with Lynch on a plane towards the end, and how she didn't turn over emails between her and the POTUS. All those are facts unless you believe that Wikileaks is fake, in which I'll add that the Clinton camp still hasn't refuted a single email to be fake.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by tke1600

Main Stream Media.

My guess on the scandal, which is still a "conspiracy" at this point, is tied to the reason Hillary ordered bleach bit on 33K emails, lied under Oath, worked secretly with the state deptartment during the email investigation, including Bill meeting with Lynch on a plane towards the end, and how she didn't turn over emails between her and the POTUS. All those are facts unless you believe that Wikileaks is fake, in which I'll add that the Clinton camp still hasn't refuted a single email to be fake.

So the scandal and reason thousands of peoples are keeping it buried is........?

I mean, is Hillary supposedly going to sell the country Aaron Burr-style?
Is she going to manipulate the Federal Reserve like a Ponzi-scheme and then run off to Switzerland with a trillion now-worthless dollars?
Is she literally a demon bent on destroying humanity?
Is she a reincarnated Nazi surgeon who wants to put Americans in FEMA camps and run sadistic experiments on them?
Does she have a self-destructive personality to such an extent that she wants to see an entire nation plunged into ruin?
Is she a sleeper agent for a communist front?

Like, wtf is the big conspiracy that nutjobs like Alex Jones and Dinesh D'Souza are circle-jerking over? Listening to some people talk about these conspiracies is like listening to a Sex Ed presentation - you can talk about everything except the actual details.

[Addison]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

I'm sorry? Could you be more specific?

Black helicopters. FEMA camps. Bilderbergs.

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

So the scandal and reason thousands of peoples are keeping it buried is........?

I do not think that the MSM knows exactly what is going on as a whole, but I believe they are being ordered to destroy Trump and ignore Wikileaks/Clinton scandals as much as possible. That second part is obvious by now.

For the overall "big" scandal, I wouldn't be too surprised personally if this PDF wasn't almost spot on when it's all said and done.

[babyfaceposey]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

So the scandal and reason thousands of peoples are keeping it buried is........?

I mean, is Hillary supposedly going to sell the country Aaron Burr-style?
Is she going to manipulate the Federal Reserve like a Ponzi-scheme and then run off to Switzerland with a trillion now-worthless dollars?
Is she literally a demon bent on destroying humanity?
Is she a reincarnated Nazi surgeon who wants to put Americans in FEMA camps and run sadistic experiments on them?
Does she have a self-destructive personality to such an extent that she wants to see an entire nation plunged into ruin?
Is she a sleeper agent for a communist front?

Like, wtf is the big conspiracy that nutjobs like Alex Jones and Dinesh D'Souza are circle-jerking over? Listening to some people talk about these conspiracies is like listening to a Sex Ed presentation - you can talk about everything except the actual details.

Details have been posted over the last week. If you want information I would recommend going on reddit and searching for the Podesta links. Otherwise you can continue to listen to the main stream media CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, MSNBC.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Details have been posted over the last week. If you want information I would recommend going on reddit and searching for the Podesta links. Otherwise you can continue to listen to the main stream media CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, MSNBC.

Or I can ask you to just say what the big conspiracy is. A single sentence will do. Is this like a Voldemort kind of thing where no one can say it out loud?

[oldgoldy97]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Or I can ask you to just say what the big conspiracy is. A single sentence will do. Is this like a Voldemort kind of thing where no one can say it out loud?

The only thing that can't be said out loud is that which cannot be verbalized.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by tke1600

For the overall "big" scandal, I wouldn't be too surprised personally if this PDF wasn't almost spot on when it's all said and done.

You know what: Thank you.

This is the first time someone has at least tried to say what the boogieman behind the curtain is. I may be incredible skeptical about a random pdf with no author or sources, but I do thank you for providing something! You've done far more than other anti-Clinton posters here to at least move the conversation in a constructive direction. Now at least there is something substantial to discuss. My following questions are asked in genuine curiosity.

Now:

1. Where is this pdf coming from? Who wrote it and what is their evidence?
2. Why was the State Department selling missiles to al Sharia? (this has to be explained before anything else)
3. How did multiple investigative committees in a Republican-controlled Congress fail to find any evidence to support this theory?
4. If it was the State Department that sold the missiles, then why was it the CIA who insisted that the attack was in response to the video?
5. Why would Hillary be using a home computer in her basement to conduct such a clandestine operation? Why would she even be the one sending the emails and why would it take 20,000 emails to conduct a deal that would necessitate minimizing communication?

And again, why would the State Department be selling missiles to an enemy organization in the first place?

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Or I can ask you to just say what the big conspiracy is. A single sentence will do. Is this like a Voldemort kind of thing where no one can say it out loud?

I think you skipped over my response above.

[NASTY222]

Originally Posted by trixstar

I have not read the emails myself. I have read right leaning sites and left leaning sites who have broken down what the emails contain. I'm not going to go through every word of 20,000 emails. I have read opinions from /r/The_Donald and I've read opinions from /r/politics. My statement still stands. She will NEVER see one day inside jail for this, she is going to be President and there's nothing Wikileaks or Donald Trump are going to produce that's going to change that.

You just made most of the people here raging mad with that sentence

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by tke1600

I think you skipped over my response above.

Got to yours after his. You actually had something that could be discussed.

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

You know what: Thank you.

This is the first time someone has at least tried to say what the boogieman behind the curtain is. I may be incredible skeptical about a random pdf with no author or sources, but I do thank you for providing something!

Now:

1. Where is this pdf coming from? Who wrote it and what is their evidence?
2. Why was the State Department selling missiles to al Sharia? (this has to be explained before anything else)
3. How did multiple investigative committees in a Republican-controlled Congress fail to find any evidence to support this theory?
4. If it was the State Department that sold the missiles, then why was it the CIA who insisted that the attack was in response to the video?
5. Why would Hillary be using a home computer in her basement to conduct such a clandestine operation? Why would she even be the one sending the emails and why would it take 20,000 emails to conduct a deal that would necessitate minimizing communication?

And again, why would the State Department be selling missiles to an enemy organization in the first place?

1. I'd have to look up the author. The reason this story stood out to me is because it adds up with a lot of what we already know and what we are finding out each day. For example, we just found out yesterday that they didn't turn over emails from the POTUS, which seem to have been part of the bleach bit batch.

2. It seems that Obama and Hillary thought it was a good strategy but didn't want to go through congress to get permission. Other than that I don't know the reason why or how missles got in the hands of Al Sharia.

3. When you have Obama, the FBi, the DOJ, and the whole Clinton camp participating in a cover up you won't find out much.

4. See answer from #3.

5. My guess is there could be a whole lot of emails that were embarrassing and classified that she didn't want congress to see, on top of the ones that had to do with the "real" Benghazi story theory posted above.

[trixstar]

Originally Posted by tke1600

Why is it you keep making statements on stuff you literally don't read into? My guess is you're also just listening to what the media is telling you, even with all the evidence they are literally corrupt and in the tank for Hillary.

The reason Hillary has a chance to win and not go to jail is because her, Obama, Lynch and Comey are all in on covering up a big scandal. If that info gets suppressed she will slide. If it comes out it's game over. That's just my informed opinion with a little bit of my own foresight added in.

I don't "listen" to what the media tells me. I try to read as much as possible from all sides and make my own informed opinion. My own opinion is that if something was going to happen i.e. her going to jail it would have already happened. My own opinion is that she's going to be President and it's not going to be a close election. We can have different opinions and still respect one another as human beings. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. One of us will be wrong and hopefully in 24 days we'll move onto something else to talk about.

[corndog]

It is quite apparent that the liberal media has been very successful with both the suppression of news and the destroy at all cost tearing down of a national political candidate. The evidence is in this thread. Trump just happens to be the candidate - the same would have happened with anyone.

[ntgm37]

Let me ask everyone in here something.

Do you agree with our Constitution, support it, and want to see it continue as is

OR

Do you disagree with it, want to rage against it, and want it to be changed?

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by trixstar

I don't "listen" to what the media tells me. I try to read as much as possible from all sides and make my own informed opinion. My own opinion is that if something was going to happen i.e. her going to jail it would have already happened. My own opinion is that she's going to be President and it's not going to be a close election. We can have different opinions and still respect one another as human beings. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. One of us will be wrong and hopefully in 24 days we'll move onto something else to talk about.

I hope you understand that I hope I'm wrong about my theories and it's all just an overblown mistake. If I'm even close to right, we are in for a big mess.

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by tke1600

1. I'd have to look up the author. The reason this story stood out to me is because it adds up with a lot of what we already know and what we are finding out each day. For example, we just found out yesterday that they didn't turn over emails from the POTUS, which seem to have been part of the bleach bit batch.

2. It seems that Obama and Hillary thought it was a good strategy but didn't want to go through congress to get permission. Other than that I don't know the reason why or how missles got in the hands of Al Sharia.

3. When you have Obama, the FBi, the DOJ, and the whole Clinton camp participating in a cover up you won't find out much.

4. See answer from #3.

5. My guess is there could be a whole lot of emails that were embarrassing and classified that she didn't want congress to see, on top of the ones that had to do with the "real" Benghazi story theory posted above.

Ok, so basically Reagan's Iran-Contra Scandal 2.0.

This would, it seems, mean two things:
1. That this is much much bigger than Hillary and therefore, even if she was a big player in the deal, it involves so many more moving parts that to single her out is naive. It'd be more of an indictment of our entire government than a single candidate. In which case it would be largely irrelevant in a runoff between the two major party candidates.
2. It would implicate the Republicans almost as much as the Democrats because, just like the idea of 9/11 being an inside job, there would be no way one party could keep the conspiracy from leaking out to the other side. In all likelihood it would mean both parties were just as guilty.
3. Believing all of this and still voting for one of the Two Parties would be like sentencing the hand that held the knife to prison and letting the other hand go free.