Hillary Clinton Derail From Religion Of Libertarianism

[Jarhyn]

In other words, Koy... he can't.

This round to Koy.

Since you have the power to edit my posts, I must accept your ruling.

Do you not see your double standard. You hate HRC due to technicities and unfounded republican allegations. And yet trump is one of the biggest con men ever elected to any office in our history?!! It's cool to dislike some of her policies. Many people do. No politician is perfect. But you are so open to allegations that you're the perfect Russian Bot target.

Yeah, in one post he says "she's much more qualified than trump", and in the very next post he's celebrating her end in politics as if he is happy with what we got instead.

It is a FPTP system. If you don't like either candidate, you elect the least-bad one and try to change the system. We should be impeaching the Dump Truck, and while not electing Hillary at THIS point, people had an obligation to, and their failure to meet this obligation is what got us to this nadir. I'm not saying we wouldn't still be in a nadir WITH her - republicans have still been in power and I don't see any reason they would have stopped their fuck-fuck games they played with Obama, and no progress would have been made, but at least we wouldn't have a self-destructive appointment in literally every cabinet agency and a rapist on the SCOTUS

It would have been better still if we had elected the 'socialist', but again, the congress would have been a problem regardless. I'm not OK with cheaters, but I'm even less ok with literal mobsters.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

That fact remains Hillary lost

The facts are that in spite of tremendous efforts against her—among them an extensive program of election fraud tactics, the FBI’s October surprise and an unprecedented and coordinated cyber/subversion attack from Russia—she won the only vote that exists anymore and that she was the clear and decisive preference of the largest percentage of registered American voters (on the order of some eight million).

Those facts won’t ever change.

her grip on the DNC has been crushed. Even the Democrats don't want her back. She's done. She's toast. She should retire gracefully and become an elder statesperson instead of making feeble attempts at a comeback with music videos and sniping from the sidelines.

I guess if you stamp your little foot hard enough you can pretend anything is true, but as has been abundantly demonstrated itt, you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. Regardless, it is the Dems who are stomping their little foot—at the behest and glee of the right—that should be begging her to get back involved.

She, however, is more likely done with the DNC for precisely this kind of DK bullshit. You have been proven wrong again and again and again throughout this thread, finally backed into your corner and this petulant display is all you have left. It is clearly not based on any facts or evidence and equally clearly contradicted by facts and evidence, yet here you stomp away.

So if you’re not just another shill, you are at least clearly demonstratimg why the Dems would be fucked as this is the same baseless bullshit the Bernie bots were regurgitating and all that nonsense got us was Trump. If facts don’t matter to you, then you’re not a Democrat.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Yeah, in one post he says "she's much more qualified than trump", and in the very next post he's celebrating her end in politics as if he is happy with what we got instead.....

Mussolini made the trains run on time but I was happy that he ended up hanging from a street post. The fact you are overlooking is that, while Hillary was indeed, the best qualified candidate and also the smartest, she was also corrupt with an iron grip on the DNC. This made her the "greater evil" in an election offering voters the chance to vote for the lesser of two evils. Trump is a fucking moron, but despite the fear-mongering of the far Left, he's his own worst enemy. When Hillary lost, her power grip was broken and money started to dry up. Even the Democrats were happy to see her gone. She bitched and moaned for months, even published a book that blamed everyone but herself, but to no avail....nor sympathy from the DNC. Senator Franken said it best: "I love Hillary...I think she is very prepared to be president of the United States … and I think she has the right to analyze what happened, but we do have to move on."

For those who question Hillary's grip on the DNC, note the link below....and her slam on the Media. LOL :
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/336018-franken-clinton-dems-need-to-move-on-from-2016-loss
"I mean, [the DNC] was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency," Clinton said. “Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.”

Clinton also derided the media’s coverage of the private email server she used during her tenure at the State Department.

“[It was] the biggest nothing-burger ever,” she said. “They covered it like it was Pearl Harbor. There was no law against it, no rule against it, nothing of that sort. I was very responsible and not at all careless.”

Critics argued that Clinton may have jeopardized sensitive national intelligence by using a personal storage device at State.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

...You hate HRC due to technicities and unfounded republican allegations. ..t.

1) I don't hate anyone as has been pointed out to you before.
2) Like the Democrats, I take everything the Republicans say with a grain of salt. OTOH, I listen to everything the FBI has to say as well as the press. Note the previously linked Hill article.

FWIW, some friendly advice: when a person repeatedly lies about someone else, that, IMHO, is indicative of a person who can't see clearly at best and a dishonest personality at worst.

 

[Harry Bosch]

...You hate HRC due to technicities and unfounded republican allegations. ..t.

1) I don't hate anyone as has been pointed out to you before.
2) Like the Democrats, I take everything the Republicans say with a grain of salt. OTOH, I listen to everything the FBI has to say as well as the press. Note the previously linked Hill article.

FWIW, some friendly advice: when a person repeatedly lies about someone else, that, IMHO, is indicative of a person who can't see clearly at best and a dishonest personality at worst.

Okay fine. You don't hate HRC. But you did call her a "deplorable scumbag"! What do you call people that you hate?!! This thread is starting to drag on and on. At the end of the day, the US has a two party system. Of course in a two party system, there is no perfect candidate. The only way to attract more than 50% of the voters is increase the size of the tent and accept some people and issues in that maybe are distasteful. As a democrat, we need significantly more than 50% to win. My favorite politician in my lifetime was Obama. But he wasn't perfect either. He made many mistakes. Anyway, I will do everything legally in my power to ensure that the most reckless and dangerous politician in my lifetime loses in 6 years....

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

while Hillary was indeed, the best qualified candidate and also the smartest, she was also corrupt

Prove it.

This made her the "greater evil" in an election offering voters the chance to vote for the lesser of two evils.

That makes absolutely no sense. You just said that she was the best qualified candidate and the smartest.

When Hillary lost, her power grip was broken and money started to dry up.

What are you talking about?

Even the Democrats were happy to see her gone.

The Sanders supporters were happy to see her gone, not "the Democrats." You are confusing the whiney ten percent with the majority simply because the whiney ones get headlines.

For those who question Hillary's grip on the DNC, note the link below....and her slam on the Media. LOL :
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/336018-franken-clinton-dems-need-to-move-on-from-2016-loss
"I mean, [the DNC] was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency," Clinton said. “Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.”

That is a fact, not a "slam" nor representative of a "grip." The Clintons have been central figures in the DNC because the overwhelming majority of Democrats have all wanted them to be central. They have raised over a billion dollars for the DNC throughout their careers and Bill Clinton remains one of the most beloved Presidents in our history.

You are demonstrating perfectly the whiney voice of the tiny percentile, so, again, if you're not a shill, then you're just as irrelevant to the conversation as none of this has to do with what the overwhelming majority of Democrats think or feel.

Clinton also derided the media’s coverage of the private email server she used during her tenure at the State Department.

“[It was] the biggest nothing-burger ever,” she said. “They covered it like it was Pearl Harbor. There was no law against it, no rule against it, nothing of that sort. I was very responsible and not at all careless.”

Again, as has been conclusively proved to you itt, she was correct on all fronts.

You are pointing at an ant hill and insisting it's Mt. Everest. We understand. You have no evidence of corruption, so all you can do is whine, because that gets you attention and it's our fault for feeding you.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

...You hate HRC due to technicities and unfounded republican allegations. ..t.

1) I don't hate anyone as has been pointed out to you before.
2) Like the Democrats, I take everything the Republicans say with a grain of salt. OTOH, I listen to everything the FBI has to say as well as the press. Note the previously linked Hill article.

FWIW, some friendly advice: when a person repeatedly lies about someone else, that, IMHO, is indicative of a person who can't see clearly at best and a dishonest personality at worst.

Okay fine. You don't hate HRC. But you did call her a "deplorable scumbag"! What do you call people that you hate?!! This thread is starting to drag on and on. At the end of the day, the US has a two party system. Of course in a two party system, there is no perfect candidate. The only way to attract more than 50% of the voters is increase the size of the tent and accept some people and issues in that maybe are distasteful. As a democrat, we need significantly more than 50% to win. My favorite politician in my lifetime was Obama. But he wasn't perfect either. He made many mistakes. Anyway, I will do everything legally in my power to ensure that the most reckless and dangerous politician in my lifetime loses in 6 years....

Yes, I called both Hillary and Trump deplorable scumbags more than once because, IMO, they both are. We, the People deserve better. I don't hate anyone so I can't answer that question. Hate is wrong because it's an emotional state that clouds judgement. I don't hate a rabid dog, even if it infected a loved one. I do think it needs to be put down and will do it myself, but I don't hate it nor take glee in putting down a diseased animal.

Agreed our system isn't perfect <insert Churchill quote here>, but there is a long, long road between "two deplorable scumbags up for President" and "there is no perfect candidate". We, the People, can do better and should demand better.

Let's hope Trump either resigns before the end of his term (my guess "medical reasons") or doesn't run in 2020. Why the fuck would a 74 year old Billionaire want to spend the last years of his life chained to a desk?

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

...

 

[Max Rockatansky]

...

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

...

 

[Tom Sawyer]

/mod

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Technically....eh, nevermind.

Maxi, provide evidence of your claim that HRC is corrupt.

 

[Jarhyn]

Okay fine. You don't hate HRC. But you did call her a "deplorable scumbag"! What do you call people that you hate?!! This thread is starting to drag on and on. At the end of the day, the US has a two party system. Of course in a two party system, there is no perfect candidate. The only way to attract more than 50% of the voters is increase the size of the tent and accept some people and issues in that maybe are distasteful. As a democrat, we need significantly more than 50% to win. My favorite politician in my lifetime was Obama. But he wasn't perfect either. He made many mistakes. Anyway, I will do everything legally in my power to ensure that the most reckless and dangerous politician in my lifetime loses in 6 years....

Yes, I called both Hillary and Trump deplorable scumbags more than once because, IMO, they both are. We, the People deserve better. I don't hate anyone so I can't answer that question. Hate is wrong because it's an emotional state that clouds judgement. I don't hate a rabid dog, even if it infected a loved one. I do think it needs to be put down and will do it myself, but I don't hate it nor take glee in putting down a diseased animal.

Agreed our system isn't perfect <insert Churchill quote here>, but there is a long, long road between "two deplorable scumbags up for President" and "there is no perfect candidate". We, the People, can do better and should demand better.

Let's hope Trump either resigns before the end of his term (my guess "medical reasons") or doesn't run in 2020. Why the fuck would a 74 year old Billionaire want to spend the last years of his life chained to a desk?

Yes, we deserve better. So do the work which must be done and join us in loudly demanding proportional representation and approval voting then, so that we can actually challenge the conservative minority and those who poison the DNC with anti democratic behavior.

You are complaining and sewing strife without advocating for a solution, or joining those who do. Shame on you.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Technically....eh, nevermind.

Maxi, provide evidence of your claim that HRC is corrupt.

Technically....eh, nevermind.

https://www.mondialisation.ca/why-both-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-are-corrupt/5549269

 

[Max Rockatansky]

A little flash from the past. A more indepth look at corruption within the DNC, of which Hillary controlled via vast injections of money from her "Foundation": https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...calling-out-corruption-during-clinton-scandal
...where was the desire by Democrats to combat corruption when we found out Hillary Clinton improperly used a private email server? We learned that there was an “anomaly” on her server discovered by the intelligence community inspector general that led him to believe that virtually every single one of the emails that went through that server was sent surreptitiously to a foreign entity unrelated to Russia. There was corruption in her decision to set up the unsecured email server in her basement in violation of longstanding security protocols. There was corruption in the ramshackle FBI “investigation” into it. Democrats continue to deny that she put national security at risk.

The Democrats were equally silent about Holder when the House held him in contempt of Congress attorney general for obstructing an oversight investigation into the “Fast and Furious” operation in 2012. Rather than take a stand, more than 100 Democrats simply left the chamber and refused to vote. Where was Pelosi trying to root out corruption then?

Similarly, the Democrats have remained silent about the manner in which the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Carter Page, a private American citizen, was secured. Release of the redacted documents revealed that the FBI agents who prepared the applications did not make clear to the court that much of the information regarding Page had come straight from an opposition research document funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, information former FBI Director James Comey himself referred to as “salacious” and “unverified.” Democrats did not wail with outrage when this corruption of the FISA process was revealed. Instead, they doubled down and defended the application.

 

[ZiprHead]

A little flash from the past. A more indepth look at corruption within the DNC, of which Hillary controlled via vast injections of money from her "Foundation": https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...calling-out-corruption-during-clinton-scandal
...where was the desire by Democrats to combat corruption when we found out Hillary Clinton improperly used a private email server? We learned that there was an “anomaly” on her server discovered by the intelligence community inspector general that led him to believe that virtually every single one of the emails that went through that server was sent surreptitiously to a foreign entity unrelated to Russia. There was corruption in her decision to set up the unsecured email server in her basement in violation of longstanding security protocols. There was corruption in the ramshackle FBI “investigation” into it. Democrats continue to deny that she put national security at risk.

The Democrats were equally silent about Holder when the House held him in contempt of Congress attorney general for obstructing an oversight investigation into the “Fast and Furious” operation in 2012. Rather than take a stand, more than 100 Democrats simply left the chamber and refused to vote. Where was Pelosi trying to root out corruption then?

Similarly, the Democrats have remained silent about the manner in which the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Carter Page, a private American citizen, was secured. Release of the redacted documents revealed that the FBI agents who prepared the applications did not make clear to the court that much of the information regarding Page had come straight from an opposition research document funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, information former FBI Director James Comey himself referred to as “salacious” and “unverified.” Democrats did not wail with outrage when this corruption of the FISA process was revealed. Instead, they doubled down and defended the application.

An opinion piece by Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the TEA Party Patriots. Sorry, not buying it. It's a piece so full of conspiracy theories it would be much more appropriate on Prison Planet.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

A little flash from the past. A more indepth look at corruption within the DNC, of which Hillary controlled via vast injections of money from her "Foundation": https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...calling-out-corruption-during-clinton-scandal
...where was the desire by Democrats to combat corruption when we found out Hillary Clinton improperly used a private email server? We learned that there was an “anomaly” on her server discovered by the intelligence community inspector general that led him to believe that virtually every single one of the emails that went through that server was sent surreptitiously to a foreign entity unrelated to Russia. There was corruption in her decision to set up the unsecured email server in her basement in violation of longstanding security protocols. There was corruption in the ramshackle FBI “investigation” into it. Democrats continue to deny that she put national security at risk.

The Democrats were equally silent about Holder when the House held him in contempt of Congress attorney general for obstructing an oversight investigation into the “Fast and Furious” operation in 2012. Rather than take a stand, more than 100 Democrats simply left the chamber and refused to vote. Where was Pelosi trying to root out corruption then?

Similarly, the Democrats have remained silent about the manner in which the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Carter Page, a private American citizen, was secured. Release of the redacted documents revealed that the FBI agents who prepared the applications did not make clear to the court that much of the information regarding Page had come straight from an opposition research document funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, information former FBI Director James Comey himself referred to as “salacious” and “unverified.” Democrats did not wail with outrage when this corruption of the FISA process was revealed. Instead, they doubled down and defended the application.

An opinion piece by Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the TEA Party Patriots. Sorry, not buying it.

First, "the Hill" is a left-of-center media source. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-hill/

Second, even if it was an article about Jews by Adolf Hitler, facts remain facts. Critical thinking allows a person to avoid "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" by gleaning facts, if any, from any source regardless of who wrote it or who published/broadcast it. In this case, the article notes several signs of either corruption or deliberate negligence on the part of the Democrats. Just so we're clear, I'm not a fan of the Republicans either and became an Independent in 2012 after years of frustration with the RNC. To paraphrase Reagan, "I didn't leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me".


Third, while you may disagree the DNC is corrupt, or at least has no interest in draining the swamp, I will certainly agree that Trump is only adding alligators to the swamp with no intention of draining it himself.

 

[ZiprHead]

A little flash from the past. A more indepth look at corruption within the DNC, of which Hillary controlled via vast injections of money from her "Foundation": https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...calling-out-corruption-during-clinton-scandal
...where was the desire by Democrats to combat corruption when we found out Hillary Clinton improperly used a private email server? We learned that there was an “anomaly” on her server discovered by the intelligence community inspector general that led him to believe that virtually every single one of the emails that went through that server was sent surreptitiously to a foreign entity unrelated to Russia. There was corruption in her decision to set up the unsecured email server in her basement in violation of longstanding security protocols. There was corruption in the ramshackle FBI “investigation” into it. Democrats continue to deny that she put national security at risk.

The Democrats were equally silent about Holder when the House held him in contempt of Congress attorney general for obstructing an oversight investigation into the “Fast and Furious” operation in 2012. Rather than take a stand, more than 100 Democrats simply left the chamber and refused to vote. Where was Pelosi trying to root out corruption then?

Similarly, the Democrats have remained silent about the manner in which the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Carter Page, a private American citizen, was secured. Release of the redacted documents revealed that the FBI agents who prepared the applications did not make clear to the court that much of the information regarding Page had come straight from an opposition research document funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, information former FBI Director James Comey himself referred to as “salacious” and “unverified.” Democrats did not wail with outrage when this corruption of the FISA process was revealed. Instead, they doubled down and defended the application.

An opinion piece by Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the TEA Party Patriots. Sorry, not buying it.

First, "the Hill" is a left-of-center media source. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-hill/

Second, even if it was an article about Jews by Adolf Hitler, facts remain facts. Critical thinking allows a person to avoid "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" by gleaning facts, if any, from any source regardless of who wrote it or who published/broadcast it. In this case, the article notes several signs of either corruption or deliberate negligence on the part of the Democrats. Just so we're clear, I'm not a fan of the Republicans either and became an Independent in 2012 after years of frustration with the RNC. To paraphrase Reagan, "I didn't leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me".


Third, while you may disagree the DNC is corrupt, or at least has no interest in draining the swamp, I will certainly agree that Trump is only adding alligators to the swamp with no intention of draining it himself.

Dude, right at the top of the article: "THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL"

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Hillary recently said she'd "like to be president" but won't think about it until after the midterms, which means she hasn't ruled it out.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLzOTMdwedg[/youtube]

If she runs again, will the press and DNC push her as heir apparent again?

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Hillary recently said she'd "like to be president" but won't think about it until after the midterms, which means she hasn't ruled it out.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLzOTMdwedg[/youtube]

If she runs again, will the press and DNC push her as heir apparent again?

Hillary is only slightly less of a narcissistic asshole than Trump. Sure she'd like to run again, if for no other reason than vindication, but I strongly doubt the DNC will let her do more than be allowed to show up as a recipient for some sort of lifetime achievement award.