Clinton Corruption

[Baldy]

Hillary Clinton's guilt-by-association ad lives in a glass house filled with convicts

In an election where Americans are clamoring for more civility and more substance, Hillary Clinton's new television ad intimating that Donald Trump might be a racist white supremacist because of the people who support him or have interviewed him has hit a media chord.

In political parlance, it's known as a guilt-by-association attack. It's one of the oldest in politics. During the nasty 1800 race, President John Adams and his supporters mercilessly attacked Thomas Jefferson's associations to paint him as a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, "the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father." Not much subtly there.

A more recent and famous example was the 1988 Willie Horton ad by George H.W. Bush's supporters. It suggested then-Democratic nominee Mike Dukakis was a soft-on-crime governor because Massachusetts released a criminal on furlough who then stabbed a man and raped a woman.

Such ads can be effective .... if the candidate lobbing them doesn't own her own record of guilty associations.

Hillary and Bill Clinton's 40 years in the public limelight has put them in touch with friends, business associates, co-workers and fund-raisers who turned out to be felons, thieves, crooked savings & loans owners, an underage sex offender and agents of foreign influence.

In fact, more than a dozen of their associates when they were last in the White House in the 1990s or from when she ran for president in 2008 have landed in prison. Many were key figures in scandals like Whitewater, the China fund-raising investigation or straw donor criminal investigations.

Here's a Top 10 List that's a good reminder of an old adage: one should pick their battles, and their friends, carefully.

JSO, please tell us again why The Hildabeast is such a better candidate...

[Skjellyfetti]

They're both terrible candidates.

Trump has mob connections out the wazoo and has plenty of business associates that have winded up in prison.

Not saying "Vote for Hillary."

Don't vote for either.

[Bronco]

-
I'll take the unknown of Trump over the known of Hillary

[Pwns]

And I still haven't heard Hillary Clinton comment on her endorsement from Communist Party USA. How do we know she isn't some sympathizer to them?

[kalm]

And I still haven't heard Hillary Clinton comment on her endorsement from Communist Party USA. How do we know she isn't some sympathizer to them?

They endorsed her? Why?

[Chizzang]

Hilary Clinton is corrupt...



Well you don't say , I'm shocked I tell you

[CID1990]

They're both terrible candidates.

Trump has mob connections out the wazoo and has plenty of business associates that have winded up in prison.

Not saying "Vote for Hillary."

Don't vote for either.

I have a liberal friend at DoS

(actually 99.9% of my friends at DoS are liberals... theres a clizzang shoker for you)

she posted an article from some site like the Atlantic or Rolling Stone talking about how the prospect of a President Trump makes it immoral to vote third party-

full stop on that for a sec...

in other words, if I vote for Johnson and Trump wins, then I am immoral for that in the same way a person who voted for the communists in Weimar Germany was morally responsible for Adolf Hitler

This is a usually sane, sober, well educated liberal State Dept type. The fact that she feels this way and also that when I queried her directly as to whether she considered me immoral for voting my conscience ... is arresting. We have turned a corner when voting your conscience in the face of two heinous choices is in itself considered reprehensible

of course she and many others who concede that Hillary is BAD (tut tut) would still be voting for her if she was running against Kasich - so there's some self righteous bullshit at work here

but suffice to say that we have reached a poisonous place when someone who refuses to reward either party for their offerings can be vilified as "immoral"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

They're both terrible candidates.

Trump has mob connections out the wazoo and has plenty of business associates that have winded up in prison.

Not saying "Vote for Hillary."

Don't vote for either.

I have a liberal friend at DoS

(actually 99.9% of my friends at DoS are liberals... theres a clizzang shoker for you)

she posted an article from some site like the Atlantic or Rolling Stone talking about how the prospect of a President Trump makes it immoral to vote third party-

full stop on that for a sec...

in other words, if I vote for Johnson and Trump wins, then I am immoral for that in the same way a person who voted for the communists in Weimar Germany was morally responsible for Adolf Hitler

This is a usually sane, sober, well educated liberal State Dept type. The fact that she feels this way and also that when I queried her directly as to whether she considered me immoral for voting my conscience ... is arresting. We have turned a corner when voting your conscience in the face of two heinous choices is in itself considered reprehensible

of course she and many others who concede that Hillary is BAD (tut tut) would still be voting for her if she was running against Kasich - so there's some self righteous bullshit at work here

but suffice to say that we have reached a poisonous place when someone who refuses to reward either party for their offerings can be vilified as "immoral"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And it's usually the liberals who take that position. Fancy that.

Except for 93, who thinks I'm morally reprehensible for voting for Johnson and handing the SCOTUS to Hillary.

[kalm]

I have a liberal friend at DoS

(actually 99.9% of my friends at DoS are liberals... theres a clizzang shoker for you)

she posted an article from some site like the Atlantic or Rolling Stone talking about how the prospect of a President Trump makes it immoral to vote third party-

full stop on that for a sec...

in other words, if I vote for Johnson and Trump wins, then I am immoral for that in the same way a person who voted for the communists in Weimar Germany was morally responsible for Adolf Hitler

This is a usually sane, sober, well educated liberal State Dept type. The fact that she feels this way and also that when I queried her directly as to whether she considered me immoral for voting my conscience ... is arresting. We have turned a corner when voting your conscience in the face of two heinous choices is in itself considered reprehensible

of course she and many others who concede that Hillary is BAD (tut tut) would still be voting for her if she was running against Kasich - so there's some self righteous bullshit at work here

but suffice to say that we have reached a poisonous place when someone who refuses to reward either party for their offerings can be vilified as "immoral"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And it's usually the liberals who take that position.:

And that's like saying it was the conservatives who supported GWB.

It's not that I don't believe Chizzy and CID with their tales of liberals supporting Clinton. I just happen to know a fair amount of "liberals" and I can think of only one who openly supports Hillary. The rest can't stand her. Will they vote for her anyway come election time? Perhaps. I suppose a fair amount of "conservatives" held their nose for Bush. But ultimately this is still a product of the duopoly.

[CID1990]

And it's usually the liberals who take that position.:

And that's like saying it was the conservatives who supported GWB.

It's not that I don't believe Chizzy and CID with their tales of liberals supporting Clinton. I just happen to know a fair amount of "liberals" and I can think of only one who openly supports Hillary. The rest can't stand her. Will they vote for her anyway come election time? Perhaps. I suppose a fair amount of "conservatives" held their nose for Bush. But ultimately this is still a product of the duopoly.

the answer is: yes they will vote for her

just as they would no matter who she is running against


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

And it's usually the liberals who take that position.:

And that's like saying it was the conservatives who supported GWB.

It's not that I don't believe Chizzy and CID with their tales of liberals supporting Clinton. I just happen to know a fair amount of "liberals" and I can think of only one who openly supports Hillary. The rest can't stand her. Will they vote for her anyway come election time? Perhaps. I suppose a fair amount of "conservatives" held their nose for Bush. But ultimately this is still a product of the duopoly.

You missed the point of my post. Nobody is more obnoxiously sanctimonious than a liberal/"progtard" when you disagree with his ideology. Where do you think the whole PC movement came from? Hint: not the right.

[kalm]

And that's like saying it was the conservatives who supported GWB.

It's not that I don't believe Chizzy and CID with their tales of liberals supporting Clinton. I just happen to know a fair amount of "liberals" and I can think of only one who openly supports Hillary. The rest can't stand her. Will they vote for her anyway come election time? Perhaps. I suppose a fair amount of "conservatives" held their nose for Bush. But ultimately this is still a product of the duopoly.

You missed the point of my post. Nobody is more obnoxiously sanctimonious than a liberal/"progtard" when you disagree with his ideology. Where do you think the whole PC movement came from? Hint: not the right.

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

[Ivytalk]

You missed the point of my post. Nobody is more obnoxiously sanctimonious than a liberal/"progtard" when you disagree with his ideology. Where do you think the whole PC movement came from? Hint: not the right.

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

So you're a moderate now? When I think of moderates on this board, I think of UNI88 and Dr. Heck.

[kalm]

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

So you're a moderate now? When I think of moderates on this board, I think of UNI88 and Dr. Heck.

And OL FU.

Yeah that was kind of the ongoing joke (although I actually find myself quite squarely in the center for the most part... )

Thanks for noticing.

[TheDancinMonarch]

You missed the point of my post. Nobody is more obnoxiously sanctimonious than a liberal/"progtard" when you disagree with his ideology. Where do you think the whole PC movement came from? Hint: not the right.

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

This was only 4 days ago.

I'm a staunch liberal...

[kalm]

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

This was only 4 days ago.

I'm a staunch liberal...

America is to the left of where you think it is.

(Did you honestly think I wasn't aware of my earlier proclamations? )

[CID1990]

As a moderate, I find this post obnoxiously sanctimonious!

This was only 4 days ago.

I'm a staunch liberal...

Some of you are only just now figuring out that klam pretends to be anything but the cookie cutter liberal he is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

JSO, please tell us again why The Hildabeast is such a better candidate...

One of the biggest problems for Trump in this area, Baldy, is that he hired Stephen Bannon to be campaign CEO. That's a guy who told a reporter that the outfit he was heading at the time "We're the platform for the alt-right."

Besides, I think it's valid to point it out when certain people support a candidate. There's no reason why that should't be a consideration. Kane said something about sharing values. Obviously White Supremacists strongly support Trump. Why is that?

It doesn't even matter if Trump intentionally curries their support. The fact that they're excited about his candacity tells you something. They like what they see.

There was a report on one Klan guy endorsing Clinton. But I suspect he really supports Trump and said that for that reason. I'm not the only one that thinks that either.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... -president

"Based on his past statements, it doesn’t appear highly credible that he has changed his effusive allegiance to Donald Trump,” Brian Levin, a former New York police officer who is director of the Centre for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University in San Bernardino, told the Telegraph. “The timing seems suspect. I think this is a function of not wanting to undermine the Trump campaign.”

It's clear that Trump is going to win the overwhelming majority of the White Supremacist vote. And it's not just that. They're obviously very enthusiastic about him.

I'm not even one that is all put off by the White Supremacists. In one sense I'm actually one of them because I do believe there are genetically based distributions of aptitudes between racial groups. But it still tells you something just like it tells you something if you find out the Black Lives Matter people support Clinton (as I'm sure they do).

The fact that Trump is obviously beloved by White Supremacists is not a factor in whether I would vote for him or not. But it you're a Black person or a Civil Rights Activist I can understand why the fact that they love him so much would give you pause. They clearly see him being elected as advancing their cause.

[Bronco]

T-
There's no alternative choice

Jill Stein, the Green Party nominee for president, on Sunday said she would like to “explore for the future” the idea of taking away guns from police officers in order to “address this scourge of racist violence.”

• Gary Johnson endorses #BlackLivesMatter
If there was any doubt, Gov. Gary Johnson is working harder at winning over former Bernie Sanders supporters than Ron and Rand Paul supporters. For whatever reason, he’s taken on several left-wing positions from bashing religious freedom to now supporting Black Lives Matter. At the CNN Libertarian Party Town Hall on Wednesday, Johnson praised the efforts of Black Lives Matter and endorsed the organization. Speaking to a Black Lives Matter protestor and registered Democrat who was shot in the leg during a march, Johnson said, “What it has done for me is that my head has been in the sand...

• "Libertarian" Gary Johnson Pushes "Free Market" Carbon Tax
Despite a historic opportunity for third parties to do well this presidential election, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson seems determined to blow it. In the equivalent of shooting himself in the political foot, Johnson announced support for a deeply unpopular tax on emissions of carbon dioxide, or CO2, to stop alleged “climate change.” And he sought to deceive voters while doing it. While the former New Mexico governor framed the tax scheme as a “fee” and a “free-market approach,” even libertarians blasted the deception.The “fee,” as Johnson referred to his proposed tax in a perfect emulation of ObamaCare-style semantic deception,...

[kalm]

This was only 4 days ago.

Some of you are only just now figuring out that klam pretends to be anything but the cookie cutter liberal he is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Life's a lot easier if everybody fits into certain molds for you.

[CID1990]

Some of you are only just now figuring out that klam pretends to be anything but the cookie cutter liberal he is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Life's a lot easier if everybody fits into the same mold for you.

Denial is more than just a river in Egypt, klam


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

And I still haven't heard Hillary Clinton comment on her endorsement from Communist Party USA. How do we know she isn't some sympathizer to them?

Did she rebuke the KKKs endorsement?

[Baldy]

JSO, please tell us again why The Hildabeast is such a better candidate...

One of the biggest problems for Trump in this area, Baldy, is that he hired Stephen Bannon to be campaign CEO. That's a guy who told a reporter that the outfit he was heading at the time "We're the platform for the alt-right."

Besides, I think it's valid to point it out when certain people support a candidate. There's no reason why that should't be a consideration. Kane said something about sharing values. Obviously White Supremacists strongly support Trump. Why is that?

It doesn't even matter if Trump intentionally curries their support. The fact that they're excited about his candacity tells you something. They like what they see.

There was a report on one Klan guy endorsing Clinton. But I suspect he really supports Trump and said that for that reason. I'm not the only one that thinks that either.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... -president

"Based on his past statements, it doesn’t appear highly credible that he has changed his effusive allegiance to Donald Trump,” Brian Levin, a former New York police officer who is director of the Centre for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University in San Bernardino, told the Telegraph. “The timing seems suspect. I think this is a function of not wanting to undermine the Trump campaign.”

It's clear that Trump is going to win the overwhelming majority of the White Supremacist vote. And it's not just that. They're obviously very enthusiastic about him.

I'm not even one that is all put off by the White Supremacists. In one sense I'm actually one of them because I do believe there are genetically based distributions of aptitudes between racial groups. But it still tells you something just like it tells you something if you find out the Black Lives Matter people support Clinton (as I'm sure they do).

The fact that Trump is obviously beloved by White Supremacists is not a factor in whether I would vote for him or not. But it you're a Black person or a Civil Rights Activist I can understand why the fact that they love him so much would give you pause. They clearly see him being elected as advancing their cause.

OMFG

Oh noes not the white supremacists...all 10 of them?

The dreaded white supremacists aren't the ones burning neighborhoods to the ground or shooting cops in the streets. The ones who are, are the ones supporting The Hildabeast. You must be the only white supremacist who supports Clinton.

For every white supremacist there is a Communist or two. Guess who is getting their support? Your gal.

Communist Party Leader Voted for Sanders, Will Back Clinton

The leader of America's most prominent communist party credits Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders with helping usher socialism into the political mainstream, but says it's essential to back Hillary Clinton if she defeats Sanders in the Democratic presidential primary.

John Bachtell, national chairman of the Communist Party USA, says he cast a ballot for Sanders in the Illinois primary in March, but that the self-styled democratic socialist's loyal backers should temper their criticism of Clinton as a warmongering Wall Street puppet.

"The most important thing is keeping our eye on this extreme right-wing danger and really hoping that all political organizations and democratic forces will unite together to try to defeat that," he says.

"Whoever emerges from the primary fight, there will be a very broad coalition to try to get them elected," he says. "We support independence from the Democratic Party and work with forces laying the groundwork for a third party, but it's not realistic in this election."

The nearly century-old Communist Party USA hasn't run a presidential candidate since 1984 and softened its ideology following the collapse of the Soviet Union. It does not advocate the violent overthrow of the government, but rather socialism through the ballot box.

JSO the white supremacist Communist.

[kalm]

Life's a lot easier if everybody fits into the same mold for you.

Denial is more than just a river in Egypt, klam


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Independent liberals give you the warm and fuzzies...

[TheDancinMonarch]

This was only 4 days ago.

Some of you are only just now figuring out that klam pretends to be anything but the cookie cutter liberal he is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it is important to point out the inconsistencies.