Hillary Clinton

And are thy reliable? Are they accurate? Can we trust the Russians and Julian Assange?

 

So you're dredging up all the anti-Clinton charges disseminated over the years by the right wing propaganda mill--including the murder allegations! What kind of person does that make you? Have the Jill Stein fans become that desperate?

 

a Patriot..

 

A sucker for right-wing propaganda. The anti-Clinton propaganda mill has been at it for decades, at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars, and not even Ken Starr could find any merit to most of the allegations.

 

I'm not sucking the teat of the Hildabeast.

 

Your source, World News Daily, is a notorious right-wing conspiracy outlet noted for its Birtherism.

 

Which ones did he find merit in? He'd have probably found a lot of merit to her unauthorized use of email server. Don't you think?

But which ones were you thinking of specifically?

 

Unfortunately, the safe space liberals have the loudest voices and most of the media's sympathy. While it does exist, I don't see too much left wing criticism of safe space liberals. Ever since the media got in bed with the SJWs, there is a great threat to losing our free speech, and racial relations are worse now than they've ever been since the 60s.

 

Does that put me on the Hildabeast teat?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Qc1G6CK3c

 

So, to sum up Sanders' opinion concerning Clinton's unauthorized use of an email server is, "Why can't we all just forget about it?" He would have made a great ass-kisser.

 

I'm not familiar with the term "Hildabeast teat", so I can't say. But I can say you're disseminating propaganda that has little or no credibility.

 

The fact that people worry that it does have a LITTLE or SOME credibility, makes it worth continuing.

 

Let me lay this out, straight, for those having a difficult time following along.

People who once said that Kenneth Starr was full of shit now want to claim his words as gospel.

This stuff cracks me up. :rofl:

 

I think what people are alarmed about concerning that particular email is that the Clinton Foundation received huge donations from both Quatar and Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia claims to have given exorbitant amounts of money to the Clinton campaign, and Saudi Arabia received an increase in arms deals when Clinton was Secretary of State. She has also received lavish presents from King Abdullah. So the thing is that now she has to completely disavow Saudi Arabia, obviously, because they fund Isis. She's known about this a considerable amount of time and has made no such disavowal. Do you think she ever will, or do you think Saudi Arabia has leverage we aren't aware of? I think the latter. And if Trump doesn't bring this up in the next debate, we can pretty much forget about it, because the media will just pretend it never happened, because their job is simply to get Hillary Clinton elected president and have the oligarchy continue on.

Their strategy is pretty transparent. Just recently Yemen allegedly attacked a US Navy ship, for which we retaliated, so now the US can say Saudi Arabia are allies against "terrorists" in Yemen. How convenient -- right when WikiLeaks exposes that they've been aiding ISIS!

And don't forget Russia! Nevermind that little ISIS problem...Cold War II with Russia is the real threat!

...

WikiLeaks has a 100% factual track record. In the last debate Hillary verified the voracity of the Wall Street transcripts that were leaked.

From the Wikileaks website:

 

Hillary Clinton Doesn’t React After Fly Lands on Her Face






http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/09/hillary-clinton-doesnt-flinch-fly-lands-face/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqt8Z1k0oWQ

 

Here's a snippet from the latest Clinton e-mail leak:

 

Birtherism?

 

Right. She's a demon, I tell you! Trump supporter & televangelist Rev. Alex Jones says she & Obama are both demons. You can tell by the smell of sulphur emanating from their bodies & the fact that they attract flies. Quick. Bring in an exorcist! Isen't modern photography great. You can superimpose a fly on somebody and make people think a real fly is on the person's face and she doesn't even flinch. And your point is?

 

Snippet is right, taken completely out of context.

 

Same tactics from you again huh?