Hillary Clinton

One of the wikileaked Podesta e-mails said:
"Better if a guy named Sayeed Farouk was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter."

Disgusting. He sounds disappointed that the media had no choice to report that the shooters were of middle eastern decent with religiously motivated intentions. Rather than a straight white man to advance their political agenda, and safely pander to the religion of peace.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpLAzAZXi2A

 

You know, I'll bet that if Julian Assange's internet wasn't cut, we'd find out a Wikileaked e-mail about Black Lives Matter stealing Bernie Sanders' mic was all a cordinated event to make him look bad. After all, Black Lives Matter is funded by Soros. And the leaked e-mails had a few quips of "Make Soros happy"

 

I was just reading that there was some stupid rally/meeting/whatever held in Sarajevo, to show some Hillary support and love.
Sarajevo votes for Clinton, they called it.
They gave out stupid T-shirts with a pic of Clinton on them.

That alone is enough for me to hope Trump wins.


Organized by Bosniaks, of course.
Oh how easy it is to have mouths full of democracy and values, and at the same time to deny basic (constitutional) rights to other constituent nations of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Hypocrisy at its highest.
Tomorrow they'll be kissing Erdogan's ass, like good little Bosnian servants.

 

Well, I think I can agree with you

 

No politician does

But she does the delivery, masterful

 

Please don't tell me you are a Trumpette?


Hey, thats a good derogatory name for female Trump supporters, sTrumpettes

 

Addendum: I wonder who wrote the "Donald really is healthy as a horse, you know like the one Vladimir Putin rides around on" as that was a cracker, he/she is a genius

Even Trump genuinely laughed at that one

 

Let's just hope she doesn't start running around without a shirt (after she wins) just to prove a point to Putin.

 

Nice video. When I looked it up just now, I found that it's already been removed.

 

But this one still remains up for all to see, and a few smitten Hillary-lovers to not talk about and pretend doesn't exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi9O_Gl15XA&feature=youtu.be

 

that video is still up..

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi9O_Gl15XA&feature=youtu.be

What on earth does your post have to do with this besides prove the point that a few smitten Hillary-lovers choose to not talk about it and pretend it doesn't exist.

 

click the top of the video where the title is Dear Mainstream Media.. will open it on youtube where you can save it..

 

Got it. Thanks.

 

I'm afraid Scott Foval is plainly heard in complete unedited sentences exposing himself as instigating voter fraud. You should pull out the dialogue from that video that you believe is suspect, and then we can discuss your suspicion that it is edited in such a way that Foval is not really saying what he is really saying.

As for the links you provided, they include nothing more than a denial of what is obviously heard in the video. Weak.

Foval was fired, and Creamer resigned. Odd that they didn't sue O'Keefe for defamation of character. If they did, they could probably have the "unedited" video subpoenaed to show how they really didn't say what we all heard them say, and then make O'Keefe pay for trying to make it look like they actually said what they are actually heard saying. But I don't think O'Keefe has anything to worry about. Do you?

 

Snopes and Washington Post have been proven to be in collusion with the Clinton campaign. Stop using them as source material.

pffft

 

I didn't click on them, because they're bogus. You need to get your head clear. Stop listening to the mainstream press -- they're lying to you. I know how easy it is to be brainwashed by the state. Listen to CNN for thirty minutes and I start to get this warm feeling that everything is right in the world.

 

Suspect all you want. You are trying to justify believing that what was clearly heard was taken out of context. If you really believe that, then give me an example of something Foval said that you believe was taken out of context or rearranged. He spoke with no interruption in the damning things he said. Your idea that words were rearranged in such a way as to make Foval's and Creamer's statements appear damning is really ridiculous.

What Foval and Creamer said is clear. You believe that condemning the source will somehow detract from what they have said. Your links may be from what you consider "reputable sources," but the fact is that those links contained nothing more than unproven opinions concerning the content of the video; specifically, that they were edited to change the meaning of what they said. If Foval and Creamer knew that their words were taken out of context, as you assume, they would surely press charges against O'Keefe for defamation of character, and have the video subpoenaed, and clear their good names. Right? Right. That's what any honest person would do. I think you understand that quite clearly why they're walking away from the mess they've made without so much as a squeak.

Someone comes out with rock solid evidence of election rigging right from the horses mouth, and all it takes is for your authority figure of choice to tell you that what you heard with your own ears is not what you heard with your own ears, and you jump right on the propaganda wagon and pull out your shovel and begin your version of damage-control. If any party really believed that the video was edited to defame them, they'd have pressed charges. But you'll probably accept whatever reason they feed you as to why they don't want to. This is a study in denial.

 

The Washington Post is also the first publication in the history of America journalism to recommend criminal charges against one of their sources. That alone is enough for me to avoid reading anything they put out