Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby mentalgongfu2 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:32 pm

Sometimes I do wish RI had a "like" button for paragraphs like the above.

Image
"When I'm done ranting about elite power that rules the planet under a totalitarian government that uses the media in order to keep people stupid, my throat gets parched. That's why I drink Orange Drink!"
User avatar
mentalgongfu2
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:02 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby liminalOyster » Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:22 pm

Image
From the book
Last edited by liminalOyster on Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:45 am, edited 3 times in total.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby 82_28 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:36 am

:rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 (Onion story)

And liminal, your image ain't showing up for me. I assume it is either funny or disturbing.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby liminalOyster » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:47 am

82_28 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:36 am wrote::rofl2 :rofl2 :rofl2 (Onion story)

And liminal, your image ain't showing up for me. I assume it is either funny or disturbing.


Fixed.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby Elvis » Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:05 am

Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ4wcnvPsSg


Free advice for Hillary Clinton: Just go away. We're tired of you. Fuck your stupid book. Just go away.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby Spiro C. Thiery » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:27 am

mentalgongfu2 » Today, 04:32 wrote:Sometimes I do wish RI had a "like" button for paragraphs like the above.

You mean this response from JR below? If so, then, it'd be +2 apparently, +1 down to the word.
JackRiddler » Yesterday, 18:47 wrote:
brekin » Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:33 pm wrote:This was a case where being experienced, being qualified, being assertive, being knowledgeable, being connected, being able to get stuff done, having a record, weren't "qualifications" but "dirty fingers".

These are all empty descriptors if don't bother specifying the direction. Being experienced, qualified, assertive, knowledgeable... at what? for what purpose? All of these were also about as true of one Dick Cheney. No one better connected or more able to get stuff done - what did he get done again? Which is not even to make an equation between these two doers of evil, since they do differ in ways that matter, but to point out the obvious lack of content in your adjectives. In any case, if these elections are about the "person," the character as portrayed, rather than the politics they pursue, then my impulse will always be to reject them. On second and careful consideration, with all factors weighed, that was easy in the case of a candidate for whom I have actually voted in the past (New York, 2000), and who rewarded that by voting for the inexcusable war of aggression on the nation of Iraq, among the many other ways she assisted the Bush regime, which is still the champion criminal outfit since at least Nixon. And this was before her acts as the hardline hawk within the Obama administration. I do not forget criminal energy on that level. Tough.
Seeing the world through rose-colored latex.
User avatar
Spiro C. Thiery
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:58 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby Spiro C. Thiery » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:33 am

The extent to which she just happens to be going all out in her assault on social equity, couched as it is in her hypocritical criticism of Sanders' campaign, I find remarkable even for her.
Seeing the world through rose-colored latex.
User avatar
Spiro C. Thiery
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:58 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby Spiro C. Thiery » Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:29 am

Reads like somebody is getting out ahead of something or another.
politico.com
Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC
When I was asked to run the Democratic Party after the Russians hacked our emails, I stumbled onto a
shocking truth about the Clinton campaign.

By DONNA BRAZILE November 02, 2017


Before I called Bernie Sanders, I lit a candle in my living room and put on some gospel music. I wanted to center myself for what I knew would be an emotional phone call.

I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested. I’d had my suspicions from the moment I walked in the door of the DNC a month or so earlier, based on the leaked emails. But who knew if some of them might have been forged? I needed to have solid proof, and so did Bernie.

So I followed the money. My predecessor, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had not been the most active chair in fundraising at a time when President Barack Obama’s neglect had left the party in significant debt. As Hillary’s campaign gained momentum, she resolved the party’s debt and put it on a starvation diet. It had become dependent on her campaign for survival, for which she expected to wield control of its operations.

Debbie was not a good manager. She hadn’t been very interested in controlling the party—she let Clinton’s headquarters in Brooklyn do as it desired so she didn’t have to inform the party officers how bad the situation was. How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was still something I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks.

By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart.

The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.

“What?” I screamed. “I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.”

That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt—$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.

If I didn’t know about this, I assumed that none of the other officers knew about it, either. That was just Debbie’s way. In my experience she didn’t come to the officers of the DNC for advice and counsel. She seemed to make decisions on her own and let us know at the last minute what she had decided, as she had done when she told us about the hacking only minutes before the Washington Post broke the news.

On the phone Gary told me the DNC had needed a $2 million loan, which the campaign had arranged.

“No! That can’t be true!” I said. “The party cannot take out a loan without the unanimous agreement of all of the officers.”

“Gary, how did they do this without me knowing?” I asked. “I don’t know how Debbie relates to the officers,” Gary said. He described the party as fully under the control of Hillary’s campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp. The campaign had the DNC on life support, giving it money every month to meet its basic expenses, while the campaign was using the party as a fund-raising clearing house. Under FEC law, an individual can contribute a maximum of $2,700 directly to a presidential campaign. But the limits are much higher for contributions to state parties and a party’s national committee.

Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the thirty-two states’ parties who were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.

“Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.

“That was the deal that Robby struck with Debbie,” he explained, referring to campaign manager Robby Mook. “It was to sustain the DNC. We sent the party nearly $20 million from September until the convention, and more to prepare for the election.”

“What’s the burn rate, Gary?” I asked. “How much money do we need every month to fund the party?”

The burn rate was $3.5 million to $4 million a month, he said.

I gasped. I had a pretty good sense of the DNC’s operations after having served as interim chair five years earlier. Back then the monthly expenses were half that. What had happened? The party chair usually shrinks the staff between presidential election campaigns, but Debbie had chosen not to do that. She had stuck lots of consultants on the DNC payroll, and Obama’s consultants were being financed by the DNC, too.

When we hung up, I was livid. Not at Gary, but at this mess I had inherited. I knew that Debbie had outsourced a lot of the management of the party and had not been the greatest at fundraising. I would not be that kind of chair, even if I was only an interim chair. Did they think I would just be a surrogate for them, get on the road and rouse up the crowds? I was going to manage this party the best I could and try to make it better, even if Brooklyn did not like this. It would be weeks before I would fully understand the financial shenanigans that were keeping the party on life support.

Right around the time of the convention the leaked emails revealed Hillary’s campaign was grabbing money from the state parties for its own purposes, leaving the states with very little to support down-ballot races. A Politico story published on May 2, 2016, described the big fund-raising vehicle she had launched through the states the summer before, quoting a vow she had made to rebuild “the party from the ground up … when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen.”

Yet the states kept less than half of 1 percent of the $82 million they had amassed from the extravagant fund-raisers Hillary’s campaign was holding, just as Gary had described to me when he and I talked in August. When the Politico story described this arrangement as “essentially … money laundering” for the Clinton campaign, Hillary’s people were outraged at being accused of doing something shady. Bernie’s people were angry for their own reasons, saying this was part of a calculated strategy to throw the nomination to Hillary.

I wanted to believe Hillary, who made campaign finance reform part of her platform, but I had made this pledge to Bernie and did not want to disappoint him. I kept asking the party lawyers and the DNC staff to show me the agreements that the party had made for sharing the money they raised, but there was a lot of shuffling of feet and looking the other way.

When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America.

The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn. Well, here was the answer.

When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party. If the party has an incumbent candidate, as was the case with Clinton in 1996 or Obama in 2012, this kind of arrangement is seamless because the party already is under the control of the president. When you have an open contest without an incumbent and competitive primaries, the party comes under the candidate’s control only after the nominee is certain. When I was manager of Gore’s campaign in 2000, we started inserting our people into the DNC in June. This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed in August 2015, just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.

I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, and I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement.

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

I had to keep my promise to Bernie. I was in agony as I dialed him. Keeping this secret was against everything that I stood for, all that I valued as a woman and as a public servant.

“Hello, senator. I’ve completed my review of the DNC and I did find the cancer,” I said. “But I will not kill the patient.”

I discussed the fundraising agreement that each of the candidates had signed. Bernie was familiar with it, but he and his staff ignored it. They had their own way of raising money through small donations. I described how Hillary’s campaign had taken it another step.

I told Bernie I had found Hillary’s Joint Fundraising Agreement. I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee. Had I known this, I never would have accepted the interim chair position, but here we were with only weeks before the election.

Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were. The polls were unanimous in her winning but what, he wanted to know, was my own assessment?

I had to be frank with him. I did not trust the polls, I said. I told him I had visited states around the country and I found a lack of enthusiasm for her everywhere. I was concerned about the Obama coalition and about millennials.

I urged Bernie to work as hard as he could to bring his supporters into the fold with Hillary, and to campaign with all the heart and hope he could muster. He might find some of her positions too centrist, and her coziness with the financial elites distasteful, but he knew and I knew that the alternative was a person who would put the very future of the country in peril. I knew he heard me. I knew he agreed with me, but I never in my life had felt so tiny and powerless as I did making that call.

When I hung up the call to Bernie, I started to cry, not out of guilt, but out of anger. We would go forward. We had to.
Seeing the world through rose-colored latex.
User avatar
Spiro C. Thiery
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:58 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:17 am

Thanks I was going to post that but hadn't got to it ....some people here have the wrong impression I wanted Clinton to be president...that couldn't be further from the truth...I joined a newly formed Bernie site immediately after it was formed...had thousands of posts (a whole lot about Paul Manafort).... before the election and actively campaigned for Bernie. Soon after the election that website went in a completely different direction confirming what I had suspected that it was a fake from the start. Most of my posts there were deleted and I was banned following the same tactic of the owner of the Progressive Independent (given over to The Bell) a Marxist website....how does that happen?
Image
Image

which had help getting started by the very same person using a different name ...I have proof of that and they know that and that is why a trap was set for me to be banned ....get a clue people I screen cap and save everything! Even all the personal attacks here that mysteriously only started last year after being here from the start 12 years ago and then I get trashed for trying to defend myself just because I post what I believe ..that is why Jeff invited me to join before this site even went up

It seems we have two things in common this morning Spiro C. Thiery
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:37 pm

Donna Brazile! Unbelievable!
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby liminalOyster » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:46 pm

If I was the fixer for a Mexican soap opera script, I'd reject this turn as too unbelievable.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:24 pm

Say what bad of her you will, and it's probably true and deserved, but Brazile is a survivor. She'll be off the sinking ship in time to swim to the next one. She and whatever she is gaining from this are totally secondary; she is still a prize source for the dirt she is exposing in a way that cannot be denied. Of course she left out the part wherein she passed the Sanders debate questions to Clinton, but again: This is a very good sign.

Also, it's news. The August 2015 financing deal between Clinton campaign and DNC, giving the campaign total control of DNC staffing and actions. This was a contract. Now with a date and a title.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:08 pm

Very surprising to see Donna Brazile has a conscience. Not surprising at all to see that DWS and Mook don't. I doubt the buck stopped with them; I've been saying since August 2015 that Bernie was getting rat-fucked for a Clinton nomination, so I'm pretty sure there were some Deep State actors higher up the food chain than those two helping her out. But still, I'm surprised to see Brazile state it so clearly: the DNC rigged the primaries for Hillary.
"Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."
-Jim Garrison 1967
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: California
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:03 pm

Whether or not she has a conscience is secondary. That she's the perfect source for the news is good.

Confirmed: In August 2015, DNC was nearing insolvency due to debts occurred in Obama reelection. A formal contract to rescue it financially was signed with the Clinton campaign. In exchange for funding DNC operations, the Clinton campaign was given full power to approve and vet all DNC staff and PR decisions, in violation of the impartiality principles that the DNC claimed to still follow thereafter. The source for this is the interim DNC chair, Brazile, who refers to the arrangement as a "cancer." In this way, the primary process could be rigged against Sanders and for Clinton. Done and out.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:16 pm

they just should have borrowed money from some Russian mobster

Trump Accuses Clinton of Deliberately Losing Election So He Could Be Impeached

By Andy BorowitzNovember 1, 2017

Photograph by Doug Mills / NYT / Redux
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In what might be his most startling allegation against his former election opponent, Donald Trump on Wednesday accused Hillary Clinton of deliberately losing the 2016 election just so that he could be impeached.
“How could one of the most experienced politicians in history lose to the most unfit candidate ever?” Trump asked reporters. “Crooked Hillary lost on purpose because she wanted me to be impeached.”
Explaining Clinton’s motives for intentionally sabotaging her quest for an office she had coveted for decades, Trump said, “Hillary Clinton is more than a nasty woman. She is an evil woman, and her sick mind is capable of anything.”
Trump said that instead of reporting the “fake story” of his campaign’s collusion with the Russians, the media should focus on Clinton’s “diabolical scheme to lose the election.”
“I don’t know if Hillary Clinton lost the election on her own,” Trump said. “Maybe she asked the Russians to help her lose. But the fact is, Hillary Clinton deliberately plotted to put me in the White House, and the American people should be very angry about that.”
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowit ... g-election
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Elihu and 44 guests