Hillary Clinton’s completely unfounded claim that Russia was behind the passing to WikiLeaks of Democratic National Committee documents was breathtakingly cynical. It was a successful ploy in that it gave her supporters, particularly those dominating mainstream media, something else to focus on other than the fact that the DNC had been busily fixing the primaries for Hillary.
It was however grossly irresponsible – an accusation that a US Secretary of State would hesitate to make in public even at the height of the Cold War. It raises further the tensions between the World’s two largest nuclear armed powers, and plays into the mood of rampant Russophobia which we are seeing whipped up daily in the press. With the Ukraine and Syria as points of major tension, to throw such an accusation wildly in defence of her own political ambitions, shows precisely why Hillary should never be US President.
This is all the more true as not only did Hillary have no evidence of Russian involvement, she almost certainly knows the allegation is completely baseless.
Which brings me to the curious murder of Seth Rich, the DNC staffer killed by an armed street robber who left Rich’s gun, watch, cash and wallet. WikiLeaks have offered an award of US $20,000 for information on his assassination. This does not indicate that it was Rich who leaked the emails. It does indicate that WikiLeaks are aware of profound shenanigans involving the Hillary campaign, and are putting effort and resources into piecing together the picture.
Just for amusement, I reproduce hereafter a comment posted in response to an article on Brexit/other possible EU exits in the online publication “The Conversation”.
Although “The Conversation” is apparently American, this commenter claims to be British.
I reproduce his comment with the thought that with that sort of tone, content and style he would probably become bosom buddies with a couple of the regular commenters on here 🙂
“Matthew Bedford
logged in via Google
yet another article that has missed the point of brexit, or why even the majority of English wanted to leave, the cold hard truth is the people coming into are modern democracy are from much less advanced societies, the very basics we brits enjoy never happened, prime example is women’s rights, basically England has been importing misogynist’s and and rapist, and for the least represented it has been a nightmare, infact its been completely swept under the carpet, the tip of the ice berg came to light , when the old ham, rochdale, and bradford, child rape scandal finally came out of the bag , not a little due to the Over kill PC initiative finally lost some power , further more we have had several decades of frankly unwise political rule that has ruined the world and England financially, things are so bad here we are sitting on a mental health time bomb , and in a twist of fate , the 80 killed in france neatly demonstrated the fact to Europe as well, globalisation has caused more suffering murder and rape, only further embedded this sickness within modern societies, people are not well they have been bullied and brutalized by there own governments seemingly being humanitarian but not actually taking into account consequences and frankly they are sick of it, or did they? the easiest way to control a population is to brutalize them and break their will, so there you have it, to the English are own government is the enemy , starting wars, importing inhumanity, giving the countries assets that we the english tax payer payed for to unscrupulous corporations, saying one thing while meaning another lies lies lies , its depressing but its the truth , politics is a game for sociopaths and psychopaths, and that is that.”
Habbabkuk
August 14, 2016 at 12:54
Just for amusement, I reproduce hereafter a comment posted in response to an article on Brexit/other possible EU exits in the online publication “The Conversation”.
………………………………………………………………………………….
Going by the poor grammar and spelling; the commenter is possibly a bit of a right wing nerd.
Toodle-pip
This New Yorker article might interest Loony:
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/38577-focus-the-ordinary-outrage-of-the-baltimore-police-report
Couple of good videos on the Clintons (how come Trump doesn’t use them – could it possibly be that the ‘election’ is just a ‘show’ for what is really a ‘selection’? (I would run with that, plus, of course, Trump doesn’t want to have an unfortunate ‘accident’ or ‘fatal mugging’, and also, he doesn’t want his own ‘skeletons in the cupboard’ exposed):
The Mena Connection – Exposing the CIA, Bush, Clinton, Iran Contra, And Drug Running:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epXVDEn3gsQ
Billary Clinton Exposed! The Clinton Chronicles (Full Version):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSN2_Xgi5u8
@Craig – Bear in mind that Donald Trump’s man Roger Stone – whose involvement in Republican election-time dirty tricks goes back to Watergate and also includes his being behind the Brooks Brothers riot of 2000 – has been in admitted contact with Julian Assange.
I have long believed that the renamed KGB own a large share in Wikileaks.
The Kremlin’s connections with the French National Front are also on the record. As for Nigel Farage…
Don’t understimate the KGBFSB/SVR.
‘As for Nigel Farage…’ indeed?
Jo Coburn (BBC) and George Galloway again (not much good), but on the same link, scroll down and there is a very good debate between George Galloway and Nigel Farage on Sputnik:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/22/george-galloway-and-bbc-presenter-jo-coburn-in-heated-argument-over-brexit_n_9289268.html
Perhaps you haven’t listened to above.
FSB/SVR? And I suppose you reckon the CIA/MI6/Mossad come out smelling of roses?
I mean don’t underestimate the
KGBFSB/SVR.‘Who is the real Hillary Clinton?’:
http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/real-hillary-clinton/?utm_source=Freedom+Articles&utm_campaign=319f7fb718-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cc6823db53-319f7fb718-149199337&mc_cid=319f7fb718&mc_eid=76f300a90c
‘When you listen to the people who have researched Hillary in depth (such as Peter Schweizer, author of Clinton Cash), the people who have worked with her (such as former Clinton insiders Larry Nichols and Dick Morris) and the people that claim to have been molested by her (Cathy O’Brien), you can begin to get a gauge on the real Hillary Clinton. This is not a person who cares greatly about children, or women, or public service. The real Hillary Clinton is a stunning and flagrant example of brazen corruption. This corruption has run all the way from Watergate to Whitewater to Arkansas to the White House and spans several decades. I have said many times that it is truly a wonder that this woman has not been locked up behind bars a long time ago, and at the same time is a sad testament to the state of current society that she is being allowed to run for the highest office in the land – and what’s more is being ushered in via blatant election rigging and control of the media. Hillary has great powers of both tenacity and mendacity. She has gritted her teeth and lied her way through scandal after scandal to somehow survive all sorts of crimes to become the anointed establishment candidate. Hillary’s health is a serious concern, and yet, as the probable recent additions to the Clinton body count seem to show, she will stop at nothing, including murder, to get her hands on the presidency to serve her hidden masters.
The Real Hillary Clinton: Grave Health Problems
Up until 2 weeks ago, Hillary had done a successful job of hiding her serious health problems – but it’s all come out now, and it’s quite scary. We have evidence in the form of leaked emails, leaked reports from insiders, photos and video clips that the real Hillary Clinton has a whole host of health issues, including:
– being regularly confused;
– becoming dazed and distracted (e.g. calling Donald Trump her husband);
– struggling to walk up, or tripping up on, stairs;
– having “short circuits” where loses it mid-sentence;
– having a bizarre hole in her tongue;
– indulging in utterly inappropriate laughter;
– erupting into barely containable coughing fits;
– adopting wild crossed-eyed looks; and
– going into convulsive seizures on camera in public.
Something is seriously not right with her physical and mental health, and many concerned people are asking what the hell is going on. There is speculation that the black man seen to be her “handler” is her doctor, with the drug diazepam in his hand, which treats spasms and seizures. Americans are obviously very concerned about Hillary’s health; a recent Rasmussen poll has shown that 59% want Hillary’s health records to be released……………’
It’s a long article, but well worth reading.
No, it isn’t worth reading at all – it’s utter BS.
Would you mind NOT reproducing swivel-eyed right-wing propaganda from completely discreditable sites like this?
On this blog, as long as it’s anti-Clinton, all sources are fair game, no matter how unreliable.
I presume you have taken your own advice, and not read it, in which case how do you justify condemning it (thus as bad as the creatures that give the knee-jerk response ‘Conspiracy theory’ to every argument against the MSM narrative they hold sacrosant) or you have read it, but know nothing and care less about it’s veracity. I know nothing about Clinton’s health or lack of it, but I do know a considerable amount about the Clinton’s appalling criminal history.
It would appear you don’t.
Remember Einstein’s dictum: ‘”Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance”.
Still, you’re not alone on this site (and many others).
I’m already familiar enough with this fact-free slur from the Republican slime-machine. It was funny watching Fox “News” hosts try to prise an affirmation from some psychologists/ psychiatrists they’d invited on, that La Clinton was indeed sick. They could not provide the answers sought.
What you reproduced above is simple, empty assertion – nothing else. A series of wild speculations, evidence-free an baseless inferences, no citation of anything credible.
Yet this sort of thing is all Gospel to you. Remember the wise words of Winston Churchill: “Do not believe everything you read on the Internet.”
As I have already said written before, I know nothing about Clinton’s physical health – I had no idea that there was any question of it till I read it on this blog.As for their gross criminality, I have read a great deal.
Gary Webb published ‘Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras and the Crack Cocaine Explosion’, which had a great deal about the Clinton’s in it, in 1998; he ‘committed suicide’ in 2004. In 1994, Terry Reed had published ‘Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA’. Cathy O’Brien and Mark Phillips wrote of the Clintons in their books ‘TranceFormation of America’ and ‘Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security’. There are a large number of videos up on the web, and the Clintons are featured in other books I have read. I have a CD with, if I remember correctly, about 2,400 court documents and other relevant documents are reproduced. They have over three tons of documentation.
So before you call the information I posted ‘baseless allegations’, I suggest you do some serious research.
Alcyone: See what our good friend Ben had to say about us over at Squonk’s?
Can’t say I’m a fan of Hillary Clinton even though the Rethuglican alternatives are just too bad to even contemplate. I didn’t like the way she jumped down the throat of that African student a few years’ back, grandstanding on him as if he’d made a deliberately sexist assumption when the mistake was instead down to a misunderstanding over his English. I thought the way she handled it showed either particular weakness of character or inability to read between the lines and realise that if someone whose first language is not English says something you may find offensive it may not necessarily mean that it was intended. If she is on as short a fuse as that and jumps so aggressively at every slight whether imagined or not, then how long will it take for the USA to be at war with every Tom, Dick and Harriet?
There is considerable information about the Clinton’s crimes on this thread already. You could look back over the thread, or just ‘research’ any of the items listed in the initial part of my quote above: ‘‘When you listen to the people who have researched Hillary in depth (such as Peter Schweizer, author of Clinton Cash), the people who have worked with her (such as former Clinton insiders Larry Nichols and Dick Morris) and the people that claim to have been molested by her (Cathy O’Brien), you can begin to get a gauge on the real Hillary Clinton. This is not a person who cares greatly about children, or women, or public service. The real Hillary Clinton is a stunning and flagrant example of brazen corruption. This corruption has run all the way from Watergate to Whitewater to Arkansas to the White House and spans several decades. I have said many times that it is truly a wonder that this woman has not been locked up behind bars a long time ago, and at the same time is a sad testament to the state of current society that she is being allowed to run for the highest office in the land – and what’s more is being ushered in via blatant election rigging and control of the media. Hillary has great powers of both tenacity and mendacity. She has gritted her teeth and lied her way through scandal after scandal to somehow survive all sorts of crimes to become the anointed establishment candidate…….’
As I admit, I have no evidence re her present health, but her moral health is zilch, nada minus infinity. A typical, soul-sold Luciferian.
By the way, I have absolutely no time for mega-crook Trump either, but I have far more knowledge of the Clinton’s.
This should get the pro-American, pro ‘a certain unmentionable country’ and anti-Truth brigade foaming at the mouth, who probably had no idea there was a Facsist coup plot in the States in 1933:
One of the key plotters, Robert Clark, one of Wall Street’s richest bankers and stockbrokers, bond salesman, Gerald MacGuire, said: “We need a fascist government in this country… to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we have built in America. The only men who have the patriotism to do it are the soldiers, and Smedley Butler is the ideal leader. He could organize a million men overnight.”
To make ’em foam even more, here is ONE of the sources:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Coup.htm
Pity the foamers weren’t around the WTC in 2001; their foaming could have put all the fires out!
Israeli buys Palestinian girl a new bike after border guards broke hers:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-buys-palestinian-girl-a-new-bike-after-border-guards-broke-he
A Palestinian girl whose bicycle was taken and broken by Border Police officers earlier this month received a new bicycle on Wednesday that had been donated by an Israeli man, peace activist Lonny Baskin told The Times of Israel.
On August 2, two border guards were caught on film taking 8-year-old Anwar Burqan’s bicycle and putting it into nearby bushes. During the incident, the bicycle was badly damaged and could no longer be used, according to the family.
When Sami Jolles, a diamond merchant who splits his time between Israel and the United States, read about the incident he decided he wanted to help.
Burqan’s experience reminded Jolles of something that had happened to his father in Europe during the 1920s, when a group of anti-Semites attacked him and threw his bicycle into a river, he said.
Giving a little girl a new bicycle after hers had unfairly been destroyed was a way to “close that circle,” Jolles said……..’
HuffPo Goes Haywire Against Russia, For Hillary
http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/08/18/huffpo-goes-haywire-against-russia-for-hillary/
‘…….The American Establishment has lost the excuse of there being an ideological reason for their hostility against Russia; so, scare-tactics are used, such as that “Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe.” That “red scare” used to be the particular demagoguery of Republicans — back when there was an ideological excuse for it. But now, it’s even the way of the U.S. press, as it presses forward with the Hillary Clinton campaign, to make her the next U.S. President. With her as the candidate, they’ve got to make it ‘respectable’.
Western media-watchdog organizations demand U.S.-government-approved standards of ‘press freedom’. However, slanting the ‘news’ as HuffPo and other major U.S. ‘news’ media do, is being treated by those organizations as if it were okay, and were a ‘free press’, when perhaps it isn’t, really. Thus, for example, wikipedia’s article on “Media Freedom in Russia” notes that ‘According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, ‘All three major television networks are now in the hands of Kremlin loyalists.’” Aren’t all television networks in the U.S. now in the hands of U.S. loyalists? There’s no more media-diversity here than there. America has its own issues regarding freedom of its press, and is in no valid position to use its standards to evaluate other nations’ standards. America’s main agencies to evaluate ‘press freedom’ in nations around the world are Freedom House, and National Endowment for Democracy. Robert Parry reported, on 8 January 2015: “Documents from the Reagan presidential library reveal that two major institutions promoting ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ — Freedom House and National Endowment for Democracy — worked hand-in-glove, behind-the-scenes, with a CIA propaganda expert in the 1980s.” And there’s lots from other U.S. Presidencies that still hasn’t been released; cover-ups are instead the norm, in our ‘democracy’ — if we have one.
25 years after the communist Soviet Union and its military alliance the Warsaw Pact ended, General Flynn’s serving RT as an expert commentator about American national-security concerns was the day’s big news on August 16th? Really? Would things have been lots better for HuffPo’s management if Flynn were instead serving as a commentator on the BBC? Really? The ‘Big News’ of the day?
In true 1950s Joseph R. McCarthy fear-mongering form — but now after the end of communism — HuffPo opened this, their top news story, of the day:….’
Our ‘Dear Leader’, Jeremy, will be giving a talk in Kilburn tomorrow, Sunday 21st:
GWS is non-party political but we are part of the movement called into being by the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party – anti-sexist, anti-racist, welcoming of immigrants and asylum seekers, and against austerity, starvation wages, war and other environmental degradation.
Many of us will be going to hear and support Corbyn on Sunday 21, 6-8pm, Ruach City Church, 197/199 Kilburn High Road, London NW6 7HY. This is a ticketed event, so you’ll need to RSVP on the Jeremy for Labour website. Hope to see you there.
It’s a ticket event: get your ticket here:
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/rally_join_jeremy_corbyn_in_london
The talk is in a church, and promises to be an uplifting, spiritual event. If any of you come along, you can recognise me by my Corbynista, UK out of EU, Cameron out of No.10, Tories out of office and Free Palestine T/shirt which I had printed. I won’t be wearing my tin-foil hat or Faraday cage, as there is a metal detector on the doors (so no guns or knives, please!!).
I attended the Kilburn rally for Corbyn; the queue went all the way from the entrance to the church, down a side road to the first road that led off it, and all the way down that road – about a mile, at least two deep and more in parts.
Sadiq Khan Booed At Jeremy Corbyn Rally Of Thousands In London … packed 4,000 capacity Ruach City Church in Kilburn, north London: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sadiq-khan-booed-at-jeremy-corbyn-rally-of-thousands-in-london_uk_57ba0cafe4b042aee74c31aa
You’d have thought it was Elvis or the Beatles appearing!! The 4,000 capacity theatre (I don’t know if it still is used for a theatre, but it is a church now) was virtually packed.
A friend of mine sitting near the front said she heard a newspaper photographer speakin into his phone, saying it was a ‘moderate size crowd’ – what a lying scumbag!!!!
@ glenn_uk
August 18, 2016 at 23:35
I’m already familiar enough with this fact-free slur from the Republican slime-machine. It was funny watching Fox “News” hosts try to prise an affirmation from some psychologists/ psychiatrists they’d invited on, that La Clinton was indeed sick. They could not provide the answers sought.
What you reproduced above is simple, empty assertion – nothing else. A series of wild speculations, evidence-free an baseless inferences, no citation of anything credible.
Yet this sort of thing is all Gospel to you. Remember the wise words of Winston Churchill: “Do not believe everything you read on the Internet.”
Paul Barbara
August 20, 2016 at 14:48
As I have already said written before, I know nothing about Clinton’s physical health – I had no idea that there was any question of it till I read it on this blog.As for their gross criminality, I have read a great deal.
Gary Webb published ‘Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras and the Crack Cocaine Explosion’, which had a great deal about the Clinton’s in it, in 1998; he ‘committed suicide’ in 2004. In 1994, Terry Reed had published ‘Compromised: Clinton, Bush and the CIA’. Cathy O’Brien and Mark Phillips wrote of the Clintons in their books ‘TranceFormation of America’ and ‘Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security’. There are a large number of videos up on the web, and the Clintons are featured in other books I have read. I have a CD with, if I remember correctly, about 2,400 court documents and other relevant documents are reproduced. They have over three tons of documentation.
So before you call the information I posted ‘baseless allegations’, I suggest you do some serious research.’
What’s up, glenn? Gone quiet all of a sudden??? Cat got your typing finger???
PB: “What’s up, glenn? Gone quiet all of a sudden??? Cat got your typing finger???”
Don’t be so goddamned stupid. Some of us have other things going on in our lives, than to answer some damned-fool conspiracy theory that a halfwit found on the Internet as soon as they put it down.
Your absolute red herrings aside, do you have anything you’d like to reference about Clinton’s supposed health concerns?
You might like to see some of your story-peddlers being taken to task:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/newsweek-reporter-hannity-and-giuliani-are-amoral-sociopaths-for-pushing-clinton-illness-story/
Perhaps you’d like to comment on how easily dupes are taken in by this rubbish?
As I painstakingly repeated twice, I do not have a clue about Killary Clinton’s health; but I do know about the other claims, which are backed up by the books I mentioned, as well as many others.
Get that? I neither know nor care what that Luciferian’s health situation is, but I sincerely believe the world will be a better place when she bites the dust.
OK, so you don’t have a clue about Clinton’s health – you just reproduced some utter garbage from some right-wing slime machine. Fine.
But you decided to bundle in every other conspiracy regarding Clinton, as if that – somehow – scored points for you.
Yours is a curious take. “Hey – here’s some whacked out conspiracy I found online. You question it? OK, here’s 100 more conspiracies – totally unrelated. There! I win!”
And if I don’t reply to that _immediately_, then you start cackling with that “cat got your tongue” BS, followed by god knows how many question marks, which assures you of total victory.
What a freaked out world you live in, Paul.
Apart from the health factor – surely the least important of all the charged laid at the Clinton’s door – the other issues are backed up by solid book info. So, yes, I do ‘win again’!
Though it would be instructive if you read the books, I doubt you will bother. But at least you could watch the video below – and then reassess your opinion:
‘The Mena Connection – Exposing the CIA, Bush, Clinton, Iran Contra, And Drug Running’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epXVDEn3gsQ
And get this – despite all the ‘scurrilous’ claims against the Clinton’s (which appears to be your view) – none of the authors or contributors have been sued, (though Gary Webb was ‘suicided’)!!
Pretty darned odd, what?
You “win” a competition in which you’re playing with yourself!
Perhaps you’d like me to say there’s nothing wrong with the Clintons, both are upstanding and fine people in every regard? Sorry, you must have mistaken me for some fan of theirs.
You claimed La Clinton’s health was poor. I challenged that – where’s the evidence? Your “response” was to throw loads of points saying what terrible people the Clintons are.
It appears you have terrible difficulty concentrating on the subject at hand – even when you brought it up yourself.
@ glenn_uk August 22, 2016 at 16:23
As you are fully aware (or should be) I did NOT say Clinton was ill; I did post an article in which the author/s argued that she was.
I posted the article because I recognised a number the article had a number of not-often written about abominable crimes of the Clintons.
Perhaps I should have issued a disclaimer over the health part of the article, in which I basically had no interest.
But surely I have done it since, multiple times? Your harping on the health point is getting boring – and there is rather a big difference between not being ‘squeeky clean’ and committing the horrendous crimes that can be laid at their door.
Fine – you can post whatever BS you want, and nobody should question it. Have I got that straight?
Why can’t we save a step, by you not posting such BS in the first place. That would save you time (I’m sure there are really, really important things you need to be doing instead!), and the rest of us annoyance at having this blog infested with worthless propaganda you’ve found from some far-right source.
Can I safely assume you agree with the other points, apart from the ‘health’ bit, as you have not addressed any of it?
Or do you believe the three books and the video I linked to are ‘from some far-right source’?
Since the ‘health bit’ was the entire point of your post to which I replied, you must be asking about something entirely unrelated, which you raised after my reply. You do that a lot.
Elsewhere, you give a pointer to Operation Northwoods – which was an actual proposal mooted by some senior military planners, and almost immediately below it a reference to a whacked-out far-right conspiracy fantasy about the Newtown School massacre. Because in your mind, if one thing is true then everything else must also be true.
If you think I’m going to go chasing down the rabbit holes you’ve set up, you’re as whacked out as the conspiracy sites you clearly spend far too much time on.
This is not a site set up for lunatics to ponder conspiracies. There are plenty of other places for that sort of thing.
@ glenn_uk August 24, 2016 at 13:43
‘…Since the ‘health bit’ was the entire point of your post to which I replied, you must be asking about something entirely unrelated, which you raised after my reply….’
Blimey, you are slow on the uptake. My post was NOT about the Snopes’ Hildabeast’, or Killary’s, health, though that was a part of the link. I linked to it (sigh – as I have already explained, already, a trillion and a half times) NOT because of the health content, but because of the other material it contained re the Clinton’s abominable crime history.
And those crimes are documented in books – not ‘theories’, conspiratorial or otherwise.
And calling something a ‘conspiracy theory’ just because it goes against the ‘Official Narrative’ is, in Einstein’s words, ‘the height of ignorance’ (“Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance”).
PB: Slow on the uptake I might be, but your post (August 18, 2016 at 15:22) quoted nothing but alleged “concerns” about Clinton’s health. Knowing that to be utter BS, I saw little reason to follow the links.
Sure – quote Einstein. Quote Operation Northwoods. Quote anything which might be true (*), and anything you say after it must be equally true – right?
It’s particularly silly for you to get all exasperated because I actually addressed the very point that you yourself brought up and highlighted.
I don’t play duelling youtubes, nor follow-the-links. If you have a good case make it, with references. Don’t give me some BS with a reference, and then blame me for not following along like some dog filled with blind faith.
—
*By the way – you might want to examine the veracity of your supposed quote:
https://www.metabunk.org/einstein-condemnation-without-investigation-is-the-height-of-ignorance.t7015
As Albert Einstein also said, “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internets.”
@ glenn_uk August 24, 2016 at 23:21
PB: Slow on the uptake I might be, but your post (August 18, 2016 at 15:22) quoted nothing but alleged “concerns” about Clinton’s health. Knowing that to be utter BS, I saw little reason to follow the links.
Sure – quote Einstein. Quote Operation Northwoods. Quote anything which might be true (*), and anything you say after it must be equally true – right?
It’s particularly silly for you to get all exasperated because I actually addressed the very point that you yourself brought up and highlighted.
I don’t play duelling youtubes, nor follow-the-links. If you have a good case make it, with references. Don’t give me some BS with a reference, and then blame me for not following along like some dog filled with blind faith.
—
*By the way – you might want to examine the veracity of your supposed quote:
https://www.metabunk.org/einstein-condemnation-without-investigation-is-the-height-of-ignorance.t7015
As Albert Einstein also said, “Don’t believe everything you read on the Internets.”
I have now found my post – there is quite a lot about the health issue – but my interest was NOT on that issue. It’s unfortunate if I gave the impression. My interst was in the first part of my quote, and in what followed after I ended the quote, asking that commenters read the whole article. Harping on about the health aspect, after I have made it abundantly clear I had no interest or knowledge in that side of the article, seems rather strange. In retrospect, I should have ommitted the health aspect, and quoted from further down the long article. OK? Can we let it rest, already?
As for Mike West’s Metabunk, I am fully aware of that site, and consider it a government proxy site (no, I can’t ‘prove it’ or offer any further reason, other than simple common sense); I’m also aware that it is unverifiable that Einstein made the statement about ‘ignorance’, but it seems in line with his undoubted intelligence – the truth of it should make it irrelevant who said it; even if Killary Clinton had said it, it would still be a truism (but, admittedly, I wouldn’t have linked it to her, as I consider her an abomination).
Can we move on?
Fair enough Paul, it certainly gave that impression (because that’s what all the quoted text referred to).
I don’t like La Clinton either, for a good number of reasons – but you have to watch out for CDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome) which can afflict people in large numbers. Particularly alt-right extremists, who can whip one up with their enthusiasm.
The problem seems to be that expressing the opinion she should be in prison gets one labelled an ‘alt-right extremist’.
I’m not surprised. Why should she be in prison, apart from on general principles?
Negligence in the handling of classified materials.
Pretty well discussed over the past couple of months.
Yes, and the FBI determined it was negligent, but not a prosecutable offence. So why should Clinton be in jail, if her crime did not even rise to the level of a prosecutable offence?
The answer is that it doesn’t. Unless, of course, one happens to suffer from CDS – in which case walking on the cracks in the pavement counts as a jailable offence.
“Yes, and the FBI determined it was negligent, but not a prosecutable offence”.
If that is your standard, all the best to you. May you one day come to the realisation that governments tell lies.
The law is very clear, though, which is what allows me to say she should be in prison.
“Unless, of course, one happens to suffer from CDS”
who he ?
The abomination isn’t in jail because the ‘Justice’ system in the States is as corrupt as every other branch of government., including the SCOTUS & POTUS.
True enough, I suppose. The US – as a constitutionally limited, representative democratic republic – as it was set up, effectively ended on 12/12/2000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore
However, La Clinton doesn’t deserve to be in jail on an actual legal basis, any more than current war criminals walking around like Blair, Bush, Rove, Kissinger, Cheney, etc. etc. etc. .
So might all you stupid alt-right dupes (or useful idiots, if you prefer, for the election season) stop chanting this silly mantra of “Jail Hillary” for a bit, eh? I know Trump needs a bunch of grunts in the trenches for him, but good grief – do you have to be so obliging?
Or has Clinton Derangement Syndrome (CDS) really set in that bad?
dupes / idiots
Looks at though you have had to abandon debate, and resort to ad homs.
I believe it ended on November 22, 1963. I certainly do not support Trump, but I do support Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate.
And Jimmy Carter shows his myopea, by tub-thumping for the Killary ‘Snopes Hildabeast’:
‘During my 1976 presidential run, a young woman moved to Indianapolis to help turn out the Indiana vote for me. Forty years later, I will proudly cast my vote for that same woman to be the next President of the United States.
Hillary is going to need more than just my vote, though. She’s got to keep building a campaign that can beat Trump soundly, and that takes resources. Chip in $3 or more before the monthly deadline tomorrow to help elect her and other Democrats.’
(From an email forwarded to me for information).
@ glenn_uk ‘….However, La Clinton doesn’t deserve to be in jail on an actual legal basis, any more than current war criminals walking around like Blair, Bush, Rove, Kissinger, Cheney, etc. etc. etc…’
Good grief, how did I miss that? You made my point yourself, in spades! ‘..any more than current war criminals walking around like Blair, Bush, Rove, Kissinger, Cheney, etc. etc. etc…’ (or, may I add, any less than)!!