Bold Claim by Wikileaks

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

If they get Hillary sent to prison, I'll be pro-Russia.

:zeitung_lesen: yeah, like that'll happen to Hillary.

You know there's a 'Hillary Standard' now & then there's just a low kinda standard for the peasants like us.

 

[82_VOL_83]

There are many things to bash her over. I agree with you, and is why I am not voting for her. Her ambition and political smarminess are insufferable.

If the GOP can win me over with that, one wonders why they waste their time with all the other stuff and look silly doing it.

It's the rest of your party with no intelligence that we worry about LG.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Getting Trump elected President does destabilize the West. Trump just said this week that we would not honor NATO Article 5 if Russia attacked a nation in the Baltics. Putin and Russia have been on a campaign of foreign disinformation threw out Europe for years with the goal of forming and financing far right parties which would be used to destabilize Western Europe. Well it looks like it has come to America now.

So, don't leave us hanging. What did they throw out?

 

[82_VOL_83]

Kankles? There has to be a fetishist out there.

I threw up in my mouth.

 

[Grand Vol]

There are many things to bash her over. I agree with you, and is why I am not voting for her. Her ambition and political smarminess are insufferable.

If the GOP can win me over with that, one wonders why they waste their time with all the other stuff and look silly doing it.

Why in the ever living hell do you defend her at every turn?

 

[knucklehead_vol]

Why in the ever living hell do you defend her at every turn?

He is of sheep.

 

[TheDeeble]

If Putin gets Hillary locked up, I will become a Putin fan as well. Secondly, locking Hillary up will not destabilize the West; it will be taking a huge step back to the West becoming what it is supposed to be.

As bad as Hillary would be for the US, I think Trump could be equally bad just maybe not in the same areas.

Regardless of who is elected I think there will be a lot of turmoil the next 4 years, and neither Trump nor Clinton will be good presidents to have in office.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Why in the ever living hell do you defend her at every turn?

All people in the PF want to know.

LG....I'm not voting for her. I'm not defending her.

Has to be embarrassed to be associated with such corruption.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

As bad as Hillary would be for the US, I think Trump could be equally bad just maybe not in the same areas.

Regardless of who is elected I think there will be a lot of turmoil the next 4 years, and neither Trump nor Clinton will be good presidents to have in office.

I agree. You have protesters on both sides now that will blow the top off this crazy country. Places will burn thanks to all this corruption that's come to light.

 

[Vol737]

He is of sheep.

Umm, cow. According to Carville anyway.

 

[VolFan_N_NC]

@KimDotcom

This @wikileaks illustration hints at the leaks you can expect in the coming months. Just look at her screen ;-)

So any guesses are why they are referring too? Perhaps US arm sales for donations to the Clinton Foundation?

I posted this a few days ago in another thread...

The Clinton Foundation is corrupt at its core, and when you peel back the layers it's pretty scary. Not sure why this hasn't got more attention.

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department



Here are a few key parts of the article:

“Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 Billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation”

“Hillary Clinton’s willingness to allow those with business before the State Department to finance her foundation heightens concerns about how she would manage such relationships as president, said Lawrence Lessig, the director of Harvard University’s Safra Center of Ethics.”

“The State Department does not disclose which individual companies are involved in direct commercial sales, but its disclosure documents reveal that countries that donated to the CF saw a combined $75 Billion increase in authorized commercial military sales under the first 3 full fiscal years Clinton served, as compared to the first 3 full fiscal years of Bush’s second term”

“17 out of 20 countries that have donated to the CF saw increases in arms exports authorized by Hillary Clinton’s State Department”

 

[lawgator1]

Why in the ever living hell do you defend her at every turn?

I am not defending her.

I'm critical of the intellectual dishonesty and frequently atrocious logic used by the right, Fox News, and the GOP, to attack her over things that either have no merit, or are greatly exaggerated.

I am particularly critical of a party that proudly claims on the one hand that it has an unwavering commitment to reduced government waste, but then on the other hand proceeds to routinely waste government time and our money conjuring up fake scandals to investigate, re-investigate, then re-re-re-investigate.

Its more a process complaint I have with them than a results oriented one.

 

[Obsessed]

I am not defending her.

I'm critical of the intellectual dishonesty and frequently atrocious logic used by the right, Fox News, and the GOP, to attack her over things that either have no merit, or are greatly exaggerated.

I am particularly critical of a party that proudly claims on the one hand that it has an unwavering commitment to reduced government waste, but then on the other hand proceeds to routinely waste government time and our money conjuring up fake scandals to investigate, re-investigate, then re-re-re-investigate.

Its more a process complaint I have with them than a results oriented one.

Yes because the Right and Fox News wrote the emails....

 

[VolFan_N_NC]

So you think the GOP "made up" the fact that HRC deleted 30,000 emails? Do you think they "made up" the fact that she set up a private server to transmit classified material?

If those things are known to be true, then shouldn't they be investigated? The fact that it cost so much money investigating HRC's shady practices while holding public office should be more of a reflection of Hillary Clinton, and not the GOP.

 

[theFallGuy]

So you think the GOP "made up" the fact that HRC deleted 30,000 emails? Do you think they "made up" the fact that she set up a private server to transmit classified material?

If those things are known to be true, then shouldn't they be investigated? The fact that it cost so much money investigating HRC's shady practices while holding public office should be more of a reflection of Hillary Clinton, and not the GOP.

Democrats only care about wasting tax payer money when they are guilty of something and it's being investigated. Hell their ENTIRE ideology is built on wasting tax payer money.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

I am not defending her.

I'm critical of the intellectual dishonesty and frequently atrocious logic used by the right, Fox News, and the GOP, to attack her over things that either have no merit, or are greatly exaggerated.

I am particularly critical of a party that proudly claims on the one hand that it has an unwavering commitment to reduced government waste, but then on the other hand proceeds to routinely waste government time and our money conjuring up fake scandals to investigate, re-investigate, then re-re-re-investigate.

Its more a process complaint I have with them than a results oriented one.

Screech it, brother. Screech screech!!

 

[lawgator1]

Yes because the Right and Fox News wrote the emails....

You are mixing apples and oranges.

I've no problem with complaining that the DNC improperly tried to influence the primary in favor of Clinton. But that is intra-party, and begins and ends there. It is no more illegal or wrongful than Trump complaining that Priebus et al were undermining him.

It makes for interesting theater and griping by the aggrieved candidate. But its not illegal or anything.

But see, its a good example of what I'm talking about. The GOP just went through months of similar complaining by Trump. Your level of concern is to shrug, say its unfair, but that's politics.

When the same thing happens on the Dem side, suddenly it takes on the scale of epic wrongdoing, and is indictable. Some moron posted above actually raised the specter of (more useless) Congressional hearings on this.

So you think the GOP "made up" the fact that HRC deleted 30,000 emails? Do you think they "made up" the fact that she set up a private server to transmit classified material?

If those things are known to be true, then shouldn't they be investigated? The fact that it cost so much money investigating HRC's shady practices while holding public office should be more of a reflection of Hillary Clinton, and not the GOP.

And here would be Exhibit (I think I'm up to C, now).

Investigated? Again? More?

You seem less interested in an investigation, and more interested in an investigation that has a particular result.

And for taxpayer dollars to be spent, until you get a particular result.

 

[dillyo51]

So you think the GOP "made up" the fact that HRC deleted 30,000 emails? Do you think they "made up" the fact that she set up a private server to transmit classified material?

If those things are known to be true, then shouldn't they be investigated? The fact that it cost so much money investigating HRC's shady practices while holding public office should be more of a reflection of Hillary Clinton, and not the GOP.

Ding! Ding! Ding! :good!:

 

[hog88]

I am not defending her.

I'm critical of the intellectual dishonesty and frequently atrocious logic used by the right, Fox News, and the GOP, to attack her over things that either have no merit, or are greatly exaggerated.

I am particularly critical of a party that proudly claims on the one hand that it has an unwavering commitment to reduced government waste, but then on the other hand proceeds to routinely waste government time and our money conjuring up fake scandals to investigate, re-investigate, then re-re-re-investigate.

Its more a process complaint I have with them than a results oriented one.

What in your mind has Hillary been involved in that warranted an investigation or congressional hearing?

 

[lawgator1]

What in your mind has Hillary been involved in that warranted an investigation or congressional hearing?

I think the initial inquiry into Benghazi was warranted and the incident deserved to be looked into.

Once. Maybe twice.

Not 10 times. Not calling 252 witnesses across 33 hearings, with 13 different reports.

 

[ETV]

@KimDotcom

This @wikileaks illustration hints at the leaks you can expect in the coming months. Just look at her screen ;-)

So any guesses are why they are referring too? Perhaps US arm sales for donations to the Clinton Foundation?

It's all Russian propaganda! Putin is trying to destroy HRC.

 

[ETV]

I think the initial inquiry into Benghazi was warranted and the incident deserved to be looked into.

Once. Maybe twice.

Not 10 times. Not calling 252 witnesses across 33 hearings, with 13 different reports.

So, thorough investigations are not practiced at the firm that employs you?

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

You are mixing apples and oranges.

I've no problem with complaining that the DNC improperly tried to influence the primary in favor of Clinton. But that is intra-party, and begins and ends there. It is no more illegal or wrongful than Trump complaining that Priebus et al were undermining him.

It makes for interesting theater and griping by the aggrieved candidate. But its not illegal or anything.

But see, its a good example of what I'm talking about. The GOP just went through months of similar complaining by Trump. Your level of concern is to shrug, say its unfair, but that's politics.

When the same thing happens on the Dem side, suddenly it takes on the scale of epic wrongdoing, and is indictable. Some moron posted above actually raised the specter of (more useless) Congressional hearings on this.

Talk about comparing apples and oranges. Numerous emails have been leaked showing how the DNC and media was conspiring against Bernie, and on the GOP side all we have is Trump's complaint. Surely you recognize those aren't quite the same... and yet somehow you are trying to suggest they are.

 

[lawgator1]

So, thorough investigations are not practiced at the firm that employs you?

We do a single thorough investigation, and act accordingly. We do not do the investigation over and over in hopes that the facts change.

 

[joevol320]

LOL lawgaytor, since when are you concerned about tax payers dollars?

how much more does your party need to bring over more muslim terrorists?