Clinton Trail of Bodies
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-05-2016, 10:16 PM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
(18-05-2016 06:14 PM)Fireball Wrote:  Blow by blow description of the entire day.

The Bill Clinton Story.....only on Lifetime.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Organic Chemist's post
19-05-2016, 05:05 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
Getting back to the OP, that first cartoon is not conspiracy theories. The point it's making, as I see it at least, is that the media is looking for scandals on Trump and largely ignoring potential scandals for Clinto. I'll ignore the Benghazi one because that is received plenty of coverage. But, e-mail thing is not a "conspiracy theory". It's the focus of an actual FBI investigation that could potentially lead to the convening of a federal grand jury to determine if Clinton should be indicted for violating the Espionage Act. The stuff on the Clinton Foundation is also not a conspiracy theory. There is actual documentation on who her downs are and a lot of questions about decisions the Clinton lead State Department made that favored some of those donors. There are legitimate questions to be asked there, and the press is barely acknowledging it. So, I'm not sure what the "Conspiracy theory" is that people are laughing off.

As for the "trail of bodies", Clinton absolutely has blood on her hands. Someone asked in another thread why people dislike Hillary Clinton. I didn't respond to that but I'll give you part of the answer and it's because of all the blood.

Let's start with Iraq. Clinton voted for a bullshit war that cost over 5,000 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. She apologized for it in 2008 and claimed she made the best judgment she could at the time with all the evidence that was available. That's demonstrably bullshit, though. There was a classified National Intelligence Estimate available to the Senate at the time and only 6 people read it. She wasn't one of them. Of the 6 who read it, 2 of those Senators, Bob Graham and Patrick Leahy, decided to vote against the war. So, Clinton likely would have voted for it anyway. But, it's simply not true that she looked at all available information. Why not read the estimate? If your a cynic about these things - and I tend to be - you may think it's so she has plausible deniability later. She doesn't wear the sin of Iraq by herself, but she wears it. However, she is part of a much smaller group who used death and destruction in Iraq to push American business agendas. This was evident in a 2011 speech she gave where she is telling American corporations to think of Iraq as a "business opportunity". She said the same thing in letters she wrote to JPMorgan and ExxonMobile. So, basically, she was pushing the same "pro-business thru war" agenda that Bush had pushed for.

Then there is Libya. Obama was not inclined on his own to start dropping bombs, but it was his hawkish Sec State, Hillary Clinton, that pushed him that way. And, forget what you read about Benghazi. The real potential conspiracy there, and one that has been largely ignored by both the Republicans and the press, is that there is evidence that the US was running weapons from out of that embassy to rebels in Syria - something that was in direct conflict with US law at the time. This came up a bit during several of the hearings but it was shut down, probably because - if true - the Republican leadership was aware of it and didn't want to highlight that they both knew about it and probably agreed with it. But, that is an Iran Contra type of scandal she may have been involved with, no one is saying "boo" about it, and you can be damn sure that not only did people die, but it is likely to have been part of the reason that embassy was targeted.

And, lastly, let's not forget poor Honduras. Honduras has a democratically elected president named Manuel Zelaya who was over thrown by a military coup. The whole region wanted to force him back into office and let him finish out his term because that is what the laws of Honduras required. Not Hillary Clinton, though. What she wanted was to force a new election, get rid of the legally elected Zelaya (who was not a US favorite) and get someone new in - which is what happened. She wrote about her great Honduras victory in her autobiography but a funny thing happened after that book was published - Honduras fell apart after her policy was implemented and became the murder capital of the world. When the paperback version of the book came out, the stuff on Honduras was missing. Probably because it became a massive embarrassment.

The fact is that, for all his bluster and racism and misogyny, Trump has none of this baggage and none of these scandals. Sure, he's disgusting and I'd never vote for him, but she's not any better.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like BnW's post
19-05-2016, 08:52 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
(19-05-2016 05:05 AM)BnW Wrote:  Getting back to the OP, that first cartoon is not conspiracy theories. The point it's making, as I see it at least, is that the media is looking for scandals on Trump and largely ignoring potential scandals for Clinto. I'll ignore the Benghazi one because that is received plenty of coverage. But, e-mail thing is not a "conspiracy theory". It's the focus of an actual FBI investigation that could potentially lead to the convening of a federal grand jury to determine if Clinton should be indicted for violating the Espionage Act. The stuff on the Clinton Foundation is also not a conspiracy theory. There is actual documentation on who her downs are and a lot of questions about decisions the Clinton lead State Department made that favored some of those donors. There are legitimate questions to be asked there, and the press is barely acknowledging it. So, I'm not sure what the "Conspiracy theory" is that people are laughing off.

As for the "trail of bodies", Clinton absolutely has blood on her hands. Someone asked in another thread why people dislike Hillary Clinton. I didn't respond to that but I'll give you part of the answer and it's because of all the blood.

Let's start with Iraq. Clinton voted for a bullshit war that cost over 5,000 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. She apologized for it in 2008 and claimed she made the best judgment she could at the time with all the evidence that was available. That's demonstrably bullshit, though. There was a classified National Intelligence Estimate available to the Senate at the time and only 6 people read it. She wasn't one of them. Of the 6 who read it, 2 of those Senators, Bob Graham and Patrick Leahy, decided to vote against the war. So, Clinton likely would have voted for it anyway. But, it's simply not true that she looked at all available information. Why not read the estimate? If your a cynic about these things - and I tend to be - you may think it's so she has plausible deniability later. She doesn't wear the sin of Iraq by herself, but she wears it. However, she is part of a much smaller group who used death and destruction in Iraq to push American business agendas. This was evident in a 2011 speech she gave where she is telling American corporations to think of Iraq as a "business opportunity". She said the same thing in letters she wrote to JPMorgan and ExxonMobile. So, basically, she was pushing the same "pro-business thru war" agenda that Bush had pushed for.

Then there is Libya. Obama was not inclined on his own to start dropping bombs, but it was his hawkish Sec State, Hillary Clinton, that pushed him that way. And, forget what you read about Benghazi. The real potential conspiracy there, and one that has been largely ignored by both the Republicans and the press, is that there is evidence that the US was running weapons from out of that embassy to rebels in Syria - something that was in direct conflict with US law at the time. This came up a bit during several of the hearings but it was shut down, probably because - if true - the Republican leadership was aware of it and didn't want to highlight that they both knew about it and probably agreed with it. But, that is an Iran Contra type of scandal she may have been involved with, no one is saying "boo" about it, and you can be damn sure that not only did people die, but it is likely to have been part of the reason that embassy was targeted.

And, lastly, let's not forget poor Honduras. Honduras has a democratically elected president named Manuel Zelaya who was over thrown by a military coup. The whole region wanted to force him back into office and let him finish out his term because that is what the laws of Honduras required. Not Hillary Clinton, though. What she wanted was to force a new election, get rid of the legally elected Zelaya (who was not a US favorite) and get someone new in - which is what happened. She wrote about her great Honduras victory in her autobiography but a funny thing happened after that book was published - Honduras fell apart after her policy was implemented and became the murder capital of the world. When the paperback version of the book came out, the stuff on Honduras was missing. Probably because it became a massive embarrassment.

The fact is that, for all his bluster and racism and misogyny, Trump has none of this baggage and none of these scandals. Sure, he's disgusting and I'd never vote for him, but she's not any better.
You don't get it, BnW! All of that is just a vast right-wing conspiracy! LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT LALALALALA IT'S HER TURN LALALALALA!

That's the average Clinton supporter for you. Laugh out load

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 09:46 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
Maybe. What I typically hear from people who plan to vote for her is, between the two, she's the less offensive candidate. I think that's true, but I'm still not voting for her.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 11:08 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
Even tho Trump is a disgusting incompetent buffoon, I believe that American people will suffer less under him then under Hilary.

Seems that Clinton's have been taking so much money from big business, foreign governments and who knows who....one would have to be completely delusional to think that that kind of money doesn't come with quid pro quo. And that quid pro quo could cost American people dearly.

There is also a likelihood of a military intervention against Iran if she becomes a president. (? )

This is just mine semi (poorly) informed I-don't-really-care opinion, so it might be off by a mile.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 11:11 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
(19-05-2016 09:46 AM)BnW Wrote:  Maybe. What I typically hear from people who plan to vote for her is, between the two, she's the less offensive candidate. I think that's true, but I'm still not voting for her.
My experience is admittedly limited to online interactions because I live in Europe, but I have yet to meet a single Clinton supporter who didn't dismiss the FBI investigation as a partisan attack and labeled every other fault she has as a right-wing conspiracy.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 11:12 AM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
(19-05-2016 05:05 AM)BnW Wrote:  Getting back to the OP, that first cartoon is not conspiracy theories. The point it's making, as I see it at least, is that the media is looking for scandals on Trump and largely ignoring potential scandals for Clinto. I'll ignore the Benghazi one because that is received plenty of coverage. But, e-mail thing is not a "conspiracy theory". It's the focus of an actual FBI investigation that could potentially lead to the convening of a federal grand jury to determine if Clinton should be indicted for violating the Espionage Act. The stuff on the Clinton Foundation is also not a conspiracy theory. There is actual documentation on who her downs are and a lot of questions about decisions the Clinton lead State Department made that favored some of those donors. There are legitimate questions to be asked there, and the press is barely acknowledging it. So, I'm not sure what the "Conspiracy theory" is that people are laughing off.

As for the "trail of bodies", Clinton absolutely has blood on her hands. Someone asked in another thread why people dislike Hillary Clinton. I didn't respond to that but I'll give you part of the answer and it's because of all the blood.

Let's start with Iraq. Clinton voted for a bullshit war that cost over 5,000 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. She apologized for it in 2008 and claimed she made the best judgment she could at the time with all the evidence that was available. That's demonstrably bullshit, though. There was a classified National Intelligence Estimate available to the Senate at the time and only 6 people read it. She wasn't one of them. Of the 6 who read it, 2 of those Senators, Bob Graham and Patrick Leahy, decided to vote against the war. So, Clinton likely would have voted for it anyway. But, it's simply not true that she looked at all available information. Why not read the estimate? If your a cynic about these things - and I tend to be - you may think it's so she has plausible deniability later. She doesn't wear the sin of Iraq by herself, but she wears it. However, she is part of a much smaller group who used death and destruction in Iraq to push American business agendas. This was evident in a 2011 speech she gave where she is telling American corporations to think of Iraq as a "business opportunity". She said the same thing in letters she wrote to JPMorgan and ExxonMobile. So, basically, she was pushing the same "pro-business thru war" agenda that Bush had pushed for.

Then there is Libya. Obama was not inclined on his own to start dropping bombs, but it was his hawkish Sec State, Hillary Clinton, that pushed him that way. And, forget what you read about Benghazi. The real potential conspiracy there, and one that has been largely ignored by both the Republicans and the press, is that there is evidence that the US was running weapons from out of that embassy to rebels in Syria - something that was in direct conflict with US law at the time. This came up a bit during several of the hearings but it was shut down, probably because - if true - the Republican leadership was aware of it and didn't want to highlight that they both knew about it and probably agreed with it. But, that is an Iran Contra type of scandal she may have been involved with, no one is saying "boo" about it, and you can be damn sure that not only did people die, but it is likely to have been part of the reason that embassy was targeted.

And, lastly, let's not forget poor Honduras. Honduras has a democratically elected president named Manuel Zelaya who was over thrown by a military coup. The whole region wanted to force him back into office and let him finish out his term because that is what the laws of Honduras required. Not Hillary Clinton, though. What she wanted was to force a new election, get rid of the legally elected Zelaya (who was not a US favorite) and get someone new in - which is what happened. She wrote about her great Honduras victory in her autobiography but a funny thing happened after that book was published - Honduras fell apart after her policy was implemented and became the murder capital of the world. When the paperback version of the book came out, the stuff on Honduras was missing. Probably because it became a massive embarrassment.

The fact is that, for all his bluster and racism and misogyny, Trump has none of this baggage and none of these scandals. Sure, he's disgusting and I'd never vote for him, but she's not any better.

But the trial of blood bit isn't about war and overseas destruction murder.

It's the claims of Hillary and Bill going back to even in the pre-presidential power point having killed off political opponents or best friends that were holding critical "secret" information and details that they couldn't let get out. That's what the whole Clinton's murder path claims are generally about.

(19-05-2016 11:11 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(19-05-2016 09:46 AM)BnW Wrote:  Maybe. What I typically hear from people who plan to vote for her is, between the two, she's the less offensive candidate. I think that's true, but I'm still not voting for her.
My experience is admittedly limited to online interactions because I live in Europe, but I have yet to meet a single Clinton supporter who didn't dismiss the FBI investigation as a partisan attack and labeled every other fault she has as a right-wing conspiracy.

you've met a Clinton supporters? fascinating... those exist?

Btw, did you know Bernie is really winning Tongue

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 01:40 PM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
I know the "trail of blood" comments generally refer to nonsense about the Clintons' killing people off. I'm just saying there's an actual body count and one I won't ignore come the election. She is very quick to conclude that sending other people's children off to kill and die is a solution. No thanks.

And yes, I know Hillary supporters. Both my parents plan to vote for her. They both feel, given the choices, she's the best option. That's not a ringing endorsement, but it's their current view.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 02:17 PM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
(19-05-2016 01:40 PM)BnW Wrote:  I know the "trail of blood" comments generally refer to nonsense about the Clintons' killing people off. I'm just saying there's an actual body count and one I won't ignore come the election. She is very quick to conclude that sending other people's children off to kill and die is a solution. No thanks.
Given that last bit, it's no surprise that members of the US military overwhelmingly favor Trump and Sanders over Clinton.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2016, 04:26 PM
RE: Clinton Trail of Bodies
I'm a bit surprised they would favor Trump. He's the one who's been talking tough about sending troops all over and how they are going to be ordered to commit murder (something the military responded to and said they would not, under any circumstances, do).

And, for all his bluster about how he would never have voted for the Iraq war, the simple fact is that when he was asked about it at the time he not only didn't raise any objections but generally agreed with it. So, he's FOS on this (and almost every) topic.

The two of them both make my skin crawl. The idea of having to vote for one of them ... I'll need to use steel wool to get the stink off my skin.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: