Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Welpee wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:^I can maybe buy the argument about not knowing what our future holds and fear of direction. But no one can honestly tell me they are enthusiastic and pleased about the prospects of Hillary Rodham Clinton leading you and I.

I am very excited about the possibility of a progressive supreme court.

Along with the Sumpreme Court, I'm excited to have a President that actually believes in Science and economic studies to understand what's really happening to the middle class in terms of wage and job growth..

Not to mention a president who actually knows what's she talking about when it comes to foreign affairs and has the intellectual capacity to understand complex matters versus having a "secret plan."

Do mention...How about a president who can embrace how rapidly technology has changed the world in the last 15/20 years and some one who is ready to deal with what will happen in the next 4/8 years..Not some one who thinks the answer is taking the country back to 1960/70s..Trump is on record as saying he doesn't like to read..Bodes well for our future..

Speaking of technology, perhaps Hillary needs to learn about her maid printing classified documents.

NY POST - Clinton directed her maid to print out classified materials

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government e-mails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, DC, e-mails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/clinton-directed-her-maid-to-print-out-classified-materials/

Talk about deflecting!
You can find plenty of accusations against Trump too. If I remember right, you said you don't like either candidate and aren't voting. (Sorry if I'm confusing you with someone else.) You seem to spend a trillion times the effort looking for anything negative about Clinton though. In this age of technology, you'll never find a 100% clean candidate again. The possibility that a maid might have printed a sensitive, unclassified document doesn't sound nearly as serious as the accusations of Trump's Fraud, child rape, sexual assault, employment demonstrate, ties to Russia and more.

Deflecting? I have come out and told you exactly where I stand.
Hillary is corrupt to the core and it should be known.

As I stated regarding CTR (Correct the Record) and Reddit a few weeks back here. A complaint has now formally been filed. They are spending millions affecting posts on Reddit and I have witnessed it daily.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/fec-complaint-accuses-clinton-campaign-of-illegally-coordinating-with-david-brock-super-pac/

The Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission on Thursday that accuses the Clinton Campaign of illegally coordinating with David Brock’s Super PAC Correct the Record.

The CLC’s complaint alleges Correct the Record has made $5.95 million in in-kind contributions in the form of coordinated expenditures that were accepted by the Clinton campaign. The complaint alleges such contributions violate the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”), 52 U.S.C. § 30101, et seq., and Commission regulations.

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Welpee wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:^I can maybe buy the argument about not knowing what our future holds and fear of direction. But no one can honestly tell me they are enthusiastic and pleased about the prospects of Hillary Rodham Clinton leading you and I.

I am very excited about the possibility of a progressive supreme court.

Along with the Sumpreme Court, I'm excited to have a President that actually believes in Science and economic studies to understand what's really happening to the middle class in terms of wage and job growth..

Not to mention a president who actually knows what's she talking about when it comes to foreign affairs and has the intellectual capacity to understand complex matters versus having a "secret plan."

Do mention...How about a president who can embrace how rapidly technology has changed the world in the last 15/20 years and some one who is ready to deal with what will happen in the next 4/8 years..Not some one who thinks the answer is taking the country back to 1960/70s..Trump is on record as saying he doesn't like to read..Bodes well for our future..

Speaking of technology, perhaps Hillary needs to learn about her maid printing classified documents.

NY POST - Clinton directed her maid to print out classified materials

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government e-mails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, DC, e-mails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/06/clinton-directed-her-maid-to-print-out-classified-materials/

Talk about deflecting!
You can find plenty of accusations against Trump too. If I remember right, you said you don't like either candidate and aren't voting. (Sorry if I'm confusing you with someone else.) You seem to spend a trillion times the effort looking for anything negative about Clinton though. In this age of technology, you'll never find a 100% clean candidate again. The possibility that a maid might have printed a sensitive, unclassified document doesn't sound nearly as serious as the accusations of Trump's Fraud, child rape, sexual assault, employment demonstrate, ties to Russia and more.

Deflecting? I have come out and told you exactly where I stand.
Hillary is corrupt to the core and it should be known.

As I stated regarding CTR (Correct the Record) and Reddit a few weeks back here. A complaint has now formally been filed. They are spending millions affecting posts on Reddit and I have witnessed it daily.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/fec-complaint-accuses-clinton-campaign-of-illegally-coordinating-with-david-brock-super-pac/

The Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission on Thursday that accuses the Clinton Campaign of illegally coordinating with David Brock’s Super PAC Correct the Record.

The CLC’s complaint alleges Correct the Record has made $5.95 million in in-kind contributions in the form of coordinated expenditures that were accepted by the Clinton campaign. The complaint alleges such contributions violate the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”), 52 U.S.C. § 30101, et seq., and Commission regulations.

earthmansurfer wrote:Unbelievable - Clinton Foundation paid for Chelsea's wedding! http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/emails-foundation-resources-used-for-chelsea-clintons-wedding/article/2606615

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/52046

From:doug@presidentclinton.com
To: john.podesta@gmail.com
CC: terry@tdmca.com, cheryl.mills@gmail.com
Date: 2012-01-04 21:45
Subject: Re:

I learned from the best

The investigation into her getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents....

I hope that you will speak to her and end this
Once we go down this road....

----- Original Message -----
From: John Podesta [mailto:john.podesta@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 05:00 PM
To: Doug Band
Cc: terry@tdmca.com <terry@tdmca.com>; cheryl.mills@gmail.com <cheryl.mills@gmail.com>
Subject: Re:

You are perfecting your skills for understatement.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Doug Band <doug@presidentclinton.com> wrote:
> I just received a call from a close friend of wjcs who said that cvc told one of the bush 43 kids that she is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from cgi to the foundation
> The bush kid then told someone else who then told an operative within the republican party
>
> I have heard more and more chatter of cvc and bari talking about lots of what is going on internally to people
>
> Not smart

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Welpee wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:^I can maybe buy the argument about not knowing what our future holds and fear of direction. But no one can honestly tell me they are enthusiastic and pleased about the prospects of Hillary Rodham Clinton leading you and I.

I am very excited about the possibility of a progressive supreme court.

Along with the Sumpreme Court, I'm excited to have a President that actually believes in Science and economic studies to understand what's really happening to the middle class in terms of wage and job growth..

Not to mention a president who actually knows what's she talking about when it comes to foreign affairs and has the intellectual capacity to understand complex matters versus having a "secret plan."

Do mention...How about a president who can embrace how rapidly technology has changed the world in the last 15/20 years and some one who is ready to deal with what will happen in the next 4/8 years..Not some one who thinks the answer is taking the country back to 1960/70s..Trump is on record as saying he doesn't like to read..Bodes well for our future..

Yep - real technology guru who does not even understand how e-mail works and has no slightest idea about cybersecurity.
Of course if her corrupted interest will be in line with some US population groups they will side-benefit from her polices but as soon as it will not be the case they will lose everything and more.
Not to say that Trump is better. Well established corrupter group of politicians may be slightly better that new one. May cost less to the people.

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:
I'll try to be fair and balanced. Obviously if true, this would be bad, but it is still not as bad as the Trump foundation allegedly paying off the Florida Attorney General who was investigating him.
Notice the bold words too. It's terrible how the right-wingers present indirect circumstantial evidence as being clear cut evidence of Clinton's guilt. Supporters of the guy who calls himself the "law and order" candidate don't seem to have any respect the legal process in the country. (And this is not an instance of Hillary being above the law - an e-mail that was illegally hacked, possibly doctored, and possibly factually incorrect even if not doctored should not convict anyone of a crime. You'd need proof that the event actually happened.)

Bonn, no doubt it goes far and wide. I just think the corruption on Hillary's side is further and wider. And all the books out there on the Clintons are a testament to that imo.

Regarding the emails being hacked - If Hillary had followed the law and not had private email servers, she wouldn't be in this mess. Corruption has a way of self repairing perhaps.

Eventually, I hope we can clean it all up.

Have you read all any of those books? Which ones did you find the most compelling?

Because you aren't just saying "where there's smoke, there's fire" are you?

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:
I'll try to be fair and balanced. Obviously if true, this would be bad, but it is still not as bad as the Trump foundation allegedly paying off the Florida Attorney General who was investigating him.
Notice the bold words too. It's terrible how the right-wingers present indirect circumstantial evidence as being clear cut evidence of Clinton's guilt. Supporters of the guy who calls himself the "law and order" candidate don't seem to have any respect the legal process in the country. (And this is not an instance of Hillary being above the law - an e-mail that was illegally hacked, possibly doctored, and possibly factually incorrect even if not doctored should not convict anyone of a crime. You'd need proof that the event actually happened.)

Bonn, no doubt it goes far and wide. I just think the corruption on Hillary's side is further and wider. And all the books out there on the Clintons are a testament to that imo.

Regarding the emails being hacked - If Hillary had followed the law and not had private email servers, she wouldn't be in this mess. Corruption has a way of self repairing perhaps.

Eventually, I hope we can clean it all up.

I don't think any of this passes as fair. Can you think of any reasons other than Clinton corruption why there might be a lot of negative books about her? You're certain that Hillary broke the law? (What specific law?) You're certain that someone who follows the law can't have their e-mail hacked and doctored? Or that third party communications (none of these are Hillary's e-mails) cannot be mistaken? If the answer is no to any of these (or yes to the first question), your whole argument loses a lot of strength.

Bonn - Do you think I have something personal with the Clintons? I don't. I honestly see how corrupt they are. The reason for all the books about the Clintons is because there is so much evidence regarding their history. They are so well protected and are such a powerful force in politics that they don't get jail time. We saw the same thing with Al Capone, who was finally jailed on tax evasion.

The amount of evidence (and deaths) around that family is unbelievable, you literally can write books, which has been done. It is non stop and for years. They, along with the Clinton foundation, are a massive criminal enterprise. Before all is said and done, I think you are going to see the Clintons both in prison for things we better not even mention yet. Hint - Look at Bill and Hillary's connections to Jeffrey Epstein.

Regarding the charges, you have to read some of the books. Or just follow the evidence. Lots of evidence to connect the dots, but no convictions. At some point it just isn't a coincidence and that point was when Bill was president.

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:
I'll try to be fair and balanced. Obviously if true, this would be bad, but it is still not as bad as the Trump foundation allegedly paying off the Florida Attorney General who was investigating him.
Notice the bold words too. It's terrible how the right-wingers present indirect circumstantial evidence as being clear cut evidence of Clinton's guilt. Supporters of the guy who calls himself the "law and order" candidate don't seem to have any respect the legal process in the country. (And this is not an instance of Hillary being above the law - an e-mail that was illegally hacked, possibly doctored, and possibly factually incorrect even if not doctored should not convict anyone of a crime. You'd need proof that the event actually happened.)

Bonn, no doubt it goes far and wide. I just think the corruption on Hillary's side is further and wider. And all the books out there on the Clintons are a testament to that imo.

Regarding the emails being hacked - If Hillary had followed the law and not had private email servers, she wouldn't be in this mess. Corruption has a way of self repairing perhaps.

Eventually, I hope we can clean it all up.

I don't think any of this passes as fair. Can you think of any reasons other than Clinton corruption why there might be a lot of negative books about her? You're certain that Hillary broke the law? (What specific law?) You're certain that someone who follows the law can't have their e-mail hacked and doctored? Or that third party communications (none of these are Hillary's e-mails) cannot be mistaken? If the answer is no to any of these (or yes to the first question), your whole argument loses a lot of strength.

Bonn - Do you think I have something personal with the Clintons? I don't. I honestly see how corrupt they are. The reason for all the books about the Clintons is because there is so much evidence regarding their history. They are so well protected and are such a powerful force in politics that they don't get jail time. We saw the same thing with Al Capone, who was finally jailed on tax evasion.

The amount of evidence (and deaths) around that family is unbelievable, you literally can write books, which has been done. It is non stop and for years. They, along with the Clinton foundation, are a massive criminal enterprise. Before all is said and done, I think you are going to see the Clintons both in prison for things we better not even mention yet. Hint - Look at Bill and Hillary's connections to Jeffrey Epstein.

Regarding the charges, you have to read some of the books. Or just follow the evidence. Lots of evidence to connect the dots, but no convictions. At some point it just isn't a coincidence and that point was when Bill was president.

earthmansurfer wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:
I'll try to be fair and balanced. Obviously if true, this would be bad, but it is still not as bad as the Trump foundation allegedly paying off the Florida Attorney General who was investigating him.
Notice the bold words too. It's terrible how the right-wingers present indirect circumstantial evidence as being clear cut evidence of Clinton's guilt. Supporters of the guy who calls himself the "law and order" candidate don't seem to have any respect the legal process in the country. (And this is not an instance of Hillary being above the law - an e-mail that was illegally hacked, possibly doctored, and possibly factually incorrect even if not doctored should not convict anyone of a crime. You'd need proof that the event actually happened.)

Bonn, no doubt it goes far and wide. I just think the corruption on Hillary's side is further and wider. And all the books out there on the Clintons are a testament to that imo.

Regarding the emails being hacked - If Hillary had followed the law and not had private email servers, she wouldn't be in this mess. Corruption has a way of self repairing perhaps.

Eventually, I hope we can clean it all up.

I don't think any of this passes as fair. Can you think of any reasons other than Clinton corruption why there might be a lot of negative books about her? You're certain that Hillary broke the law? (What specific law?) You're certain that someone who follows the law can't have their e-mail hacked and doctored? Or that third party communications (none of these are Hillary's e-mails) cannot be mistaken? If the answer is no to any of these (or yes to the first question), your whole argument loses a lot of strength.

Bonn - Do you think I have something personal with the Clintons? I don't. I honestly see how corrupt they are. The reason for all the books about the Clintons is because there is so much evidence regarding their history. They are so well protected and are such a powerful force in politics that they don't get jail time. We saw the same thing with Al Capone, who was finally jailed on tax evasion.

The amount of evidence (and deaths) around that family is unbelievable, you literally can write books, which has been done. It is non stop and for years. They, along with the Clinton foundation, are a massive criminal enterprise. Before all is said and done, I think you are going to see the Clintons both in prison for things we better not even mention yet. Hint - Look at Bill and Hillary's connections to Jeffrey Epstein.

Regarding the charges, you have to read some of the books. Or just follow the evidence. Lots of evidence to connect the dots, but no convictions. At some point it just isn't a coincidence and that point was when Bill was president.

Which books have you read?

I don't remember, it was a few years ago. But since then I've researched more of their history, and pretty much all the data points to the same thing - corruption, deep corruption.

But my next one will be - Partners in Crime: The Clintons' Scheme to Monetize the White House for Personal Profit
Excellent author.

In Partners in Crime, two-time No. 1 New York Times bestselling author Jerome Corsi presents the detailed research and expert testimony proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Clinton Foundation is "a vast, criminal conspiracy," also described in these pages as "a slush fund for grifters."

Corsi exposes how the Clintons amassed hundreds of millions of dollars in personal net worth, while building a $2 billion empire in the Clinton Foundation. The victims are countless thousands of honest people who contributed their hard-earned money to what they thought were philanthropic causes. The sordid tale involves suspicion of Enron-like fraudulent accounting practices by none less than PricewaterhouseCoopers, a "Big Four" firm, as well as the several "shell corporations" and "pass-through" bank accounts Bill Clinton has established in secret to hide what amount to kickbacks from Clinton Foundation donors and sponsors.

In Partners in Crime, Corsi provides readers the names and addresses of state attorney generals throughout the country, explaining that any one state in the Union can get a temporary restraining order from a state judge to place the Clinton Foundation in receivership and launch law enforcement examinations of Clinton Family philanthropic fraud accomplished on a global scale.

It is not enough, Corsi concludes, to appeal to Hillary Clinton to withdraw from the 2016 presidential race in disgrace. A national campaign to "Shut Down the Clinton Foundation" must be launched, Corsi insists, to prevent Barack Obama and other heads of state worldwide from following the Clinton Family crime formula to create their own "charitable foundations" to enrich themselves upon leaving office.

Sounds like a fun hobby ;)

Bonn1997 wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:
I'll try to be fair and balanced. Obviously if true, this would be bad, but it is still not as bad as the Trump foundation allegedly paying off the Florida Attorney General who was investigating him.
Notice the bold words too. It's terrible how the right-wingers present indirect circumstantial evidence as being clear cut evidence of Clinton's guilt. Supporters of the guy who calls himself the "law and order" candidate don't seem to have any respect the legal process in the country. (And this is not an instance of Hillary being above the law - an e-mail that was illegally hacked, possibly doctored, and possibly factually incorrect even if not doctored should not convict anyone of a crime. You'd need proof that the event actually happened.)

Bonn, no doubt it goes far and wide. I just think the corruption on Hillary's side is further and wider. And all the books out there on the Clintons are a testament to that imo.

Regarding the emails being hacked - If Hillary had followed the law and not had private email servers, she wouldn't be in this mess. Corruption has a way of self repairing perhaps.

Eventually, I hope we can clean it all up.

Have you read all any of those books? Which ones did you find the most compelling?

Because you aren't just saying "where there's smoke, there's fire" are you?

A more important question might be, what Pro-Hillary sources are you reading, EMS? I ask that because it's important to get many perspectives. As a check on my views, I listen to our local conservative radio program about half the time I'm in the car and I read conservative sources occasionally like WSJ. I should do better with the reading part but I think I listen to the opposing view much more than most people do.

I don't watch TV for the most part. I mostly follow other researchers by scouring the web, but TV clips are always there, so that base is generally covered. Not much radio though. There are people who do this full time it seems (Researching). Many are posted to social news sites, which is why I brought up Reddit as the Super Pac project "Correct the Record" is actively sensoring things. When I saw/experienced/witnessed that start a couple of months back (and continue till now), I knew something was up and started to look further.

Another nice researcher/philosopher is Stefan Molyneux. Here is an interview of him with a notable guest on the Clinton Foundation. Good one (so far)... Don't mind the BS pic, very professional talk.

Bonn1997 wrote:Comey clears Hillary again

Damage is already done..