Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

bellenuit · 30 October 2016

DB008 said:
There has been a tsunami of leaks coming from Wikileaks damaging the Clintons.

CNN (Clinton News Network) telling viewers not to read the leaks, CNN will decide what is newsworthy.

Joke

Its funny DB008, but on listening to that piece from CNN, no where does he say not to read the leaks. And the caption that the conspiratorialists put to the video is blatantly false. The caption says: "watch CNN tell viewers it is illegal to read the wikileaks Hillary emails". The CNN anchor says that it is illegal to possess them. That is quite different.

In fact most companies now add a clause to each company email and example of which is the following:

This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by mistransmission. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that copying, forwarding or other dissemination or distribution of this message is prohibited

There is nothing stopping your from reading the wikileaks emails if published on a publicly accessible news site (as he said, it is OK for the media to have them, though I am not sure on what basis - probably under some public interest provision).

luutzu · 30 October 2016

DB008 said:
There has been a tsunami of leaks coming from Wikileaks damaging the Clintons.

CNN (Clinton News Network) telling viewers not to read the leaks, CNN will decide what is newsworthy.

Joke

I think that just show how the mainstream media isn't leftist. They're pro-Clinton for sure, but Clinton and the Democrats aren't Lefty.

The MSM are there to serve power, power do not reside in hippies do-gooders. Power reside in corporation and big businesses who buy the majority of the advertising.

Knobby22 · 31 October 2016

Watch on Iview Planet America ABC where they go through the emails in detail.

luutzu · 31 October 2016

Knobby22 said:
Watch on Iview Planet America ABC where they go through the emails in detail.

Haven't watched MSM much lately; though have scanned through a few papers on the Clinton WikiLeaks and so far it just confirm the conspiracy theory - when you can no longer deny the facts, the best way to hide truth is to selectively discuss and frame it.

So there's plenty of news about Chelsea being seen as a brat and doesn't give some senior Clinton aide the respect he deserves (that was from a Murdoch press if I remember right).

On Reuters, same dance around very minor issues and what the Clinton spokes people say about it - that it's a Russian play; Clinton and the DNC are victim of cybercrime etc.

wayneL · 31 October 2016

luutzu said:
No one in the mainstream can really be called a "Lefty".

Say what?

Have we shifted the goalposts so far, have we enterered the age of Oceanian doublespeak so comprehensively that left is now right?

Tisme · 31 October 2016

luutzu said:
I think that just show how the mainstream media isn't leftist. They're pro-Clinton for sure, but Clinton and the Democrats aren't Lefty.

The MSM are there to serve power, power do not reside in hippies do-gooders. Power reside in corporation and big businesses who buy the majority of the advertising.

Never underestimate the need for people to saddle up to a notion that best describes their bias, no matter how distant and disconnected the choices are.

bellenuit · 31 October 2016

wayneL said:
Have we shifted the goalposts so far, have we enterered the age of Oceanian doublespeak so comprehensively that left is now right?

That already happened years ago when the Soviet Union collapsed. The hardline communists who wanted to keep the union intact and vehemently opposed the opening of the iron curtain suddenly became the extreme right, even though a few years before the advent of Gorbachev they were seen as the intransigent left. Remember when Boris Yeltsin played siege to the Kremlin, they labelled the hardliners who wanted to maintain the status quo the Right of the party.

What's funny is that it is those that steadfastly refused to change swung from being labelled the far left to the far right, even though they professed the exact same ideology at both times.

luutzu · 31 October 2016

wayneL said:
Say what?

Have we shifted the goalposts so far, have we enterered the age of Oceanian doublespeak so comprehensively that left is now right?

The Lefties now call themselves "progressives". All the "liberal" and left leaning politicians have now gone right to capture new market share, and so drag the political spectrum right with them.

Politicians can't go left because going left would mean too much caring and paying to the poor plebs, and we can't have that nonsense. So smart politicians like Bill Clinton and Obama speak nice leftist ideals about freedom and brother's keepers - to keep the left voters - but in reality they do what the Right wing powers tells them so they'd get the money and so it's a win-win.

The media might have been a bit liberal and left-ish way back then where, maybe, the ownership were more diverse and spread to a dozen or two owners. Now, most media/news companies are owned by about five or six big boys. So that's the mainstream media... and as a business, you got to serve those who pay you; and those who pays you aren't the subscribers - they get theirs for free mostly - but the advertisers: the big corporations, not the local trade who place a few lines in the classifieds.

So if you read the papers and watch the mainstream... it's all the same on issues that really matters to the establishment. Only difference would be on unimportant issues where, as a business, you segment and attract certain readers. So on the "lefty" papers, you get a couple of opinions on gay marriage is a good thing; on the "righty" papers you get to deny CC, don't like the gays or the Muslims.

Just look at Hillary Clinton. She's more hawkish than Bush Jr. She think Obama is a bit weak for not going tough on Russia in Syria... and she's a darling to the "Left".

Anyway, when a country is fighting in some 8 wars... any real papers and journalist worth their profession ought to start questioning their gov't.

explod · 31 October 2016

luutzu said:
The Lefties now call themselves "progressives". All the "liberal" and left leaning politicians have now gone right to capture new market share, and so drag the political spectrum right with them.

Politicians can't go left because going left would mean too much caring and paying to the poor plebs, and we can't have that nonsense. So smart politicians like Bill Clinton and Obama speak nice leftist ideals about freedom and brother's keepers - to keep the left voters - but in reality they do what the Right wing powers tells them so they'd get the money and so it's a win-win.

The media might have been a bit liberal and left-ish way back then where, maybe, the ownership were more diverse and spread to a dozen or two owners. Now, most media/news companies are owned by about five or six big boys. So that's the mainstream media... and as a business, you got to serve those who pay you; and those who pays you aren't the subscribers - they get theirs for free mostly - but the advertisers: the big corporations, not the local trade who place a few lines in the classifieds.

So if you read the papers and watch the mainstream... it's all the same on issues that really matters to the establishment. Only difference would be on unimportant issues where, as a business, you segment and attract certain readers. So on the "lefty" papers, you get a couple of opinions on gay marriage is a good thing; on the "righty" papers you get to deny CC, don't like the gays or the Muslims.

Just look at Hillary Clinton. She's more hawkish than Bush Jr. She think Obama is a bit weak for not going tough on Russia in Syria... and she's a darling to the "Left".

Anyway, when a country is fighting in some 8 wars... any real papers and journalist worth their profession ought to start questioning their gov't.

One of the better posts in awhile.

Ukraine, US sponsored, for example is only about trying to stop Russia from feeding their oil and gas south.

For the mighty (about to crash) petro dollar.

CanOz · 31 October 2016

explod said:
One of the better posts in awhile.

Ukraine, US sponsored, for example is only about trying to stop Russia from feeding their oil and gas south.

For the mighty (about to crash) petro dollar.

Petro Dollar???

I trust your're not referring to the US dollar?

luutzu · 1 November 2016

explod said:
One of the better posts in awhile.

Ukraine, US sponsored, for example is only about trying to stop Russia from feeding their oil and gas south.

For the mighty (about to crash) petro dollar.

I didn't know that. Thought it was just NATO pulling down that Iron Curtain - this time right up around Russia's borders.

Heard from a comedian's YouTube news channel quoting a piece by RFK's [?] son saying how Syria is also just about a couple of pipelines.

Apparently Qatar and Saudi Arabia wanted a pipeline from Qatar, thru S.Arabia, to Jordan, Syria, Turkey and into Europe... Assad was the only one saying no because that would compete with Russia's own pipeline soooo... so Assad have to go because he's a tyrant. Saudi's public executions and stuff aren't so bad, I guess.

The Saudis and a couple other kingdoms told John Kerry that if the US were to overthrow Assad, they'd foot the bill. So why not right?

The situation is just insane but the media is focusing on Trump's petty crimes. I mean, we all know how horrible Trump is on every level, what most voters might want to know is why Hillary is so insistent on taking out Syria's air defences, put American foot into Syria to enforce her proposed no-fly zone when both Russia and China are arming and training Assad's armed forces.

luutzu · 1 November 2016

CanOz said:
Petro Dollar???

I trust your're not referring to the US dollar?

Maybe the dollar is low because they want it low. When you owe a lot of cash and you can print more to pay less... you'd print more. Helps with export too.

Part of the reasons Saddam was taken out was because he was thinking of joining some non-USD based oil exchange - Yuan-based system maybe, can't remember. Same with Gadhafi's Libya and Venezuela.

Our masters of war are going for broke here. That they either dominate the entire world, in every aspect, or there's nothing left.

I mean, since WW2, most of the countries that were played with were weak and defenceless. So it's somewhat of a cakewalk carpet bombing them. China and Russia will fight back... and that is not going to end well for anyone.

It's like the British Empire colonising most of the world's less industrialised countries... until it takes on the likes of Germany and its allies; Or the Nazi taking on weaker European states until they allied themselves.

Worth thinking that for us who already own the world's riches, there is much more to lose than to gain from endless military campaigns. And that's not mentioning to moral and domestic economic costs of wars.

bellenuit · 1 November 2016

The Trump camp is elated and the Clinton's in absolute despair after the unearthing of this devastating Clinton email. Fox News stated that it proves all along what a criminal she is and her jailing should be the first act of the Trump administration, who undoubtedly will be elected now.

qldfrog · 1 November 2016

bellenuit said:
The Trump camp is elated and the Clinton's in absolute despair after the unearthing of this devastating Clinton email. Fox News stated that it proves all along what a criminal she is and her jailing should be the first act of the Trump administration, who undoubtedly will be elected now.

View attachment 68654

I assume you are using irony Bellenuit, but how would you feel knowing that your government is using untraceable (or intended to) communication away from scrutiny of freedom of information, law,senat3e enquiries, any grand jury, etc;
The email business looks minor until you try to anwer the question: why was she going into this trouble, and the answers are NOT nice...

bellenuit · 1 November 2016

qldfrog said:
I assume you are using irony Bellenuit, but how would you feel knowing that your government is using untraceable (or intended to) communication away from scrutiny of freedom of information, law,senat3e enquiries, any grand jury, etc;
The email business looks minor until you try to anwer the question: why was she going into this trouble, and the answers are NOT nice...

Of all the emails released so far, what is the most damning?

She acted stupidly by keeping the emails on a private server, but remember that Colin Powell suggested that it was something one should do. The big mistake is that even though there has been no ticking time bomb (the FBI said there was nothing criminal in what she did after their initial investigation), it does encourage innuendo as to why she did it. Innuendo like this: why was she going into this trouble, and the answers are NOT nice...

You may validly ask why was she going to this trouble, but so say "the answers are NOT nice..." is an overstatement. We (including you) do not know the answers, other than the excuses she gave, so the vacuum is filled by innuendo. But the fact that nothing of serious consequence has been found suggests that her actions were more stupid than nefarious.

luutzu · 1 November 2016

qldfrog said:
I assume you are using irony Bellenuit, but how would you feel knowing that your government is using untraceable (or intended to) communication away from scrutiny of freedom of information, law,senat3e enquiries, any grand jury, etc;
The email business looks minor until you try to anwer the question: why was she going into this trouble, and the answers are NOT nice...

exactly.

Who sends Classified emails over their own private server?

luutzu · 1 November 2016

bellenuit said:
The Trump camp is elated and the Clinton's in absolute despair after the unearthing of this devastating Clinton email. Fox News stated that it proves all along what a criminal she is and her jailing should be the first act of the Trump administration, who undoubtedly will be elected now.

View attachment 68654

You probably missed the WikiLeaks showing how Hillary was going to go to Saudi Arabia to give a speech for some $12m just before deciding to run for president.

Her staff advised against it, she was quite insistent. But then Bill Clinton and Chelsea should go instead - pass on that wisdom and pick up that cheque. All so that little girl in Yemen could have something done for her.

Until, of course, Saudi Arabia bomb and starve the heck out of Yemen's population over the past two years, and counting.

Or you probably missed the leak about Hillary's private and public position - all because the stupid plebs just can't understand how, she says to Goldman Sachs over the 3 paid speeches at some $250k a pop...

See, poor people are envious of bankers, who are people of the highest integrity, says she. That people are wrong to blame the bankers for crashing the economy - and crashing people's life savings with it... They are just envious of success, says she.

Or that leak about her telling her rich friends that the environmentalists should really get a life.

Or that "we came, we saw, he dies... ha ha ha"

Or the doubling down of no-fly zones over Syria.. which mean taking out of Syria's air defences - located in populated areas - having US boots on the ground, and taking on Russian jets.

But that's all cool because she's a woman and she cares for that little girl whose relatives, and whose friends and neighbours are probably dead or starving to death from the Saudis that paid Clinton that $12m for her wisdom.

If I have 0.1% of Clinton's cash, and forget about political influence, and if I care that much for that poor little girl... I'd sponsor her over at a flick of a finger. That would take the same amount of time to write that pathetic email wondering what's going on.

luutzu · 1 November 2016

bellenuit said:
Of all the emails released so far, what is the most damning?

She acted stupidly by keeping the emails on a private server, but remember that Colin Powell suggested that it was something one should do. The big mistake is that even though there has been no ticking time bomb (the FBI said there was nothing criminal in what she did after their initial investigation), it does encourage innuendo as to why she did it. Innuendo like this: why was she going into this trouble, and the answers are NOT nice...

You may validly ask why was she going to this trouble, but so say "the answers are NOT nice..." is an overstatement. We (including you) do not know the answers, other than the excuses she gave, so the vacuum is filled by innuendo. But the fact that nothing of serious consequence has been found suggests that her actions were more stupid than nefarious.

She set the server up long before she knew about Powell's gmail. And Powell's gmail were used purely for his personal messages, never used for receiving or transferring classified state secrets... that and Powell soon stop even sending his personal email on anything other than gov't approved system... that and a gmail account, according to the FBI, would be more secured than her private server.

Name one other politician in the US who gain anywhere near the financial "donations" the Clinton has after leaving office? There's some $2b in donation to the foundation; and over the past ten years alone, Bill and Hill receives some $140m in paid speeches. Then there are the memoirs for $10m a pop.

Yea man, just innuendos. All the politicians in China, VN, Russia and other countries all get the same kind of cash... and they're never at all do any favours in return.

DB008 · 1 November 2016

luutzu said:
I think that just show how the mainstream media isn't leftist. They're pro-Clinton for sure, but Clinton and the Democrats aren't Lefty.

The MSM are there to serve power, power do not reside in hippies do-gooders. Power reside in corporation and big businesses who buy the majority of the advertising.

LOL

STUDY: Big Three Networks Attack Comey Over Clinton by 3 to 1

http://archive.is/jrugc

This election in the USA has actually been a good thing. Now we know where the biased U.S. media stand

(Sorry if link or editing doesn't work as l previously do, posting from a mobile)

Knobby22 · 1 November 2016

Trump has a chance now. Been selling some shares just in case.

Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

bellenuit

luutzu

Knobby22

Mmmmmm 2nd breakfast

luutzu

wayneL

VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!

Tisme

Apathetic at Best

bellenuit

luutzu

explod

explod

CanOz

Home runs feel good, but base hits pay bills!

Attachments

luutzu

luutzu

bellenuit

qldfrog

bellenuit

luutzu

luutzu

luutzu

DB008

Knobby22

Mmmmmm 2nd breakfast

Similar threads

Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

Mmmmmm 2nd breakfast

VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!

Apathetic at Best

explod

Home runs feel good, but base hits pay bills!

Attachments

Mmmmmm 2nd breakfast

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency