Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Obama was in on Hillary’s Emails Huma Abedin Tells FBI
Martin Armstrong
Nov 29, 2016
What is really disturbing is just how far politics has fallen. The FBI released Huma Abedin 302, or the notes on her interview with the FBI. It is becoming painfully clear why Obama would never indict Hillary and may provide her a pardon to protect himself.
Abedin told FBI agents she “had to tell the White House” every time Hillary Clinton changed her email address to make sure Obama’s device would accept it. Therefore, Obama outright lied saying the first time he heard of Hillary’s private emails was when the New York Times broke the story.
Abedin says she had to notify Obama of Hillary’s private emails so he knew what she was doing. The trail of evidence with Norway and Obama being given the Noble Peace Prize for nothing means that Obama was clearly a co-conspirator with Hillary. No wonder the FBI and Justice Department have stood down. They had to otherwise Obama could be criminally charged as well.
Politics has definitely found a new low.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/obama-was-in-on-hillarys-emails-huma-abedin-tells-fbi/
it appears to happening world wide,...We The People are telling the bankers and crooks to go F*ck themselves,....
Bolivia Becomes First South American Country To Ban Rothschild Banks
Nov 28, 2016
Bolivia has become the latest country to kick the Rothschild banks out of their country, with President Evo Morales announcing that Bolivia will no longer respond to pressure or financial blackmail from the US government or Rothschild-controlled international banking institutions.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and US-dominated World Bank have been major players in the global economic landscape ever since their creation in 1944. These international banking organizations, which are privately controlled by the notorious Rothschild banking family, first pressure nations to deregulate their financial sector, allowing private banks to loot their economies.
Once the governments are forced to bail-out their deregulated financial sector, the IMF or World Bank sets up a loan package written in secret by central bankers and finance ministers that undermine their national sovereignty and force them to adopt policies of austerity that harm workers, families, and the environment.
Bolivia have become the first South American country to grow wise to the ruse. They have worked hard to gain financial independence and are now in the process of kicking the Rothschild controlled banks out of their country.
True Activist reports:
Before Evo Morales assumed the office of president, Bolivia was suffering from the effects of IMF/World Bank-imposed austerity and privatization that exploited its people and resources. It was also South America’s poorest nation. Though the Bolivian people, through strong showings of popular resistance over a period of years, were able to stop some of the worst privatization efforts – particularly the privatization of the nation’s water supply, many of the shackles imposed by these Rothschild-controlled institutions remained.
Morales, who became Bolivia’s 80th president in 2006, was the first president to come from Bolivia’s majority indigenous Aymara population and has since focused on poverty reduction and combating the influence of the United States and multinational corporations in Bolivia. Ten years later, Morales, a Democratic socialist, has managed to transform Bolivia into the fastest growing South American economy all while maintaining a balanced budget and slashing its once-crippling government debt.
Bolivia’s newfound economic independence has now empowered Morales to reject the very same institutions that once preyed upon his country. Just a few weeks ago, Morales announced that Bolivia will no longer respond to the demands or blackmail of the United States, the World Bank, or the IMF.
During a visit to Tarija in Southern Bolivia, Morales said “Before, in order to obtain credit from the IMF, we were forced to give up a part of our country, but we have liberated ourselves economically and politically and we are no longer dependent on other countries or institutions.” Morales praised social movements and the people’s unity for the country’s ability to resist and reject privatization and foreign influence.
However, Bolivia has done much more under Morales’ leadership than ban international banking cartels from operating within it borders. Bolivia has kicked out numerous multi-corporations since Morales took office, including McDonalds and Coca Cola, while also refusing to cooperate with the US’ disastrous War on Drugs.
It is also devotes 14% of its national budget to education, the second most of any country in South America. In contrast, only 1.7% of the national budget goes to education in the US. Morales also forced foreign oil and gas companies to pay an astounding 82% of its profits to the Bolivian government, which is used to fund a variety of popular social programs benefiting the poor. Poverty in Bolivia has dropped significantly as a result. Bolivia’s transformation under Morales proves that any nation, no matter how impoverished, can throw off the shackles imposed by international bankers and return the power to the people.
http://yournewswire.com/bolivia-bans-rothschild-banks/
THE ROTHSCHILD CONTROLLED BANKS
An increasingly number of people are waking up to the fact that 99% of the Earth’s population is controlled by an elite 1% – but did you know that one family, the Rothschilds, rule everything, even that elite 1%?
Behind the scenes the Rothschild dynasty is unquestionably the most powerful bloodline on Earth and their estimated wealth is around $500 trillion.
Here is a complete list of all Rothschild owned and controlled banks. The U.S. entries might surprise you.
(SO THAT IT IS NOT MISSED IN THE huge list,....)
United States: Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Afghanistan: Bank of Afghanistan
Albania: Bank of Albania
Algeria: Bank of Algeria
Argentina: Central Bank of Argentina
Armenia: Central Bank of Armenia
Aruba: Central Bank of Aruba
Australia: Reserve Bank of Australia
Austria: Austrian National Bank
Azerbaijan: Central Bank of Azerbaijan Republic
Bahamas: Central Bank of The Bahamas
Bahrain: Central Bank of Bahrain
Bangladesh: Bangladesh Bank
Barbados: Central Bank of Barbados
Belarus: National Bank of the Republic of Belarus
Belgium: National Bank of Belgium
Belize: Central Bank of Belize
Benin: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Bermuda: Bermuda Monetary Authority
Bhutan: Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan
Bolivia: Central Bank of Bolivia
Bosnia: Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana: Bank of Botswana
Brazil: Central Bank of Brazil
Bulgaria: Bulgarian National Bank
Burkina Faso: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Burundi: Bank of the Republic of Burundi
Cambodia: National Bank of Cambodia
Came Roon: Bank of Central African States
Canada: Bank of Canada – Banque du Canada
Cayman Islands: Cayman Islands Monetary Authority
Central African Republic: Bank of Central African States
Chad: Bank of Central African States
Chile: Central Bank of Chile
China: The People’s Bank of China
Colombia: Bank of the Republic
Comoros: Central Bank of Comoros
Congo: Bank of Central African States
Costa Rica: Central Bank of Costa Rica
Côte d’Ivoire: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Croatia: Croatian National Bank
Cuba: Central Bank of Cuba
Cyprus: Central Bank of Cyprus
Czech Republic: Czech National Bank
Denmark: National Bank of Denmark
Dominican Republic: Central Bank of the Dominican Republic
East Caribbean area: Eastern Caribbean Central Bank
Ecuador: Central Bank of Ecuador
Egypt: Central Bank of Egypt
El Salvador: Central Reserve Bank of El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea: Bank of Central African States
Estonia: Bank of Estonia
Ethiopia: National Bank of Ethiopia
European Union: European Central Bank
Fiji: Reserve Bank of Fiji
Finland: Bank of Finland
France: Bank of France
Gabon: Bank of Central African States
The Gambia: Central Bank of The Gambia
Georgia: National Bank of Georgia
Germany: Deutsche Bundesbank
Ghana: Bank of Ghana
Greece: Bank of Greece
Guatemala: Bank of Guatemala
Guinea Bissau: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Guyana: Bank of Guyana
Haiti: Central Bank of Haiti
Honduras: Central Bank of Honduras
Hong Kong: Hong Kong Monetary Authority
Hungary: Magyar Nemzeti Bank
Iceland: Central Bank of Iceland
India: Reserve Bank of India
Indonesia: Bank Indonesia
Iran: The Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Iraq: Central Bank of Iraq
Ireland: Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland
Israel: Bank of Israel
Italy: Bank of Italy
Jamaica: Bank of Jamaica
Japan: Bank of Japan
Jordan: Central Bank of Jordan
Kazakhstan: National Bank of Kazakhstan
Kenya: Central Bank of Kenya
Korea: Bank of Korea
Kuwait: Central Bank of Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan: National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic
Latvia: Bank of Latvia
Lebanon: Central Bank of Lebanon
Lesotho: Central Bank of Lesotho
Libya: Central Bank of Libya (Their most recent conquest)
Uruguay: Central Bank of Uruguay
Lithuania: Bank of Lithuania
Luxembourg: Central Bank of Luxembourg
Macao: Monetary Authority of Macao
Macedonia: National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia
Madagascar: Central Bank of Madagascar
Malawi: Reserve Bank of Malawi
Malaysia: Central Bank of Malaysia
Mali: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Malta: Central Bank of Malta
Mauritius: Bank of Mauritius
Mexico: Bank of Mexico
Moldova: National Bank of Moldova
Mongolia: Bank of Mongolia
Montenegro: Central Bank of Montenegro
Morocco: Bank of Morocco
Mozambique: Bank of Mozambique
Namibia: Bank of Namibia
Nepal: Central Bank of Nepal
Netherlands: Netherlands Bank
Netherlands Antilles: Bank of the Netherlands Antilles
New Zealand: Reserve Bank of New Zealand
Nicaragua: Central Bank of Nicaragua
Niger: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria
Norway: Central Bank of Norway
Oman: Central Bank of Oman
Pakistan: State Bank of Pakistan
Papua New Guinea: Bank of Papua New Guinea
Paraguay: Central Bank of Paraguay
Peru: Central Reserve Bank of Peru
Philip Pines: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
Poland: National Bank of Poland
Portugal: Bank of Portugal
Qatar: Qatar Central Bank
Romania: National Bank of Romania
Rwanda: National Bank of Rwanda
San Marino: Central Bank of the Republic of San Marino
Samoa: Central Bank of Samoa
Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency
Senegal: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Serbia: National Bank of Serbia
Seychelles: Central Bank of Seychelles
Sierra Leone: Bank of Sierra Leone
Singapore: Monetary Authority of Singapore
Slovakia: National Bank of Slovakia
Slovenia: Bank of Slovenia
Solomon Islands: Central Bank of Solomon Islands
South Africa: South African Reserve Bank
Spain: Bank of Spain
Sri Lanka: Central Bank of Sri Lanka
Sudan: Bank of Sudan
Surinam: Central Bank of Suriname
Swaziland: The Central Bank of Swaziland
Sweden: Sveriges Riksbank
Switzerland: Swiss National Bank
Tajikistan: National Bank of Tajikistan
Tanzania: Bank of Tanzania
Thailand: Bank of Thailand
Togo: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Tonga: National Reserve Bank of Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago: Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia: Central Bank of Tunisia
Turkey: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey
Uganda: Bank of Uganda
Ukraine: National Bank of Ukraine
United Arab Emirates: Central Bank of United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom: Bank of England
United States: Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Vanuatu: Reserve Bank of Vanuatu
Venezuela: Central Bank of Venezuela
Vietnam: The State Bank of Vietnam
Yemen: Central Bank of Yemen
Zambia: Bank of Zambia
Zimbabwe: Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe
Hillary Exposed – Australia Withdraws Donation for Hillary’s Pay-to-Play Scheme
Martin Armstrong
Nov. 27, 2016
For all the fools who supported Hillary claiming her Foundation was not illegal and doing good,
Now Australia, who donated $75 million to the Clintons tax free has joined Norway cutting their donations.
All government will withdraw their support for Hillary’s foundation because it was just corruption – pay to play. Hillary even had the audacity to say her foundation would continue when she was President and would not be shut down.
When the Clintons thought they had won, Bill jumped for joy like a school kid. They were probably singing to themselves ” Were in the money” song from the Great Depression.
Stanford University Confirms
Democratic Election Fraud
by Sean Adl-Tabatabai
Posted on June 16, 2016
(even back several months there was proof that Hitlary was attempting to rig the election to win. but then i guess the Wash Post and other SMS outlets owned by the DNC will say that Sanford is also part of Russia's attempt to manipulate ,... LOL,... ROTFLMAO)
A bombshell study released by Stanford University
confirms evidence of election fraud during the 2016
Democratic Party primaries.
According to a paper released this week entitled, “Are
we witnessing a dishonest election?,” a state
comparison based on the voting procedures used
during the election reveals endemic election fraud
within the system.
Given the stakes in the outcome of the American presidential elections, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process is of the utmost importance.
Are the results we are witnessing in the 2016 primary
elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed
a clear and early edge over his Republican rivals, the
Democratic contest between former Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders
has been far more competitive.
At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent
advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage
legitimate?
We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation
for the advantage: States that are at risk for election
fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly
favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging
evidence for this claim.
First, we show that it is possible to detect
irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by
comparing the states that have hard paper evidence
of all the placed votes to states that do not have this
hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final
results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls.
Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred
in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama.
As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud
has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts
may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton
with an exaggerated margin of support.
THE ACTUAL STUDY ====>
Are we witnessing a dishonest election?
A between state comparison based on the used voting procedures
of the 2016 Democratic Party Primary for
the Presidency of the United States of America
Axel Geijsel
Tilburg University – The Netherlands
Rodolfo Cortes Barragan
Stanford University – U.S.A.
June 7, 2016
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you
cannot fool all of the people all of the time.” Abraham Lincoln
“No one has yet figured out a straightforward method of ensuring that one of the most revered
democratic institutions – in this case, electing a U.S. president – can be double checked for
fraud, particularly when paperless evoting systems are used.” Larry Greenemeier, Scientific American
Summary Statement
Given the stakes in the outcome of the American presidential elections, ensuring the
integrity of the electoral process is of the utmost importance. Are the results we are witnessing
in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge
over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive. At present, Secretary
Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate? We
contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for
election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide
converging evidence for this claim.
First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries
by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do
not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the
discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008
competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama. As such, we
find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may
have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support.
Different outcomes in primary states with paper trails and without paper trails
Data procurement: Given the potential that the underlying voting number has been corrupted,
we had to restrict our analysis to a proxy: the percentage of delegates won by Secretary Clinton
and Senator Sanders. To group states according to the accountability of the vote, we used
Ballotpedia and created two groups. First, there are 18 states that feature voting procedures
wherein the accuracy of electoral results of a primary ballot vote are backed by a paper trail.
Second, there are 13 states that do not have such a paper trail.
Analysis: ?The [data] show a statistically significant difference between the groups. States
without paper trails yielded higher support for Secretary Clinton, (M no paper trail = 65.13%, SD = no
paper trail = 10.41%) than states with paper trails (M paper trail = 48.53%, SD = paper trail = 16.00%), t(29)
= 3.21, P = 0.003, d = 1.19 [Figure 1]. As such, the potential for election fraud in voting
procedures is strongly related to enhanced electoral outcomes for Secretary Clinton. In the
Appendix, we show that this relationship holds even above and beyond alternative explanations,
including the prevailing political ideology and the changes in support over time.
Supplemental analysis on caucus states: Does the pattern seen in ballot states occur in caucus
states? By the very nature of caucusing procedures, caucus results are generally thought to be
more trustworthy. However, in the current Democratic caucusing cycle, Iowa and Nevada had
caucuses widely alleged to have involved a considerable level of voter suppression and
potential fraud. We examined the [data] and found that these two states had far higher support
for Secretary Clinton, [M fraud allegations = 54.71%, SD = fraud allegation = 3.44%] than the other caucus
states, [M no fraud allegations = 31.61%, SD = no fraud allegations = 9.98%], t
independent means
(11) = 3.13, P =
0.009, d = 3.10.
Anomalies exist between exit polls and final results
Data procurement: We obtained exit poll data from a database kept by an expert on the
American elections.
Analysis: On the overall, are the exit polls different from the final results? Yes they are. The data
show lower support for Secretary Clinton in exit polls than the final results would suggest, [M exit
= 54.38%, SD = exit = 13.95%; M final = 57.52%, SD = final = 13.87%], t dependent means
(23) = 3.49, P =
0.002, d = 0.71. While an effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable
difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even
more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without
paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the
Secretary in the hours following the exit polls [M exit = 62.93%, SD = exit = 8.80%; M final = 65.68%,
SD = final = 9.52%], t dependentmeans
(9) = 4.68, P < 0.001. In contrast, the effect size is much smaller
in states with paper trails, [M exit = 48.28%, SD = exit = 13.94%; M final = 51.69%, SD = final =
13.77%], t dependentmeans
(13) = 2.27, P = 0.04, d = 0.58.
Irregularities are unique to 2016
To show that the pattern of votes may suggest a systematic effort to undercut Senator Sanders,
we must show that no such patterns were in place in similar elections. Given that Secretary
Clinton lost to President Obama in 2008, their data is a natural control and the best possible
point of comparison for the 2016 data. Thus, as we did for 2016, we tabulated the percentage of
delegates won in each state by (then Senator) Hillary Clinton. The data show that, contrary to
the 2016 data, there is no evidence that primary states without paper trails favored Senator
Clinton in 2008, P = 0.38. As such, the patterns of 2016 are different from their best point of
comparison.
Conclusion
Are we witnessing a dishonest election? Our first analysis showed that states wherein the voting
outcomes are difficult to verify show far greater support for Secretary Clinton. Second, our
examination of exit polling suggested large differences between the respondents that took the
exit polls and the claimed voters in the final tally. Beyond these points, these irregular patterns
of results did not exist in 2008. As such, as a whole, these data suggest that election fraud iS occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election. This fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders.
then we have outlets like the WaPo that are so biased in their reporting that they can't walk a straight line for a sobriety test;
The Washington Post: Useful-Idiot Shills for a Failed, Frantic Status Quo That Has Lost Control of the Narrative
oftwominds.com
November 27, 2016
Don't you think it fair and reasonable that anyone accusing me of being a shill for Russian propaganda ought to read my ten books in their entirety and identify the sections that support their slanderous accusation?
I was amused to find my site listed on the now-infamous list of purportedly Russian-controlled propaganda sites cited by The Washington Post. I find it amusing because I invite anyone to search my 3,600-page archive of published material over the past decade (which includes some guest posts and poems) and identify a single pro-Russia or pro-Russian foreign policy entry.
If anything, my perspective is pro-US dollar, pro-liberty, pro-open markets, pro-local control, pro-free-press, pro-innovation, and pro-opportunities to rebuild America's abandoned, decaying localized economies: in other words, the exact opposite of Russian propaganda.
My "crime" is a simple one: challenging the ruling elite's narrative. Labeling all dissent "enemy propaganda" is of course the classic first phase of state-sponsored propaganda and the favorite tool of well-paid illiberal apologists for an illiberal regime.
Labeling everyone who dissents or questions the ruling elite's narrative as tools of an enemy power is classic McCarthy-era witch-hunting, i.e. a broad-brush way of marginalizing and silencing critics with an accusation that is easy to fabricate but difficult to prove.
Such unsupported slander is a classic propaganda technique. It has more in common with Nazi propaganda than with real journalism.
The real useful-idiot shills are the editors and hacks paid by the Washington Post, who are busy penning articles such as "Why the electoral college should choose Hillary Clinton". Isn't this fundamentally a call to over-ride the Constitutional framework of the republic's democracy?
In other words, the ruling elite's candidate lost, so let's subvert democracy to "right this terrible wrong" that was wrought by fed-up debt-serfs.
Substitution is a useful technique to reveal propaganda: if Trump had lost by a thin margin, would the The Washington Post publish an article "Why the electoral college should choose Donald Trump"?
Any site suggesting such an outlandish subversion of American democracy would of course by labeled Russian-controlled propaganda by The Washington Post. In other words, it's OK for the organs of Imperial Propaganda to call for the subversion of the Constitution, but if someone else dares to do so, you know the drill: they're labeled a tool of Russian propaganda.
Just as a reminder, this is the status quo / ruling elite's handiwork The Washington Post shills/propagandists support: a status quo of institutionalized privilege, corruption and systemically soaring wealth and income inequality:
The institutionalized impoverishment of non-elite students:
The institutionalized impoverishment of the bottom 99.9%:
The institutionalized impoverishment of everyone below the protected technocrat-insider class of shills, apparatchiks and professionals:
This is what The Washington Post is pushing: a parasitic, predatory, exploitive, ruinously corrupt and venal ruling class and its army of apologists/lackeys/factotums.
The fundamental source of the Post's hysterical accusations is the ruling elite has lost control of the narrative. This is the source of the mainstream media's angst-tinged hysteria and frantic efforts to marginalize and discredit any dissenting narratives that undermine or question the power of a corrupted, self-serving ruling elite that has failed the nation and its citizens.
This is why Donald Trump was routinely labeled a Russian shill by the mainstream media during the campaign. Regardless of what you think of Trump or Clinton, what can we say about a supposedly responsible media that so cavalierly spews fact-free accusations of foreign control? This is the height of irresponsible propaganda being passed off as "journalism."
Free speech implicitly carries the responsibility of the reader/listener/viewer to make a critical assessment of the content, its source and its aim: who benefits if we accept the narrative being pushed?
The delicious irony of The Washington Post's hysterical campaign to smear dissenters as tools of Russian propaganda is that it only serves to discredit the Post itself.
For my part, I invite you to read all ten of my books and make your own critical assessment of the content and answer these questions:
1. Did you find even a single passage in the thousands of pages that favored Russian policies?
2. Did you find any passages that favored domestic resilience and self-reliance, localized economic development, and the promotion of innovations that favored the many rather than the few?
3. Don't you think it fair and reasonable that anyone accusing me of being a shill for Russian propaganda ought to read my ten books in their entirety and identify the sections that support their slanderous accusation?
If they can't support it, then isn't their accusation the very propaganda they claim to be identifying?
Just as a reminder: here's my chart of the Ministry of Propaganda (from 2007):
http://www.oftwominds.com/blognov16/useful-idiots11-16.html
littlejohn,...i would be totally surprised if anything close to Hitlary came anywhere close to a court for her illegal actions.
i haven't given it too much thought but the only potential way to get her ( and Bill and Chelsea) is through the illegal status and illegal activity of the Clinton Foundation. other than that i see this criminal walking away.
on another note,..i love how the arrogance and ignorance is infiltrating the DNC and how desperate they've become. it's obvious they are the liars and sore losers...but they cannot accept it. they think by doing this re-count it's a sign of strength,...no way. it's a sign of their immaturity.
pathetic
#JailClintonS...reap what you sow...
Ignorance to Law and Order...
We want Texas recounted and
audited for accuracy of every
voter having valid US Citizenship
that supposedly voted for
Clinton in Texas...
And get ready to jail
millions for Voter Fraud...
Do You Feel Safer?...
intersting stuff, on trains ????? boat ????? illegal drive ?????
re;
Exports of criminal illegal aliens will rise
according to 2017 forecasts...
Importing higher moral aliens
is expected to gain support...
Wall Street rallied on forecasts...
The Trend is your Friend...
reading, they were showing sending back migrants on this one
http://www.rt.com
Exports of criminal illegal aliens will rise
according to 2017 forecasts...
Importing higher moral aliens
is expected to gain support...
Wall Street rallied on forecasts...
The Trend is your Friend...
greetings ????? to all american's for better place to live
re;
Sanctuary City Protestors don't want to Leave...
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg/800px-US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg.png&imgrefurl=http://www.apsanlaw.com/law-246.List-of-Sanctuary-cities.html&h=495&w=800&tbnid=XTryfGFdcdq-wM:&vet=1&tbnh=113&tbnw=184&docid=sRyFXkFW6uKe9M&usg=__evapkbruLPrdshce_MS52_2rdMg=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGpNfMjaDQAhUm1oMKHfHWD5AQ9QEIHzAA
Money Train Media will make
you feel like sharing a tissue
with Hillary supporters...
Many criminal, illegal aliens
have been getting booted by
President Obama...
The trend will be your Friend...
the media hitting harder tonight in crowd gather to protest #nevertrump
Sanctuary City Protestors don't want to Leave...
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg/800px-US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg.png&imgrefurl=http://www.apsanlaw.com/law-246.List-of-Sanctuary-cities.html&h=495&w=800&tbnid=XTryfGFdcdq-wM:&vet=1&tbnh=113&tbnw=184&docid=sRyFXkFW6uKe9M&usg=__evapkbruLPrdshce_MS52_2rdMg=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGpNfMjaDQAhUm1oMKHfHWD5AQ9QEIHzAA
Money Train Media will make
you feel like sharing a tissue
with Hillary supporters...
Many criminal, illegal aliens
have been getting booted by
President Obama...
The trend will be your Friend...
what i find sooooo fascinating is all the Clinton supporters that were so filled with love and no hate and rebuking all the alleged violence that the Trump campaign was doing and,...what is their motto "When they go low, we go high." hmmmmm
burning an image of Trump,...
it's pretty obvious that it is the Clinton supporters appear to be the real hate mongers.
HOLLYWOODSTERS CLAIM N.C. hillary love child.
U.S Queen lost her smile on Monday...
A devoted child assembled a
mass of young, fair skinned
ladies to throw a gala event
for her, upon the strike
of midnight, in North Carolina...
But the U.S. Queen still
didn't find her smile...
U.S Queen lost her smile on Monday...
A devoted child assembled a
mass of young, fair skinned
ladies to throw a gala event
for her, upon the strike
of midnight, in North Carolina...
But the U.S. Queen still
didn't find her smile...
that was lamb's sacrifice to bury paper's dare.
Pray for dead Marines from Benghazi attack
and their families before voting...
Folks can show respect whether
it seems a difference or not...
Do You Feel Safer?...
hi LJ, it is in almost for change real change
Huma Abedin connection to terrorist funders...
Secret World of US Election: Julian Assange talks
a great interview filled with valuable info contained in this 24 minute interview,...
this the regular society today
re;
CNN censored m'phoking rap at Clinton Rally
on Friday and didn't display
his vile filth or any coverage
of him at Clinton Rally...
Only decade old tape of dirty
words from a Presidential candidate
can slip thru their censorship...
How Sweet It is...
Do You Feel Safer?...
CNN censored m'phoking rap at Clinton Rally
on Friday and didn't display
his vile filth or any coverage
of him at Clinton Rally...
Only decade old tape of dirty
words from a Presidential candidate
can slip thru their censorship...
How Sweet It is...
Do You Feel Safer?...
good morning, yes true, last har rah for big wkend splash.
re;
gencies need to dispel Graphic investigation
rumors if there isn't sickness...
Agencies need to dispel Graphic investigation
rumors if there isn't sickness...
If you've misplaced $6 billion in your purse...
You might know how Hillary feels...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/4/state-dept-misplaced-6b-under-hillary-clinton-ig-r/
Obama said on 11/03/16 that
Hillary is better qualified...
Florida sunshine got to him...
Obama Never Appointed an
Inspector General to oversee
Clinton U.S. State Dept...
Do You Feel Safer?
State Department Responds To Obama Sending Email's To Hillary Clinton's Private Server
Douglas Wright
Douglas Wright
Obama & Clinton Collusion & Corruption? - New Email Bombshells Rock Clinton Camp - Clinton Scandal
Wake Up America
Wake Up America
arf arf arf, goot ah biscuit ?????
re;
Cute...Hillary teaches Obama to roll over...
Cute...Hillary teaches Obama to roll over...
09-06-12, Obama DNC speech,,09-11-12, Benghazi
terrorist attack started around
3:40 pm US time...
Link to a detailed review...
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1755
Even that in depth review doesn't
portray Red Cross pull out date
to correspond with intel report of
Aug. 23rd, 2012 from Sid Blumenthal
to Hillary Clinton...
Following info was put together
to reflect on the internal break
down and some potential causes...
What difference, at this Point, does
it make?...H.
i would like this, california, n.y. fl. reverse flow to ah red state for this election
re;
California should rejoin US and dump Grump
and vote for Trump
and border security to protect
the growing MJ biz and keep
out the illegal border weed...
H. Clinton may not get a
top secret security clearance
and calls may be monitored...
If California has a problem
3,000 miles away from East
Coast, who knows if their
collect calls to H. Clinton
will get answered?...
OK, that may be stretching
it, but calls thru a monitored
answering service could run
into connection glitches...
Do You Feel Safer?...
09-28-2009...China and Iran Oil Deal...
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/Clinton_Email_January_29_Release/C05766329.pdf
And Iran was holding hostages...
till 09-13-2011
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/Clinton_Email_January_7_Release/C05782850.pdf
Trump says China doesn't have
best US interests in mind...
China could have had Iran release
everyone who cut a fart wrong
before doing oil deal...
Flip side is lot of spin for
years about sanctions against
Iran while China is doing deals...
Do You Feel Safer?...
California should rejoin US and dump Grump
and vote for Trump
and border security to protect
the growing MJ biz and keep
out the illegal border weed...
H. Clinton may not get a
top secret security clearance
and calls may be monitored...
If California has a problem
3,000 miles away from East
Coast, who knows if their
collect calls to H. Clinton
will get answered?...
OK, that may be stretching
it, but calls thru a monitored
answering service could run
into connection glitches...
Do You Feel Safer?...
like ah duck water rolls off them,
re;
Work related emails were captured and preserved...
good evening , what ah mess for tuesday. i think obama may enact
martial law.
he will be king
re;
Hey, let's vote in North Carolina
this year on a road trip...
Hey, let's vote in North Carolina
this year on a road trip...
Democrats plan to train North Carolina Black
Voters properly in decision making...
Work related emails were captured and preserved...
Mr. Faddis writes in an Op-ed published at The Hill:
I have worked in national security my entire life. Most of that has been in the intelligence community surrounded by classified information. For twenty years, I worked undercover in the Central Intelligence Agency, recruiting sources, producing intelligence and running operations. I have a pretty concrete understanding of how classified information is handled and how government communications systems work.
Nobody uses a private email server for official business. Period. Full stop.
The entire notion is, to borrow a phrase from a Clinton campaign official, “insane.” That anyone would presume to be allowed to do so is mind-boggling. That government officials allowed Hillary Clinton to do so is nauseating.
Classified and unclassified information do not mix. They don’t travel in the same streams through the same pipes. They move in clearly well defined channels so that never the twain shall meet. Mixing them together is unheard of and a major criminal offense.
If you end up with classified information in an unclassified channel, you have done something very wrong and very serious.
Accidentally removing a single classified message from controlled spaces, without any evidence of intent or exposure to hostile forces, can get you fired and cost you your clearance. Repeated instances will land you in prison.
Every hostile intelligence agency on the planet targets senior American officials for collection. The Secretary of State tops the list. Almost anything the Secretary of State had to say about her official duties, her schedule, her mood, her plans for the weekend, would be prized information to adversaries.
It is very difficult, in fact, to think of much of anything that the Secretary of State could be saying in email that we would want hostile forces to know.
As we wait for more information on the latest revelations, let’s quickly note what we already know Hillary Clinton did.
While Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton exclusively used a private email address for official business. Instead of using a State Department account, she used a personal email account, housed on a private server located in her home in Chappaqua, New York. The Department of State exercised zero control or oversight in this process. No government security personnel were involved in protecting them.
When the House Select Committee on Benghazi asked to see these emails, the Department of State said they did not have them. Clinton’s lawyers then went through all the emails on her server. They turned over 30,000 emails they decided were work related and deleted all of the rest.
How they, the Clinton camp, made the decision as to which emails to share and which to destroy remains unknown. Active government officials were not involved in this process.
Hillary says she did not use the account to transmit classified information. This has been proven false. The FBI found over 100 messages that contained information that was classified when sent, including numerous email chains at the level of Top Secret/Special Access Programs. They don’t get any more highly classified, it’s the virtual summit of Mt. Everest. One theme pertained to the movement of North Korean nuclear assets obtained via satellite imagery. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out this is extremely sensitive information.
The FBI found another 2,000 messages containing information that should have been classified at the time it was sent. How much more classified information may have been in the tens of thousands of emails, which Clinton’s lawyers erased, is completely unknown.
Hillary Clinton supporters like to ask rhetorically, “Well, what about Colin Powell?” Nice try, but using your own private email address which received 2 emails determined to be classified later, is nothing like deliberately operating a home brewed server, and then see it handle thousands of classified e-mails.
What happens next we do not know. What we do know already is this. While serving in one of the most senior positions in the United States Government, Hillary Clinton was at a minimum, grossly negligent in the handling of classified information and when confronted with this practice, acted immediately to destroy information and prevent a full, fair and complete investigation of any damage to national security.
Anyone else who did such things in the government would long ago have been tried, convicted and sent to jail.
You decide if you want to send her to the White House instead sporting this level of crimes.
2006 Audio Emerges of Hillary Clinton Proposing Rigging Palestine Election
By Ken Kurson
10/28/16
Unearthed tape: 'We should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win'
On September 5, 2006, Eli Chomsky was an editor and staff writer for the Jewish Press, and Hillary Clinton was running for a shoo-in re-election as a U.S. senator. Her trip making the rounds of editorial boards brought her to Brooklyn to meet the editorial board of the Jewish Press.
The tape was never released and has only been heard by the small handful of Jewish Press staffers in the room. According to Chomsky, his old-school audiocassette is the only existent copy and no one has heard it since 2006, until today when he played it for the Observer.
The tape is 45 minutes and contains much that is no longer relevant, such as analysis of the re-election battle that Sen. Joe Lieberman was then facing in Connecticut. But a seemingly throwaway remark about elections in areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority has taken on new relevance amid persistent accusations in the presidential campaign by Clinton’s Republican opponent Donald Trump that the current election is “rigged.”
Speaking to the Jewish Press about the January 25, 2006, election for the second Palestinian Legislative Council (the legislature of the Palestinian National Authority), Clinton weighed in about the result, which was a resounding victory for Hamas (74 seats) over the U.S.-preferred Fatah (45 seats).
“I do not think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake,” said Sen. Clinton. “And if we were going to push for an election, then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.”
Chomsky recalls being taken aback that “anyone could support the idea—offered by a national political leader, no less—that the U.S. should be in the business of fixing foreign elections.”
Some eyebrows were also raised when then-Senator Clinton appeared to make a questionable moral equivalency.
Regarding capturing combatants in war—the June capture of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit by Hamas militants who came across the Gaza border via an underground tunnel was very much front of mind—Clinton can be heard on the tape saying, “And then, when, you know, Hamas, you know, sent the terrorists, you know, through the tunnel into Israel that killed and captured, you know, kidnapped the young Israeli soldier, you know, there’s a sense of like, one-upsmanship, and in these cultures of, you know, well, if they captured a soldier, we’ve got to capture a soldier.”
Equating Hamas, which to this day remains on the State Department’s official list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, with the armed forces of a close American ally was not what many expected to hear in the Jewish Press editorial offices, which were then at Third Avenue and Third Street in Brooklyn. (The paper’s office has since moved to the Boro Park section of Brooklyn.) The use of the phrase “these cultures” is also a bit of a head-scratcher.
According to Chomsky, Clinton was “gracious, personable and pleasant throughout” the interview, taking about an hour to speak to, in addition to himself, managing editor Jerry Greenwald, assistant to the publisher Naomi Klass Mauer, counsel Dennis Rapps and senior editor Jason Maoz.
Another part of the tape highlights something that was relatively uncontroversial at the time but has taken on new meaning in light of the current campaign—speaking to leaders with whom our country is not on the best terms. Clinton has presented a very tough front in discussing Russia, for example, accusing Trump of unseemly ardor for strongman Vladimir Putin and mocking his oft-stated prediction that as president he’d “get along” with Putin.
Chomsky is heard on the tape asking Clinton what now seems like a prescient question about Syria, given the disaster unfolding there and its looming threat to drag the U.S., Iran and Russia into confrontation.
“Do you think it’s worth talking to Syria—both from the U.S. point [of view] and Israel’s point [of view]?”
Clinton replied, “You know, I’m pretty much of the mind that I don’t see what it hurts to talk to people. As long as you’re not stupid and giving things away. I mean, we talked to the Soviet Union for 40 years. They invaded Hungary, they invaded Czechoslovakia, they persecuted the Jews, they invaded Afghanistan, they destabilized governments, they put missiles 90 miles from our shores, we never stopped talking to them,” an answer that reflects her mastery of the facts but also reflects a willingness to talk to Russia that sounds more like Trump 2016 than Clinton 2016.
Shortly after, she said, “But if you say, ‘they’re evil, we’re good, [and] we’re never dealing with them,’ I think you give up a lot of the tools that you need to have in order to defeat them…So I would like to talk to you [the enemy] because I want to know more about you. Because if I want to defeat you, I’ve got to know something more about you. I need different tools to use in my campaign against you. That’s my take on it.”
A final bit of interest to the current campaign involves an articulation of phrases that Trump has accused Clinton of being reluctant to use. Discussing the need for a response to terrorism, Clinton said, “I think you can make the case that whether you call it ‘Islamic terrorism’ or ‘Islamo-fascism,’ whatever the label is we’re going to give to this phenomenon, it’s a threat. It’s a global threat. To Europe, to Israel, to the United States…Therefore we need a global response. It’s a global threat and it needs a global response. That can be the, sort of, statement of principle…So I think sometimes having the global vision is a help as long as you realize that underneath that global vision there’s a lot of variety and differentiation that has to go on.”
It’s not clear what she means by a global vision with variety and differentiation, but what’s quite clear is that the then-senator, just five years after her state was the epicenter of the September 11 attacks, was comfortable deploying the phrase “Islamic terrorism” and the even more strident “Islamo-fascism,” at least when meeting with the editorial board of a Jewish newspaper.
In an interview before the Observer heard the tape, Chomsky told the Observer that Clinton made some “odd and controversial comments” on the tape. The irony of a decade-old recording emerging to feature a candidate making comments that are suddenly relevant to voters today was not lost on Chomsky, who wrote the original story at the time. Oddly enough, that story, headlined “Hillary Clinton on Israel, Iraq and Terror,” is no longer available on jewishpress.com and even a short summary published on the Free Republic site offers a broken link that can no longer surface the story.
“I went to my bosses at the time,” Chomsky told the Observer. “The Jewish Press had this mindset that they would not want to say anything offensive about anybody—even a direct quote from anyone—in a position of influence because they might need them down the road. My bosses didn’t think it was newsworthy at the time. I was convinced that it was and I held onto it all these years.”
excerpt for us'ins yuge yuge yuge/ Clinton aide left classified info behind on 2010 China trip
By Malia Zimmerman, Adam Housley Published October 31, 2016 FoxNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/31/clinton-aide-left-classified-info-behind-on-2010-china-trip.html
An unnamed “senior aide”
to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
left classified information unsecured and unattended
in a hotel room during a 2010 trip to China,
one of several overseas lapses by Clinton’s inner circle,
Fox News has learned.
Confirmation of the alarming violation comes as Clinton herself is under a renewed FBI probe for mishandling sensitive information on a private server and
her longtime senior aide, Huma Abedin, also faces scrutiny as part of the investigation.
It was not known which of Clinton’s aides left the information exposed.
“In May 2010,
Secretary Clinton was on official travel in Beijing, China,
accompanied by senior staff. Upon Secretary Clinton’s departure,
a routine security sweep by Diplomatic Security agents identified classified documents in a staff member’s suite,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told Fox News in a statement,
issued several weeks after a Freedom of Information Act request was filed with the agency.
Diplomatic Security, which protects the Secretary of State in the U.S. and abroad, as well as high-ranking foreign dignitaries and officials visiting the United States, wrote up the incident on a Form 117,
while the Marine Security Guards filed a separate formal report, the source said.
The information came to light when the FBI was investigating
whether Clinton or her staff
violated the US Espionage Act by mishandling classified and top secret information.
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif.,
citing a whistleblower who separately came to him with an allegation
it was Clinton who left the material out,
wrote to the FBI director on Monday asking for more information.
One treat from a new email review
could turn another trick...
If they find some Holder email
correspondence to H. Clinton
State Dept. public server...
Did Huma and Hillary break up?...
after using unprotected emails
on each other so long?...
Do You Feel Safer?...
trick r treat money r eat. 10-31-2016
...BOO...
https://twitter.com/PrayerChain4HRC/status/793120441577705472/photo/1
LOL, cute costume...
Will Barack Obama Suspend The Election If Hillary Is Forced Out By The New FBI Email Investigation?
Submitted by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog
Oct 31, 2016 2:10 PM
Just when it looked like Hillary Clinton was poised to win the 2016 election, the FBI has thrown a gamechanger into the mix. On Friday, FBI Director James Comey announced that his agency has discovered new emails related to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information that they had not previously seen. According to the Associated Press, the newly discovered emails “did not come from her private server”, but instead were found when the FBI started going through electronic devices that belonged to top Clinton aide Huma Abedin and her husband Anthony Weiner.
The FBI has been looking into messages of a sexual nature that Weiner had exchanged with a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina, and that is why they originally seized those electronic devices. According to the Washington Post, the “emails were found on a computer used jointly by both Weiner and his wife, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, according to a person with knowledge of the inquiry”, and according to some reports there may be “potentially thousands” of emails on the computer that the FBI did not have access to previously.
Even though there are less than two weeks to go until election day, this scandal has the potential to possibly force Clinton out of the race, and if that happens could Barack Obama delay or suspend the election until a replacement candidate can be found?
Let’s take this one step at a time. On Friday, financial markets tanked when reports of these new Clinton emails hit the wires. The following comes from CNN…
After recommending earlier this year that the Department of Justice not press charges against the former secretary of state, Comey said in a letter to eight congressional committee chairmen that investigators are examining newly discovered emails that “appear to be pertinent” to the email probe.
“In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear pertinent to the investigation,” Comey wrote the chairmen. “I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.”
At this point, we do not know what is contained in these emails. But without a doubt Huma Abedin is Hillary Clinton’s closest confidant, and I have always felt that she was Clinton’s Achilles heel. Journalist Carl Bernstein (of Watergate fame) is fully convinced that the FBI would have never made this move unless something significant had already been discovered…
We don’t know what this means yet except that it’s a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that’s where we are…
Is it a certainty that we won’t learn before the election? I’m not sure it’s a certainty we won’t learn before the election.
One thing is, it’s possible that Hillary Clinton might want to on her own initiative talk to the FBI and find out what she can, and if she chooses to let the American people know what she thinks or knows is going on. People need to hear from her…
If the FBI has indeed found something explosive, would they actually charge her with a crime right before the election?
It is possible, but we also have to remember that government agencies (including the FBI) tend to move very, very slowly. If there are thousands of emails, it is going to take quite a while to sift through them all. And of course Barack Obama has lots of ways that he could influence, delay or even shut down the investigation.
So those that are counting on this to be the miracle that Donald Trump needs should not count their chickens before they hatch.
But if Hillary Clinton were to be forced out of the race by this FBI investigation, the Democrats would have to decide on a new candidate, and that would take time. The following is from a U.S. News & World Report article that examined what would happen if one of the candidates was forced out of the race for some reason…
If Clinton were to fall off the ticket, Democratic National Committee members would gather to vote on a replacement. DNC members acted as superdelegates during this year’s primary and overwhelmingly backed Clinton over boat-rocking socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
DNC spokesman Mark Paustenbach says there currently are 445 committee members – a number that changes over time and is guided by the group’s bylaws, which give membership to specific officeholders and party leaders and hold 200 spots for selection by states, along with an optional 75 slots DNC members can choose to fill.
But the party rules for replacing a presidential nominee merely specify that a majority of members must be present at a special meeting called by the committee chairman. The meeting would follow procedures set by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee and proxy voting would not be allowed.
It would be extremely challenging to get a majority of the members of the Democratic National Committee together on such short notice. If Clinton were to drop out next week, it would be almost impossible for this to happen before election day.
In such a scenario, Barack Obama may attempt to invoke his emergency powers. Since the election would not be “fair” until the Democrats have a new candidate, he could try to delay or suspend the election. There would be a lot of controversy as to whether this is legal or not, but Barack Obama has not let the U.S. Constitution stop him in the past.
Meanwhile, new poll numbers show that the Trump campaign was already gaining momentum even before this story about the new emails broke. According to a brand new ABC News/Washington Post survey, Donald Trump is now only trailing Hillary Clinton by 4 points after trailing her by as much as 12 points last weekend.
And CNBC is reporting on a highly advanced artificial intelligence system that accurately predicted the outcomes of the presidential primaries and which is now indicating that Trump will be the winner in November…
An artificial intelligence system that correctly predicted the last three U.S. presidential elections puts Republican nominee Donald Trump ahead of Democrat rival Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House.
MogIA was developed by Sanjiv Rai, founder of Indian start-up Genic.ai. It takes in 20 million data points from public platforms including Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in the U.S. and then analyzes the information to create predictions.
The AI system was created in 2004, so it has been getting smarter all the time. It had already correctly predicted the results of the Democratic and Republican Primaries.
Without Hillary at the top of the ticket, the odds of a Trump victory would go way, way up.
So if Hillary is forced out of the race by this investigation, Barack Obama and the Democrats will want to delay or suspend the election for as long as possible if they can.
At this point there is probably not a high probability that such a scenario will play out, but in this crazy election year we have already seen that just about anything can happen.
When they do not prosecute police for some of these outrageous murders of citizens, it had diminished the respect for ALL police.
When they covered up priests for child molestation, it generated an image of ALL priests in the mind of many.
If you do not prosecute the wrong-doing and and turn a blind eye, you undermine the entire system.
Bill and Hillary Clinton/Democrats/DNC are all betraying the people and the country by allowing this insanity to continue.
Their actions are diminishing respect for ALL government.
The people no longer trust government and are taking appropriate actions.
CHICAGO TRIBUNE Headine: Democrats should ask Clinton to step aside
Martin Armstrong
Oct 31, 2016
I fully agree from my “opinion” perspective that Hillary is a disgrace and she should step aside and Joe Biden should be the Democratic Candidate. Americans have “become so numb by the decades of lies and cynicism oozing from Clinton Inc. that it could elect Hillary Clinton as president, even after Friday’s FBI announcement that it had reopened an investigation of her emails while secretary of state?” wrote the Tribune.
The Tribune continued: “It’s obvious the American political system is breaking down. It’s been crumbling for some time now, and the establishment elite know it and they’re properly frightened. Donald Trump, the vulgarian at their gates, is a symptom, not a cause. Hillary Clinton and husband Bill are both cause and effect.”
If Hillary is elected, and keep in mind many people are voting already before this announcement, we will not only see the most corrupt administration is history, we will also see the most scandalous and investigated President in history.
She should think of the country FIRST, and not her life-long goal to be the first woman president. This is not a personal contest. This is supposed to be the leader of the country and they like to claim to be the leader of the free world. The stakes are too high to allow Hillary to take office. Joe Biden should take the flag and lead the charge for the Democrats.
This is my “opinion” and it has nothing to do with Trump. This is the peak in government (2015.75) and for Hillary to be the choice just makes our model want to turn out the lights itself and wake up when she is gone. Yes it has been forecasting the biggest spike in 3rd Party activity. That is obviously Trump because the Republican elite do not support him, nor do career politicians, corporate America, Wall Street, and of course the media.
So it looks like the computer was right on that one as well since he is a default 3rd party all on his own and his biggest donors are the middle class individuals, not the Republican money machine. They are backing Hillary. We should see the largest voter turnout for the past 23 elections. Those who have already voted for Hillary in the pre-election ballot schemes in many states, cannot now change their vote. So it will depend entirely upon the masses coming out as they did in the BREXIT vote against the establishment.
Our model says we are headed down anyway. But if Hillary is elected, the magnitude of that decline may be much worse than expected.
We have almost a perfect Double Monthly Bearish Reversal in the Dow Jones Industrial Index at the 17330 level and a Bullish standing at 18625. In gold we have a Monthly Bearish Reversal at 12420 and a Minor Bullish at 13060. In Crude Oil, we have 4933 coming into play for the closing of October.
We have interest rates that appear to be getting ready to lift off after a 5,000 year historic low. Keep in mind, that a collapse in confidence of government will cause more and more people to shun government bonds and hoard even more cash.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/chicago-tribune-calls-for-hillary-to-step-down/
Followers
|
3
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
254
|
Created
|
03/21/16
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |