Da Kine 17, Like i said it has been mentioned and or alluded to in a number of your conspiracy screeds. On the other hand your repeated lies and misinformation is a problem. Every post you make contains too many, dubious, misleading so-called fact and inference. Your repeated bs as regards the Clinton Foundation for one. You push widely debunked claimed illegalities of Clinton Foundation which still operates while the Trump Foundation has been closed because of illegality.
Foundation faceoff: The Trump Foundation vs. the Clinton Foundation
[...]
In 2016, Charity Navigator began listing the Clinton Foundation as a “low concern” charity, with a four-star rating, its highest rating. The Clinton Foundation currently has a score of 93.91 out of 100 for finances, accountability and transparency.
Meanwhile, Charity Navigator in 2016 issued a “high concern” advisory on the Trump Foundation after news reports that the New York attorney general would investigate it and Trump would seek to close it.
The New York Post report claimed that the Clinton Foundation took $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid, based on 2013 tax filings. But as we explained, it is a public charity. The ratio of 6.4 percent toward charities and 93.6 percent toward expenses, suggested by the tax form and repeated in the chart, is based on a misreading of the tax documents filed by the foundation.
By contrast, the American Institute of Philanthropy’s CharityWatch gives the Clinton Foundation an “A” rating, its second-highest efficiency rating, which is based on the percent of total expenses a charity spent on its programs in the year analyzed and the cost to raise $100.
For 2016, according to tax documents and audited financial statements, the Clinton Foundation spent 88 percent of its cash budget on programs, compared to 12 percent on overhead, such as fundraising, management and expenses. The organization also calculated that it costs the Clinton Foundation only $2 for every $100 it raises.
In other words, the reality is almost the opposite of what Parscale portrays in his chart. Indeed, CharityWatch includes the Clinton Foundation on its list of top-rated charities.
(CharityWatch primarily rates public charities, as well as some social welfare and veterans organizations that broadly solicit the public for donations, so it does not rate the Trump Foundation.)
Parscale did not respond to a request for comment.
The Pinocchio Test
Here’s an example of where data can lie, if presented in a misleading fashion. Parscale’s chart compares apples and oranges — and then offers an expense-charity ratio for the Clinton Foundation that is virtually backward. One could raise legitimate questions about the Clinton Foundation without resorting to phony math — or ignoring the well-documented issues with the running of the Trump Foundation. Parscale earns Four Pinocchios.
While you combine facts and falsity to end up with conspiracy.
"Ever since 1998, the Clintons have violated legions of laws that might protect New Yorkers from charity and tax frauds. For example, a public charity must further specific, tax-exempt purposes. If it wishes to alter its geographic focus, it ordinarily must secure IRS approval, in advance, before making such a change. And, states including New York legally require charities to make prompt, publicly available notification of such changes.
The Clinton "charities" never have complied with crucial charity laws and did not even bother to file independent certified audits of their financial results for 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003 in New York, as is specifically required. Thereafter, purported audits for 2004 forward are each materially false and incomplete. Without effective audits, no outsider can know what actually happened to donations sent towards a charity.”
“...And what do the many preening "investigative journalists" at The New York Times do? They stubbornly ignore the largest, as yet unprosecuted fraud and corruption scandal in American history.” ~zerohedge""
With no link for that section of your junk. It's conspiracy bullshit and no more.
Why is the Clinton Foundation still operating. It has worked within the law on most counts. Why has the Trump Foundation been closed? It violated the laws in such a fashion it had to be closed.
Your way out of such reasoning is simply to ignore fact and claim deep state conspiracy.
Repeat: Your gish gallop multi-topic posts are more misinformation than not.
Every single one of them are basically dishonest conspiratorial slander. As all conspiracy truth mixed with fact and unconnected instances linked for no good reason.
I'm thinking enough and that you should limit each post to one topic.
They is little content of substantial truth in your posts. Which means there is little discussion value in any of them.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
