Trump 2016 Or Hillary?

Simple question Hillary or Trump?


  • Total voters
    294
with him.... he could say anything...so I believe it to be real.... he is right... right now.... anything he says... they buy! But I also remember a few years ago he was talking about running.... and just as outlandish then... difference is now.... the republicans are falling apart and he stepped in at the right time
Some of it may be they´re so tired of having a democrat in the white house...an us vs. them sort of mentality...that they´re just ecstatic to be behind a guy who seems to be steamrolling his way to the white house. Some may really even care less about a HUUUUGE wall, lols. I have one republican buddy who has NO clue what he´s running on but LOVES the guy, so...

But it´s a democracy (?) and majority rules, like it or not. Politics seems like such a game with opposing sides playing as dirty as they can and the voters are like, ¨the dirtier the better!¨

BTW...i DO NOT vote. I don´t believe that our political system is real. I believe that it´s a charade carried out by wealthy, powerful folks running a nation with vast resources in a way that lines their pockets to the fullest at the expense of the fooled masses. The foes aren´t really foes but very good actors/actresses greasing each others palms. And they all pretty much have the same, to a lesser or greater degree, corporate sponsors (bosses?) to answer to.

Sorry, no offense intended, i just can´t believe, from things that i´ve seen on C-Span, that it´s actually real.
 
BTW...i DO NOT vote. I don´t believe that our political system is real
hate to hear that... but in this country it is kind of common... not sure why... the wealthy ALWAYS vote... that is how they get so many in there... here we take voting for granted and yet in some countries where they have not had it or fought for it....almost everyone votes
 
just did your fact check.... and it can't really verify nothing... if you take the time to read the article you posted...they can't find anything... but DID have several articles about him mostly divorce
So they found articles about Trump's divorce...so what? They didn't find any article where he was quoted with what that meme says. If you want us to think otherwise, show us where he said it.
 
typical of you.... they said they couldn't find anything showing the interview... period... doesn't mean it isn't true.... but in your twisted mind you are going to believe what you want... your track record shows it!
typical of you. You want to believe he said it, despite complete lack of any evidence. Sorry, I live here in the real world.
 
Hillary is definitely not a socialist and along with her Husband has done more to help Wallstreet and crony capitalism than even the Repubs have. While Hillary should be indicted on her negligence and mishandling of sensitive information with her own personal server is a clear violation of US law and anyone else who wasn't her would have been indicted already she is still the lesser of two incompetent evils compared to Trump.

screen-shot-2016-03-21-at-3-22-57-pm-png.803328

I can go all in with the negatives about Hillary which is a long list, but at least she has more practicality and pragmatism with foreign diplomacy and business dealings than Trump's naivete.

Here is some info on Hillary's Crony Capitalistic dealings that even Sanders has been attacking her on with her coziness with Wallstreet and big money.

Here Come the Cronies – Buffett and Blackstone (One of the Largest Wallstreet Firms) President Launch $33,400 a Plate Hillary Clinton Fundraiser
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Dec 4, 2015 at 3:04 pm
Screen-Shot-2015-12-04-at-2.52.23-PM.jpg


All you need to know about Warren Buffett can be gleaned from this one sentence he uttered in a Bloomberg interview earlier this year:

Clinton has a vision for America that’s very similar to mine.

Indeed, and that vision is one of crony capitalism and oligarchy. Two things both Buffett and Hillary have a long history of supporting.

As such, he’s busying running a $33,400 a plate fundraiser for this faux populist, along with the President of private equity giant Blackstone. Blackstone, of course, is one of the firms that benefited most from the Obama administration’s banker bailouts, by quickly buying up all the foreclosed homes only to turn around rent them right back to the peasants who were evicted. Here are a few articles on the topic to get caught up.

Read the Full Article »
ref: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/page/2/?s=Hillary

Former Citigroup Trader Explains How Wall Street Came to Own the Clintons and the Democratic Party
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Jan 29, 2016 at 1:45 pm

Screen-Shot-2015-08-31-at-2.27.14-PM-1024x458.jpg


Former FX trader at Citigroup, Chris Arnade, just penned a poignant and entertaining Op-ed at The Guardian detailing how Wall Street came to own the Democratic Party via the Clintons over the course of his career. While anyone reading this already knows how completely bought and paid for the Clintons are by the big financial interests, the article provides some interesting anecdotes as well as a classic quote about a young Larry Summers.

Here are some choice excerpts from the piece:

I owe almost my entire Wall Street career to the Clintons. I am not alone; most bankers owe their careers, and their wealth, to them. Over the last 25 years they – with the Clintons it is never just Bill or Hillary – implemented policies that placed Wall Street at the center of the Democratic economic agenda, turning it from a party against Wall Street to a party of Wall Street.

That is why when I recently went to see Hillary Clinton campaign for president and speak about reforming Wall Street I was skeptical. What I heard hasn’t changed that skepticism. The policies she offers are mid-course corrections. In the Clintons’ world, Wall Street stays at the center, economically and politically. Given Wall Street’s power and influence, that is a dangerous place to leave them.

The administration’s economic policy took shape as trickle down, Democratic style. They championed free trade, pushing Nafta. They reformed welfare, buying into the conservative view that poverty was about dependency, not about situation. They threw the old left a few bones, repealing prior tax cuts on the rich, but used the increased revenues mostly on Wall Street’s favorite issue: cutting the debt.

Most importantly, when faced with their first financial crisis, they bailed out Wall Street.

Read more:
Ref: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/0...to-own-the-clintons-and-the-democratic-party/


Ex-Goldman Banker Who Profited from Housing Crash and Subsequent Bailout Donates $100k to Hillary SuperPAC
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Dec 4, 2015 at 2:01 pm



Hillary Clinton is so completely owned and captured by Wall Street, she recently decided the only way to defend such blatant ties is to shamelessly say she helped them because of 9/11.

In case you need further evidence of how confident financial cronies are that she will do their every bidding, we learn the following from the Intercept:

The fact remains that the Clinton campaign is fundraising heavily from Wall Street. Contributions from the securities and investment industries comprise her fourth-largest pile of campaign money, totaling $2,044,471. Commercial banks have given $443,519 directly to her campaign.

One major donor to her Super PAC, Priorities USA, is Donald Mullen, Jr., a man who was singularly able to profit from the financial crisis both before and after the crash of the housing bubble.

Read the Full Article »
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/page/3/?s=Hillary

“What Difference Does it Make” – Hillary Clinton Emails Reveal More Shameless Cronyism
Michael Krieger | Posted Tuesday Mar 15, 2016 at 11:21 am

Screen-Shot-2016-03-15-at-11.00.50-AM.jpg


Excerpt:
"When it comes to raking in questionable dough via the abuse of political power, the Clintons are in a league all to themselves. In fact, their shamelessness is so rampant and sloppy, the only explanation is they simply thought no one would ever dare hold them to account.

Here’s the latest example, from Raw Story:

Student loan debt continues to be one of the largest economic issues plaguing the U.S., with the total amount topping $1.3 trillion. Hillary Clinton’s higher education policy touts debt-free degrees for underprivileged students. But is she being genuine in her efforts to address the issue?

While Hillary loves to rail against shady for-profit colleges on the campaign trail, she does have some financial ties to them that are likely to shape whether or not she holds them accountable for ripping students off.

It was recently revealed through Hillary’s emails that during her first year as Secretary of State she insisted that Laureate Education be included in the guest list for an education policy dinner hosted at the U.S. Department of State.

“It’s a for-profit model that should be represented,” she wrote in the August 2009 email, and as a result, a senior vice president at Laureate was added to the guest list. Several months later, former President Bill Clinton became an honorary chancellor of Laureate International Universities, which turned out to be incredibly lucrative. He was paid a cool $16.5 million between 2010 and 2014 for his role with the for-profit college.

Also consider that while 12 percent of the country’s students go to for-profits, a whopping 96 percent of them have to take out federal loans. As a result, for-profit colleges account for 25 percent of all federal financial aid dollars and half of all Department of Defense Tuition Assistance funds."

ref: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/0...linton-emails-reveal-more-shameless-cronyism/

More examples of 'PYSCHOLOGICAL WARFARE' Being conducted on the American Population:


America’s Corrupt Media – How Reporters Took Direct Orders from Hillary Clinton’s Staff
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Feb 12, 2016 at 9:24 am


Screen-Shot-2016-02-12-at-9.04.00-AM-1024x678.jpg


Excerpt:
It is the job of the Fourth Estate to act as a check and a restraint on the others, to illumine the dark corners of Ministries, to debunk the bureaucrat, to throw often unwelcome light on the measures and motives of our rulers. ‘News’, as Hearst once remarked, ‘is something which somebody wants suppressed: all the rest is advertising’. That job is an essential one and it is bound to be unpopular; indeed, in a democracy, it may be argued that the more unpopular the newspapers are with the politicians the better they are performing their most vital task.

– Brian R. Roberts from a October 29, 1955 article in the London periodical “Time & Tide”

A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier.

– H.L. Mencken

If you really want to know how weak Hillary Clinton is as a candidate, you merely have to appreciate that the U.S. media essentially acts as her own personal PR firm, yet the public still recognizes her as a dishonest crook. Brace yourself for the following story, it’s huge.

Earlier this week, we learned from Gawker that at least one U.S. reporter traded content in his article for information from Hillary Clinton’s staff while she was Secretary of State. In what is an almost hard to believe exchange, Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic, agreed to insert specific words and imagery into his article in return for a copy of Hillary’s upcoming speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

We have the exact exchange thanks to emails released from a 2012 Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA).

ref: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/0...ok-direct-orders-from-hillary-clintons-staff/



Leaked Documents Show How Blackstone Fleeces Taxpayers via Public Pension Funds
Michael Krieger | Posted Monday May 5, 2014 at 11:47 am

The following story by David Sirota at PandoDaily is simply excellent. It zeros in on the secretive and rapidly expanding relationship between private equity firms and the public pensions that invest in them. It shows a crony capitalist love affair greased by lobbyist influence peddlers known as “placement agents,” as well as non-public agreements between PE firms and public pensions chock full of conflicts of interest, extremely high fees and underperformance. Unbelievably, in many instances the trustees of the public pensions are not allowed to know what funds the “fund of funds” invest in. This makes due diligence impossible, and in one particularly egregious example it led the Kentucky Retirement Systems to unknowingly invest in SAC Capital despite the fact it was under SEC investigation at the time.

Furthermore, with the Wall Street Journal reporting back in 2011 that $37 of every $100 dollars invested in Blackstone’s investment pool coming from state and local pension plans, it appears that taxpayers are once again being fleeced by the financial oligarch class. Additionally, it appears to answer a recent question I posed in my piece: Is the Credit Bubble Popping? Carlyle Group Warns on Frothiness and Junk Bond Deals Get Pulled. After reading about a growing pool of insane “dividend deals” and payment-in-kind” notes being issued, I wondered who in their right mind was buying these deals. Well, based on the complete lack of competence and due diligence happening at public pension funds, I think we have solved part of the mystery.

The chief villain in this article will be no stranger to readers of this site. It is Blackstone, the private equity giant who I have criticized many times on these pages for buying up homes all across America in “all cash” deals, making homes unaffordable to average American peasants. Of course, Blackstone is just one of many, but given its size and influence, highlighting its practices is probably quite representative.

Here are some excerpts from the article. Read it and weep:

When you think of the term “public pension fund,” you probably imagine hyper-cautious investment strategies kept in check by no-nonsense fiduciary laws.

But you probably shouldn’t.

An increasing number of those pension funds are being stealthily diverted into high-fee, high-risk “alternative investments” that deliver spectacular rewards for the Wall Street firms paid to manage them – but not such great returns for pensioners and taxpayers.

And yet… despite the fact that they deal with the expenditure of taxpayer money, the agreements between public pension systems and alternative investment firms are almost entirely secret.

Until now.

Thanks to confidential documents exclusively obtained by Pando, we can now see some of the language and fee structures in the agreements between the “alternative investment” industry and major public pension funds. Taken together, the documents raise serious questions about whether the government employees, trustees and politicians overseeing major public pension funds are shirking their fiduciary responsibilities under the law when they are cementing “alternative” investment deals.

The documents, which were involved in a recent SEC inquiry into the $14.5 billion Kentucky Retirement Systems (KRS), were handed to us by SEC whistleblower Chris Tobe, an investment consultant and former trustee of the KRS. Tobe has also written a book — “Kentucky Fried Pensions” — about the scandalous state of the Kentucky public pensions system.

The documents provided by Tobe (embedded below) specifically detail Kentucky’s dealings with Blackstone – a giant Wall Street investment firm which has deployed a platoon of registered lobbyists in Kentucky and whose employees are major financial backers of Kentucky U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R).

Read the Full Article »
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/0...axpayers-via-public-pension-funds/#more-12858



Wall Street on Parade Explores JP Morgan’s Disturbing Links to the CIA, NYPD and More…
Michael Krieger | Posted Thursday Feb 13, 2014 at 7:48 am

Pam Martens of Wall Street on Parade does some excellent work, and I have featured her articles several times on this site. Most recently, I highlighted her article: New York is Drowning in Bribes and Corruption, which was a particularly popular post. In the article I have chosen today, she dives into a topic frequently discussed on the Wall Street on Parade site. Namely, the incestuous and entirely inappropriate relationship between JP Morgan and law enforcement, including the CIA itself. No wonder no one ever gets in trouble or goes to jail…

Here are some excerpts from her latest:

The nonstop crime news swirling around JPMorgan Chase for a solid 18 months has started to feel a little spooky – they do lots of crime but never any time; and with each closed case, a trail of unanswered questions remains in the public’s mind.


The price of no prosecution.

Full article here.
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/0...ng-links-to-the-cia-nypd-and-more/#more-10784
 
A good tweet from a UK person i saw:

screen-shot-2016-03-21-at-2-45-13-pm-png.803330

screen-shot-2016-03-21-at-2-52-42-pm-png.803331

Whether you vote for Hillary or Trump - your still voting for America's upperclass and Ultra-rich who only serve themselves and people like them who make up 5% of the world's population and control 95% of the world's wealth. Might be fine if you identify yourselves as one of the 1%. Sometimes the objectives of the upperclass who have billions of dollars to finance the expensive US political office campaigns overlap with the middle-class and poor but its not that often. Hence the middle-class and poor are pissed-off and I get it.

We live in an Oligarchy and the best Democratic-Republic that money can buy. The American middle-class are living under a modern-day trapped in debt/wage-slave/serfdom system to the upper-class. Your wages don't go up as fast as the rate of inflation on goods you purchase there fore the middle class purchasing power is shrinking, you make more purchases on credit that keeps revolving than you can pay off, and they are none too wise on what to do to stop it besides thinking doing the same thing over and over again with the electorate officials that are selected for you are going to change the status-quo. No, the upperclass only interest is in laying off workers and off-shoring jobs to minimize the labor expense to help increase profit margins between revenues on the corporate balance sheets therefore maximizing their take-home bonus pay of the largest share-holders (WallStreet and wealthy Business Execs). After-all this is how capitalism works right, someone has to do the pimping, and someone has to do the hoeing.

Our "Government of the people, by the people, for the people...," is really a Government selected and elected by the DC Insider Cabal Establishment who work not for 'the (common US citizen) people' but only for a select percentage of the people who stuff their pockets to help them remain career politicians such as lobbyists for large corporations, PACs, & large individual donors.

Open your eyes, be wise and know the facts - Hillary can't be painted as a socialist and even Bernie Sanders has been pointing that out. I'm not a socialist either but I don't believe in a Big Government brought out by a small Ultra-wealthy elite either. I know people are being exploited so just a few people at the top can make obscene amounts of cash with relatively little bit of work equity (*******, sweat, and tears) while the rest of the majority work like mules carrying the load of weight and get little compensation for it. Its just plain exploitation. Take it from a guy who works around the NY and DC power-bases and understands the inner-mechanics, I know.


~BBB76
------------------

Charting the American Oligarchy – How 0.01% of the Population Contributes 42% of All Campaign Cash
Michael Krieger | Posted Monday Apr 27, 2015 at 11:43 am

Screen-Shot-2015-04-27-at-11.22.37-AM-1024x714.jpg


This is an economic fight, but this is also a political fight. The biggest financial institutions aren’t just big – they wield enormous political power. Last December, Citibank lobbyists wrote an amendment to Dodd-Frank and persuaded their friends in Washington to attach it to a bill that had to pass or the government would have been shut down. And when there was pushback over the amendment, the CEO of JPMorgan, Jamie Dimon, personally got on the phone with Members of Congress to secure their votes. How many individuals who are looking for a mortgage or a credit card could make that call? How many small banks could have their lobbyists write an amendment and threaten to shut down the US government if they didn’t get it? None. Keep in mind that the big banks aren’t trying to make the market more competitive; they just want rules that create more advantages for themselves. The system is rigged and those who rigged it want to keep it that way.

– From Senator Elizabeth Warren’s excellent speech: “The Unfinished Business of Financial Reform”

This is probably one of the most important posts I’ll write all year. The reason is because in order to displace the current paradigm, the public needs to deeply and intellectually understand exactly where the real cancer resides.

I never liked the saying: “We are the 99%.” While admittedly catchy and effective as a slogan, I think it is ultimately divisive and counterproductive. The reason I say this is because the statement itself alienates much needed allies for no good reason.

In a country with a population of 320 million, the 1% represents 3.2 million people, which is a pretty big number. While the 1% certainly have far superior material lives compared to the 99%, that doesn’t mean a particularly large percentage of them are thieves, cronies or oligarchs. In fact, it behooves people interested in transitioning to another paradigm to court as many of them as possible to the cause. It is very useful to have well meaning people with resources and connections on your side. To blithely assume there aren’t plenty of potential allies from a pool of 3.2 million is committing strategic suicide. Indeed, John Hancock came from one of the wealthiest families in the American colonies in the run up to the Revolution, yet he isn’t remembered by history for his family’s tremendous wealth, but for his signature:

Screen-Shot-2015-04-27-at-10.45.54-AM-859x1024.jpg



The moment you proudly espouse, “I am the 99%,” you are being tribal and open yourself up to irrational thought. You are essentially saying 3.2 million of your countrymen and women are in some way the enemy merely because of their income. You are lumping a lot of very decent — albeit wealthy — people inappropriately into the oligarch bucket. While many of them are indeed oligarch wannabes or their well paid henchmen, many of them are not. You create a barrier between yourselves and them. This works to make many of the 1% reflexively align with each other when they should be aligning with you. It’s a pretty stupid strategy to alienate millions of people you know nothing about.

The root of the problem is the oligarchy, run by, well, oligarchs. Here is how I defined the term in the post: Inside the Mind of an Oligarch – Sheldon Adelson Proclaims “I Don’t Like Journalism.”

In a nutshell, while many oligarchs are extremely wealthy (or have access to extreme wealth), not all people with extreme wealth are oligarchs. The term oligarch is reserved for those with extreme wealth who also want to control the political process, policy levers and most other aspects of the lives of the citizenry in a top-down tyrannical and undemocratic manner. They think they know best about pretty much everything, and believe unelected technocrats who share their worldview should be empowered so that they can unilaterally make all of society’s important decisions. The unwashed masses (plebs) in their minds are unnecessary distractions who must to be told what to do. Useless eaters who need to be brainwashed into worshipping the oligarch mindset, or turned into apathetic automatons incapable or unwilling to engage in critical thought. Either outcome is equally acceptable and equally encouraged.

So oligarchs are the problem, but there aren’t 3.2 million of them. In case you missed it the first time around, I discussed this in the post, Where Does the Real Problem Reside? Two Charts Showing the 0.01% vs. the 1%. In that piece, I highlighted the following chart, which showed how the 1% has more or less been treading water while the wealth of the 0.01% has exploded in recent years:

Screen-Shot-2015-04-27-at-10.56.53-AM-1024x934.jpg


While that chart is disturbing in its own right, over the weekend, I came across another one that simply blew me away. It was from Palo Alto based political data compiling company CrowdPac, and it showed the percentage of political contributions emanating from the 0.01% of income earners. Here is what it showed:



You’ll notice a couple of trends from the chart above, but one that is crystal clear is that although the trend has been higher for decades, it hit escape velocity since the bailouts (and the Citizens United decision). These two things resulted in an increased concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the oligarchy (the bailouts), and provided an avenue for this wealth and power to be wielded (Citizens United). The bailouts did very little to help the American economy, but served as a mind-boggling windfall for the plutocracy.

There are roughly 250 million adults in America, so 0.01% of that is about 25,000 people. I would argue even this number is too high. In fact, I want to find out information about what percentage of political contributions come from the 0.001%. That number will probably get us much closer to the root of the problem. It is far more possible and efficient to closely monitor 2,500 people as opposed to 25,000. After all, 25,000 people don’t regularly call Congress and get the specific legislation they want passed. 25,000 people don’t have a direct line to the Federal Reserve, but people like Jamie Dimon do, and it is these people we must watch like hawks. If we can zero in on the 2,500 wealthiest people, we can also efficiently pick out the worst offenders, as opposed to just demonizing people based on wealth, even within the 0.001%. You can’t easily separate the good from the bad with a sample of 25,000 people, but you can with 2,500 (and that smaller group has much more pull anyway).


Far fewer people are calling the shots in America than you could ever imagine, and we must zero in with laser like precision on them, as opposed to alienating 3.2 million people. A more accurate slogan would be: “We are not the Oligarchy.”

For related articles, see:

Portrait of the American Oligarchy – The Very Troubling Income and Wealth Trends Since 1989

When Asked if the U.S. is a Capitalist Democracy or Oligarchy, Janet Yellen Can’t Answer…

New Report from Princeton and Northwestern Proves It: The U.S. is an Oligarchy

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger
ref: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/0...pulation-contributes-42-of-all-campaign-cash/

screen-shot-2016-03-21-at-3-39-17-pm-png.803332

 
Neither , they are both terrible candidates!
They're both idiots. Trump is an arrogant pompous ass who will bring nothing but disgrace to the presidency. The era of bulldog politics ended with that racist Roosevelt and US diplomacy cant afford to have racist Trump at the helm. Oh seems they both have that in common. Hillary is undercover racist and completely useless. The choices available at the moment are both sad and scary. God save us everyone!!!
The problem with "trump" is while he speaks his mind, what he speaks is not in the best interest of the U.S. citizens, especially from a constitutional context. He simply is not a respectable political candidate. He, like Romney (who had REAL and MORE political experience), will endure a similar outcome. That's a LOT of money being thrown away by a "billionaire," but I'm just a U.S. citizen.
Neither (In answer to the original question).
Neither. If those are our only two choices we are in more trouble than we already are.

I'm in agreement with the other members above - this is the one year since I have been able to vote when Bill Clinton ran that I see no clear choice. I modified the poll to add the choice 'NONE OF THE ABOVE' which you can go back and change your prior vote to select. Thats what I choose.

The problems are becoming more serious and deep in American politics this year also. This was a great Monologue that Judge Jeannine Piro who has a show on FOX News made about the Trump campaign and how to quote her:

"The Republican establishment, elected officials and party leaders are in bed wit the Democrats!"
BBB76: At least in bed with the Big money and business affiliated Oligarchy they are.

-----------------------------------

Judge Jeanine's Warning To The GOP: "Your Scorn For The Will Of The American People Is Mindboggling; Be Very, Very Careful"
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/21/2016 10:38 -0400

Two weeks ago, Judge Jeannine Pirro [OF FOX NEWs of All Places] hit it out of the ballpark with her stunningly honest and frank monologue that "there's an insurrection coming" and that "the American people are sick and tired of crony capitalism."

Overnight, she followed it up with another striking rant, this time explaining why the Republican Party's mantra has suddenly become that "Donald Trump must be stopped. "Why?" she asks rhetorically:"why would Republicans try to sabotage their own front-runner and risk a Democrat winning the White House?" Her answer, which is absolutely accurate: "The Republican establishment, elected officials and party leaders are in bed with the Democrats!"

She explained:

If Hillary wins, nothing is lost for them, it’s business as usual. The lobbyists keep their offices on K Street, the pharmaceutical companies keep paying them, the unions keep adding to their pensions and the lawmakers get their reelection bribes – I mean contributions – while we the underclass work two and three jobs and rack up a debt our children and grandchildren will have to pay for generations!”

Instead of supporting Trump – “the guy who keeps winning” – party leaders have talked about creating a so-called “‘unity ticket’ of other candidates to make sure he doesn’t win,” said Judge Jeanine. “To scare you into submission, they predict Trump cannot win the general election.”

It’s because “party elders are petrified of Trump,” Judge Jeanine explained. “The man is beholden to no one. He wins, and it’s game over for the elite.

Her latest clip is below:


And the full transcript:

So, you don't like Donald Trump. You're going to create a "unity ticket" of other candidates to make sure he doesn't win.

Say again? You want to stop one of the biggest vote-getters in your own party's Republican Party primary history?

Yet ‘Donald Trump must be stopped’ is the Republican Party’s mantra! Hey, I didn't always like my party’s choice for president, but I generally supported him.

Good that Trump is a white male otherwise they'd be accused of being racist, and lucky Trump's not gay otherwise the Republican Party would be accused of being homophobic.

So let me see if I understand this. The guy who keeps winning, despite his being called a misogynist, a racist, and a xenophobe, who has more than 50 percent of the delegates, with even as many as 17 other Republicans in those primaries and the Republican Party's mission is to block Trump's nomination?

What are you guys smoking?

Okay, you like Ted Cruz. Good for you. But he needs to win 80% of the remaining Republican delegates. Keep dreaming guys – it ain't gonna happen.

John Kasich. Nice guy. Absolutely no path to the nomination.

So I say to myself, ‘Self, why?’ Why would Republicans try to sabotage their own front-runner and risk a Democrat winning the White House? And I keep coming up with the same answer: the Republican establishment, elected officials and party leaders are in bed with the Democrats!

So if Hillary wins, nothing is lost for them, it’s business as usual.

The lobbyists keep their offices on K Street, the pharmaceutical companies keep paying them, the unions keep adding to their pensions and the lawmakers get their reelection bribes – I mean contributions – while we the underclass work two and three jobs and rack up a debt our children and grandchildren will have to pay for generations!


To scare you into submission, they predict Trump cannot win the general election. If not, pray tell why does he keep winning primaries and drawing crowds like we've never seen in American primary history?

An election note primer: Trump already has 678 delegates. He needs 1237 to win. He's won 6 closed and 13 open primaries and caucuses – one where Independents and Democrats – or just Independents vote. Why is this important?

It tells you Trump, besides winning the base, appeals to Independents and Democrats as well. Does that not bode well for the general election, especially against an establishment politician most consider untrustworthy and dishonest.

They say he's divisive. Yet the looting and burning and riots in Ferguson happened long before Trump! Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, moveon.org – all before trump. [BBB76: THIS INCLUDES SANDERS TOO - THAT'S WHY TRUMP'S CLAIM ON SANDERS SUPPORTING THE PROTESTS AT HIS RALLIES IS B.S!] The 'what do we want – dead cops, when do we want them – now' chant, all before Trump.

It's astonishing, Republicans plotting against their own front-runner!

If the establishment had exercised this energy to get evangelical votes to Romney in 2012 he might have won! But then again, it wasn't that important because either way, either party the establishment wins – their jobs, their offices, their lifestyles intact – as they continue on their treadmill of DC money and power.

The party elders are petrified of Trump. The man is beholden to no one. He wins and it's game over for the elite. With Hillary, the game goes on.

Heads up, Washington. We're not listening to you anymore because we're fed up. You haven't fixed a damn thing. We can't take it anymore: the lies, the corruption, the debt, the taxes, the invasion, the freebies, the lack of accountability, sanctuary cities, religions ****** to violate their own faith, by providing birth control and abortifacts at the altar of Obamacare and your saying one thing and doing another.

The patronage games and the free ride on our backs are over. You're not listening. For us, it's not just an election – it's the selection of Supreme Court justices and the direction our country takes for generations.

We don’t want anything more than what our Founding Fathers intended. The slippery slope into socialism doesn't work for us. We want an America where law enforcement, the military and our allies are not the enemy.

Boys, your arrogance is astonishing. And your condescension and scorn for the will of the American people is both mind-boggling and reminiscent of another time in our history.

From the beginning, we knew this would be a political revolution. Be careful boys, be very, very careful. You don't want to make this a different kind of revolution.

ref; http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ng-against-trump-proof-they-are-bed-democrats

----
Some interesting responses to the article from off the Zerohedge site:

Mon, 03/21/2016 - 11:12 | ******* of Loki


When National Propaganda Radio asked their local reporter on the ground at a Trump campaign rally why is Trump so popular, to their Horror, he said, "They all disdain the GOP, Obama and the Dems." Interstingly, he said the same was true at Sanders rallies.

Intense disdain for those groups as well as the media.

Mon, 03/21/2016 - 11:24 | 7340991 Soul Glow

Yet it is misplaced. It is poor logic to elect Sanders because Clinton is bad. This because Sanders is cut from the same cloth. Slightly better? Of course, as Hillary is pure evil, but the MIC will run Sanders once he enters the oval office.

Same with Trump. Sure he is better than Cruz et al but he is run by the (CORPORATE BUSINESS) mafia and they will run this country into the ground.
 
Last edited:
She isn't old enough to run for president. But she probably isn't any worse than the current offerings by both parties. And she damn sure will look better in a bikini than Hillary or any other candidates
Say -what, have you seen Hillary in a Bikini, you may want to rethink that... :blackgrimace:

Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.38.27 PM.png
Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.38.20 PM.png
Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.38.04 PM.png
first-lady-bill-clinton.gif

This is who we want for President in a Bikini:
Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.40.49 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.41.26 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.42.39 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.43.09 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.42.04 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.41.45 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 4.44.20 PM.png
 
is she really anymore dishonest than anyone else that has run.... besides the Benghazi committee has gone out of their way to make her look that way... and even a few republicans have admitted so!
so take away Benghazi and now what is dishonest about her?
there have been 3 different republican committees investigate the thing and found no wrong doing... but that didn't satisfy Mr gowdy!
If she wasn't running for office that whole thing would have been done and dismissed a year ago!

Man like I said I can go in on Hillary but I need to do some other ******* today, but here is some more data to dump on her (I do my homework as you can see my friend. Too many dots linking up on why not to trust hillary):

Must Read – “Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote”
Michael Krieger | Posted Wednesday Feb 10, 2016 at 3:27 pm

Why the black community supports Hillary Clinton is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps someone can rectify my ignorance in the comment section, but it appears irrational to support a person so single-mindedly focused on her own wealth and power, as opposed to someone genuinely interested in helping poor and struggling communities.

Perhaps it’s merely a name recognition thing, or the fact that her husband was so popular with the black community. I don’t know, but what I do know is Hillary Clinton is running for President because she wants the Presidency. In contrast, Bernie Sanders is running because he sees America in deep trouble. There’s a huge difference.

– From the post: Former Head of the NAACP to Endorse Bernie Sanders

Earlier today, we learned that Ta-Nehisi Coates will be voting for Bernie Sanders. A few hours later, a hugely important piece written by Michelle Alexander at the Nation began making the rounds titled: Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote. Taken together, these two revelations could represent a major turning point with regard to Bernie Sanders’ success within the black community. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to see her lead among blacks cut in half over the next few weeks. It’s about to get real.

Here are a few excerpts from the fantastic Nation article which outlines how disastrous the Clinton administration was when it came to the black community.

Hillary Clinton loves black people. And black people love Hillary—or so it seems. Black politicians have lined up in droves to endorse her, eager to prove their loyalty to the Clintons in the hopes that their faithfulness will be remembered and rewarded. Black pastors are opening their church doors, and the Clintons are making themselves comfortably at home once again, engaging effortlessly in all the usual rituals associated with “courting the black vote,” a pursuit that typically begins and ends with Democratic politicians making black people feel liked and taken seriously. Doing something concrete to improve the conditions under which most black people live is generally not required.


Hillary is looking to gain momentum on the campaign trail as the primaries move out of Iowa and New Hampshire and into states like South Carolina, where large pockets of black voters can be found. According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans. It seems that we—black people—are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.

And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.

What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans? Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities? Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?

No. Quite the opposite.

Bill Clinton presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history. Clinton did not declare the War on Crime or the War on *******—those wars were declared before Reagan was elected and long before crack hit the streets—but he escalated it beyond what many conservatives had imagined possible. He supported the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack versus powder an addictive white substance, which produced staggering racial injustice in sentencing and boosted funding for *******-law enforcement.


Clinton championed the idea of a federal “three strikes” law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who “were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.”


When Clinton left office in 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. Human Rights Watch reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all ******* offenders sent to prison, even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal *******. Prison admissions for ******* offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level in 1983. All of the presidents since 1980 have contributed to mass incarceration, but as Equal Justice Initiative founder Bryan Stevenson recently observed, “President Clinton’s tenure was the worst.”


An oft-repeated myth about the Clinton administration is that although it was overly tough on crime back in the 1990s, at least its policies were good for the economy and for black unemployment rates. The truth is more troubling. As unemployment rates sank to historically low levels for white Americans in the 1990s, the jobless rate among black men in their 20s who didn’t have a college degree rose to its highest level ever. This increase in joblessness was propelled by the skyrocketing incarceration rate.

Why is this not common knowledge? Because government statistics like poverty and unemployment rates do not include incarcerated people. As Harvard sociologist Bruce Western explains: “Much of the optimism about declines in racial inequality and the power of the US model of economic growth is misplaced once we account for the invisible poor, behind the walls of America’s prisons and jails.” When Clinton left office in 2001, the true jobless rate for young, non-college-educated black men (including those behind bars) was 42 percent. This figure was never reported. Instead, the media claimed that unemployment rates for African Americans had fallen to record lows, neglecting to mention that this miracle was possible only because incarceration rates were now at record highs. Young black men weren’t looking for work at high rates during the Clinton era because they were now behind bars—out of sight, out of mind, and no longer counted in poverty and unemployment statistics.

read rest of article here:
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/02/10/must-read-why-hillary-clinton-doesnt-deserve-the-black-vote/

How Progressive – Private Prison Company Lobbyists are Raising Funds for Hillary
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Jul 24, 2015 at 2:01 pm

Screen-Shot-2015-07-24-at-1.56.55-PM-1024x682.jpg


Earlier this week, we learned that lobbyists for Monsanto, Exxon Mobil, Microsoft and the Telecom industry are actively raising funds for the pantsuit revolutionary, Hillary Clinton. Today, we can add private prison companies to the list. Because private prisons are sooooooo progressive.

From the Intercept:

As immigration and incarceration issues become central to the 2016 presidential campaign, lobbyists for two major prison companies are serving as top fundraisers for Hillary Clinton.


Corrections Corporation of America and the Geo Group could both see their fortunes turning if there are fewer people to lock up in the future.


Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit.

You ready?

Screen-Shot-2015-07-21-at-3.08.33-PM-1024x545.jpg


For related articles, see:

A Deep Look into the Shady World of the Private Prison Industry

Video of the Day – John Oliver on Municipal Fines and Private Probation Companies

Profiting from Prisoners – How Jails Partner with Private Firms to Charge for Video Calls While Ending Visitation Rights

Poverty Profiteering in 2014 – Introducing Private Probation Companies

FBI Launches Investigation into a Private Prison So Violent it is Called “Gladiator School”
 
Man like I said I can go in on Hillary but I need to do some other ******* today, but here is some more data to dump on her (I do my homework as you can see my friend. Too many dots linking up on why not to trust hillary):
welllll ok.....but I still think she is the lesser of the evils.... what's the old saying.... better the dog you know than the one you don't
she is not a great candidate by any means..... but look at what we are being offered.... besides like I said before if it wasn't for Bengazi... there would be a lot more "trust" in her... but they are playing games with her to try and get people to not vote for her

where's Joe when you need him?... and even he wasn't a great choice.... would love to see John Kerry run again... but he won't... there just aren't ANY good candidates out there... every friggn one of them corrupt!
Sanders is the logical choice..... but in this climate he could not get any of his dreams passed!.... and his foreign affairs are.... lacking to say the least... again that's where Hillary has a leg up on all of them
Kasich is not bad ... but that friggn Cruz is so sneaky.. well him and Trump... he won't make it past their little "vote"
wouldn't be surprised to see Romney's name come up again at that little party!
 
welllll ok.....but I still think she is the lesser of the evils.... what's the old saying.... better the dog you know than the one you don't
she is not a great candidate by any means..... but look at what we are being offered.... besides like I said before if it wasn't for Bengazi... there would be a lot more "trust" in her... but they are playing games with her to try and get people to not vote for her

where's Joe when you need him?... and even he wasn't a great choice.... would love to see John Kerry run again... but he won't... there just aren't ANY good candidates out there... every friggn one of them corrupt!
Sanders is the logical choice..... but in this climate he could not get any of his dreams passed!.... and his foreign affairs are.... lacking to say the least... again that's where Hillary has a leg up on all of them
Kasich is not bad ... but that friggn Cruz is so sneaky.. well him and Trump... he won't make it past their little "vote"
wouldn't be surprised to see Romney's name come up again at that little party!

I don't disagree in Hillary over Trump or Cruz or Sanders from the current available pool being offered to choose from. Kasich is the best choice out of all of them to me, but from the ruminations and rumor mill of the GOP establishment, I hear Rick Perry's name being touted as one to put on the ticket during the contested convention. They want a conservative - Romney voted for Universal Healthcare in Massachusetts and loosing the last election doesn't bode well for another backing.

Looks like the Repubs are on their way to a 2 party split. I really want to see the libertarian party (Ultra-Fiscal Conservative/small Gov. and Socially Liberal) become a serious and viable 3rd party choice but I wouldn't select Trump for its representation. To me the Libertarian party takes the best from both parties to meet in a groud-zero middle of the road, pragmatic moderate platform and become purple from the Red and Blue mix.

Conservatives won't go for it but ideology is not going to stop people from smoking marijuana and gay marriages so Conservatives might as well move on from holding on to those beliefs. I'm not pro 420/gay marriage but I know I can't stop it either hence 'live and let live' and everyone's right to "..life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as according to our Constitution. Those two acts are not harming society nor themselves so why should we regulate and be against it?

But whats wrong is wrong and Hillary Clinton is 'CLEARLY' in the wrong and no one should be held above or outside of the law.

If Hillary Isn't Indicted, The Rule Of Law & The Republic Are Dead
Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

Once the Oligarchy is above the law, the Republic is already dead.

To paraphrase Ernest Hemingway: How did you lose your Republic? Two ways, gradually and then suddenly. The Romans experienced this when their Republic was extinguished by Empire.

The erosion of the Republic was gradual: slowly but surely, the lower classes' representation in governance was curtailed; the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful cemented their privileges at the expense of the many; Oligarchs rose above the laws that were supposed to apply to all, and executive power was consolidated in top administrators and the wealthy at the expense of the Senate.

When Caesar crossed the Rubicon with his army to seize control of Rome, the Roman Republic ceased to exist. Gradually and then suddenly: this is how Republics become Empires.

We find ourselves in a parallel moment in history: the American Republic has been hollowed into a shell that is maintained for PR purposes. Beneath the propaganda, the Establishment runs the nation for its own benefit. The people are ignored, because they are powerless in this hollow shell of democracy: their only role is to provide bodies, talent and ******* for the Imperial armed forces, pay taxes if they have any money, and be content with their food stamps if they don't.

Here's the proof:

Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

Here are two articles in the same vein:

America the Banana Republic

The Quiet Coup

The United States has reached a crossing the Rubicon moment: either Hillary Clinton is indicted for knowingly violating statutes regarding State Department security, or the rule of law and the Republic are dead. This is a binary moment: we either let Hillary evade the laws that were established to protect the security of the nation and confess there is no rule of law now for the Oligarchy, or the agencies tasked with defending the nation indict her.

There is no middle ground. If Hillary isn't indicted, the rule of law, i.e. no one is above the law, is dead.

Clintons.jpg


If you believe Hillary that she didn't really do anything to violate the spirit or the letter of security laws, please review these statutes:

U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 12 - Diplomatic Security
12 FAM 531.1 Top Secret Storage
12 FAM 531.1-1 Domestic
(CT: DS-185; 01-31-2012)
(Uniform State, USAID, OPIC, TDP)

2 FAM 558 CRIMINAL LAWS
(TL: DS-70; 10-01-2000)

Incidents involving intentional or grossly negligent release or mishandling of classified information may be subject to criminal penalties. An illustrative list of criminal statutes establishing penalties of fine and imprisonment for the release of classified information is set forth in 12 FAM 558 Exhibit 558.


Once the Oligarchy is above the law, the Republic is already dead. Once the people have lost the ability to influence the central state's policies and decisions, the Republic is dead. Once the elected officials can no longer impose the nation's statues on the Oligarchy (or have lost interest in doing so because they are all corrupted cronies), the Republic is dead. Once the nation's agencies of law enforcement are stayed from indicting, prosecuting and jailing members of the Oligarchy, be they super-wealthy politicos like Hillary or super-wealthy Wall Street bankers, the Republic is dead.

The Democratic Party bosses and special interests have already selected Hillary as their shoo-in candidate for the Presidency, and these Oligarchs and special interests won't let any pesky details like laws protecting the security of the nation stand in the way of their Not So Quiet Coup.


The nation's Deep State, which I have covered extensively, has at least grudgingly approved Hillary as the next neo-conservative (never met an Imperial entanglement or drone strike she didn't like), neocolonial (we're going to put the "little people" in their rightful place, i.e. under our management) Imperial President.

A vote for Hillary, unindicted Oligarch, is a vote in favor of the destruction of the rule of law and the Republic. This is the Rubicon every voter must decide to cross or refuse to cross: vote for Hillary (destroy the Republic and surrender to Imperial Oligarchy) or refuse to vote for an unindicted Imperial Oligarch.

ref: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-21/if-hillary-isnt-indicted-rule-law-republic-are-dead

Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 3.22.57 PM.png

Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 2.52.42 PM.png

Screen Shot 2016-03-21 at 3.39.17 PM.png
 
Last edited:
Trillary 2016! Both horrible choices. I support the one who follows the constitution of the United States as it is written. The only one defending individual liberty. Senator Ted Cruz! #Cruzcrew
 
..... I support the one who follows the constitution of the United States as it is written. The only one defending individual liberty. Senator Ted Cruz! #Cruzcrew
That's kewl, but, of course if you do THAT ... that makes Ted Cruz, himself, ineligible to be President. Read the US Constitution as "IT Is Written".
 
That's kewl, but, of course if you do THAT ... that makes Ted Cruz, himself, ineligible to be President. Read the US Constitution as "IT Is Written".
I don't know why people latch onto non-facts and claim they're facts. Cruz is a natural born American citizen. That's the plain truth of the matter. That's also why Trump is a sad excuse for a candidate. Zero substance, just wild claims about everybody.
 
I don't disagree in Hillary over Trump or Cruz or Sanders from the current available pool being offered to choose from
for someone for Hillary.... you have a funny way of showing support
Next I suppose out come the Pro Trump slogans or pro Cruz... just to point out how bad Hillary is

and now I see you have a supporter!... another Cruz fan!
 
I don't know why people latch onto non-facts and claim they're facts. Cruz is a natural born American citizen.
who cares... he wants to shut down everything he doesn't like... to include the whole government if he has to.... that's why he is so popular on the hill.... Graham said it best... if someone was to shoot Cruz and the senate was on the jury.... no one would find him guilty!
 
Back
Top