BOOM! FBI Claims Pedophilia?!

[rewcox]

Actually, George Bush lost 22 million emails, figure that. And that's after laws that the President is not suppose to lose that information.

Finrock, you need to see the full story, not just a one-sided mindset. http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/geor ... 97373.html

You need to stop using the red herring fallacy and address the issues concerning Hillary Clinton. What does Bush have to do with Hillary Clinton? Even if somebody else has lied, it doesn't excuse or speak to or in anyway address Hillary Clinton lying. Bush is irrelevant.

Hillary Clinton said there were no classified emails on her private server. She lied. Clinton pretended that she didn't understand what "wiping" the server mean. She lied. She unethically received at least two questions to the debates from her supporters before the debates and lied about it. These are not speculative, hearsay, he said/she said, lies, but confirmed, documented, flat out deceptions. And these examples aren't even the worst of it. Please stop the red herring tactic and address why Hillary Clinton lied? How is that cool? Why is it okay for her to lie? What makes her special in that she can lie and it doesn't matter? How come her intentionally, purposefully, blatantly lying and being deceptive is okay with you or to any person, for that matter?

Red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

-Finrock

Except the FBI said there wasn't anything there to indict.

You may want to try a different flavor of kool aid.

Another red herring. Irrelevant what the FBI says.

Let's just address one confirmed lie. Hillary Clinton stated to the public that there were no classified emails on her private server. Later, this was confirmed to be a false statement. Whether or not the FBI didn't indict her, does this change the fact that she lied? No. Does this change the ethical and moral implications? No. Does this make it OK for her to lie? No. She, put the FBI aside (red herring) and deal with this one issue.

-Finrock

You don't have to vote for her, for whatever reason. You are not her bishop.

On the other hand, would you really vote for someone on the hot mic tape?

[Finrock]

Concerning the FBI probe:

Unprecedented actions taken. Agents not allowed to use subpoena. Immunities given to key witnesses. After immunity, key witnesses are confirmed liars. DOJ would not approve subpoenas or search warrants. Senior FBI agent resigns during investigation because he understands that the investigation is going "sideways" (being stone walled and it is clear the DOJ intends to exonerate Hillary). FBI officials conflict of interest (cozy with Clintons and receiving financial support in elections).

Mr. McCabe’s wife, Jill McCabe, received $467,500 in campaign funds in late 2015 from the political-action committee of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime ally of the Clintons and, until he was elected governor in November 2013, a Clinton Foundation board member.

FBI agents not allowed to probe evidence that points to corruption with Clinton Foundation. Senior agents and FBI agents on the ground being told to limit investigation and not allowed to utilize available tools that would normally be utilized in such a case. Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch.

Comey may have said there wasn't anything there to indict, but that doesn't mean there isn't anything there to indict. The government and government agencies say and do a lot of things that don't mean jack squat or they are in conflict with the truth.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

You need to stop using the red herring fallacy and address the issues concerning Hillary Clinton. What does Bush have to do with Hillary Clinton? Even if somebody else has lied, it doesn't excuse or speak to or in anyway address Hillary Clinton lying. Bush is irrelevant.

Hillary Clinton said there were no classified emails on her private server. She lied. Clinton pretended that she didn't understand what "wiping" the server mean. She lied. She unethically received at least two questions to the debates from her supporters before the debates and lied about it. These are not speculative, hearsay, he said/she said, lies, but confirmed, documented, flat out deceptions. And these examples aren't even the worst of it. Please stop the red herring tactic and address why Hillary Clinton lied? How is that cool? Why is it okay for her to lie? What makes her special in that she can lie and it doesn't matter? How come her intentionally, purposefully, blatantly lying and being deceptive is okay with you or to any person, for that matter?

Red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

-Finrock

Except the FBI said there wasn't anything there to indict.

You may want to try a different flavor of kool aid.

Another red herring. Irrelevant what the FBI says.

Let's just address one confirmed lie. Hillary Clinton stated to the public that there were no classified emails on her private server. Later, this was confirmed to be a false statement. Whether or not the FBI didn't indict her, does this change the fact that she lied? No. Does this change the ethical and moral implications? No. Does this make it OK for her to lie? No. She, put the FBI aside (red herring) and deal with this one issue.

-Finrock

You don't have to vote for her, for whatever reason. You are not her bishop.

On the other hand, would you really vote for someone on the hot mic tape?

Irrelevant. I don't have to be her bishop. Again, instead of addressing the issues at hand you completely ignore facts and just toss out another red herring.

red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

[rewcox]

Except the FBI said there wasn't anything there to indict.

You may want to try a different flavor of kool aid.

Another red herring. Irrelevant what the FBI says.

Let's just address one confirmed lie. Hillary Clinton stated to the public that there were no classified emails on her private server. Later, this was confirmed to be a false statement. Whether or not the FBI didn't indict her, does this change the fact that she lied? No. Does this change the ethical and moral implications? No. Does this make it OK for her to lie? No. She, put the FBI aside (red herring) and deal with this one issue.

-Finrock

You don't have to vote for her, for whatever reason. You are not her bishop.

On the other hand, would you really vote for someone on the hot mic tape?

Irrelevant. I don't have to be her bishop. Again, instead of addressing the issues at hand you completely ignore facts and just toss out another red herring.

red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

I thought you were about love these days. I guess it depends on the subject.

[Finrock]

Another red herring. Irrelevant what the FBI says.

Let's just address one confirmed lie. Hillary Clinton stated to the public that there were no classified emails on her private server. Later, this was confirmed to be a false statement. Whether or not the FBI didn't indict her, does this change the fact that she lied? No. Does this change the ethical and moral implications? No. Does this make it OK for her to lie? No. She, put the FBI aside (red herring) and deal with this one issue.

-Finrock

You don't have to vote for her, for whatever reason. You are not her bishop.

On the other hand, would you really vote for someone on the hot mic tape?

Irrelevant. I don't have to be her bishop. Again, instead of addressing the issues at hand you completely ignore facts and just toss out another red herring.

red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

I thought you were about love these days. I guess it depends on the subject.

Ad hominem and another red herring.

Ad hominem = intellectual dishonesty

red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

[Finrock]

Concerning the FBI probe:

Unprecedented actions taken. Agents not allowed to use subpoena. Immunities given to key witnesses. After immunity, key witnesses are confirmed liars. DOJ would not approve subpoenas or search warrants. Senior FBI agent resigns during investigation because he understands that the investigation is going "sideways" (being stone walled and it is clear the DOJ intends to exonerate Hillary). FBI officials conflict of interest (cozy with Clintons and receiving financial support in elections).

Mr. McCabe’s wife, Jill McCabe, received $467,500 in campaign funds in late 2015 from the political-action committee of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime ally of the Clintons and, until he was elected governor in November 2013, a Clinton Foundation board member.

FBI agents not allowed to probe evidence that points to corruption with Clinton Foundation. Senior agents and FBI agents on the ground being told to limit investigation and not allowed to utilize available tools that would normally be utilized in such a case. Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch.

Comey may have said there wasn't anything there to indict, but that doesn't mean there isn't anything there to indict. The government and government agencies say and do a lot of things that don't mean jack squat or they are in conflict with the truth.

-Finrock

-Finrock

[rewcox]

Ad hominem and another red herring.

Ad hominem = intellectual dishonesty

red herring = intellectual dishonesty

-Finrock

This intellectual dishonesty seems to be rampant with Trump: http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/20 ... ishonesty/

[Silver]

Let's just address one confirmed lie. Hillary Clinton stated to the public that there were no classified emails on her private server. Later, this was confirmed to be a false statement. Whether or not the FBI didn't indict her, does this change the fact that she lied? No. Does this change the ethical and moral implications? No. Does this make it OK for her to lie? No. She, put the FBI aside (red herring) and deal with this one issue.

-Finrock

Not sure if these quotes are correctly attributed, but I'll just put them here for now.
Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. —Greg King
Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain
Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. —Proverbs 26:4 (King James version)

[Joel]

[markharr]

Except the FBI said there wasn't anything there to indict.

You may want to try a different flavor of kool aid.

The FBI did not say that there wasn't anything there to indict. They said they couldn't find intent and that no reasonable prosecutor would take the case.

[dlbww]

Silent Counter-Coup by 17 Intel Agencies To Stop Crooked Clintons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v20EYJvBUM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Silver]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

[Original_Intent]

Except the FBI said there wasn't anything there to indict.

You may want to try a different flavor of kool aid.

The FBI did not say that there wasn't anything there to indict. They said they couldn't find intent and that no reasonable prosecutor would take the case.

i.e. no reasonable prosecutor would take the case with the head of the Dept of Justice telling you it was your head if you took the case.

[iWriteStuff]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

[markharr]

Vote your conscience but just remember this.

As dlbww pointed out there are good people in the government who have had enough of our government being stolen from us and there is a silent coup going on within certain departments to make sure it doesn't continue by exposing the corruption and fraud. A revolution if you will. These brave government employees are risking everything to expose this. Imagine what they have seen that you haven't that would cause them to risk so much.

If Hillary wins, imagine what is going to happen to the people in the FBI and other government agencies that exposed her. The best case scenario is that they will be fired and replaced with cronies who will turn a blind eye to her activities. Imagine what Hillarys supreme court picks will do to the constitution, religious freedom, and individual rights. Imagine what's going to happen when our whole country is up for sale rather than just the state department. Imagine what happens when DHS takes control of elections in this country and they implement their proven rigged election algorithms across the nation. Your vote will never count for anything again. Even in small municipal elections. Imagine what happens when she hands more control over to the UN.

Trump is far from perfect. He is a boor, crude, egotistical, and vulgar at times, but he is also the only candidate who has vowed to prosecute those who have stolen our country from us. He is the only one who has vowed a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary and investigate the investigation. That legendary ego may be exactly what the country needs right now. Ted Cruz, and Jeb Bush, and Marco Rubio were all more refined but none of them would have done anything to fix the corruption in our government.

Open your eyes. Look at the big picture. Look around you at all the fraud and corruption. There won't be another chance to fix this democratically. Obama has already seen to that. Hillary will finish the job. Vote your conscience but don't complain about what happens after Hillary wins if you in any way helped her win the white house.

[rewcox]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

What is really amazing is that all of this power came out of Arkansas, really unbelievable.

[Silver]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

Perhaps you're mistaking the power she has for the total control the real Gadiantons have. In the end, Hillary's a puppet. She may scare the average American and overseas entities may use her to buy favors for themselves. However, if the Gadiantons didn't want us to know about 650,000 fresh emails, we wouldn't. Just like the media could have ignored Donald from the beginning no matter how ludicrous his statements are.

[Silver]

Vote your conscience but just remember this.

Open your eyes. Look at the big picture. Look around you at all the fraud and corruption. There won't be another chance to fix this democratically. Obama has already seen to that. Hillary will finish the job. Vote your conscience but don't complain about what happens after Hillary wins if you in any way helped her win the white house.

Perhaps you were sincere and genuine in your comments, and perhaps they are not even directed specifically at me, but I take umbrage to your comments.

Here's why. You assume too much:
1. I have opened my eyes.
2. I have looked at the big picture.
3. I am fed up with the fraud and corruption.
4. I agree that this may be the last "free" election.

In spite of us being in sync on all those points, who do you think you are to take away my right to complain just because I don't want to vote for a tainted Donald Trump?

I can counsel you the same way. Watch this:
Go ahead and vote your conscience, but don't complain about getting sent to the Telestial Kingdom for voting for the lesser of two evils.

So how does that feel? You don't like it much, I bet.

[iWriteStuff]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

Perhaps you're mistaking the power she has for the total control the real Gadiantons have. In the end, Hillary's a puppet. She may scare the average American and overseas entities may use her to buy favors for themselves. However, if the Gadiantons didn't want us to know about 650,000 fresh emails, we wouldn't. Just like the media could have ignored Donald from the beginning no matter how ludicrous his statements are.

My honest opinion is that they propped Trump up because they thought he would be easy to beat, too crazy to elect. Perhaps they were too clever by half.

That being said, what could they possibly hope to gain by allowing him to beat Hillary? Unless he's in the tank for them as well, I can't see them being ok with this. What makes Trump any easier to control than Hillary?

[markharr]

Vote your conscience but just remember this.

Open your eyes. Look at the big picture. Look around you at all the fraud and corruption. There won't be another chance to fix this democratically. Obama has already seen to that. Hillary will finish the job. Vote your conscience but don't complain about what happens after Hillary wins if you in any way helped her win the white house.

Perhaps you were sincere and genuine in your comments, and perhaps they are not even directed specifically at me, but I take umbrage to your comments.

Here's why. You assume too much:
1. I have opened my eyes.
2. I have looked at the big picture.
3. I am fed up with the fraud and corruption.
4. I agree that this may be the last "free" election.

In spite of us being in sync on all those points, who do you think you are to take away my right to complain just because I don't want to vote for a tainted Donald Trump?

I can counsel you the same way. Watch this:
Go ahead and vote your conscience, but don't complain about getting sent to the Telestial Kingdom for voting for the lesser of two evils.

So how does that feel? You don't like it much, I bet.

I don't want to bias your opinion so I'm not going to provide my own source. On your own google search some of the scandals and accusations made about George Washington. A lot of them are the same accusations and scandals leveled at Donald Trump. No, i'm not saying that Donald Trump is George Washington, I'm just saying that he is a man and therefore not perfect. What is important is that he shows remorse.

[Silver]

Brandon Smith...hitting the nail on the head:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3051 ... d-confused" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Through the majority of this election cycle the public consensus has been that Clinton will win. Some argued that Trump would not be able to compete with the leftist media empire standing against him, while others have argued that the entire system including the Republican establishment would ensure that Trump would fail. The alternative media has in the past simply pointed out that elections have always been rigged, either by the elites playing both sides of the competition, or through outright voter fraud. They have assumed that the elites want Clinton, and therefore, the election has already been decided.

I tend to agree with the latter point of view, though I disagree with the conclusion. U.S. elections are indeed controlled, and have been for decades, primarily through the false left/right paradigm. However, as I have been pointing out since I correctly predicted the success of the Brexit referendum, I don’t think that Clinton is the choice of the elites.

I outline my reasons for this conclusion in-depth in articles like '2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency', published in August. For the past several months it seems as though I have been the only person holding the view that Trump will be president. Only in the past few days have I received emails from readers stating that they used to think I was probably crazy, but now they aren’t so sure…"

Read the whole article. It's great.

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

Perhaps you're mistaking the power she has for the total control the real Gadiantons have. In the end, Hillary's a puppet. She may scare the average American and overseas entities may use her to buy favors for themselves. However, if the Gadiantons didn't want us to know about 650,000 fresh emails, we wouldn't. Just like the media could have ignored Donald from the beginning no matter how ludicrous his statements are.

My honest opinion is that they propped Trump up because they thought he would be easy to beat, too crazy to elect. Perhaps they were too clever by half.

That being said, what could they possibly hope to gain by allowing him to beat Hillary? Unless he's in the tank for them as well, I can't see them being ok with this. What makes Trump any easier to control than Hillary?

Just to clarify then, what Brandon Smith is saying, and I concur, is that Trump may not even be aware that his path is being cleared by the elites. However, post-election it won't be a matter of them controlling Trump. They have no intention of just controlling him. The elites will take away the quantitative easing they've been engaging in for decades and blame the financial crash on Trump and his alt-right supporters. That way liberalism remains untouched as a political philosophy which wouldn't happen if Hillary were in office. Entitlement-dependent Americans (who are totally unaware of how fractional reserve banking has destroyed their freedom) will turn to the government for support and lose more of their independence and self-reliance in the process.

Wow, the prophets sure knew what they were talking about when they urged us to gather (1) food storage, (2) water and a (3) financial reserve. I wonder if they intended for only two of those three to be physical and the third to be digital...

[Silver]

Vote your conscience but just remember this.

Open your eyes. Look at the big picture. Look around you at all the fraud and corruption. There won't be another chance to fix this democratically. Obama has already seen to that. Hillary will finish the job. Vote your conscience but don't complain about what happens after Hillary wins if you in any way helped her win the white house.

Perhaps you were sincere and genuine in your comments, and perhaps they are not even directed specifically at me, but I take umbrage to your comments.

Here's why. You assume too much:
1. I have opened my eyes.
2. I have looked at the big picture.
3. I am fed up with the fraud and corruption.
4. I agree that this may be the last "free" election.

In spite of us being in sync on all those points, who do you think you are to take away my right to complain just because I don't want to vote for a tainted Donald Trump?

I can counsel you the same way. Watch this:
Go ahead and vote your conscience, but don't complain about getting sent to the Telestial Kingdom for voting for the lesser of two evils.

So how does that feel? You don't like it much, I bet.

I don't want to bias your opinion so I'm not going to provide my own source. On your own google search some of the scandals and accusations made about George Washington. A lot of them are the same accusations and scandals leveled at Donald Trump. No, i'm not saying that Donald Trump is George Washington, I'm just saying that he is a man and therefore not perfect. What is important is that he shows remorse.

I've read Washington's Secret War by Thomas Fleming. The hero did have a tough slog of it even before becoming President. But now you're changing the argument from how I should feel about a Clinton victory to I should forgive Trump for being an imperfect human like me. I do overlook all that. I am simply saying that there is a candidate, Darrell Castle, Constitution Party, who is much closer to Washington and to Ezra Taft Benson in terms of his ability to lead the US under true principles of liberty. I will not vote for the Trump just to beat Hillary.

[markharr]

Vote your conscience but just remember this.

Open your eyes. Look at the big picture. Look around you at all the fraud and corruption. There won't be another chance to fix this democratically. Obama has already seen to that. Hillary will finish the job. Vote your conscience but don't complain about what happens after Hillary wins if you in any way helped her win the white house.

Perhaps you were sincere and genuine in your comments, and perhaps they are not even directed specifically at me, but I take umbrage to your comments.

Here's why. You assume too much:
1. I have opened my eyes.
2. I have looked at the big picture.
3. I am fed up with the fraud and corruption.
4. I agree that this may be the last "free" election.

In spite of us being in sync on all those points, who do you think you are to take away my right to complain just because I don't want to vote for a tainted Donald Trump?

I can counsel you the same way. Watch this:
Go ahead and vote your conscience, but don't complain about getting sent to the Telestial Kingdom for voting for the lesser of two evils.

So how does that feel? You don't like it much, I bet.

I don't want to bias your opinion so I'm not going to provide my own source. On your own google search some of the scandals and accusations made about George Washington. A lot of them are the same accusations and scandals leveled at Donald Trump. No, i'm not saying that Donald Trump is George Washington, I'm just saying that he is a man and therefore not perfect. What is important is that he shows remorse.

I've read Washington's Secret War by Thomas Fleming. The hero did have a tough slog of it even before becoming President. But now you're changing the argument from how I should feel about a Clinton victory to I should forgive Trump for being an imperfect human like me. I do overlook all that. I am simply saying that there is a candidate, Darrell Castle, Constitution Party, who is much closer to Washington and to Ezra Taft Benson in terms of his ability to lead the US under true principles of liberty. I will not vote for the Trump just to beat Hillary.

Then don't.

[iWriteStuff]

I hope that's true, but I can't see why it would be.... Clinton has a hand in literally everyone's pocket. There's hardly a power player in the world that doesn't bow and pay homage to her in one form or another. They have toadies at every level of government and connections all around the world. How could they not want her in power where she can do them the most good? And what could Trump offer them that she can't?

Perhaps you're mistaking the power she has for the total control the real Gadiantons have. In the end, Hillary's a puppet. She may scare the average American and overseas entities may use her to buy favors for themselves. However, if the Gadiantons didn't want us to know about 650,000 fresh emails, we wouldn't. Just like the media could have ignored Donald from the beginning no matter how ludicrous his statements are.

My honest opinion is that they propped Trump up because they thought he would be easy to beat, too crazy to elect. Perhaps they were too clever by half.

That being said, what could they possibly hope to gain by allowing him to beat Hillary? Unless he's in the tank for them as well, I can't see them being ok with this. What makes Trump any easier to control than Hillary?

Just to clarify then, what Brandon Smith is saying, and I concur, is that Trump may not even be aware that his path is being cleared by the elites. However, post-election it won't be a matter of them controlling Trump. They have no intention of just controlling him. The elites will take away the quantitative easing they've been engaging in for decades and blame the financial crash on Trump and his alt-right supporters. That way liberalism remains untouched as a political philosophy which wouldn't happen if Hillary were in office. Entitlement-dependent Americans (who are totally unaware of how fractional reserve banking has destroyed their freedom) will turn to the government for support and lose more of their independence and self-reliance in the process.

Wow, the prophets sure knew what they were talking about when they urged us to gather (1) food storage, (2) water and a (3) financial reserve. I wonder if they intended for only two of those three to be physical and the third to be digital...

So Trump is the fall guy. Got it. Interesting theory. I'm not sure I buy it, but I get where you're coming from now. I guess we'll see. Somehow I don't see them pouring billions of dollars into a campaign and candidate that they set up to lose....

*Footnote: heading towards the seventh straight day of market declines. This is either the warm up to something worse or a warning of what would happen under a Trump presidency. I would fully expect QE and market manipulations to protect Hillary, but definitely not under Trump. Could get interesting.

Food, water, cash. Amen!

[Joel]

Mr. James Comey
FBI Director
November 2, 2016

I am the 15-year-old (now 16) who was the victim of Anthony Weiner. I now add you to the list of people who have victimized me. I told my story originally to protect other young girls that might be a victim of online predators.

Your letter to Congress has now brought this whole matter back into the media spotlight. Not even 10 minutes after being forensically interviewed with the FBI for seven hours, I received a phone call from a REPORTER asking for a statement. Why didn’t you communicate with the local FBI agents that I had just spoken to? They could have scheduled our interview sooner or scheduled a time to interview me later, or change locations of the interview. My neighborhood has been canvassed by reporters asking for details about me.

In your letter, you chose to use a vague approach, meaning the media had to keep searching to try and find out what evidence you had uncovered and how. Every media outlet from local to national has contacted me and my family to get my “story.” Why couldn’t your letter have waited until after the election, so I would not have to be the center of attention the last week of the election cycle?

In his “cooperation” with you and with his love of the spotlight, Anthony Weiner has given information that led to the media finding me. You have assisted him in further victimizing me on every news outlet. I can only assume that you saw an opportunity for political propaganda.

I thought your job as FBI Director was to protect me. I thought if I cooperated with your investigation, my identity as a minor would be kept secret. That is no longer the case. My family and I are barraged by reporters’ phone calls and emails. I have been even been blamed in a newspaper for causing Donald Trump to now be leading in some polls and costing Hillary the election.

Anthony Weiner is the abuser. Your letter helped that abuse to continue. How can I rebuild my life when you have made finding out my “story” the goal of every reporter? When I meet with my therapist next time, she will already know what we are going to talk about before I get there by reading Friday, October 28th, 2016’s New York Times article.

I may have been Weiner’s victim, but the real story here is that I am a survivor. I am strong, intelligent, and certain that I will come out from under this nightmare, but it will not be as a result of your doing your job to protect me. I hope that by making my letter to you public, you will think about how your actions affect the victims of the crimes you are investigating. The election is important, yes, but what happened to me and how it makes me feel and how others see me, is much more important. It’s time that the FBI Director puts his victims’ rights above political views.

— Girl that lost her faith in America

P.S. To all reporters: AP, FOX, CBS, NBC, and all other media outlets, please respect my position and stop interrupting my life!

https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/here ... tw04EMOeZQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;