I'm assuming HRC has her marching orders by now

Started by Hurt, November 06, 2016, 05:25:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hurt

Since Podesta had the overlords' list for Obama's cabinet a month before the 2008 election, I can only assume he has the list for Clinton.

https://www.rt.com/usa/362836-emails-citigroup-obama-cabinet/

QuoteWikiLeaks emails shows Citigroup’s major role in shaping Obama administration’s cabinet
Among the many revelations from the #PodestaEmails are passages showing that even before President Obama was elected, the staffing for leading cabinet positions had more or less been decided by a group led by an Citigroup exec.
The revelation came from a hack of the email account of John Podesta, a chair of Obama’s 2008 Transition Team. They show that Obama gave executives of Citigroup an “outsized role in shaping and staffing his first term.”

Nothing to see here, the oligarchy marches on.
Cui Bono

AllPurposeAtheist

And I should believe anything whatsoever that comes from wikileaks and rt "news" why exactly?
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Hurt

Anything whatsoever? No, you shouldn't believe that from anyone.
Cui Bono

Gawdzilla Sama

Even GOP polls are showing her winning. America just might dodge the Trumpette of Dumb.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Atheon

Wikileaks has lost all credibility ever since they were shown to be 1) Purely partisan (where is all the dirt on Trump? Why only Clinton), 2) releasing forged documents, and 3) run by a man who has lost his mind.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca

Hurt

#5
1) Does this make the information released about Clinton false?

2) Please tell me which documents they released were forged? Are you saying they forged documents or someone provided forged documents to them and they released them?

3) Isn't this attacking the person?
Cui Bono

Baruch

Quote from: Hurt on November 06, 2016, 06:36:24 PM
1) Does this make the information released about Clinton false?

2) Please tell me which documents they released were forged? Are you saying they forged documents or someone provided forged documents to them and they released them?

3) Isn't this attacking the person?

No it is irony.  Some atheists believe that their favored candidate is Jesus Christ Superstar (in a pantsuit or in bad hair, your pick).  Rationalists using fallacies .. such as ad hominem.  And in the SJW world, you can't criticize anyone, not even Nazis, because you will cruelly trigger them.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Gawdzilla Sama

The FBI said today that they have nothing new to go on. EOF
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Hurt

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on November 06, 2016, 07:44:17 PM
The FBI said today that they have nothing new to go on. EOF

I'm no longer as concerned as I was about the laws broken by Clinton and her staff over the intentional mishandling of classified information. My concern now is fighting the corruption in our country that is resulting in lost lives and livelihood, the destruction of biodiversity and the wrecking of our climate. Clinton is as corrupt as they come and will be responsible for continuing this suicidal trend.

I'd like to hear from a Clinton supporter about what good she will do for the country and the citizens. Because that is something that is missing from the email leak, all the good she wants to do.
Cui Bono

AllPurposeAtheist

Let's get something straight. RT does not represent the interests of the United States nor the citizens of the United States nor does wikileaks and for that matter nor does Fox news, CNN or even the NYT.. That's not to say that none of them are ever right, but they represent their interests first and foremost.
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Draconic Aiur

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on November 06, 2016, 07:44:17 PM
The FBI said today that they have nothing new to go on. EOF

there just performing a show

AllPurposeAtheist

Quote from: Hurt on November 06, 2016, 08:00:32 PM
I'm no longer as concerned as I was about the laws broken by Clinton and her staff over the intentional mishandling of classified information. My concern now is fighting the corruption in our country that is resulting in lost lives and livelihood, the destruction of biodiversity and the wrecking of our climate. Clinton is as corrupt as they come and will be responsible for continuing this suicidal trend.

I'd like to hear from a Clinton supporter about what good she will do for the country and the citizens. Because that is something that is missing from the email leak, all the good she wants to do.
I ain't got time for all that shit..
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
Look it up yourself.
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Hurt

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on November 06, 2016, 08:08:48 PM
I ain't got time for all that shit..
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
Look it up yourself.

I'll clarify; do you believe what she says? Do you believe she wants to implement everything that is listed on her page or in the speeches she has given to the electorate? What about the two positions she says you have to have? Which one would she go with on any given issue, the one she tells the precariats or the one she tells her wealthy donors?

I'll ask a different way, what good do you honestly think she will do for the average American?
Cui Bono

Hurt

Quote from: Atheon on November 06, 2016, 06:33:04 PM
Wikileaks has lost all credibility ever since they were shown to be 1) Purely partisan (where is all the dirt on Trump? Why only Clinton)

It is my understanding wikileaks releases what they are provided by others, they do not hack anyone. Maybe they haven't been given information on Trump. Perhaps they have and it's the same shit Trump himself says and tweets so no big secrets.
Cui Bono

Atheon

The issue stands. Why not release any info they receive on Trump?
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca