Jump to content
zooloo75

DNC Leaks

Recommended Posts

People are not dumb enough to start a nuclear war.

Unless you can have quick and flawless victory and make everyone think you did the right thing. This way you can have any type of war started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear war has been unlikely for awhile at the state level.

Mainly do to the assured second strike capability of the opposing country and the required number of icbms to assure mutual destruction.

In the late 60s after the huge nuclear push I believe it was estimated that an assured second strike capability would require in the area of 225 nuclear icbms. At the time the US had stockpiled over 10000 or some ridiculous number and I'm sure the Ussr had the same or more..

You couldn't even get that many in the air before the better part of either involved country was decimated.

What is more concerning is the proxy wars and general enrichment Haliburton style from conflicts orchestrated by governments for profit...

While less "scary" then all out nuclear war, it is an insidious disease eating us from within and as it happens bit by bit and gradually, society seems to become more and more numb to the underlying effects...

On topic...

What a shock... Wasserman Schultz now is campaign manager for hilary... favors repaid... neither is corrupt at all :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikileaks on Twitter about leaked DNC Clinton e-mails:

 

 #DNCLeak: DNC knew of Clinton 'paid troll factory' fighting Sanders supporters 

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/8351 

… #FeelTheBern

 

* Clinton: Yes, Super PAC paying young voters to push back online on Sanders supporters.

 

 

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/757077620928512000?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you can have quick and flawless victory and make everyone think you did the right thing. This way you can have any type of war started.

 

I don't think there is any way you can convince even your own population that there is any good reason to nuke a country and kill millions of people, the ones that do call for nuking of countries are in the minority, granted americans tend to have a carefree mentality, we still have our limits and that goes beyond it.

Besides its horrible for the global economy, you just destroyed who knows how many natural resources and trade partners, chances are other countries aren't going to want to be your friends...what are we going to nuke them too?   It's a lose lose situation no matter how one looks at it, there is no justifiable reason and there is no positive outcome. 

Also why start a war you can win when you can make bank on an eternal conflict that demands more and more logistics...oh wait we already have that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is any way you can convince even your own population that there is any good reason to nuke a country and kill millions of people, the ones that do call for nuking of countries are in the minority, granted americans tend to have a carefree mentality, we still have our limits and that goes beyond it.

Besides its horrible for the global economy, you just destroyed who knows how many natural resources and trade partners, chances are other countries aren't going to want to be your friends...what are we going to nuke them too?   It's a lose lose situation no matter how one looks at it, there is no justifiable reason and there is no positive outcome. 

Also why start a war you can win when you can make bank on an eternal conflict that demands more and more logistics...oh wait we already have that.

 

https://www.africanexponent.com/post/new-evidence-the-real-reason-gaddafi-was-killed-2706

From reading this article that was published in April, ISIL sprouted from Hillary and bankers' greed. No surprise here. The Iraq War likely started for similar reasons as well. Being humanitarians is an excuse/justification to carry on the overthrowing of foreign rulers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This campaign is going really ugly.

 

Now, some newspapers have released some old pictures of Melania Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This campaign is going really ugly.

 

Now, some newspapers have released some old pictures of Melania Trump.

 

True yes, that's getting ridiculous. The worst is that she plagiarized her speech or that she pretended to have a diploma she never obtained, but who cares that she made nude pictures...strange country to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 You'd have to be outta your fucking mind to vote for Trump -he's not only a Borderline personality, he's borderline insane. They are both meglomaniacs but at least I know Clinton thru her husband and Obama and both of their terms where light years better than Bush. Trump I could easily see starting a war over a slight via instagram, and then selling Trump Water at $200/bottle to all the fallout survivors from his Tower.

 

 Theres alot of 'fuck it, lets go to war/start another civil revolutionary war/purge the country back to 1776' bullshit nihilism in this country which sadly no candidate can fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clinton was in for the US intervention in Iraq.

Plus, she fucked up the Libyan case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Alot of democrats were in on the Invasion for one reason -blind blood lust of the populace. The neo-cons who planned an invasion far before 911 gambled on the idiot knee jerk response that since we were just attacked by A-rabs, lets go get us some (other) A-rabs -doesnt matter it was entirely different country. Obama had the common sense and less to lose (politically) than Clinton who would face political suicide had she voted against.

 

 there is no single blunder, crime thats ever been done in my name as an American than the iraq War. We cry about 3000 lost at 911, while low estimates of 65,000 civialians died since our invasion. ISIS is a direct result of that power vacuum. Bush pulled intelligence resource from actually getting the guy who attacked us over to his bullshit war and declared publically "Getting Bin Laden is not important.."

 

Point being -THAT was an atrocity done under the republican name which NO Republican wil say was a good idea now -that says alot. Clintons done wrong sure and i dont like her personally but its like choosing the little devil or THE BIG DEVIL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wikileaks is saying the next batch of files could "(will)" get hillary arrested, wouldn't that be a hilarious outcome to have a candidate arrested in the run..  That said,  I'm going for Gary Johnson just because I don't like either...we have an obvious war criminal and a lier who is about as real as her eternal smile and is willing to say anything to get everyones vote. 

Versus a guy who is the epitome of narcissism, the same man who started a speech with "I am so proud of myself."  A guy who to his credit would make a superb politician in that he can somehow give a speech for half an hour and somehow say nothing, and has the most selfish perspectives in comparison to others that I have ever seen, who refuses to disclose his benefactors and rumor has it Russia is paying a great sum for his campaign.

Tl;dr - we get a choice between a war criminal and THE corporate candidate who will say anything to appeal to everyone versus a man with some of the thinnest skin immagineable and no answers for anything.  
And naturally the news is pushing the two party narrative because apparently two is the only choice we should have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think wikileaks will release their info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our election and party system should be thrown in the trash. The two party dominance only narrows our freedom of choice, eliminating any chance for an independent to take on the presidency. This is where I have some respect for Sanders and Trump, they went in and "shook" the two party system, throwing them out of their status quo comfort zone.

I'd like to see a system that goes by popular vote alone. Keep it simple; whoever gets the most votes by the people wins.

I'll admit that Trump isn't perfect, neither is his personality favorable to some, but in the realm of the two party system where it's either him or Hillary, I'm voting for Trump.

I don't trust the mainstream media at all. In regards to choosing the lesser of two evils, I'll pick the one that hasnt been picked before.

We need to get rid of the corruption in our government, and get our country back on track. We can already see what Hillary can get away with now, just think about what she could get away with as president. Anything that is truly unconstitutional or unethical would likely get shot down by the other branches of government if Trump were in office.

We're in this election mess because our system is shit. Any hope of voting independent is faced with the reality that an independent has no chance of winning with this setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let's see what's on the table :) if Trump wins America gets.... what? A change? Something different? A shakeup? Confirmation of the actual ineffectiveness of the Presidential seat?

If Clinton wins what does America get? Exactly the same thing as it already has for decades now.

 

It seems clear to me that Trump is working to a plan. First step was to do two things simultaneously: say some ridiculous crap that:

Got him endless FREE publicity.

Got him the support of all the low thinkers. (Getting the low thinkers early on was a great step. They generally don't like to change their minds and have difficulty responding to new information. Get them early and most of them will cling to their choice for the duration, and are easier to get at the beginning than at the end).

 

Next step is to methodically dispatch his direct opponents, one at a time in order of their threat. Does this by appealing to playground tactics, which disappointingly seems to work. Job done.

 

Now he seems on a glide slope to the Presidency. Scott Adams brought up an interesting point: Donald aside, the Trump dynasty is a good looking bunch. Who wants to watch Hilary & family become more decrepit over the next 4 years when the Trump family look like they're just going to continue blooming? Don't underestimate this idea, I think it will become maybe not the deciding factor, but certainly a part of it.

 

All he has to do now is to be more careful with his rhetoric, which is exactly what he's doing now. He's starting to use autocues more now. I think people had better start to think in terms of Trump vs West in 4 years time. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let's see what's on the table :) if Trump wins America gets.... what? A change? Something different? A shakeup? Confirmation of the actual ineffectiveness of the Presidential seat?

If Clinton wins what does America get? Exactly the same thing as it already has for decades now.

 

It seems clear to me that Trump is working to a plan. First step was to do two things simultaneously: say some ridiculous crap that:

Got him endless FREE publicity.

Got him the support of all the low thinkers. (Getting the low thinkers early on was a great step. They generally don't like to change their minds and have difficulty responding to new information. Get them early and most of them will cling to their choice for the duration, and are easier to get at the beginning than at the end).

 

Next step is to methodically dispatch his direct opponents, one at a time in order of their threat. Does this by appealing to playground tactics, which disappointingly seems to work. Job done.

 

Now he seems on a glide slope to the Presidency. Scott Adams brought up an interesting point: Donald aside, the Trump dynasty is a good looking bunch. Who wants to watch Hilary & family become more decrepit over the next 4 years when the Trump family look like they're just going to continue blooming? Don't underestimate this idea, I think it will become maybe not the deciding factor, but certainly a part of it.

 

All he has to do now is to be more careful with his rhetoric, which is exactly what he's doing now. He's starting to use autocues more now. I think people had better start to think in terms of Trump vs West in 4 years time. ;)

 

Now do an analysis of Clinton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Clinton wins what does America get? Exactly the same thing as it already has for decades now.

 

I included a 1-line analysis of Clinton in my previous post :) Everything you need to know: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Yeah but all that is moot when you have Trump asking why we cant use nuclear weapons against ISIS. Nuclear. Fucking. Weapons.

 

 Your hatred of democrats or Hillary would have to be pathalogical at this point to vote in Trump Storm Crow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assange implies murdered DNC staffer was WikiLeaks' source 

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange implied in an interview that a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer

was the source of a trove of damaging emails the rogue website posted just days before the party's convention

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/assange-implies-murdered-dnc-staffer-was-wikileaks-source.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/was-murdered-dnc-staffer-behind-email-leak-wikileaks-offers-20k-reward-conspiracies-swirl-1575274

 

 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Assange implies murdered DNC staffer was WikiLeaks' source 

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange implied in an interview that a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer

was the source of a trove of damaging emails the rogue website posted just days before the party's convention

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/assange-implies-murdered-dnc-staffer-was-wikileaks-source.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/was-murdered-dnc-staffer-behind-email-leak-wikileaks-offers-20k-reward-conspiracies-swirl-1575274

 

 

 

 

Wikileaks is also offering a $20k reward for more information on Seth Rich's murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's bloody terrifying... Though, there's actually a very long paper trail of "murders", i mean, robberies, to people who opposed the current running nomination for the Democratic Party, at least according to Last Week Tonight's DNC episode. Apparently, people going against Hillary come to a less than favorable demise. Could this be another added to that same list?

 

Also, you don't have to vote for either, there are still the Liberal and Independent candidates, but of course main stream media won't include their names or existence unless they cough up a decent amount of capital for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF??! is just happening?

I just saw the #clintonsmemory and #idontrecall on twitter.

Seriously??!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×