44 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

If you don't think both sides are corrupt. You are not paying attention. End of story. Some are far more blatant with their corruption...that does not excuse others who hide it.

I direct your attention to the word some in my post. Not sure if I’m the one not paying attention.

2 hours ago, JCon said:

He got there because the US is hole filled with horribly racist, misogynist, and selfish people. The system was corrupt and they allowed a foreign country to heavily influence their election.  

Yes, all of that is true, but let's be real, if the Dems don't nominate and run the ultra corrupt and ultra dislikeable Clinton candidate they probably could have/should have overcome all of that. Her very presence stoked the fire that fed Trump's support. Laugh if you want, but Trump did win the election and not every voter he had was mysoginistic, racist or selfish....a lot of them just really didn't like anything about Hilary or what she stands for and really didn't understand what they were getting themselves into.

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by GCn20

10 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Yes, all of that is true, but let's be real, if the Dems don't nominate and run the ultra corrupt and ultra dislikeable Clinton candidate they probably could have/should have overcome all of that. Her very presence stoked the fire that fed Trump's support. Laugh if you want, but Trump did win the election and not every voter he had was mysoginistic, racist or selfish....a lot of them just really didn't like anything about Hilary or what she stands for and really didn't understand what they were getting themselves into.

agreed, Trump won because he was able to lie about emptying the swamp (life long corrupt politicians like Hillary). And Hillary was literally the poster child of what he was talking about. Selfish ego driven politicians who come off as "elite", compared to the down right modest trump!...which of course is laughable...but thats what trump does....he makes the insane look reasonable to those who don't know any better.

People maybe have forgotten that Bernie by most accounts was the front runner for the Dems in 2016. If the Dems didn't rig the vote to dislodge Bernie...they win in 2016 no question. BUT they new Bernie wanted to go after all their buddies (the rich/industry/corruption) so they HAD to go with the only other option that would play their game...Hillary. 

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by Bigblue204

Can someone explain what made Hillary so corrupt other than being a long time established politician? Like specific examples please. 

To me she didn't seem corrupt so much as just a boring uncharismatic career politician. Which isn't the same as corrupt. Behold to the system perhaps but that in an of itself doesn't mean corruption.

23 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Can someone explain what made Hillary so corrupt other than being a long time established politician? Like specific examples please. 

To me she didn't seem corrupt so much as just a boring uncharismatic career politician. Which isn't the same as corrupt. Behold to the system perhaps but that in an of itself doesn't mean corruption.

Millions of dollars missing from the Clinton Foundation for one.

On 2022-04-04 at 11:34 AM, rebusrankin said:

Other than crazy Republicans talking their usual nonsense, why would Biden be impeached?

We will have to see how far down the rabbit hole we get I suppose but Biden sure looks like he has got some explaining to do.

 

https://www.maciverinstitute.com/2022/03/the-hunter-biden-story-was-always-about-joes-corruption/

4 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Millions of dollars missing from the Clinton Foundation for one.

Are you referring to claims made by Michael Cohen which are not provable? Or is there something else you are referring to?

4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Are you referring to claims made by Michael Cohen which are not provable? Or is there something else you are referring to?

Lol. The people of Haiti aren't as optimistic about her honesty as you are.

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by GCn20

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Are you referring to claims made by Michael Cohen which are not provable? Or is there something else you are referring to?

It is long disproved b.s. that is repeated endlessly.

been checked, double, triple checked, there is no missing money, clinton foundation, haiti. Or anywhere else.

jewish space lasers, soros, pizza, uranium, emails, all b.s., doesnt matter, just keep,saying it.

Newt Gingrich: wiki

"According to Harvard University political scientists Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky, Gingrich's speakership had a profound and lasting impact on American politics and health of American democracy. They argue that Gingrich instilled a "combative" approach in the Republican Party, where hateful language and hyper-partisanship became commonplace, and where democratic norms were abandoned. Gingrich frequently questioned the patriotism of Democrats, called them corrupt, compared them to fascists, and accused them of wanting to destroy the United States. Gingrich furthermore oversaw several major government shutdowns.

University of Maryland political scientist Lilliana Mason identified Gingrich's instructions to Republicans to use words such as “betray, bizarre, decay, destroy, devour, greed, lie, pathetic, radical, selfish, shame, sick, steal, and traitors” about Democrats as an example of a breach in social norms and exacerbation of partisan prejudice.

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by Mark F

3 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Lol. The people of Haiti aren't as optimistic about her honesty as you are.

I think the people of Haiti are more concerned about their own government stealing from them. The former Haitian president implemented a flat tax of $1.50 for all calls and money transfers into Haiti over a decade ago, and all funds were supposed to rebuild schools and public buildings. Nobody in Haiti can point to a single school built with this money. The poorest country in the Western hemisphere has bigger problems than the Clinton foundation.

A whole lot of hand waving. 

34 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

We will have to see how far down the rabbit hole we get I suppose but Biden sure looks like he has got some explaining to do.

 

https://www.maciverinstitute.com/2022/03/the-hunter-biden-story-was-always-about-joes-corruption/

Hunter Biden is the president? What? Oh, he ran for office? He works in the White House? 

 

Oh, wow, a Koch funded institute. Corruption to the core. 

29 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Millions of dollars missing from the Clinton Foundation for one.

We will have to see how far down the rabbit hole we get I suppose but Biden sure looks like he has got some explaining to do.

https://www.maciverinstitute.com/2022/03/the-hunter-biden-story-was-always-about-joes-corruption/

Imagine using a source like that and expecting anyone to take your comments seriously.

3 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Imagine using a source like that and expecting anyone to take your comments seriously.

Get the unfiltered truth at REBEL MEDIA

Sorry, Rebel NEWS if I'm gonna **** on them I should at least get the name right

38 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

Lol. The people of Haiti aren't as optimistic about her honesty as you are.

So regurgitating Trump campaign talking points as evidence of corruption. Ok that's what I thought.  Nothing credible.

 

That really drives home how pathetic voters in the US are.  Trump stood up and told everyone he was corrupt and they lapped it up. 

Misogyny and racism are the core values in the US. 

24 minutes ago, JCon said:

That really drives home how pathetic voters in the US are.  Trump stood up and told everyone he was corrupt and they lapped it up. 

Misogyny and racism are the core values in the US. 

Ahhh my Christian image on my Twitter bio while I spew diarrhea everywhere suggests otherwise. 

Sinclair Lewis is quoted as saying," When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"

2 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Can someone explain what made Hillary so corrupt other than being a long time established politician? Like specific examples please. 

To me she didn't seem corrupt so much as just a boring uncharismatic career politician. Which isn't the same as corrupt. Behold to the system perhaps but that in an of itself doesn't mean corruption.

The problem with your question is - How do you prove someone is corrupt? Any reports or articles that would have been added to a reply, would likely be dismissed as nonsense. Because that's how the machine works. Evidence comes out, the other side of the isle calls it nonsense - See Trumps entire life as proof - any article written will have another article to refute it. Facts no longer matter in these cases because someone will call those facts nonsense. 

Now you can believe she's not corrupt. But knowing what we know about how people get elected in the states and how they remain in power, it would take a lot of mental gymnastics (for me anyway) to say all of those donations/payments etc were made on good faith. And that doesn't even get into the Epstein issues with her husband.

11 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

The problem with your question is - How do you prove someone is corrupt? Any reports or articles that would have been added to a reply, would likely be dismissed as nonsense. Because that's how the machine works. Evidence comes out, the other side of the isle calls it nonsense - See Trumps entire life as proof - any article written will have another article to refute it. Facts no longer matter in these cases because someone will call those facts nonsense. 

Now you can believe she's not corrupt. But knowing what we know about how people get elected in the states and how they remain in power, it would take a lot of mental gymnastics (for me anyway) to say all of those donations/payments etc were made on good faith. And that doesn't even get into the Epstein issues with her husband.

That's a lot of words to say "I got nuthin'."

11 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

...any article written will have another article to refute it. Facts no longer matter in these cases because someone will call those facts nonsense. 

Hence the importance of fact-checking and journalistic integrity, more than ever before.

There are actual, verifiable, proven facts and those still matter today.

3 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Hence the importance of fact-checking and journalistic integrity, more than ever before.

There are actual, verifiable, proven facts and those still matter today.

absolutely. Facts still remain. But there's far more noise now than ever before. And previously reputable sources are now part of the problem for various reasons.

The corruption of western governments runs extremely deep. It's not as easy as just pulling up proof and satisfying the search. Proof is hidden, when it reaches the people, it is dismissed as conspiracy or just nonsense.

 

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by Bigblue204

18 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

absolutely. Facts still remain. But there's far more noise now than ever before. And previously reputable sources are now part of the problem for various reasons.

The corruption of western governments runs extremely deep. It's not as easy as just pulling up proof and satisfying the search. Proof is hidden, when it reaches the people, it is dismissed as conspiracy or just nonsense.

 

That is such a stupid attitude to take... "oh I don't trust the source, must not be facts.... no facts are facts regardless of the source. The key is knowing when you're getting facts and when you aren't.  Which is possible but apparently it's too much for some people who would rather just be told what to think.

As regards the allegations against Hillary  Clinton, the sheer number of investigations by the GOP-dominated Congress (I believe 9 in all) turned up zero evidence that she had done anything wrong apart from poor judgement regarding her use of non-government cellphones and emails. But as the propaganda officer of Nazi Germany said, if you repeat a lie often enough and loudly enough, people will start to believe it, and the sexist bias against her was and is staggering- really pathological.

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

That is such a stupid attitude to take... "oh I don't trust the source, must not be facts.... no facts are facts regardless of the source. The key is knowing when you're getting facts and when you aren't.  Which is possible but apparently it's too much for some people who would rather just be told what to think.

I agree it can be a bad way to go about things. But that's the truth of how it works today. How many people on here read the link that was posted by GCn20? People immediately dismissed it because of the source. Now that might not be the best example lol....but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

I believe she is corrupt, not because of emails, not because she is a woman. I believe she is corrupt because you can not be in American politics today and be clean. You certainly can not be a life long politician and be clean. It's not possible. The level of corruption changes from person to person, but you don't get to her position because you're playing by the rules.