What, afraid someone is going to come and help you with your long-planned suicide?

No mention at all in the Washington Post this morning of that latest leak of DNC donor data.

Maddox Wrote:Notice the telltale sign of a man who has a penchant for boy ass: the pedophile-smile or "pedosmile." It's part smirk, part grin, and all molester.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/...t_the_pedo

Event going on in DC today. Location a secret. What a total scam she's running.

   

Assange is a douche and I'm not surprised he fucked us at the last minute. I'm sick of "good" liberals, or "moderate" liberals. They always ALWAYS cuck out when it's crunch time. That being said, even if he had released some DAMNING shit on Hillary, it wouldn't matter, nothing would come of it. As said earlier shes protected.

RedPillage I thought the same at first but now I give him the benefit of the doubt because of the guccifer leak. Perhaps guccifer contacted him and he decided to wait a minute to avoid the leaks lessening each others impact.

That said I would not be in the least bit surprised if he is compromised, or just bullshitting.

In all fairness, the pressure on Assange is incomprehensible.

With the accompanying paranoia that comes with the leadership in powerful countries openly calling for his assassination while being in what is essentially a prison, if he's trying (or has) brokered some deal I'm not sure I could blame him.

Realizing you may be confined for the rest of your possibly short life in a 3rd world country's embassy probably makes your reconsider if your attention whoring motives were worth it all.

I still have hope he's going to deliver and like Kai said, he probably is doing all the indexing himself.

I doubt any of his subordinates are so gung ho loyal to him that they would be happy riding his coattails

(10-05-2016 11:36 AM)Fisto Wrote:  I doubt any of his subordinates are so gung ho loyal to him that they would be happy riding his coattails

All his die hards are women. That's all I have to say about that.

To those saying to give him the benefit of the doubt, I'm going on record here saying fuck that. He knew damn well what people were expecting to hear that night and he delivered some half baked self congratulatory bullshit. You think he's not aware of that? Get the fuck outta here.

It's folly to think he didn't know what he was doing or that he will deliver anything at a later date. It would be even dumber to think that if he DID deliver something that it would put a dent in Hillary's image...anyone still voting for her would do so even if there was footage of her sacrificing babies to lucifer himself. The battle lines have long since been drawn.

No matter what deal Assange brokers, he'll have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his days. He'd be better off divulging the info.

If you kill someone to keep them quiet, you've benefited so long as you don't get caught, and no one else has the info you wish to suppress.

Although it may feel good to kill someone as an act of revenge, it's a risky gambit, and if you're seeking revenge, the damage to you has already been done, and could increase by your revenge murder.

(10-04-2016 01:13 PM)Blaster Wrote:  Hillary is back to hiding from the public. But she's got The Obamas and Bernie out carrying water for her, as well as Warren and forum favorite Kirsten Gillenbrand.

She's either in the hospital or prepping for the next debate. Either way, Trump would be wise to back off on the rallys and do some debate prep himself.

So what happened to that gurney story? Did it die? Is there any rumors of Hillary being in the hospital? It is convenient that all her allies are stumping for her instead.

(10-04-2016 08:40 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-04-2016 07:45 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  What if the insurance file is nothing but bull shit?

Quote:I realise you are being hypothetical, but killing him will never happen. He's simply far too famous. .... They have tried the next best thing though: discrediting him with false allegations of sexual misconduct.

Too famous? That's not a good reason not to assassinate someone. That's a good reason TO assassinate someone. Who ever assassinated a nobody?

Obama has insecurities and might flex again. The UK isn't EU anymore either. Ecuador is not a country well respected.

Obama is not going to have Assange murdered, first they have too much in common, second Assange is not a full-on murderer like Bin Laden was.

Only the most totally non-violent people or Islamist sympathizers felt sorry Bin Laden got wasted. He thought offing 3000 people was funny.

Why is it "folly" to think Assange may deliver?

Hasn't he always delivered up to this point?

You keep saying that the people voting for Clinton are going to no matter what.

You are missing other KEY things about damaging leaks to Clinton.

When more evidence that she's horribly corrupt surfaces it causes her supporters to question whether they REALLY want to vote for her. Others are fatigued from having to defend her stale policies and corruption.

The net result is these people stay home.

They may say they'll vote for her on FB but showing up to the booth is another story.

Telling everyone on the forum who is holding out that Assange will deliver to "get the fuck outta here" is overboard don't you think?

(10-05-2016 01:08 PM)Fisto Wrote:  Why is it "folly" to think Assange may deliver?

The way he was hemming and hawing and jerking himself off on that stream just tells me he can't be trusted, that he has nothing left to offer or was bought off.

(10-05-2016 01:08 PM)Fisto Wrote:  Telling everyone on the forum who is holding out that Assange will deliver to "get the fuck outta here" is overboard don't you think?

It's a figure of speech, and it's not directed at you or anyone on this board in particular.

The Hillary people are dyed in the whool ideologues. I'm not convinced anything will change their minds. The more their hugboxes shrink the more they retreat into delusion.

Why people praise Trump for running a ruse at his DC hotel for press but shame Assange for doing the same thing with his book?

Same thing if you ask me.

Marketing gods want your attention and time to push you product. They don't care if you are happy or mad with that exchange after the fact.

People just butt hurt they had to waste time watching Assange verbally stroke himself. Why you fall for the scam like that? I didn't watch that shit, no point.

Assange always drops massive files that you have to wait for media or sties to comb through anyhow. The headline is never from them aside from a tweet or something, it is always from the media or sites that comb through it and find the goodies.

He wouldn't ruse like this if he had nothing. I don't think it will be as big and massive as he claims but I think he will come through.

With the rapid news cycle why drop something now? Media will play games and try to roll over it quickly. We still have 4 weeks. Best timing would be just before the last debate or 2 weeks to the election cycle to provide her with no ability to save herself.

(10-05-2016 12:58 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(10-04-2016 08:40 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-04-2016 07:45 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  What if the insurance file is nothing but bull shit?

Quote:I realise you are being hypothetical, but killing him will never happen. He's simply far too famous. .... They have tried the next best thing though: discrediting him with false allegations of sexual misconduct.

Too famous? That's not a good reason not to assassinate someone. That's a good reason TO assassinate someone. Who ever assassinated a nobody?

Obama has insecurities and might flex again. The UK isn't EU anymore either. Ecuador is not a country well respected.

Obama is not going to have Assange murdered, first they have too much in common, second Assange is not a full-on murderer like Bin Laden was.

Only the most totally non-violent people or Islamist sympathizers felt sorry Bin Laden got wasted. He thought offing 3000 people was funny.

They have nothing in common, aside from being basic pro gay liberals on paper. They are diametrically opposed to each other on everything. Julian believes in no secrets. Obama protects his secrets to the point of breaking the law. How do we know Obama did not order that hit on Seth? It benefited Clinton the most, but he does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Bush was huge into torture. Obama very slowly ended the obvious torture. He talked about closing Guantanamo Bay in 2008 and 8 years later the cancer is still open. He's thrown more journalists in jail than all previous presidents combined.

Don't let that Peace Prize fool you, Obama is every bit of a monster that Bush was. Neither have respect for life, human rights, nor the rule of law. I wonder which guy has bombed the most weddings? Obama probably sends him the snuff videos of the carnage in his spare time so they can laugh about it later.

You don't need to be a murderer to get assassinated. Not in these people's world. A clandestine hit, is not beneath these people. They could never avoid discussing the Bin Laden hit because they flew 2 SEAL squads on DEVGRU, on the fanciest helicopters they had, to assault a compound, in a country we have no rights to fly into. If it had failed, it would have been Mogadishu X 100 and nuclear style.

They could pay Mossad to kill Assange discreetly if they could not get into that embassy or close enough. In politics, everything has a price. The people inside the agency would sell him out. They don't love him. They aren't soldiers. They are not rich. This is not Pablo Escobar holed up with all his men inside with him along with hostages. We are talking about one wimpy dude with clean fingernails here.

This is the same US govt, that worked with Mossad to create a computer virus (Stuxnet) that was so advanced it had ~ 10 Zero Day exploits inside Microsoft did not know about, and used it to destroy Iran's uranium enrichment programs. All spread from a USB thumbdrive. I'm quite certain, they could kill little old Julian if they actually tried. If he died from poison or a sudden heart attack, people will point and quickly want to blame the US for it, but let's be real here. With no proof, it would be bullshit conjecture at the end of the day, and forum fodder for guys like us. Quite a few governments would actually be happy he is gone too. They have nothing to lose by killing him, especially since at least half of Congress approves of it.

Her staff are either incompetent or actively trying to take her down:

   

   

   

(10-05-2016 12:04 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  No matter what deal Assange brokers, he'll have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his days. He'd be better off divulging the info.

If you kill someone to keep them quiet, you've benefited so long as you don't get caught, and no one else has the info you wish to suppress.

Although it may feel good to kill someone as an act of revenge, it's a risky gambit, and if you're seeking revenge, the damage to you has already been done, and could increase by your revenge murder.

I think Assange is holding out on the most devastating bits of info as his insurance policy, to be published posthumously should anything happen to him.

Damn. Hillary Clinton has to be the most anti gun presidential candidate we have ever had in our history. Other Democrats never went after guns this hard. Obama only recently takes jabs at guns, but during his first campaign, he felt nowhere close to being against them the way Hillary is. I bet a lot of her large losses with men and women in the past month, isn't because wimpy men suddenly dropped balls or some women decided she was a liar. A good bit of that might have been her openly strong hatred to disarm the country.

Anytime I have bought a pistol, I have seen a single woman buying one down the counter. Some black and some white. If a woman cannot buy a pistol (or any force multiplier) to defend themselves against home invaders and large male attackers, they may not want to vote for that candidate, regardless of how gun violence repulses them. You got gays getting armed these days. Some rugged and individualistic minded females were already gun owners and they are just another shade of feminist. I don't think her attacks on guns is going to help her causes at all.

Would be nice to see some really good data out there on if the Orlando event actually changed the demographic makeup of gun owners in America permanently. The NRA is very diverse compared to the past, but seeing some legit data after the election would be nice.

More quality shitlording from Evil Hillary:

Hillary Clinton wants to disarm young women, so that super-predators like her husband can continue to take advantage of them without fear of resistance!

Hillary pushing for a ban on guns is what her overlords want and is a perfect example of what Trump was getting at when he said her bodyguards should be disarmed. The migrant rape wave wouldn't be such a problem in Europe if 1 in 3 women were armed with a 9mm. The ME/African migrants wouldn't know how to process such a thing. A woman? Armed and ready to defend herself and others? They'd sooner jump ship.

Quote:James Woods [email protected]
So is the scary clown epidemic solved now..?

8:08 PM - 5 Oct 2016

ZeroHedge Wrote:At a Hillary Clinton town hall yesterday in Haverford, Pennsylvania, a 15 year old girl was supposedly "chosen at random" to ask a question of the former Secretary of State. But, the well-scripted performance raised some suspicion with a YouTuber named Spanglevision who decided to dig a little deeper. And, wouldn't you know it, the "random" participant was none other than child actor, Brennan Leach, whose father just happens to be Pennsylvania democratic State Senator Daylin Leach. Oh, and in case it wasn't obvious, Daylin supports Hillary for president...shocking.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-05...a-townhall

Must be getting desperate.

The actress said,"Hi Madam Secretary. I'm Brennan and I'm 15 years old. At my school, body image is a really big issue for girls my age. I see with my own eyes the damage Donald Trump does when he talks about women and how they look. As the first female president how would you undo some of that damage and help girls understand that they're so much more than just what they look like?"

The New York Times covered this story as "Clinton Talks to Teen about Body Image".

(10-06-2016 06:34 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  The New York Times covered this story as "Clinton Talks to Teen about Body Image".

Lolz. And I'm sure the journalist who wrote that is one of those "investigative reporters". That's another thing with the MSM, they all refer to each other as "investigative" journalists. The only thing these rats might be investigating are their turds in the toilet bowl.