(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 11:15 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  2. I understand the politics of it, but does anyone else think this "OMG, Bill Clinton is a rapist!!" stuff just just adopts feminist "Rape Culture" narrative?

This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Donald J. Trump Wrote:Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

The rest of Bill's "victims" are scorned women and pump-n-dumped attention whores.

(10-11-2016 09:40 AM)Rush87 Wrote:  

Quote:From: Darnell Strom
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 3:13 PM
To: Tulsi Gabbard ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>)
Cc: Michael Kives
Subject: Disappointed
Representative Gabbard, We were very disappointed to hear that you would resign your position with the DNC so you could endorse Bernie Sanders, a man who has never been a Democrat before. When we met over dinner a couple of years ago I was so impressed by your intellect, your passion, and commitment to getting things done on behalf of the American people. For you to endorse a man who has spent almost 40 years in public office with very few accomplishments, doesn't fall in line with what we previously thought of you. Hillary Clinton will be our party's nominee and you standing on ceremony to support the sinking Bernie Sanders ship is disrespectful to Hillary Clinton. A woman who has spent the vast majority of her life in public service and working on behalf of women, families, and the underserved. You have called both myself and Michael Kives before about helping your campaign raise money, we no longer trust your judgement so will not be raising money for your campaign.

Darnell Strom with Jenna Bush

I know I'm late to the party on the Iraq/Isil email, but did anyone else pick out how the message more or less wrote Turkey off as an ally of the US and referred to some sort of "islamic transition"?

Quote:3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Quote:6. ... At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time.

To me this is the biggest OMFG moment in the whole email. I mean, we all suspected, right? But this is confirmation that Turkey and the US as allies is OVER.

I'm reading this email and the words are reforming to spell out "the EU is about to face a literal oncoming wall of human garbage and NATO IS FUCKING TOAST!"

To say these e-mails are shocking is an understatement. This is the confirmation of decades of corruption like we have all speculated but truly never imagined, this shit is mind-boggling how deep the rabbit hole goes. These e-mails contain info that are some of the biggest bombshells of our lifetimes, this is laying the entire Democratic political mafia bare for the world to see and it's more evil and corrupt than most people could possibly imagine. Some serious shit is going to happen because of the fallout of all this, get ready everyone because we could be heading for a Civil/World War before the end of the year.

Donna Brazile was feeding NBC debate questions to Hillary in advance of her debates with Sanders.

(10-11-2016 09:55 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 11:15 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  2. I understand the politics of it, but does anyone else think this "OMG, Bill Clinton is a rapist!!" stuff just just adopts feminist "Rape Culture" narrative?

This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Donald J. Trump Wrote:Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

The rest of Bill's "victims" are scorned women and pump-n-dumped attention whores.

I agree with you most of the time on rape allegations, etc. This time, I will say that the potential for Bill Clinton rapes is a little higher than say someone like Colin Kapernick or Bill Cosby, due to the fact that even when he was governor, he had serious power in terms of intimidation.

Small states like Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. are easier to get away with stuff like this if you are at the top of the food chain in terms of power. Even Penn State's scandal festered so badly because Joe Pa, the AD, and Sandusky were very powerful in the state, because of the football program. Lots of people came out and said, that saying anything bad about any of them could get you into alot of trouble.

Bill Cosby raping white women in the 70s and 80s makes no sense because white women were still on protected species status against any black man. They were fucking him to get ahead in life. The fact that many of them returned to him later makes their claims of rape even more absurd.

Bill and Hillary as a team could threaten and bully anyone and their reputation for having a body count was before getting into the White House. If Bill told a chick he raped that she would be found in a ditch, do you think she would go to the police station in Little Rock and ask for a rape kit? I highly, highly doubt it.

Bill Clinton told Kevin Spacey he thought the show House of Cards was definitely real. That should be a major red flag to everyone because it's blatantly obvious that the show is about him and Hillary in a post 90s setting.

First, keep in mind that the reason the Kathy Shelton is bad for HRC is that HRC is on tape laughing about the case. She does not express solemn dedication to playing a necessary part in a system that is the best we've got but sometimes gets things wrong. She comes off as someone who loves exploiting the broken system and haha fuck everyone else.

As for the MRA angle:

(10-11-2016 09:55 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 11:15 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  2. I understand the politics of it, but does anyone else think this "OMG, Bill Clinton is a rapist!!" stuff just just adopts feminist "Rape Culture" narrative?

This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Donald J. Trump Wrote:Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

Be unmoved all you want. My point is that HRC's use of the "victim has rape fantasies" defense is exactly the kind of case that very effectively persuades voters that rape shield laws are important and necessary. If you're interested in Men's rights and infringement on due process you have to at least consider the worst-case scenarios like this, because we ultimately live in a democracy where laws can change based on what the people want.

From the Washington Post-Op (aka Jeff Bezos blog not at all Trump-friendly):

Quote:As part of her handling of the case, Clinton filed an affidavit July 28, 1975, requesting that the girl go through a psychiatric examination. “I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing,” Clinton said. “I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”

Clinton offered no source for the claims.

(10-11-2016 10:14 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I know I'm late to the party on the Iraq/Isil email, but did anyone else pick out how the message more or less wrote Turkey off as an ally of the US and referred to some sort of "islamic transition"?

Quote:3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Quote:6. ... At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time.

To me this is the biggest OMFG moment in the whole email. I mean, we all suspected, right? But this is confirmation that Turkey and the US as allies is OVER.

I'm reading this email and the words are reforming to spell out "the EU is about to face a literal oncoming wall of human garbage and NATO IS FUCKING TOAST!"

I did not see it like that. What I saw was an excuse for clandestine operations amounting to possible regime change if the leadership doesn't do what they are told. Turkey in NATO is too important of a buffer strategically to just simply revoke their membership.

They will try to manage that relationship. If that fails, change their leadership. They would not want to indirectly arm a flaky ally in an unstable government.

Look at it this way. Turkey if shunned by the EU and NATO, would ally with Russia for heavy armaments. Do you really think they will let Turkey do that?

They want Turkey to have a missile defense zone closer to Eastern Europe to buffer Russia, but it needs to stabilize more before that happens. That coup attempt hurts that case, but in some ways makes it stronger because they squashed it so easily.

(10-11-2016 10:37 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  I agree with you most of the time on rape allegations, etc. This time, I will say that the potential for Bill Clinton rapes is a little higher than say someone like Colin Kapernick or Bill Cosby, due to the fact that even when he was governor, he had serious power in terms of intimidation.

Small states like Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. are easier to get away with stuff like this if you are at the top of the food chain in terms of power. Even Penn State's scandal festered so badly because Joe Pa, the AD, and Sandusky were very powerful in the state, because of the football program. Lots of people came out and said, that saying anything bad about any of them could get you into alot of trouble.

Bill Cosby raping white women in the 70s and 80s makes no sense because white women were still on protected species status against any black man. They were fucking him to get ahead in life. The fact that many of them returned to him later makes their claims of rape even more absurd.

Bill and Hillary as a team could threaten and bully anyone and their reputation for having a body count was before getting into the White House. If Bill told a chick he raped that she would be found in a ditch, do you think she would go to the police station in Little Rock and ask for a rape kit? I highly, highly doubt it.

Bill Clinton told Kevin Spacey he thought the show House of Cards was definitely real. That should be a major red flag to everyone because it's blatantly obvious that the show is about him and Hillary in a post 90s setting.

I am getting the same impression. On the one hand, I think plenty of women hooked up with Bill voluntarily. Some of the notable ones may certainly be pump-n-dumps. Monica Lewinsky, for example. But it also looks like WJC may have been coercive as well.

But again, the important angle here isn't that we're trying to convict Bill Clinton of Rape. The angle is to highlight Hillary's hypocrisy with her positions on standing up for women. Monica Lewinsky, for example. She might be a pump-n-dump sob story (and everyone knows it) but that doesn't mean Hillary can get away with calling her a "narcissistic loony toon."

(10-11-2016 10:48 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:14 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I know I'm late to the party on the Iraq/Isil email, but did anyone else pick out how the message more or less wrote Turkey off as an ally of the US and referred to some sort of "islamic transition"?

Quote:3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Quote:6. ... At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time.

To me this is the biggest OMFG moment in the whole email. I mean, we all suspected, right? But this is confirmation that Turkey and the US as allies is OVER.

I'm reading this email and the words are reforming to spell out "the EU is about to face a literal oncoming wall of human garbage and NATO IS FUCKING TOAST!"

I did not see it like that. What I saw was an excuse for clandestine operations amounting to possible regime change if the leadership doesn't do what they are told. Turkey in NATO is too important of a buffer strategically to just simply revoke their membership.

They will try to manage that relationship. If that fails, change their leadership. They would not want to indirectly arm a flaky ally in an unstable government.

Look at it this way. Turkey if shunned by the EU and NATO, would ally with Russia for heavy armaments. Do you really think they will let Turkey do that?

They want Turkey to have a missile defense zone closer to Eastern Europe to buffer Russia, but it needs to stabilize more before that happens. That coup attempt hurts that case, but in some ways makes it stronger because they squashed it so easily.

They took everyone against the Islamists and threw them in prison, awaiting trial and possible execution.

Turkey is lost.

The coup was foiled from the start because it was leaked and they panicked, making it worse for them and better for the Islamists.

(10-11-2016 11:07 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:48 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:14 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I know I'm late to the party on the Iraq/Isil email, but did anyone else pick out how the message more or less wrote Turkey off as an ally of the US and referred to some sort of "islamic transition"?

Quote:3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Quote:6. ... At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time.

To me this is the biggest OMFG moment in the whole email. I mean, we all suspected, right? But this is confirmation that Turkey and the US as allies is OVER.

I'm reading this email and the words are reforming to spell out "the EU is about to face a literal oncoming wall of human garbage and NATO IS FUCKING TOAST!"

I did not see it like that. What I saw was an excuse for clandestine operations amounting to possible regime change if the leadership doesn't do what they are told. Turkey in NATO is too important of a buffer strategically to just simply revoke their membership.

They will try to manage that relationship. If that fails, change their leadership. They would not want to indirectly arm a flaky ally in an unstable government.

Look at it this way. Turkey if shunned by the EU and NATO, would ally with Russia for heavy armaments. Do you really think they will let Turkey do that?

They want Turkey to have a missile defense zone closer to Eastern Europe to buffer Russia, but it needs to stabilize more before that happens. That coup attempt hurts that case, but in some ways makes it stronger because they squashed it so easily.

They took everyone against the Islamists and threw them in prison, awaiting trial and possible execution.

Turkey is lost.

The coup was foiled from the start because it was leaked and they panicked, making it worse for them and better for the Islamists.

Correct. They screwed the pooch on that one. They will likely try again. Even if Trump wins, unless he grabs the CIA and demands they cease all activities until he reviews them, they will keep on. Maybe even if he tells them to stop. Who knows.

I wonder if the Russians, the Chinese, or others tipped off the Turks, based upon the shitty email security of these Liberals. They probably saw that coup attempt from a 100 miles away.

Either way, our generals and intelligence community may successfully convince Trump to continue trying regime change. Giving up on them might make it easier for them to ally with Russia, which may or may not be a good thing. Depends upon what strategy and things we are should spend money on. If Trump ignore it, I don't see anything wrong with that short term at least, but 20 or 30 years from now, will that decision backfire? Who knows.

EDIT: Trump should be careful not to let generals and Intel people inadvertently work on behalf of the dark side of the NRA and Arms Manufacturers/Defense contractors looking for any excuse possible to sell Turkey armaments for a money reason. If they pursue that agenda, it better not be about money, otherwise he will be a sellout just like Obama and the others are, and nothing will change.

(10-11-2016 10:37 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:55 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 11:15 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  2. I understand the politics of it, but does anyone else think this "OMG, Bill Clinton is a rapist!!" stuff just just adopts feminist "Rape Culture" narrative?

This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Donald J. Trump Wrote:Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

The rest of Bill's "victims" are scorned women and pump-n-dumped attention whores.

I agree with you most of the time on rape allegations, etc. This time, I will say that the potential for Bill Clinton rapes is a little higher than say someone like Colin Kapernick or Bill Cosby, due to the fact that even when he was governor, he had serious power in terms of intimidation.

Small states like Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. are easier to get away with stuff like this if you are at the top of the food chain in terms of power. Even Penn State's scandal festered so badly because Joe Pa, the AD, and Sandusky were very powerful in the state, because of the football program. Lots of people came out and said, that saying anything bad about any of them could get you into alot of trouble.

Bill Cosby raping white women in the 70s and 80s makes no sense because white women were still on protected species status against any black man. They were fucking him to get ahead in life. The fact that many of them returned to him later makes their claims of rape even more absurd.

Bill and Hillary as a team could threaten and bully anyone and their reputation for having a body count was before getting into the White House. If Bill told a chick he raped that she would be found in a ditch, do you think she would go to the police station in Little Rock and ask for a rape kit? I highly, highly doubt it.

Bill Clinton told Kevin Spacey he thought the show House of Cards was definitely real. That should be a major red flag to everyone because it's blatantly obvious that the show is about him and Hillary in a post 90s setting.

Sure, that's a fair and nuanced view. I just object to the promotion of this "Bill Clinton is a RAPIST" theme based on weak evidence - that is like Mattress Girl, etc.

The evidence does differ. If Broaddrick made a complaint to her friends at the time, that lends credibility - the only problem is that the complaint was not recorded. It's possible he raped her. Willey is almost certainly a liar. Jones, who knows? The original American Spectator story implied she (not named in the story) fucked Bill in a hotel room.

(10-11-2016 11:34 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 11:07 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:48 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:14 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I know I'm late to the party on the Iraq/Isil email, but did anyone else pick out how the message more or less wrote Turkey off as an ally of the US and referred to some sort of "islamic transition"?

Quote:3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone.

Quote:6. ... At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time.

To me this is the biggest OMFG moment in the whole email. I mean, we all suspected, right? But this is confirmation that Turkey and the US as allies is OVER.

I'm reading this email and the words are reforming to spell out "the EU is about to face a literal oncoming wall of human garbage and NATO IS FUCKING TOAST!"

I did not see it like that. What I saw was an excuse for clandestine operations amounting to possible regime change if the leadership doesn't do what they are told. Turkey in NATO is too important of a buffer strategically to just simply revoke their membership.

They will try to manage that relationship. If that fails, change their leadership. They would not want to indirectly arm a flaky ally in an unstable government.

Look at it this way. Turkey if shunned by the EU and NATO, would ally with Russia for heavy armaments. Do you really think they will let Turkey do that?

They want Turkey to have a missile defense zone closer to Eastern Europe to buffer Russia, but it needs to stabilize more before that happens. That coup attempt hurts that case, but in some ways makes it stronger because they squashed it so easily.

They took everyone against the Islamists and threw them in prison, awaiting trial and possible execution.

Turkey is lost.

The coup was foiled from the start because it was leaked and they panicked, making it worse for them and better for the Islamists.

Correct. They screwed the pooch on that one. They will likely try again. Even if Trump wins, unless he grabs the CIA and demands they cease all activities until he reviews them, they will keep on. Maybe even if he tells them to stop. Who knows.

I wonder if the Russians, the Chinese, or others tipped off the Turks, based upon the shitty email security of these Liberals. They probably saw that coup attempt from a 100 miles away.

Either way, our generals and intelligence community may successfully convince Trump to continue trying regime change. Giving up on them might make it easier for them to ally with Russia, which may or may not be a good thing. Depends upon what strategy and things we are should spend money on. If Trump ignore it, I don't see anything wrong with that short term at least, but 20 or 30 years from now, will that decision backfire? Who knows.

EDIT: Trump should be careful not to let generals and Intel people inadvertently work on behalf of the dark side of the NRA and Arms Manufacturers/Defense contractors looking for any excuse possible to sell Turkey armaments for a money reason. If they pursue that agenda, it better not be about money, otherwise he will be a sellout just like Obama and the others are, and nothing will change.

This is another example of why Europe should be really pissed off at the American leadership. The neocon bs first started the Syrian war, then they drive the Russians into the arms of the Turk madman strengthening this islamist who at the moment can decide to swamp Europe with muslim refugees.

American neocons royally fucked over Europe. I hope Trump cleans it up.

(10-11-2016 11:39 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:37 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:55 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

The rest of Bill's "victims" are scorned women and pump-n-dumped attention whores.

I agree with you most of the time on rape allegations, etc. This time, I will say that the potential for Bill Clinton rapes is a little higher than say someone like Colin Kapernick or Bill Cosby, due to the fact that even when he was governor, he had serious power in terms of intimidation.

Small states like Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. are easier to get away with stuff like this if you are at the top of the food chain in terms of power. Even Penn State's scandal festered so badly because Joe Pa, the AD, and Sandusky were very powerful in the state, because of the football program. Lots of people came out and said, that saying anything bad about any of them could get you into alot of trouble.

Bill Cosby raping white women in the 70s and 80s makes no sense because white women were still on protected species status against any black man. They were fucking him to get ahead in life. The fact that many of them returned to him later makes their claims of rape even more absurd.

Bill and Hillary as a team could threaten and bully anyone and their reputation for having a body count was before getting into the White House. If Bill told a chick he raped that she would be found in a ditch, do you think she would go to the police station in Little Rock and ask for a rape kit? I highly, highly doubt it.

Bill Clinton told Kevin Spacey he thought the show House of Cards was definitely real. That should be a major red flag to everyone because it's blatantly obvious that the show is about him and Hillary in a post 90s setting.

Sure, that's a fair and nuanced view. I just object to the promotion of this "Bill Clinton is a RAPIST" theme based on weak evidence - that is like Mattress Girl, etc.

The evidence does differ. If Broaddrick made a complaint to her friends at the time, that lends credibility - the only problem is that the complaint was not recorded. It's possible he raped her. Willey is almost certainly a liar. Jones, who knows? The original American Spectator story implied she (not named in the story) fucked Bill in a hotel room.

Yep, the evidence is weak as hell. I would prefer none of that came up and the more I think about it, Trump giving them a stage, may have been a mistake. Sometimes fighting fire with fire just makes the damn thing bigger.

Unless 20 women come out of the woodwork tomorrow and ask congress to be put into witness protection, this looks petty, partisan, and as if Trump is giving whores a platform to be salty with Bill and Hillary. I bet several of them dreamed of being Mrs. Arkansas back then like several wanted to be Mrs. Cosby back then too.

Most people are not going to go through the mental gymnastics to try and understand what they may perceive as a few whores being bitter. Real players and connoisseurs of Game, know that while they are alpha widows, they probably hate Hillary much much more, because when Bill was going through hell, they never not once called him a rapist, to my recollection. They were jealous that he stayed married to a mean ass lesbian that probably called them on the phone and cursed them out on several occasions, like some Arkansas trailer park drama made for TV show.

Hillary probably was the bad cop telling them they would end up like Vince Foster or dead in a ditch. Bill probably played good cop called them back later saying, "Come on ladies, you know Hillary doesn't mean it. I won't let her hurt you." These women are just upping the ante, because they hate Mrs. Bitch for coming after them hard all those years ago. Women always hate each other the most.

Media polling fully exposed

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/201...ore-123009

You have probably seen the latest example of the media claiming a released presidential poll from NBC and The Wall Street Journal as an example of Hillary Clinton expanding to an 11 point lead in the weekend following the “controversial” leaked tape of Donald Trump.

The claim is complete and utter nonsense. Here’s the proof.

Transparently the poll is manipulated with: a) a small sample (500); and b) the following ideological make-up:



♦ Republican and Republican leaners 36%
♦ Democrat and Democrat leaners 43%
♦ Independents 12%

By itself that ideological snapshot is silly. Nationally the party registration is roughly 27% ®, 32% (D), and 40% (I) – SEE HERE – However, the polling sample is the least of the issues for this deconstruction.

Arguing about the construct or methodology of the poll is typically what most people do when they are refuting a media poll. That aspect alone is not the big story.

Look at the polling organization:
Do you see: Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies?

Hart Research Associates is headed up by Peter D Hart (founder), and Geoff Garin (President) – SEE HERE

Now look at what role Geoff Garin, Hart Research Associate President, is currently occupying (link here):

OK, so Mr. Geoff Garin, the President of Hart Research and Associates”, is currently working as “a strategic adviser for Priorities USA in support of Hillary Clinton’s election“. Gee, I wonder why the media never tells us that part?

See the issue?

Wait, we’re not even close to finished. It gets better.

Let’s take a look at the recent financial connection between, Geoff Garin, Hart Research Associates and Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC.

For that information we turn to FEC filings -HERE-. What do they indicate?

On Page #118 of the September 2016 (most recent) filing we find a payment for $178,500 (screen grab above)

On Page #92 of the same September 2016 (most recent) filing, we find another payment for $42,000 (screen grab below)

♦ $220,500.00 in the month of September alone paid by Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC to Hart Research Associates.

♦ The President of Hart Research Associates, Geoff Garin, is working for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

♦ NBC (S Burke) and The WSJ (Murdoch) contact Geoff Garin (Hart Research Associates) for the post-debate poll data they will use on the day following the debate.

♦ Hart Research Associates provides a small national poll sample (500) result, with skewed party internals, showing Hillary Clinton +11 points.

Do you see now how “media polling” works, and why we advise to ignore it?

A friend of mine just sent me this. Any idea if it's real? If so, major shitlording by Russia.

Got into a little Facebook banter with some Hillary supporters.... I knew better and I never should have done it but I did and its so INFURIATING to listen to these sheep talk. They get all their information from Facebook memes and CNN. I want Trump to win something fierce, not just cause I think he is clearly the best option we have going right now but also just to see the sadness and pain in the peoples eyes who are against him.

#MAGA

Whether you want to believe Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey or Juanita Broaddrick or not - you still have to take into account Clinton blackmailed and threatened these women into silence, she also claimed a 12-year-old girl had a proclivity to seek out older men for sex without a single credible source to back-up her claim.

But it doesn't end there.

Bill has also been spotted repeatedly on the "Lolita Express" - the nickname for an aircraft flown by pedophile Jeffrey Epstein on which Clinton flew to a private island to have sex with underage girls. Hillary covered for him.

The Clintons are not advocates for women, that's the point. Hillary brands herself as a champion of women's rights when she's "married" to a man who has physically raped them for three decades while she raped them mentally by threatening them to keep their mouths shut.

(10-11-2016 12:21 PM)DamienCasanova Wrote:  Media polling fully exposed

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/201...ore-123009

You have probably seen the latest example of the media claiming a released presidential poll from NBC and The Wall Street Journal as an example of Hillary Clinton expanding to an 11 point lead in the weekend following the “controversial” leaked tape of Donald Trump.

The claim is complete and utter nonsense. Here’s the proof.

Transparently the poll is manipulated with: a) a small sample (500); and b) the following ideological make-up:



♦ Republican and Republican leaners 36%
♦ Democrat and Democrat leaners 43%
♦ Independents 12%

By itself that ideological snapshot is silly. Nationally the party registration is roughly 27% ®, 32% (D), and 40% (I) – SEE HERE – However, the polling sample is the least of the issues for this deconstruction.

Arguing about the construct or methodology of the poll is typically what most people do when they are refuting a media poll. That aspect alone is not the big story.

Look at the polling organization:
Do you see: Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies?

Hart Research Associates is headed up by Peter D Hart (founder), and Geoff Garin (President) – SEE HERE

Now look at what role Geoff Garin, Hart Research Associate President, is currently occupying (link here):

OK, so Mr. Geoff Garin, the President of Hart Research and Associates”, is currently working as “a strategic adviser for Priorities USA in support of Hillary Clinton’s election“. Gee, I wonder why the media never tells us that part?

See the issue?

Wait, we’re not even close to finished. It gets better.

Let’s take a look at the recent financial connection between, Geoff Garin, Hart Research Associates and Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC.

For that information we turn to FEC filings -HERE-. What do they indicate?

On Page #118 of the September 2016 (most recent) filing we find a payment for $178,500 (screen grab above)

On Page #92 of the same September 2016 (most recent) filing, we find another payment for $42,000 (screen grab below)

♦ $220,500.00 in the month of September alone paid by Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC to Hart Research Associates.

♦ The President of Hart Research Associates, Geoff Garin, is working for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

♦ NBC (S Burke) and The WSJ (Murdoch) contact Geoff Garin (Hart Research Associates) for the post-debate poll data they will use on the day following the debate.

♦ Hart Research Associates provides a small national poll sample (500) result, with skewed party internals, showing Hillary Clinton +11 points.

Do you see now how “media polling” works, and why we advise to ignore it?

Quick someone PM this to Eljefe. Or post it in the trump thread.

I've been playing around with Google. When I type "Bill Clinton is a rapist" it doesn't auto-complete. In fact, I type all the way to the "s" of "rapist" and it still won't autocomplete. After typing the "t", no search results will appear, as usually happens, until I actually click the magnifying lens button. Same thing happens if I type, "Did Bill Clinton rape" or "Bill Clinton rapes". Same thing if I type "Is Hillary Clinton a rape enabler" it won't autocomplete or bring up search results until the button is clicked.

Moving stuff.

(10-11-2016 12:56 PM)C-Note Wrote:  I've been playing around with Google. When I type "Bill Clinton is a rapist" it doesn't auto-complete. In fact, I type all the way to the "s" of "rapist" and it still won't autocomplete. After typing the "t", no search results will appear, as usually happens, until I actually click the magnifying lens button. Same thing happens if I type, "Did Bill Clinton rape" or "Bill Clinton rapes". Same thing if I type "Is Hillary Clinton a rape enabler" it won't autocomplete or bring up search results until the button is clicked.

That doesn't happen on Bing. All of those statements will autocomplete on Bing.

That doesn't seem unusual, Google has always disabled autocomplete when you use adult-oriented words. You can try anything, just now I started typing "big boobs" as a test, and it autocompletes up until the second b in boobs.

EDIT: Dammit, I posted in politics without even realizing it. Whoops!

(10-11-2016 09:55 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:33 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 09:05 AM)Blaster Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 11:15 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  2. I understand the politics of it, but does anyone else think this "OMG, Bill Clinton is a rapist!!" stuff just just adopts feminist "Rape Culture" narrative?

This is a case where the politics of it are very important. It's about Trump in the White House:

Donald J. Trump Wrote:Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Also, it's looking more and more like WJC actually did assault at least some of those women.

And then there's Kathy Shelton (who was not a WJC victim, she's the one HRC abused in court with lies). She is one of the best examples of what a genuine rape victim looks like. You read her story, you watch her interviews-- you know that poor girl was horribly victimized. Shelton talks about her experiences with a simple acceptance, tinged with regret and sadness, that comes from years and years of private therapy to cope with the physical and psychological damage from the traumatic experience. She is the opposite of an XoJane attention whore. She's the opposite of Mattress Girl. She's clearly a genuine victim who deserves support and sympathy.

As a former criminal defense lawyer who defended accused rapists myself, I am utterly unmoved by the Shelton story. "Abused in court with lies?" That sounds like the framing "Rape Culture" advocates make. How are we to know what are "lies?" As I say to many people, it's the jury's job to decide what happened - I wasn't there, and the prosecutor wasn't there, either.

But the Shelton story feeds into the "Rape Culture" hysteria just as much, because it promotes the idea that accused rapists should not get the zealous defense the law orders.

Anyways, the accused in that case got convicted of a lesser charge and served a year in jail.

The rest of Bill's "victims" are scorned women and pump-n-dumped attention whores.

Then I think it's poetic justice that the rape culture hysteria and PC word games that have ruined innocent men's lives are now being turned against it's top party creators.

(10-11-2016 12:21 PM)CaptainChardonnay Wrote:  A friend of mine just sent me this. Any idea if it's real? If so, major shitlording by Russia.

Ahaha the Russian meme machine is modernizing!

Cernovich has a new video out calling out Hillary's Saudi sugardaddies:





Simple but visceral use of contrast. Great way to get the message across. Hopefully some of the media picks up on the new email leaks which shows her deep connections with the House of Saud, which will further spread Cerno's clip.

Spread it folks.