In regards to Clinton, Trump does not have to do anything at the moment. Most of the millions of people who voted for him are going to keep voicing their demands that he lock her up. So by comparison, its no different from the debate where he said she would be in jail.

This has created an environment where it allows the Clinton machine to go about business more or less as per usual, but with much more paranoia. A paranoid enemy is one who is rash and quick to react, but makes too many mistakes and ends up undone by their own hand.

He gave them a bit of breathing room today, but make no mistake they know they are not even close to being out of trouble yet. They might think to close up shop, but also this makes them look guilty. Instead, they are likely bringing in as many allies as possible, under cloaks and daggers, to do some massive cleaning in the hopes that they can be left alone.

But we all know that they are never going to be left alone. No matter where they go, or what they do, they are going to be watched so closely- by Trump and by the people- that they will never have even a hope of rebuilding their corrupt empire.

They will be banished, but most likely by their own will.

This is a comment on Cernovich blog:

Quote:What is the alt-right movement other than calling people cucks and frog memes?

The white nationalists are actually the flip side of liberalism but without any power. Liberals blame all their failures in life on white heterosexual men and white nats blame all their failures in life on liberal Jews and brown and black people.

When white nationalists start building financial institutions, going to law school, going into academia, going into the public schools, going into entertainment and media, and start competing with the Jews they hate, then it will be a serious movement.

It shouldn't be that difficult. There is something like 80 million white men in the US and only 6 million Jews and their numbers are dwindling fast from intermarriage, faggotry, and small families.

Get to work instead of whining like a bunch of pussies.

And no, President Trump won't save you from yourselves.

The above is what cuckservatism (reminder: corrupt gov, hawkish foreign, liberal cultural) sounds like post-Trump win.

Notice the shaming language and false equivalence. Doesn't try to figure out if what is said about jews is actually true or not, but just makes an emotional rethorical deflection.

Notice the focus on competing with the ever so clever jews, next up, why don't Joe Shmoe compete with the hardworking Chinese so his job doesn't get outsorced, god I hate those whiny entitled fucking white males who just hate that their priviledge is slipping.

Yeah I see you cucks. The above cuckery is also everywhere on Breitbart, just waiting and biding time for a left swing before jumping right back on publick cuckery and leftism again.

At the moment I'm inclined to go with Samseau's view: if Trump doesn't make at least some move on Clinton at some point in his Presidency, it's going to make it a lot tougher for him mid-term if not long into his Presidency. Those of us saying "But the Democrats won't insist he prosecutes" are, with respect, forgetting something: Trump is not only fighting the Democrats to get his agenda through. The Republican party still has a decent array of traitors within its ranks.

Refusing to prosecute Hilary Clinton or push into the Foundation is a gimme for #NeverTrump types to start concern trolling other Republicans over the "risk" to their "mandate" or similar such rubbish. "Because You'd Be In Jail" is way too big and simple a threat to walk away from without looking seriously bad.

On the other hand, let's repeat the chorus: the guy hasn't even been elected yet, and he still has enough wiggle room on his statements to be able to change his mind about prosecuting people if he's apprised of some new evidence.

Prosecuting Clinton over the email server or foundation will cost political capital.

You have to remember that.

If Jeff Sessions (or whoever becomes Attorney General) pursues the Clintons for their corruption, it will cost significant political capital for the Trump Administration as a whole, since a lot of time and resources will be spent on that. It could also have a negative effect on public perception of the Trump Administration as a whole.

In addition to this, the Clintons are now politically ruined.

It just does not seem worth it to me to stir up a hornets nest when you have already won. Time and energy would be better spent on other things now.

(11-22-2016 09:21 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  Prosecuting Clinton over the email server or foundation will cost political capital.

You have to remember that.

If Jeff Sessions (or whoever becomes Attorney General) pursues the Clintons for their corruption, it will cost significant political capital for the Trump Administration as a whole, since a lot of time and resources will be spent on that. It could also have a negative effect on public perception of the Trump Administration as a whole.

In addition to this, the Clintons are now politically ruined.

It just does not seem worth it to me to stir up a hornets nest when you have already won. Time and energy would be better spent on other things now.

Fair comment.

It's the old two-reality problem that Scott Adams is talking about. One half of the country will believe Trump is delivering on a campaign promise and making an effort to strike a blow against a major corrupting influence in Washington politics. The other half of the country will believe Trump is persecuting Jesus Christ. And a court prosecution against Clinton is the Heisenbergian moment of choice where one of these realities must collapse (although even not then - you could have a smoking gun on Clinton, a jury taking five minutes to convict, and the Left would still insist she wasn't guilty.) There are always risks in making someone a martyr, especially when the Obsolete Media are in, and never got out of, the barrel for Clinton.

Either rule of law exists in this country, or it doesn't. Are we all equal under the law, or not?

^^^ if the Obamunist in chief does a lsst minute pardon of hill and bill... very likely just to mask his accessoryship in their federal crimes... President Viking Emporer Elect Trump can still go the souther district of NYC against thr Clinton Crimes Foundation... Conway saying she has suffeted enough was a NFL style faint or fake to take the Clinton Criminals eyes of the ball lest they move their mega bux to tax shelters around the globe ouside the reach of oour new Trumpian IRS.

https://youtu.be/_LTKLwOYJEc

Time to send Kissinger Soros Bloomberg and the Clintons to gitmo or worse black rendition sites....

WOW, a triple duplicate.

Trips dupes.

(11-22-2016 09:24 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 09:21 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  Prosecuting Clinton over the email server or foundation will cost political capital.

You have to remember that.

If Jeff Sessions (or whoever becomes Attorney General) pursues the Clintons for their corruption, it will cost significant political capital for the Trump Administration as a whole, since a lot of time and resources will be spent on that. It could also have a negative effect on public perception of the Trump Administration as a whole.

In addition to this, the Clintons are now politically ruined.

It just does not seem worth it to me to stir up a hornets nest when you have already won. Time and energy would be better spent on other things now.

Fair comment.

It's the old two-reality problem that Scott Adams is talking about. One half of the country will believe Trump is delivering on a campaign promise and making an effort to strike a blow against a major corrupting influence in Washington politics. The other half of the country will believe Trump is persecuting Jesus Christ. And a court prosecution against Clinton is the Heisenbergian moment of choice where one of these realities must collapse (although even not then - you could have a smoking gun on Clinton, a jury taking five minutes to convict, and the Left would still insist she wasn't guilty.) There are always risks in making someone a martyr, especially when the Obsolete Media are in, and never got out of, the barrel for Clinton.

It really depends on what hard evidence they have and whose hands it ends up in. If the hard, undeniable evidence is so blatant then it supersedes the "two realities" discussion as no one can deny the evil that may be looming in the darkness.

That is what is all comes down to, hard evidence.

Everyone knows they are corrupt as shit. But its not what you know, its what you can prove.

You have to remember, this doesn't just implicate the clintons. It implicates the media, NGOs, hundreds of swamp dwellers, and maybe even the senior most officials of the current administration.

It would be undeniably ugly and painful for the country, scratch that, the world, to go through.

If it is so bad that and just some of the many allegations turn out to be 100% accurate then the indictment occurs.

But keep in mind, this is a battle, just like running for the presidency, that once it begins, has to be fought to win. Total warfare. There are no moral victories in such a scenario.

And you can bet that people on both sides of the aisle would go down with them. So the implications of such a scenario are ominous.

Imagine if all the sudden you have numerous congressional and senate seats from both parties opening up because the incumbent is going to jail.

That is most likely what you'd be wading into by pursuing this.

So while we can speculate about his intentions and honesty just remember, on this point, heavy ways the crown.

And the only thing that lightens the load is immense, hard evidence to illuminate the evil.

Until he takes office, all the speculation is just that.

The game isn't played on paper, its played on the field. And kick off is a mere 58 days away.

If I had to guess, they get the first 100 days of the administration completed and positive momentum built before turning to this subject. The deeds have already been done so no point in getting hamstrung out of the gate. It would probably be 6-9 months before anything official is announced.

I mean, is there a statute of limitations on treason? No, probably not.

In short, it is not as bad as the MSM wants you to believe.

(11-22-2016 09:32 PM)weambulance Wrote:  Either rule of law exists in this country, or it doesn't. Are we all equal under the law, or not?

Theory: yes.
Practice: frequently, no. Even Gerry Spence will admit to that.

Why would the Trump camp go out of their way to announce anything to do with prosecutions of Hillary now?
Does Trump have the capacity to do anything until he's sworn in in January?
Maybe Trump just doesn't want Killary to flee the country until he is actually POTUS?

(11-22-2016 09:33 PM)Deepdiver Wrote:  ^^^ if the Obamunist in chief does a lsst minute pardon of hill and bill... very likely just to mask his accessoryship in their federal crimes... President Viking Emporer Elect Trump can still go the souther district of NYC against thr Clinton Crimes Foundation... Conway saying she has suffeted enough was a NFL style faint or fake to take the Clinton Criminals eyes of the ball lest they move their mega bux to tax shelters around the globe ouside the reach of oour new Trumpian IRS.

https://youtu.be/_LTKLwOYJEc

Time to send Kissinger Soros Bloomberg and the Clintons to gitmo or worse black rendition sites....

There won't be any last minute pardons. Obama's been bluntly public on the subject: he can't pardon someone who hasn't been before a court yet. This was a subject of much glee at Zero Hedge a couple of days ago.

On top of Scorpion's take on Trump lowering his sword, I think the dude is sending a message to Hildawg herself.

She is now in the inferior position. She's visibly shaken and spent. Even broken. He says he doesn't want to hurt the Clintons and thinks they've been through enough. If she tries to challenge the result, that immediately goes out the window, she once again makes herself his opponent, and he will come down on her with all the fury of the Old Testament.

One way or the other, he's got her by the pussy. It's her call how hard he squeezes.

(11-22-2016 11:24 AM)YossariansRight Wrote:  IT’S REAL! Leaked Document from Trump’s Sunday Meeting Shows Plans for 1,989 Mile Wall:

"Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach met with Donald Trump on Sunday in New Jersey. A mainstream media photographer caught the moment..."

"The photographer also caught a piece of paper outlining a potential Trump immigration reform agenda..."

"Reporters zoomed in on the paper and this is what they saw. The Kobach notes include a 1,989 Trump wall in addition to the 386 miles of existing wall..."



http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/...rder-wall/

>>>>>>>>Leaked

This was a smart move by Trump coordinated with Kobach, the media loves the idea of "leaked" information captured in pictures like this, they love the idea "we got Trump this time", is similar to the leaked John Miller tape, the media did not realize they just play what Trump wants.

The media was spreading the rumor Trump wall will be just a fence, others were saying the wall was a metaphor, and how he wont really build almost 2000 miles.

Now this "leaked" information prove all that wrong, the wall will be built, and discredit the media even more.

(11-22-2016 11:28 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 10:27 AM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 02:29 AM)Latinopan Wrote:  This, and like other said, Rogan takes too long to make a point, his show is about 3 hours long, if he was able to make a point faster his show could be not longer than 2 hours.

For me, the whole premise of Rogan's show is to not "make a point faster". If you want that, there are plenty of other shows out there.

The value in his show (again, for me), is the long rambling convo-between-friends that happens and evolves. Some of the most interesting stuff is said once people can warm up and flex their thoughts while speaking. They gradually arrive at something.

Or they don't, but it's still mildly entertaining. Like an improv jazz concert.

What I'm saying is that appeals to his main audience base, and it would be silly for him to change it based on the opinion of a bunch of people who aren't really his main base.

Who cares if he doesn't want Mike on for whatever reason?

Those are indeed fine points TooFineAPoint. Rogan is a talented interviewer and the process he engages in effectively utilizes many good investigative techniques. These techniques are not effective in a short time frame. Rogan's objective is to get to know his guest, not to make points of his own. When Joe does express his opinions, he is only doing it to challenge his guest. It's a lot like the Socratic method.

Having said that though, I care that he doesn't want Cerno on his show, and I am an enthusiastic Rogan fan. If Joe wants to maintain credibility among fans like me for being [b]authentic, then he better interview Cerno. Rogan cannot hope to rely on the argument that Cerno is "not important enough" to warrant a show. We all know that's absolute bullshit. So those of us who are die-hard fans of Rogan are left wondering, "So why DON'T you interview him Joe?" The answer that is rearing it's ugly head to us is... because Rogan is AFRAID of the consequences from the "powers that be", the same mysterious powers that clearly crashed down hard on Fox after Cerno did Red Eye. If Rogan wants to hold on to street cred as an independent info-warrior in the style of Alex Jones (and I argue that he does), then he had best get Cerno on his show.[/b]

And forthwith.

Look at it this way:

-Paul Joseph Watson
-Bill Mitchell
-Alex Jones
-Stefan Molyneux
-Mike Cernovich
-Steven Crowder

All these people had their particular audience and their particular format, but during this election many of them came together, Mitchell and Cernovich were talking to Molyneux on his show, Mitchell was having a live conversation with Joseph Watson on Prisonplanet, Molyneux was at the Alex Jones Show, Crowder was making fun of The Young Turks.

They don't lose audience, they share audience to some part, if somebody watch Cernovich on Molyneux's show that person will may now watch Cernovich on Periscope, but wont stop listening to Molyneux.

Rogan wants to be over the top neutral, which I think is a way to keep his audience at the same level.

Not one of these people above claim to be the absolute source of wisdom, but they do help each other, Molyneux has good data but Alex Jones has reporters on the ground, is a good connection, the strength of the left is how connected the media is interconnected between each other.

Glenn Beck is a good example of the kind of people who claim to be the first and last bastion voice of conservatism and right wing, he isolate himself in his echo chamber and replica of the oval office in his studio, there are videos of Beck getting angry for people comparing him to Alex Jone, Beck thought kneeling in front of the audience and crying when giving a speech was what people on the right wanted.

Here is a good move, Crowder and Jones join forces to make fun of The Young Turks.





This is how you fight the cultural war.

(11-22-2016 12:38 PM)Fisto Wrote:  Disagree about boycotting all mainstream media including Tucker Carlson.

We need to suppor Tucker and send the message that this is what the market wants.

Boycott the rest, but when these tone deaf fools stumble upon something we can get behind we absolute should get behind it.

More will follow as the money comes back and the culture war will continue to tip towards our views.

Re not prosecuting Clinton, I know Pres Trump has his reasons, but the clear message that no one is above the law should be sent.

He should do it saying he doesn't want to. He should do it oh so begrudgingly.

He should do it with emerging reports of a child pedophile ring that cannot go ignored.

He should do it while saying it's very unfortunate our country was thrust into this state of corruption without our consent and without his approval.

But he should do it.

Yes, the culture is driven by money, you don't have to watch Fox News all day, but tune in for Tucker, they know when people are watching.

Michael Savage thinks that Trump and Hillary made a deal that he wouldn't prosecute her if she didn't contest the election. But she clearly should be prosecuted. There are people who are in prison for accidentally giving $10,000 too much in campaign contributions, whereas the fraud that Hillary did was massive and treasonous. She established a private e-mail system so she could run a pay-for-play scheme giving the Clintons $300 million dollars by selling access to foreign countries. What this says is that the only people in prison are the little guys who get caught. But the crooks who are big enough never get charged or serve time.

Re Cernovich / Joe Rogan

While they bring content to the audience in a very different manner, Rogan knows Cernovich is a huge competitor to his platform, and will probably lose clicks to Cernovich if he has Cernovich on. Business is business.

(11-22-2016 11:35 PM)Enoch Wrote:  Re Cernovich / Joe Rogan

While they bring content to the audience in a very different manner, Rogan knows Cernovich is a huge competitor to his platform, and will probably lose clicks to Cernovich if he has Cernovich on. Business is business.

Another factor could be, that as his daughters get older, Rogan will just inevitably tone his style down. At least in those outlets that are readily & easily accessible.
YouTube podcast? Toned down.
L.A. Comedy Store stand-up set? As edgy as he can make it.

Going with your son to explore old a gold mine.



Make Fatherhood Great Again

Part 2 :

(11-30-2016 01:20 PM)Ethan Hunt Wrote:  

(11-30-2016 12:52 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(11-30-2016 10:03 AM)Samseau Wrote:  While it looks like Trump has his 2020 run figured out already, someone else is thinking big and ready to kick ass...

What? STILL NO FLYING CARS???

Wont he be too young to run on 2036?

But not in 2086.

(11-30-2016 01:23 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(11-30-2016 12:41 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I'm interested to see how he got them to stay - leveraging or with subsidies ? Did he give them any breaks ?

It's so nice to be on a forum where people ask questions about things they don't know, instead of leaping to assumptions. I spent a lot of yesterday dealing with idiots who said, "Trump promised them all this government money! He just bribed them to stay!"

Here's some actual information from Forbes.

Quote:A source close to the company said President-elect Trump called Greg Hayes, CEO of Carrier’s parent company United Technologies, two weeks ago and asked him to rethink the decision to close the Carrier plant in Indiana.

....

In the end, UTC agreed to retain 850 manufacturing jobs at the Indiana plant that had been slated to move to Mexico, as well as another 100 headquarters jobs that were going to move to Charlotte and 200 engineering jobs. In return, UTC will get roughly $700,000 in state tax abatements.

Some 1,300 Carrier jobs will still go to Mexico. The company has plans in place to offer displaced workers employment and relocation in UTC’s aerospace business, or to provide funding for reeducation.

So $700,000 in tax abatements, which is a rounding error, to save almost 1200 jobs. The state will make that money back in income tax in a single year.

And the others whose jobs are being eliminated will be given funding for re-education, or employment and relocation.

WINNING.

How about this to compare to. Here in Ontario our Premier let Heinz close up a bunch of plants which led to about 2000 jobs being lost over all. The plant had good paying jobs in small communities all over Ontario.

Fast forward a little later and Wynne the lesbian Premier signs a deal with Cisco to being 1700 jobs to Toronto. Great right? Tech jobs in the new modern economy. But the details don't tell you is that Ontario had to cut a cheque for $190 million dollars to make Cisco come here, over $100K a job if you do the shit napkin math.

She probably could have kept Heinz around with the same type of deal Trump did with Carrier but chose not to. These leaders are not about protecting jobs. All these deals are all just political push plays with lobbyists and cronies making money off the back side of failed or pushed through deals.

Imagine. All it took was some hard bargaining and some meetings, and you keep jobs in America. Many of these firms don't want to leave, give them a reason to stay and they will. Many are forced with the backs to the wall, a simple olive branch and some necessary incentives (with consequences if they do leave) all you need.

(11-30-2016 03:01 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  This Breitbart article explains what I deem an idiotic situation.

Kelloggs breakfast cereals company announces they will never ever never advertise on Breitbart's website, because Breitbart "doesn't represent our values as a company".

This is the only 'value' a company should ever be interested in. Corporations are well advised to stay out of the 'moral value' business. Because we may just have to take a more detailed look what lurks under that sanctimonious hood. I don't know - could it perhaps be that Kellogg's is willfully poisoning millions of children with GMO corn sprayed with pesticides? Wouldn't it be a shame if Kellogg's would suddenly be associated with the hashtags #gmo #pesticides #cancercorn #cancerflakes - just from the top of my head...

So what 'values' are those motherfuckers talking about again?

(11-30-2016 03:01 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  So who the fuck told Kelloggs that their Corn Flakes and Pop Tarts represented anything other than a breakfast food? Their advertisers told us, as a manipulative ploy to get us to buy more, while looking down on us for having it work on us .

That's so true. An admission that they have essentially programmed us to think a certain way about their product, when at the end of the day it's just cornflakes.