Rigged

[jimnyc]

First off, my personal belief is that once the media is in the tank for the candidate, that alone is a way of 'rigging' the election. And here is yet another. I wonder what those folks think, those that whined at Trump's campaign for some of the things that happened during his campaign, some of the 'violent' things - now knowing that some of it was nothing more than a setup. I know what most of them think - nothing. :)

Here's another way it's rigged.

-----

Exclusive: O’Keefe Video Sting Exposes ‘Bird-Dogging’ — Democrats’ Effort to Incite Violence at Trump Rallies

Democrats have used trained provocateurs to instigate violence at Republican events nationwide throughout the 2016 election cycle, including at several Donald Trump rallies, using a tactic called “bird-dogging,” according to a new video investigation released Monday by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas.

The goal of “bird-dogging”: to create a sense of “anarchy” around Donald Trump that would undermine his political support. Often, the tactic uses the most vulnerable people — including the elderly and disabled — to maximize shock value.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

O’Keefe’s extensive video investigation reveals that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are involved in “bird-dogging” and other provocative tactics through a web of consultants led by Robert Creamer, a veteran Chicago activist and convicted felon who is thought to have planned Democrats’ political strategy during the push for Obamacare in 2009 and 2010.

Creamer is also the co-founder of Democracy Partners, a consulting group that, according to Project Veritas videos, apparently contracts directly with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, and that works with an array of super PACs and consultants to organize, film and publicize their provocations.

Rest here - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/17/exclusive-okeefe-video-sting-exposes-bird-dogging-democrats-effort-to-incite-violence-at-trump-rallies/

[jimnyc]

But violence to Trump supporters has happened a bunch at Hillary campaigns now, and not a peep - so not surprising. Some folks only denounce when prodded - while quickly and often do the same to Trump.

[revelarts]

I predict that the voting machines will be/are rigged again as well.
Hillary the establishment candidate will get the machine votes.
But since it's partisan only people on the right will believe it's happened.
Just like when many machines where rigged for Bush only those on the left believed it really happened. (I'm not talking about hanging chads here)

So well end up with another stalemate where both sides call the other conspiracy theorist
and nothing is done across the board to fix a problem that no one admit their pure and righteous side is invoked in.

[jimnyc]

I predict that the voting machines will be/are rigged again as well.
Hillary the establishment candidate will get the machine votes.
But since it's partisan only people on the right will believe it's happened.
Just like when many machines where rigged for Bush only those on the left believed it really happened. (I'm not talking about hanging chads here)

So well end up with another stalemate where both sides call the other conspiracy theorist
and nothing is done across the board to fix a problem that no one admit their pure and righteous side is invoked in.

I know nothing of the machines. But I KNOW that the media has been hugely biased. Many of them don't even discuss Wikileaks at all. Some of their websites barely carry Clinton articles at all. And then now this information about violence - where you condemn at Trump rallies, and now just ignored again...

[Bilgerat]

https://twg2a.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/seiuvotingmachines.jpg?w=595

[jimnyc]

And they would be 100% correct. The media is the largest and oldest way of voters getting their information. If the media is in collusion with a candidate, or party - that is rigging the election. And one is a big fat liar now if they don't finally recognize the bias. CBS, NBC, FOX, ABC - watch them and see VERY little about Hillary, and not a peep about the biggest scandal of her history. Except for Fox of course - who the liberals claim of being biased - and they have BOTH sides covered, on TV and their site, and even their poll gives Hillary a lead. Seems like only one MSM agency is being honest and presenting issues accurately to the American people.

-----

Poll: 41 percent of voters say election could be ‘stolen’ from Trump

The American electorate has turned deeply skeptical about the integrity of the nation's election apparatus, with 41 percent of voters saying November's election could be "stolen" from Donald Trump due to widespread voter fraud.

The new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll -- conducted among 1,999 registered voters Oct. 13 through Oct. 15 -- shows that Trump’s repeated warnings about a “rigged” election are having effect: 73 percent of Republicans think the election could be swiped from him. Just 17 percent of Democrats agree with the prospect of massive fraud at the ballot box.

The public sentiment is beginning to reflect Trump's campaign message. Over the last week, the GOP nominee has intensified his criticism of the U.S. electoral system, much to the chagrin of elected Republicans, who think it threatens the peaceful transfer of power. Trump calls the process rigged, and has said the media is colluding with Hillary Clinton to throw the presidential race in her favor.

Trump’s comments casting doubt upon the process have drawn a gentle rebuke from House Speaker Paul Ryan, whose spokesperson put out what would ordinarily be an unremarkable statement on Saturday: “Our democracy relies on confidence in election results, and the speaker is fully confident the states will carry out this election with integrity.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/poll-41-percent-of-voters-say-the-election-could-be-stolen-from-trump-229871#ixzz4NN1XY1e5

[jimnyc]

Too lazy to search for yet another article...

But the Clinton News Network, aka CNN - has reported to its watchers that it is ILLEGAL to search the Wikileaks website and read the releases. WTF??? IT IS NOT.

I wonder why they would tell their listeners as much?

[Abbey Marie]

I just logged in to post that very video. There are no words to explain how it makes me feel.

[Black Diamond]

I predict that the voting machines will be/are rigged again as well.
Hillary the establishment candidate will get the machine votes.
But since it's partisan only people on the right will believe it's happened.
Just like when many machines where rigged for Bush only those on the left believed it really happened. (I'm not talking about hanging chads here)

So well end up with another stalemate where both sides call the other conspiracy theorist
and nothing is done across the board to fix a problem that no one admit their pure and righteous side is invoked in.
Question for ya Rev.
If it's done by machine, could God make the machines say His candidate won?

[Bilgerat]

Take a gander folks



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

[Black Diamond]

Question for ya Rev.
If it's done by machine, could God make the machines say His candidate won?

This is actually open to any poster

[jimnyc]

I add this here, as this was clearly a part of things being RIGGED. And yep, I'll continue with that word, since it's exactly what we have seen on many fronts. The DOJ, FBI & State Dept. - all involved. What does one call it when such high ranking agencies go into the tank for a candidate? RIGGING.

-----

Intel, Oversight Chairmen Call for IG Investigation of State Dept. Handling of Clinton Email Classification

(CNSNews.com) - House Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R.-Calif.) and House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R.-Utah) wrote to the inspector general of the State Department today calling for him to “initiate an inquiry into apparent abuse of power by senior State Department personnel trying to influence classification determinations for emails sent or received by Secretary Clinton.”

The chairmen also wrote to current Secretary of State John Kerry requesting that he remove Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy “pending an independent and unbiased investigation into his conduct during the review of Secretary Clinton’s emails.”

“In the course of our committees’ ongoing oversight activities relating to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server, new information indicates that Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy inappropriately pressured State Department and FBI reviewers to refrain from marking emails classified,” Nunes and Chaffetz said in their letter to Kerry.

“According to the FBI interview summaries, Under Secretary Kerry allegedly went so far as to consider a ‘quid pro quo’ arrangement where the State Department would trade a favor with the FBI in exchange for keeping an email unclassified,” the chairmen said.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/intel-oversight-chairs-call-ig-investigation-state-dept-handling

[Kathianne]

I add this here, as this was clearly a part of things being RIGGED. And yep, I'll continue with that word, since it's exactly what we have seen on many fronts. The DOJ, FBI & State Dept. - all involved. What does one call it when such high ranking agencies go into the tank for a candidate? RIGGING.

-----

Intel, Oversight Chairmen Call for IG Investigation of State Dept. Handling of Clinton Email Classification

(CNSNews.com) - House Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R.-Calif.) and House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R.-Utah) wrote to the inspector general of the State Department today calling for him to “initiate an inquiry into apparent abuse of power by senior State Department personnel trying to influence classification determinations for emails sent or received by Secretary Clinton.”

The chairmen also wrote to current Secretary of State John Kerry requesting that he remove Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy “pending an independent and unbiased investigation into his conduct during the review of Secretary Clinton’s emails.”

“In the course of our committees’ ongoing oversight activities relating to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server, new information indicates that Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy inappropriately pressured State Department and FBI reviewers to refrain from marking emails classified,” Nunes and Chaffetz said in their letter to Kerry.

“According to the FBI interview summaries, Under Secretary Kerry allegedly went so far as to consider a ‘quid pro quo’ arrangement where the State Department would trade a favor with the FBI in exchange for keeping an email unclassified,” the chairmen said.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/intel-oversight-chairs-call-ig-investigation-state-dept-handling


I agree about DOJ, FBI, etc., though I think that reflects much more on the Obama administration than it does on being 'anti-Trump.' Pro-Hillary, that I buy to a degree, though again I think the behavior would have been the same regardless of who was up against her.

Rhetoric aside, think that if Hillary wins, the citizenry should react in violent protest?

[jimnyc]

Violent? Then folks would be no better than the black lives matter dirtbags, or other groups that use a protest as an excuse to riot or damage things.

[Gunny]

They call anything they wiah to dismiss a conspiracy theory. They think it blows smoke over the elephant in the room.

[Kathianne]

Violent? Then folks would be no better than the black lives matter dirtbags, or other groups that use a protest as an excuse to riot or damage things.

Armed insurrection is by definition violent. Yes, I've seen folks calling for it if the election is 'stolen' from Trump.

[Gunny]

Armed insurrection is by definition violent. Yes, I've seen folks calling for it if the election is 'stolen' from Trump.You are oversimplifying the term "armed insurrection". There are legal means to change our government. Too many hard-heads won't use them while we still have a chance.

Any armed insurrection as a result will be on the peoples' heads willing to watch it crash and burn for not getting their way as it will be those doing the crashing and burning.

[Kathianne]

You are oversimplifying the term "armed insurrection". There are legal means to change our government. Too many hard-heads won't use them while we still have a chance.

Any armed insurrection as a result will be on the peoples' heads willing to watch it crash and burn for not getting their way as it will be those doing the crashing and burning.

I agree there are legal means to change government, voting and getting involved in the system. I fail to understand how I'm oversimplifying the term 'armed insurrection' though.

[jimnyc]

Armed insurrection is by definition violent. Yes, I've seen folks calling for it if the election is 'stolen' from Trump.

Well, it IS being 'stolen', or at least attempting it thus far.

I don't think a few out there calling for violence represents the entirety of Trump supporters.

[Kathianne]

Well, it IS being 'stolen', or at least attempting it thus far.

I don't think a few out there calling for violence represents the entirety of Trump supporters.

I never said that the few represent the whole. I was asking 'here' what folks thought, not accusing anyone of anything.

[Elessar]

Too lazy to search for yet another article...

But the Clinton News Network, aka CNN - has reported to its watchers that it is ILLEGAL to search the Wikileaks website and read the releases. WTF??? IT IS NOT.

I wonder why they would tell their listeners as much?

liberal mind control.

So the lid comes off on what has been suspected for a year now, and
the MSM will not post it.

Surprised? I'm not at all.

[Elessar]

I agree there are legal means to change government, voting and getting involved in the system. I fail to understand how I'm oversimplifying the term 'armed insurrection' though.

Republicans by and large are not into 'armed insurrection', but honor due process. liberals, on the other hand, invite violent
insurrection: Occupy Wall Street, Pink Movement, BLM, New Black Panthers, etc. Don't forget KKK...they are rooted from the Democratic
Party.

[Kathianne]

Jonathan Turley responded to this pretty darn quick:

https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/17/cnn-it-is-illegal-for-voters-to-possess-wikileaks-material/


CNN: It Is Illegal For Voters To Possess Wikileaks Material<time class="entry-date published" datetime="2016-10-17T10:01:25+00:00" style="box-sizing: border-box;">1, October 17, 2016</time> (https://jonathanturley.org/2016/10/17/cnn-it-is-illegal-for-voters-to-possess-wikileaks-material/) jonathanturley (https://jonathanturley.org/author/jonathanturley/)

There was an interesting segment on CNN last week where CNN anchor Chris Cuomo reminds viewers for it is illegal for them to “possess” Wikileaks material and that, as a result, they will have to rely on the media to tell them what is in these documents. The legal assertion is dubious, but the political implications are even more concerning. Polls show that many voters view the media as biased (http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/09/public-confidence-in-media-falls-to-all-time-low-in-2016-228168) and this is a particularly strong view among supporters of Donald Trump who view CNN and other networks openly supporting Clinton or attacking Trump. More importantly, the mainstream media has reported relatively little from the Wikileaks material and has not delved deeply into their implications, including embarrassing emails showing reporters coordinating with the Clinton campaign and supposedly “neutral” media figures like Donna Brazile, formerly with CNN, allegedly slipping advance question material to Hillary Clinton (http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/roland-martin-cnn-email-donna-brazile-wikileaks-229673). The credibility of the media is at an all-time low and most voters hardly feel comfortable with this material being reported second-hand or interpreted by the mainstream media. So is it really illegal for voters to have this material?

Cuomo was about to discuss embarrassing emails from Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s inbox but he stopped to remind viewers “remember, it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents,” Cuomo says. “It’s different for the media, so everything you’re learning about this, you’re learning from us.”

First, the criticism of Cuomo as trying to keep people from reading this material (which is damaging to Clinton) seems a bit far-fetched. It is more likely that he felt obligated to disclose the uncertain legal status of such documents. However, he overstated the case in my view.

It is true that possession of stolen items is a crime and documents can be treated as stolen items. However, this material has already been released and it is doubtful that downloading widely available material (particularly in a matter of great public interest) would be seen as prosecutable possession. Whoever had original possession has released them widely to the public like throwing copies out a window by the thousands. Whatever crime is alleged, it will be directed at the original hacker and not the public. Just downloading and reading public available material is unlikely to be viewed as a crime unless you use material to steal someone’s identity or commit a collateral crime. Otherwise, possession of the Pentagon Papers would lead to the arrest of tens of thousands of citizens.

More importantly, most people do not download these documents but read them on line and there is no actionable crime in reading the material from any of the myriad of sites featuring the Wikileaks documents.

Cuomo is right about status of reporters being clear and protected. In Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the media is allowed to publish material that may have been obtained illegally and declared a law unconstitutional to the extent that it would make such media use unlawful. The Court reaffirmed the need to protect the first amendment interests and took particular note of the fact that the material was a matter of public interest:

“The Court holds that all of these statutes violate the First Amendment insofar as the illegally intercepted conversation touches upon a matter of “public concern,” an amorphous concept that the Court does not even attempt to define. But the Court’s decision diminishes, rather than enhances, the purposes of the First Amendment, thereby chilling the speech of the millions of Americans who rely upon electronic technology to communicate each day.”


...

[Gunny]

I agree there are legal means to change government, voting and getting involved in the system. I fail to understand how I'm oversimplifying the term 'armed insurrection' though.

We already have armed insurrection. The left and minorities have been using violence in mob settings for decades and escalated the violence at every turn. When is enough enough should be the question. Your comments suggest accept defeat or violence as the only choices.

I don't see self defense, nor defense of the principles this nation stands for as insurrection.

[Kathianne]

We already have armed insurrection. The left and minorities have been using violence in mob settings for decades and escalated the violence at every turn. When is enough enough should be the question. Your comments suggest accept defeat or violence as the only choices.

I don't see self defense, nor defense of the principles this nation stands for as insurrection.

Last first, I am not advocating anything, if I was it would be against those that are saying they will take to the streets, with arms, against having an election 'stolen.'

I may be missing something here, but insurrection in the sense of a response to election results, isn't quite the same as rioting or looting. It would be an attempt to change what has happened. What form it would take? I really don't know what they are speaking of, other than blowing more blowhard smoke.

[bullypulpit]

First off, my personal belief is that once the media is in the tank for the candidate, that alone is a way of 'rigging' the election. And here is yet another. I wonder what those folks think, those that whined at Trump's campaign for some of the things that happened during his campaign, some of the 'violent' things - now knowing that some of it was nothing more than a setup. I know what most of them think - nothing. :)

Here's another way it's rigged.

-----

Exclusive: O’Keefe Video Sting Exposes ‘Bird-Dogging’ — Democrats’ Effort to Incite Violence at Trump Rallies

Democrats have used trained provocateurs to instigate violence at Republican events nationwide throughout the 2016 election cycle, including at several Donald Trump rallies, using a tactic called “bird-dogging,” according to a new video investigation released Monday by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas.

The goal of “bird-dogging”: to create a sense of “anarchy” around Donald Trump that would undermine his political support. Often, the tactic uses the most vulnerable people — including the elderly and disabled — to maximize shock value.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

O’Keefe’s extensive video investigation reveals that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are involved in “bird-dogging” and other provocative tactics through a web of consultants led by Robert Creamer, a veteran Chicago activist and convicted felon who is thought to have planned Democrats’ political strategy during the push for Obamacare in 2009 and 2010.

Creamer is also the co-founder of Democracy Partners, a consulting group that, according to Project Veritas videos, apparently contracts directly with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, and that works with an array of super PACs and consultants to organize, film and publicize their provocations.

Rest here - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/17/exclusive-okeefe-video-sting-exposes-bird-dogging-democrats-effort-to-incite-violence-at-trump-rallies/

Yeah Jimmy...Breitbart, a real reliable news source that. But only at supporting the right wing paranoia Trump is whipping up. I would suggest you return to reality, but the chances of that happening are slim to none.

[Elessar]

Yeah Jimmy...Breitbart, a real reliable news source that. But only at supporting the right wing paranoia Trump is whipping up. I would suggest you return to reality, but the chances of that happening are slim to none.

You should crawl back under your rock. You won't listen to anyone at all.
Do you have a direct teat to the DNC, but only pop it out every 4 years?

[bullypulpit]

Trump is systematically undermining the system which has provided this country with a peaceful exchange of power for the better part of two centuries. He is inciting followers to violent action, couched in terms which provide a small measure of plausible deniability. He is inciting his followers to violence which, if it comes to pass, he must be held accountable for. He is fomenting armed rebellion with his baseless accusations and undermining the fabric of the Republic...and all because this narcissistic little prick can't stomach being beaten, and by a woman at that.

[bullypulpit]

Well, it IS being 'stolen', or at least attempting it thus far.

I don't think a few out there calling for violence represents the entirety of Trump supporters.

No Jimmy. The "plot" to "steal" the election exists only in the fever dreams of Trump and his slavish followers.Trump is systematically undermining the system which has provided this country with a peaceful exchange of power for the better part of two centuries. He is inciting followers to violent action, couched in terms which provide a small measure of plausible deniability. He is inciting his followers to violence which, if it comes to pass, he must be held accountable for. He is fomenting armed rebellion with his baseless accusations and undermining the fabric of the Republic...and all because this narcissistic little prick can't stomach being beaten, and by a woman at that.

[Bilgerat]

Trump is systematically undermining the system which has provided this country with a peaceful exchange of power for the better part of two centuries. He is inciting followers to violent action, couched in terms which provide a small measure of plausible deniability. He is inciting his followers to violence which, if it comes to pass, he must be held accountable for. He is fomenting armed rebellion with his baseless accusations and undermining the fabric of the Republic...and all because this narcissistic little prick can't stomach being beaten, and by a woman at that.


OR

Trump is systematically showing the rot that the system has come under. That the corrupt, establishment of both parties are controlling the process, denying the actual voters and deciding whom they want to assume the "mantle of power".

And now, "We the People" are actually coming to the realization of the corruption that has come to embody the political process.




http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-the-tree-of-liberty-must-be-refreshed-from-time-to-time-with-the-blood-of-patriots-and-tyrants-thomas-jefferson-94121.jpg

[gabosaurus]

You forgot all the illegal immigrants we are going to bus in to vote for Hillary. :rolleyes:

[Bilgerat]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9431&stc=1

[revelarts]

Question for ya Rev.
If it's done by machine, could God make the machines say His candidate won?

Frankly, God could make you and all the other Trump and Hillary supporters suddenly decide to vote for Gary Johnson, or someone at this point unknown.
no need to mess with machines.

[revelarts]

...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

...

That is some corrupt Skeazy low life crap right there. Clinton Mafia style politics.

And i have to apologize to the some of Trump people at those rallies.
They were being provoked by people trained and preped to get them riled up. My sincere apologizes to SOME of Trump's people.
I say some because I suspect that some... maybe the minority.... still don't have an excuse for their violence and ugliness.
And you ask me why I haven't said anything before. frankly I hadn't heard any details about this before.

Frankly from you and other Trump supporters all I've heard is that the stupid Democratic are out of control thugs (and worse names). and the violence is "worse with them and it's ALL their fault.
So will we hear any walk backs on all the knee jerk name calling since it seems it was all very rational, well planned, paid and scripted. Not just random "thugs" etc but organized mafia style campaign tactics. Well oiled and run by "the man" for Hillary and the DNC.


But The other thing that slows me from making a full apology to Trump and some of his supporters is that Trump Himself over and over again egged his supporters on into negative and violent reactions. the fact that lowlifes organized it and lowlife people got paid to provoke it is one thing but for Trump and some supporters to engage and enflame it more is another.

Trump fell into it with relish and encouraged his supporters to become violent.
February 1 in Iowa:
"If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell. I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise."

February 22 in Nevada:
"I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They'd be carried out on a stretcher, folks. It's true. … I'd like to punch him in the face, I'll tell you."

St. Louis
"protesters realize there are no consequences to protesting anymore"

St. Louis
Trump informs crowd he is currently fantasizing about doing something to protesters, but "won't say what's on my mind."

February 29 in Virginia:
"Get him out of here please. Get him out. Get him out. … Are you from Mexico? Are you from Mexico? Huh? Are you from Mexico?"

Fayetteville, North Carolina,
“See, in the good old days this doesn’t happen, ...because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, you know, they would not do it again so easily. But today they walk in and they put their hand up and they put the wrong finger in the air at everybody and they get away with murder because we’ve become weak, we’ve become weak.”

Oklahoma,
“You see, in the good old days, law enforcement acted a lot quicker than this, a lot quicker,” he said. “In the good old days, they’d rip him out of that seat so fast. But today, everybody’s politically correct. Our country’s going to hell with being politically correct.”

Las Vegas,
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya,” "good old days"

March 4 in Michigan:
"Get out of here. Get out. Out! … This is amazing. So much fun. I love it. I love it. We having a good time? USA, USA, USA! … All right, get him out. Try not to hurt him. If you do, I'll defend you in court. Don't worry about it. … We had four guys, they jumped on him, they were swinging and swinging. The next day, we got killed in the press — that we were too rough. Give me a break. You know? Right? We don't want to be too politically correct anymore. Right, folks?"

March 9 in North Carolina:
"We had some people, some rough guys like we have right in here. And they started punching back. It was a beautiful thing. I mean, they started punching back. … In the good old days, this doesn't happen because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, you know, they would not do it again so easily. But today, they walk in and they put their hand up and put the wrong finger in the air at everybody, and they get away with murder, because we've become weak."

March 11 in Missouri, hours before the Chicago rally:
"Part of the problem and part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore. Right? And they're being politically correct the way they take them out. So it takes a little bit longer. And honestly, protesters, they realize it — they realize that there are no consequences to protesting anymore. There used to be consequences. There are none anymore."

"These are not good people..." "these people contribute nothing..." "these people are destroying America.." "we're to soft on these people..


So Yeah, No clean hands here IMO. Both Trump and Clinton or scummy as far as i can tell.

SaveSave

[Gunny]

Last first, I am not advocating anything, if I was it would be against those that are saying they will take to the streets, with arms, against having an election 'stolen.'

I may be missing something here, but insurrection in the sense of a response to election results, isn't quite the same as rioting or looting. It would be an attempt to change what has happened. What form it would take? I really don't know what they are speaking of, other than blowing more blowhard smoke.

I see no difference. The means of force mean little. The fact the coercion exists at all is what matters. What you are missing is that the results of the last 2 elections and a Hillary win are leading to exactly that which you claim you don't want.

I won't accept a Hillary win. She's a criminal getting a pass for crimes no one else would. Why should anyone accept that? Due process? There is no due process/election in accordance with our principles when that standard is corrupted beyond recognition.

Good luck trying to pin a vet down to a black and white static answer; especially, those of us that are retired and/or rely on the government for bennies. Little clause we all know all about and most of you don't comes with our retirement papers: we are subject to recall to service until we die. We are STILL US military personnel. Most people won't touch the topic and vets least of all. We have more to lose. Like an automatic charge of treason the Hillary defense won't pass.

I have zero respect for the process as it is currently carried out. Not a lot more for those that hide behind a corrupt process as an excuse to do nothing.

[Kathianne]

I see no difference. The means of force mean little. The fact the coercion exists at all is what matters. What you are missing is that the results of the last 2 elections and a Hillary win are leading to exactly that which you claim you don't want.

I won't accept a Hillary win. She's a criminal getting a pass for crimes no one else would. Why should anyone accept that? Due process? There is no due process/election in accordance with our principles when that standard is corrupted beyond recognition.

Good luck trying to pin a vet down to a black and white static answer; especially, those of us that are retired and/or rely on the government for bennies. Little clause we all know all about and most of you don't comes with our retirement papers: we are subject to recall to service until we die. We are STILL US military personnel. Most people won't touch the topic and vets least of all. We have more to lose. Like an automatic charge of treason the Hillary defense won't pass.

I have zero respect for the process as it is currently carried out. Not a lot more for those that hide behind a corrupt process as an excuse to do nothing.

Gunny, good post! So what is it that people should do, if they believe the election was stolen in their opinion? You say 'no' to insurrection, so what legal recourse do you recommend after the fact?

[jimnyc]

Yeah Jimmy...Breitbart, a real reliable news source that. But only at supporting the right wing paranoia Trump is whipping up. I would suggest you return to reality, but the chances of that happening are slim to none.

Kill the story then - SPECIFICALLY what was a lie or wrong in the article? Was the video also invented with software?

Stick your head in the sand - but the video is the video. If you don't care, then so be it, at least admit it.

[Gunny]

Gunny, good post! So what is it that people should do, if they believe the election was stolen in their opinion? You say 'no' to insurrection, so what legal recourse do you recommend after the fact?

I don't know that there is an answer. The people that need to do something arre the ones that are doing nothing. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specific but you have a dynamic here that's a tried and true formula for the left while the right tries the same old thing hoping for a different result.

The right gets behind the latest patsy that has no chance of wining and the left stays mostly mum while the right destroys itself. Then, just as we see it playing out now, when it's down to two, the left and the media rip apart what remains of the right. Trump is a dream come true for the Dems. Andy they don't care who they vote for.

Solution? I don't see one under today's way of thinking. I see a revolution, one way or the other. The left keeps demanding and taking using the government as its muscle while more and more of the right are getting fed
up.

In regard to the above, there is NO doubt in my mind the system is "rigged". Why shouldn't the left play it? Been working like a charm andtoo many self-absorbed people on the right can't grasp the fact that ther is a time to play as a team to win. You have no rights if they don't exist because you gave them away.

[Kathianne]

I don't know that there is an answer. The people that need to do something arre the ones that are doing nothing. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specific but you have a dynamic here that's a tried and true formula for the left while the right tries the same old thing hoping for a different result.

The right gets behind the latest patsy that has no chance of wining and the left stays mostly mum while the right destroys itself. Then, just as we see it playing out now, when it's down to two, the left and the media rip apart what remains of the right. Trump is a dream come true for the Dems. Andy they don't care who they vote for.

Solution? I don't see one under today's way of thinking. I see a revolution, one way or the other. The left keeps demanding and taking using the government as its muscle while more and more of the right are getting fed
up.

In regard to the above, there is NO doubt in my mind the system is "rigged". Why shouldn't the left play it? Been working like a charm andtoo many self-absorbed people on the right can't grasp the fact that ther is a time to play as a team to win. You have no rights if they don't exist because you gave them away.


Well the last 2 elections and now this one in much larger numbers, seem to show that many that identified with 'the right' are abandoning them, either by staying home or choosing another candidate.

We can argue about what's causing this, but for now I choose to hope that those leaving-mostly joining the ranks of independents-choose to go a different way.

While any party needs to reach out to others in order to grow, the differences found within the Republican Party truly are divisive to the point that even those within that tent, find others traitors and other great adjectives. The problem has grown to the point that the Republican nominee is encouraging the destruction of those running for offices downticket on the same ticket.

Truth is, the Democrats actually had the defections to 'Independents' following Clinton. For the most part, these were folks voting for Republican and then splitting downticket between the candidates.

Those leaving the Republican Party should join with those folks, getting back to the idea of voting for the best person, not by party, but by positions.

[Gunny]

Well the last 2 elections and now this one in much larger numbers, seem to show that many that identified with 'the right' are abandoning them, either by staying home or choosing another candidate.

We can argue about what's causing this, but for now I choose to hope that those leaving-mostly joining the ranks of independents-choose to go a different way.

While any party needs to reach out to others in order to grow, the differences found within the Republican Party truly are divisive to the point that even those within that tent, find others traitors and other great adjectives. The problem has grown to the point that the Republican nominee is encouraging the destruction of those running for offices downticket on the same ticket.

Truth is, the Democrats actually had the defections to 'Independents' following Clinton. For the most part, these were folks voting for Republican and then splitting downticket between the candidates.

Those leaving the Republican Party should join with those folks, getting back to the idea of voting for the best person, not by party, but by positions.

This nation in the meantime is circling the drain in the hands of idiots. I don't think the losing the Supreme Court for the next 3-4 generations is worth anything you point out. You are right, the GOP is divisive. Dividing it more isn't helping a thing. Tiy can't clean a house you don't own.

[Kathianne]

This nation in the meantime is circling the drain in the hands of idiots. I don't think the losing the Supreme Court for the next 3-4 generations is worth anything you point out. You are right, the GOP is divisive. Dividing it more isn't helping a thing. Tiy can't clean a house you don't own.

At some point it needs to start. Can't think of a better time.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This nation in the meantime is circling the drain in the hands of idiots. I don't think the losing the Supreme Court for the next 3-4 generations is worth anything you point out. You are right, the GOP is divisive. Dividing it more isn't helping a thing. Tiy can't clean a house you don't own.
Well, one thing is a certainty, if one throws away their vote in some symbolic gesture --then by default they have helped to insure the hildabeast's win.
That reality may be denied but not defeated as a truth.
If hillary gets in , very likely the ship will sink and even if not that it will be so greatly refitted with left-side socialists and dem beaurocrats , as to be too far gone to ever right again--peacefully.
If they get by with this massive swindle and stealing--this nation is almost certainly going to fall because of it.
We have finally reached that breaking point IMHO..
Nobody bothered to raise the Titanic....AND IT DID NOT HAVE MILLIONS DEDICATED(BY GREED AND POWER-LUST) KEEPING IT DOWN!-- TYR

[Gunny]

At some point it needs to start. Can't think of a better time.

I can think of almost ANY better time. You stop the bleeding first. You can dress the wound all you want first and you just bleed out. And NOTHING will change a thing if people just go rogue when things don't go their way. This the 3rd election in a row with the same result for the same reason.

[Kathianne]

I can think of almost ANY better time. You stop the bleeding first. You can dress the wound all you want first and you just bleed out. And NOTHING will change a thing if people just go rogue when things don't go their way. This the 3rd election in a row with the same result for the same reason.

Yep, which is a very good indicator that it's time for the 'core' to do their thing and others to join with those that want to govern. Trump is just the epitome of what has gone before.

There is a core that really needs to have their say, I don't disagree with that. They need to be heard.

There are also many that just aren't into the blow it all up, whether from the right or left. The bottom line is that the Democrats lost many of theirs back at the end of the 90's, they became independents and many voted for GW. Now the bleeding from the 'right' isn't so much non-conservatives, but those who just don't agree with what has become dominant within the party.

It's not necessarily a break in all there is in common, as a joining of those in the vast middle-from those that did ID at some point as Democrat or Republican, but can no longer do so. They will have disagreements on issues, no doubt on that. The difference though with 'the middle' and the extremes of both parties, is they do want a return to compromise and are willing to fight, but give some/take some, and move on.

The extremes? Not so much.

[Kathianne]

Well, one thing is a certainty, if one throws away their vote in some symbolic gesture --then by default they have helped to insure the hildabeast's win.
That reality may be denied but not defeated as a truth.
If hillary gets in , very likely the ship will sink and even if not that it will be so greatly refitted with left-side socialists and dem beaurocrats , as to be too far gone to ever right again--peacefully.
If they get by with this massive swindle and stealing--this nation is almost certainly going to fall because of it.
We have finally reached that breaking point IMHO..
Nobody bothered to raise the Titanic....AND IT DID NOT HAVE MILLIONS DEDICATED(BY GREED AND POWER-LUST) KEEPING IT DOWN!-- TYR

Nah, those that voted with Trump in the primaries, those that saw this election as Hillary's due, they own it.

[jimnyc]

Nah, those that voted with Trump in the primaries, those that saw this election as Hillary's due, they own it.

And yet those of us that did so in the primaries - here we are still with Trump. He received record votes in the primaries. He has been getting enormous crowds wherever he goes. Regardless of everything that has happened in the past year, he is still within striking distance. I see ZERO reason to fault those who supported him. On the other hand, some will bitch and moan about just how horrible Hillary is as well, if not worse, and those abstaining or voting elsewhere WILL be taking votes away from Trump. Those numbers cannot be debated. Whether directly or indirectly those on the right that don't support their candidate, are helping place Hillary in office. I know you don't like to hear that, but it's a fact. If the opportunity is there to keep Hillary out of office, and some choose otherwise, then they own that. I'll gladly own supporting Trump. I don't want to own helping put Hillary in office.

[Kathianne]

And yet those of us that did so in the primaries - here we are still with Trump. He received record votes in the primaries. He has been getting enormous crowds wherever he goes. Regardless of everything that has happened in the past year, he is still within striking distance. I see ZERO reason to fault those who supported him. On the other hand, some will bitch and moan about just how horrible Hillary is as well, if not worse, and those abstaining or voting elsewhere WILL be taking votes away from Trump. Those numbers cannot be debated. Whether directly or indirectly those on the right that don't support their candidate, are helping place Hillary in office. I know you don't like to hear that, but it's a fact. If the opportunity is there to keep Hillary out of office, and some choose otherwise, then they own that. I'll gladly own supporting Trump. I don't want to own helping put Hillary in office.

and it's a 'fact' that those who voted for him in the primaries, in overwhelming numbers, put us here. Right on that.

Now the question for many, where to go from here. I loathe John Kerry, but if it were him in place of Hillary, I could vote for him. I know many liberals that could easily vote for Rubio or others over Hillary.

It was the parties as now constituted that led to where we are now. Folks on both side that want to stick it to half of the country.

[jimnyc]

I can think of almost ANY better time. You stop the bleeding first. You can dress the wound all you want first and you just bleed out. And NOTHING will change a thing if people just go rogue when things don't go their way. This the 3rd election in a row with the same result for the same reason.

Yups.

I had preferences 100% for sure in the primaries - but I was going to vote what is best to keep Hillary out of office, no matter who won the primaries. I don't think everyone sees the threat of what Hillary can do in office equally, with the SC and what not. And to avoid Trump - I'm betting not long after Hillary gets in office we'll see the first executive order in some manner against guns and/or ammo. Of course that's after the SC has been altered.

[jimnyc]

and it's a 'fact' that those who voted for him in the primaries, in overwhelming numbers, put us here. Right on that.

Now the question for many, where to go from here. I loathe John Kerry, but if it were him in place of Hillary, I could vote for him. I know many liberals that could easily vote for Rubio or others over Hillary.

It was the parties as now constituted that led to where we are now. Folks on both side that want to stick it to half of the country.

Ok, you go and vote for John Kerry.

Thanks for Hillary.

[Kathianne]

Ok, you go and vote for John Kerry.

Thanks for Hillary.

Hillary being unacceptable does not make Trump acceptable.

We're both going to vote the way we're going to vote, as is our right. I don't want to have this type of choice of unacceptables forever in the future. I will be looking for folks that want to get the country going in the right direction and it certainly isn't either of these fools.

[Black Diamond]

and it's a 'fact' that those who voted for him in the primaries, in overwhelming numbers, put us here. Right on that.

Now the question for many, where to go from here. I loathe John Kerry, but if it were him in place of Hillary, I could vote for him. I know many liberals that could easily vote for Rubio or others over Hillary.

It was the parties as now constituted that led to where we are now. Folks on both side that want to stick it to half of the country.
Well that was..

Enlightening.

[jimnyc]

I don't think I could ever vote for Kerry any more than I could for Hillary. Ok, maybe a little bit more. But he's a piece of crap too and I haven't forgotten. And now apparently he may be responsible for cutting off wikileaks? He's been better than Hillary, but that's not saying much.

[Kathianne]

Well that was..

Enlightening.

It was. The whole idea that one needs to vote for someone like Trump, just because he ran as a Republican, is a joke. He's no 'conservative' and his informed supporters know it. The problem is, there is no alternative after the core got Trump as the nominee.

The idea that he ran a 'phenomenal campaign' is a joke. The media grabbed onto the joke and ran with it, name recognition and 'hating on the Republicans' did the rest. Then the media went for his throat. Now the supporters are calling it 'rigged' when the rigging was all done during the primaries. Again, many of the supporters know it, just keep up on the Hillary mantra. Hope that if he is elected, he keeps some of his promises or gets impeached and Pence steps in.

It's no way to run a country.

BTW, many of those that are voting for Hillary share the same hope of impeachment.

[Black Diamond]

I wonder if Trump would have loaded Iran's nuclear rifle the way Kerry did.

[Kathianne]

I wonder if Trump would have loaded Iran's nuclear rifle the way Kerry did.

Right. He should have stood up to Obama, that's what every SOS should do. :rolleyes: Actually, I'd love to see that, whether on the right or left, when the President in question is just very bad-which Obama is.

[Black Diamond]

I don't think I could ever vote for Kerry any more than I could for Hillary. Ok, maybe a little bit more. But he's a piece of crap too and I haven't forgotten. And now apparently he may be responsible for cutting off wikileaks? He's been better than Hillary, but that's not saying much.

He's farther left than Hillary, but probably not as crooked. I would say, politically, he's as far left as Obama minus the racial horseshit.
Maybe you could say his Iraq vote makes him a bit right of Obama?

[Black Diamond]

Right. He should have stood up to Obama, that's what every SOS should do. :rolleyes: Actually, I'd love to see that, whether on the right or left, when the President in question is just very bad-which Obama is.
I almost said he helped Obama do it or they did it together. But Kerry was the one there in person..

[Black Diamond]

Right. He should have stood up to Obama, that's what every SOS should do. :rolleyes: Actually, I'd love to see that, whether on the right or left, when the President in question is just very bad-which Obama is.

Profiles in courage?

It's amazing no one has stood up to him. World leaders don't seem to respect him. Why should anyone here? I know there's"respecting the office" but it's still amazing

[Kathianne]

I used Kerry as an example, you're free to run with it however you like. My point however was how to avoid such a choice as we face this time. Kerry was and would be not my choice, unless he was running against a Trump or someone equally as bad-whom we've yet to meet as a Republican.

We all agree that previous elections were moving more and more towards holding your nose and voting. I can't disagree, though I did like GW a lot, I didn't have a huge problem with McCain or Romney. While they certainly weren't my ideal candidates, I didn't have problems voting for either. I've disagreed with McCain on many issues, especially Palin. I think Romney just ran an awful campaign, I think he really would have been great, in hindsight.

[hjmick]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9yZqsDUbKI

[revelarts]

I used Kerry as an example, you're free to run with it however you like. My point however was how to avoid such a choice as we face this time. Kerry was and would be not my choice, unless he was running against a Trump or someone equally as bad-whom we've yet to meet as a Republican.

We all agree that previous elections were moving more and more towards holding your nose and voting. I can't disagree, though I did like GW a lot, I didn't have a huge problem with McCain or Romney. While they certainly weren't my ideal candidates, I didn't have problems voting for either. I've disagreed with McCain on many issues, especially Palin. I think Romney just ran an awful campaign, I think he really would have been great, in hindsight.

Kerry Is definitely better than Hillary. His trail of corruption and general scumminess is FAR less than the Clintons.
But he's a fully onboard with the leftist globalist hawkish corporate agendas as Hillary. maybe more so. He's a real player. notice how he's the left establishment's go to guy when they need a fill in. Secretary of state, Presidential candidate, and back during the Iran/Contra hearings he was the head of the Drug portion of that investigation, which somehow got very little TV coverage at the time. MSM on the JOB ..again.... He managed and downplayed the drug smuggling and money handling by federal and state (including Arkansas) gov't players. He gets advise from the war criminal Henry Kissinger on a regular basis.

So yeah he's more of the same at this point.
I couldn't vote for him either ...even against Trump.... but he would be 5 times better than Hillary.
Sanders would have be better than Hillary. He would have beaten Trump without a problem... If Hillary hadn't fixed the election 6 ways to sunday.

[Elessar]

Gunny, good post! So what is it that people should do, if they believe the election was stolen in their opinion? You say 'no' to insurrection, so what legal recourse do you recommend after the fact?

You are not going to see Republicans, in mass, take to the streets in armed insurrection. That is a liberal tactic.

[Bilgerat]

You are not going to see Republicans, in mass, take to the streets in armed insurrection. That is a liberal tactic.


Damn Skippy!

[Elessar]

This nation in the meantime is circling the drain in the hands of idiots. I don't think the losing the Supreme Court for the next 3-4 generations is worth anything you point out. You are right, the GOP is divisive. Dividing it more isn't helping a thing. Tiy can't clean a house you don't own.

Supreme Court is our future.

Voting for Johnson is not. He hasn't an ice cube chance on a BBQ Grill.
Wasted vote. Let crooked Hillary in!