US Politics Thread

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
sputniknews.com
Clinton Foundation Conduit for Tyrants ‘Unequalled in History’ - Official
Sputnik
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The Clinton Foundation is a service offering corruption and slush funds for the use of tyrants and despots around the world on a scale never before seen in history, former Wall Street hedge fund manager and financial analyst Mitch Feierstein told Sputnik.

"The Clinton Foundation is an international illegal slush fund for despots and dictators used to sell favors and gain access to Washington, Feierstein, author of "Planet Ponzi" and a hedge fund manager who has spent 37 years working in the financial markets in London, New York and Tokyo, said.

"It is a cover up unequalled in history and none of the US media wants to cover it," he added.

Feierstein said younger US voters remained ignorant of the decades of earlier documented scandals that had plagued former President Bill Clinton and his wife, current Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, throughout their careers.

"Younger voters do not know the Clintons’ track record or their 30 years of criminality; which explains the push to get out the millennial vote," Feierstein said.

Clinton enjoyed the powerful support of the US financial leadership because of her willingness to do whatever they wanted, Feierstein stated.

"Wall Street backs Hillary Clinton because Wall Street wants ‘certainty’ or a ‘rigged game’. In our lifetime, no other politicians (other than Clinton Incorporated) have made pay-to-play available. Hillary Clinton has a career track record of doing whatever the banks pay her to do," he said.

Feierstein pointed out the WikiLeaks revelations of the texts of speeches Clinton had secretly given to top New York bankers exposed her dependence on them.

"How can anyone believe that Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $250,000 for a speech and expected nothing in return?" he asked.

Feierstein noted that Clinton also benefited from the support not just of moguls controlling the main broadcast and print media outlets in the United States, but also from the commitment of popular satirical entertainers to her.

"Most Americans regard Saturday Night Live, Jimmy Fallon, John Oliver, Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert and Trevor Noah as legitimate news sources rather than obvious propaganda bullhorns they are," Feierstein explained.

Clinton, working closely with her husband, expressed the terminal corruption of the US political system and its disregard for the wishes and needs of the American public, Feierstein insisted.

"Hillary and Bill are terminal forms of cancer, dredged out of Washington's cesspool of corruption. While [Republican presidential nominee Donald] Trump may not be perfect, he's a better option than terminal cancer," Feierstein added.

The United States remained deep in a structural economic crisis and claims of economic recovery under President Barack Obama were just empty propaganda without any truth or substance, Feierstein further stated.

"Obama has lied, again, to America about a fake economic recovery during his eight years in office. Obama’s claims of 14 million jobs created are simply untrue. There are millions of ‘bread winner’ jobs that will never came back," he said.

The low level of labor participation in the US work force has not been as bad since 1977 when President Jimmy Carter was in the White House, Feierstein recalled.

After eight years of Obama’s presidency, Wall Street remained untouchable and not a single financial executive had ever been tried or convicted for their role in causing the 2008 financial meltdown, the worst since the 1929-32 Wall Street Crash and Great Depression, Feierstein pointed out.

"Wall Street remains above the law. Zero bankers went to jail for their role in the 2008 financial crisis. My book ‘Planet Ponzi’ identifies the need for transparency and accountability — we do not have either in Wall Street," he said.

The US financial structure remained a ‘rigged’ regulatory system functioning freely within Washington’s partisan dysfunctional pay-to-play swamp, Feierstein explained.

Obama has repeatedly said he has reduced the exercise of unaccountable presidential power by reducing his use of executive orders issued from the White House, but this was just another falsehood, Feierstein observed.

"Obama’s claim that he has cut down the number of executive orders being issued is yet another material misstatement because he never mentions his Presidential memoranda that do not require the same reporting," he said.

Presidential executive decisions include not only the formal executive orders, but also executive memoranda, Feierstein noted.

"It is likely that Obama has issued more of these than all the 43 presidents who preceded him combined," he added.

The US corporate mainstream media is trying hard to protect Hillary Clinton from the exposures of her many scandals involving claims of corruption and failed policies, Feierstein remarked.

"We have never witnessed this extent of media bias in our lifetime," he said.

It was another objective of Team Clinton to conflate issues in peoples’ minds such as undermining the Benghazi hearings into the murder of US Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and his guards while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, Feierstein commented.

Clinton’s record of public service spanning more than three decade s had been consistently filled with outrageous scandals, mistakes and claims of corruption that had never been properly probed, Feierstein insisted.

"Hillary Clinton’s 30-year resume in Washington (and Arkansas) scandals, bungles and corruption allegations that were never adequately investigated: The list is almost too long to count," he said.

Those scandals included Whitewater, File-Gate, the death of Vince Foster, Sniper-Gate, the Pork Bellies scandal, pay-for-play in the State Department, the use of private server for official business, erased official emails, the Benghazi controversy and the way in which most prosecutions over these issues were avoided, Feierstein continued.

"It just doesn’t stop," he stated.

Obama and Hillary Clinton approved a record $1.4 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia while she was secretary of state, Feierstein went on.

"At the same time Hillary and the Clinton Foundation were filling their pockets with Saudi Arabia’s ‘contributions.’ Saudi Arabia is her biggest contributor and it is a country that throws homosexuals off buildings, where women and minorities have no rights," Feierstein said.

Clitnon’s four year record as secretary of state under Obama should have disqualified her from running as a presidential candidate, Feierstain maintained.

"A secretary of state that sells favors to global despots and dictators with impunity is not acceptable, it’s criminal. In a country with 'a rule of law' that person should be disqualified from running for president and prosecuted," he said.

The Clintons had proven highly successful for decades in blunting or diverting legitimate criticisms and preventing any serious scrutiny of their personal financial dealings, Feierstein demonstrated.

"The Clinton playbook, for the past 30 years, for dealing criticisms and exposure of their scandals, has largely remained the same; Bill and Hillary or their proxies accuse their accusers of the very things they themselves are guilty of but do it louder and in a more arrogant manner," he described the Clintons’ approach.

Feierstein described this technique to avoid accountability and prosecution a "Four Ds" strategy.

"I call this Clinton scheme the four Ds — Divert, Deflect, Deceive and Deny. Accuse your accuser of exactly what you are doing," he said.

Hillary Clinton stated during the third presidential debate with Donald Trump on October 20 that everything she did as secretary of state was in furtherance of American interests.

She also noted then that she is proud of the work of the Clinton Foundation and characterized the organization as a world renowned charity with highest ratings given by foundation watchdogs. She pointed out that the Foundation has enabled, among other pursuits, treatment for 11 million people infected with HIV/AIDS.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
Colour me optimistic, but I'm starting to think this Comey thing just might be the best thing to happen to HRC. It's entirely possible that complacency might have hampered turnout for HRC before. But now the Democratic base is energised, and any Clinton supporters who thought this thing was in the bag are too freaked about a last minute vote not to go out. Ironically, the opposite effect might be in play for some Trump supporters. Let's see. I feel a lot more optimistic than I did a few days ago. Even if I'll be worrying about Michigan and Pennsylvania until I hear the results. Got a sneaky feeling she'll pinch Florida and North Carolina
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moxie

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
This is my big hope. Wives going into the polling booth will hopefully pick HRC despite pretending to be a Trump supporter in front of their husbands
We haven't totally reverted to the 1950s yet. LOL. I actually think there are men, too, who will say in their inner circles that they're voting Trump, but won't do it. A lot of party Republicans are more for the status quo than Trump, and will vote Hillary because they think a Trump win will be the death knell of the party. Several have said as much.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
^I hear you. But I've heard stories of people in Trump land, particularly wives, who've been quietly supporting HRC, but don't want the hassle of fighting with their spouses. Just hoping it's a "Big League" phenomenon :)

We should probably get @britbox to set up the streaming thread for election night. I"m as excited about it as I would be for the Wimbledon final!
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
^I hear you. But I've heard stories of people in Trump land, particularly wives, who've been quietly supporting HRC, but don't want the hassle of fighting with their spouses. Just hoping it's a "Big League" phenomenon :)

We should probably get @britbox to set up the streaming thread for election night. I"m as excited about it as I would be for the Wimbledon final!
It could be so. There are some very committed women to the Trump thing, (inexplicable to me, #againsttheirowninterests,) but the smart money says that if women turn out in big numbers, Hillary wins. Likewise, the minority vote. I'll be observing the evening with friends who regularly host political events. But I'll try to post, if we should go live streaming. I wish I could be as "excited" as you. I'm guardedly confident that Clinton will win, but, like most of the US, am in low-grade constant anxiety-mode. This has really been an enervating, overly-long contest, which has gone to our worst, most-base inclinations. We all want it over, and no one on the losing side is going to be anything but heartbroken. I look to a rather long week.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
sputniknews.com
Clinton Foundation Conduit for Tyrants ‘Unequalled in History’ - Official
Sputnik doesn't like Hillary Clinton? Color me shocked. Conduit for tyrants? What about Trumps ties and obligations to Russia, which are at least as loudly implied as spurious claims against Clinton.

Teddy, you are a woman who lives in the US. I would like to know not what you don't like about Clinton, but what you actually see as value for this country in a Donald Trump presidency. Clinton has a resume that puts to shame most who've run for the office in many, many decades. She's up against the least qualified candidate that has ever been put forward. She has been under many investigations most of her political life, which have resulted in no sanctions against her, just endless mud thrown, which too many buy into, and do not take on board the political agenda against her.

Trump, apart from being the anti-status quo candidate, has no chops in government, no credibility in his policies, which have either been all over the map, or are not delineated. Except those that are, which are racist, xenophobic, exclusionary and include degrading the 1st Amendment...the insidious mark of an autocrat. He calls women pigs, slobs and fat-shames them, feels entitled to grab their pussies, because he's famous, and trades-in wives like cars. He calls Mexicans rapists...though allows how a few of them might be nice. Thinks that all African-Americans in the US live in squalid conditions, that they live in fear, and are the victims of the Democrats' racism. That's rich, especially when his dog-whistling at his supporters likely just resulted in a black church being burned in Mississippi...a throw-back to the early 1960s. Not to mention that he hasn't disavowed the KKK or David Duke, who he pretended not to even know, though he'd said years back that he was a disgrace. In fact, the white supremacists, the KKK or any of that extremist bilge water had been long-irrelevant in US politics until this cycle. The KKK newspaper endorses Trump, and precious few other papers have. Many long-standing conservative papers have urged voters to come out for Clinton. I'd like to hear you make a case FOR Trump, not just against Clinton.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
The media collusion is all in this mess. (Not from some random Russian cite):

http://www.newsweek.com/blame-rise-trump-failure-tv-news-516162

And if this isn't the most cynical thing you've ever heard:

'As ratings soared, CBS CEO Les Moonves said of Trump’s dominance in the election coverage, “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.… The money’s rolling in and this is fun.”'
 

teddytennisfan

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2015
Messages
3,166
Reactions
498
Points
113
some of you here are so funny -- you keep talking amonst yourselves about WONDERFUL , OH POOR SAINTLY HILLARY BEING SO OPPRESSED...who just happens to have behindher the WAR MAKERS...and she IS lusting for war against russia.

well -- to cut to the chase --

her ''promised" 'no fly zone over syria" where the USA has NO BUSINESS being in -- and is ILLEGAL in its presence there (whole world knows this, except some of you) trying to PROTECT its TERRORISTS which RUSSIA IS legally allowed to DESTROY to keep syria from falling into their hands --


UNDERSTAND THAT IF that is what Hillary ''promises" -- because as she says "russia and china will pay a price" (for what? for not ASKING THE USA'S permission? ofcourse -- that's THEIR sin) --

this video below should tell you exactly what is the END result...YOUR usa IS GOING TO BE DESTROYED.

for your own sake moxie -- please watch it the USA HAS NO DEFENSE SYSTEM CAPABLE of taking down a russian RESPONSE should hillary TRIGGER a war , by accident or design -- that initiates an initial loss in russia - be it a small village blown up, or just a few russian planes hit and traceable to the USA...

AND THE MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM OF THE USA -- in NATO directed at russia -- the russians NEVER will tolerate to be allowed to enter russian airspace...
please view this..for your own good...

you REALLY have no idea -- that if provoked -- which IS what the USA is trying to do encircling russia -- and it leads to HARM to the russian territory itself --

your usa IS WIPED OFF the face of the map. you are LUCKY they have NOT been aggressive towards. the way your ''candidate" hillary TELLS YOU -- when it is SHE and her milkitary industrial complex behind her that is ITCHING for a hot war with russia because russia WILL NOT KNEEL to american dictates.

UNDERSTAND THIS, PLEASE.

you just do not understand that the LAST thing russians want is WAR -- THEY KNOW the misery of it FAR MORE than any of you americans ...but what they will NOT permit is for their country to ''ordered" to behave the way americans THINK they can...and they ARE ready - more than you can ever imagine..and in a REAL shooting wra? YOU WILL LOSE.
putin and russia have REPEATEDLY appealed to americans

you people directly even in his guest editorials in NY TIMES --

''PLEASE DESIST IN TRYING TO MAKE AN ENEMY OF RUSSIA".

BUT YOUR HILLARY and leaders and YOU never listen...to his appeals that it is YOU AND NATO that are encirclikng their country REMINDING THEM of HITLER preparing his invasion that COST the russians 20 million of their peole before retaliating and destroying HITLER...

therefore -- the russians clearly have NOW decided -- the usa WILL NOT LISTEN -- and so have decided on a WAR DEFENSE FOOTING --

THIS included recently preparing their citizenry -- in a 40 million adult person one week training -- to ensure response to EVERY kind of contingency -- and with the scenario of TOTAL war ..

they WILL have a great number dead if so -- but also a great number surviving AND with much room to recover in siberia etc...for russia is 3 times the size of the USA...and the USA can NOT cover all of russia in an attack EVEN with a surpriose attack which IS NOT going to GO BEYOND a few hits -- IF at that due to russia's unbelievable defense system that is DECADES ahead of the USA'S.

you however -- should HILLARY PROVIKE AND TRIGGER THIS?

and her ''NO FLY ZONE OVER SYRIA" - TO THE RUSSIANS QUALIFY as a trigger once it kills even a few russian soldiers DUE to american actions?

YOUR COUNTRY -- all of it -- ceases to exist.

this what i fear for you...because you REALLY do not understand what kiND OF HORROR YOUR HILLARY and those behind her are leading you into...
==========================

watch
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
^Well you've been drinking the Putin koolaid too long teddy. There is a fairly strong case to be made that the accelerated efforts to secure Assad's position in Syria before a new (and the Russians are pretty much resigned to dealing with President Clinton) US President is inaugurated tells you all you need to know about Russia's own perception of its capability. The fact they are trying to do as much as possible now before a more robust American response is a clear sign that they can't contest an aggressively minded superpower. This is the problem with absorbing propaganda without exercising critical thinking.
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,402
Reactions
6,205
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
^ I wouldn't go that far Federberg. We've seen superpowers unravel in the quagmire of war enough times to know the opposite. The US in Vietnam, The Russians in Afghanistan. No sane person should even be dreaming of a conflict between the US and Russia. That's why the thought of Clinton in power is hugely concerning.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
^ I wouldn't go that far Federberg. We've seen superpowers unravel in the quagmire of war enough times to know the opposite. The US in Vietnam, The Russians in Afghanistan. No sane person should even be dreaming of a conflict between the US and Russia. That's why the thought of Clinton in power is hugely concerning.
Clinton is not anti-Russia. But do you prefer a Trump, who seems specifically to be in bed with the Russians, financially and philosophically? The notion that Hillary is lusting for war against anyone is an internet/Trump construct. She hasn't always made the most dovish choices, but that is often the lot for women in politics. However, no matter what anyone says, she's not solely or even largely responsible for any single act of war or aggression by the US.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
^ I wouldn't go that far Federberg. We've seen superpowers unravel in the quagmire of war enough times to know the opposite. The US in Vietnam, The Russians in Afghanistan. No sane person should even be dreaming of a conflict between the US and Russia. That's why the thought of Clinton in power is hugely concerning.

I'm not sure you've properly understood what I'm saying. I am not suggesting a Clinton government will militarily intervene in Syria. They are far more likely to engage the Russians assertively, which forces Russia to bank as many credits on its side of future negotiations. There's a little bit too much hysteria everywhere these days! Realpolitik is still in play in the dialogue between Russia and the US. I very much doubt that Syria is that critical to Russian thinking, very likely they'll concede a lot there to get more elsewhere, particularly Ukraine
 

Tennis Fan

Major Winner
Joined
Dec 14, 2013
Messages
1,171
Reactions
429
Points
83
Teddy: Your over-enthusiastic posting again makes it unreadable, (or I can't be bothered, because you are such an extremist,) but you are wrong about some of the things I could pick out: Donna Brazile was not HRC's campaign manager, she was the head of the DNC. Hillary is NOT directly responsible for the deaths of 4 people in Bengazi; that's blaming the candidate where there was a more disbursed fault, (and not to mention that 4 deaths pales in comparison to the Bush-led Iraq war.)

If you want to talk about double-standards, why is Comey making a case of new emails with only the vaguest of innuendo, and not making anything of the Manafort case, which is a pending investigation of Trump's former campaign manager's ties to Russia?

As to your question: I've never believed that Hillary would be materially aided by being fed questions: The questions that might be asked are not that mysterious, and she's always beyond prepared. Trump complains about it because he doesn't prepare well, doesn't have a great (or even passable) grasp of most issues, and he loses concentration and patience about 30 minutes into any debate. If Brazile crossed a line, I seriously doubt that it aided Clinton materially. She does great on her own.

Great post, Moxie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moxie

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
Well! Well! Well! So another letter. Nothing to see there folks says Comey. But people are still going to believe what they want to believe. It's rather ironic, that HRC is the most extremely vetted politician in history. And nothing is ever found against her. Anyone without bias would accept that on it's face, but that's not the world we live in. The tin hats will have their say as usual...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennis Fan

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
I think the news that basically all the emails were duplicates (as many suspected) and there is nothing new in there will make some difference in swing states that don't have early voting, like NH, and where people were saying they were swayed by the notion that there was something new against Clinton. There isn't, and that should free some up to vote for her. But it doesn't change the fact that slinging feces like crazed chimps doesn't leave stains. What Comey did by writing that letter is beyond protocol and precedent, which demands that nothing be released within 60 days of an election, (much less 11 days.) On top of that, former NY mayor Giuliani came out on Fox News 2 days (10/26) before the letter came out (10/28) to say a bomb-shell was about to be released on the Clinton campaign. How did he know that? Was he just posturing, and then got lucky? Since he worked for the Justice Dept. as an AG for NY, it's hard to believe that something didn't get leaked to him, if not the Trump campaign. If that is so, people should definitely go down for that.

Thankfully, the polls are looking better for Hillary this weekend, even before this news.
 

Ricardo

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
2,674
Reactions
646
Points
113
protocols and procedures, funny you mention it on the back of the email scandal. it's there when you need it for argument and non-existent when it's against your idol. Cherry-picking much?

same as always, typical Clinton fan.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reactions
14,662
Points
113
protocols and procedures, funny you mention it on the back of the email scandal. it's there when you need it for argument and non-existent when it's against your idol. Cherry-picking much?

same as always, typical Clinton fan.
As if there was a real protocol for emails and Secretaries of State, since Powell didn't follow it, either. But rather than nit-pick, Ricardo, since you've decided to drop in, you voting for Trump? I'd be interested to hear your take on him, and his fitness for the job.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
good strategy by HRC. Nothing good will come from her talking directly about the emails. Make your positive case to the electorate and close the deal
 

Ricardo

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
2,674
Reactions
646
Points
113
As if there was a real protocol for emails and Secretaries of State, since Powell didn't follow it, either. But rather than nit-pick, Ricardo, since you've decided to drop in, you voting for Trump? I'd be interested to hear your take on him, and his fitness for the job.

I would never consider Trump, i would've thought....if there wasn't another worse candidate. But you've already made up your mind that any criticism one may have for Clinton is 'nit pick', there is no point going into too much detailed discussion with you. Do i think he is fit for the job? stating the obvious, he is firstly unproven and he is a risk. But as everyone can see, just about every media has chipped in on how bad Trump can be if he gets elected, they pretty much mapped out the worst scenario....and this kind of one-sided favouritism i've never seen or heard of before, perhaps only in communist countries. Maybe i am wrong, but a lot of voters might be unimpressed by such one-sided beat up of a candidate and maybe they think the Clinton campaign is behind this pulling all the strings.

It may impact Clinton negatively, my gut feeling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: britbox

Ricardo

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
2,674
Reactions
646
Points
113
good strategy by HRC. Nothing good will come from her talking directly about the emails. Make your positive case to the electorate and close the deal

Naive, you think people are stupid? dodging the real issue, same old...i think people see it from miles away. You can't get away with it these days; you made mistakes in the past and you want to just sugar-coat them all and move on as if nothing happened?

if only life was so simple, good for you to be simplistic.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
mrzz World Affairs 2449
T World Affairs 13
britbox World Affairs 82
britbox World Affairs 1004
britbox World Affairs 46