The American (USA) 2016 presidential elections thread?

[Woodman]

what does it mean when the news of a billionaire heiress has to post 100 million dollars in bond and who is a member of the Clinton Global initiative skips the fabricated news cycle?

https://www.healthnutnews.com/rothsc...ex-slave-ring/

And when there's this recent executive order.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...se-corruption/

You have any clues as to what this is?

https://goo.gl/images/hMcNuz

Why the fuck would I click on your gay porn links?

[Viking01]

Lets see what your Link says its a bad thing for a Leader of a country to address the US congress
Okay
Indias PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4DEQFII7_s

Japans PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAsaOKamY3E

Nelson Mandela SA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0xtQ9Cw25U

UK prime Minister
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYiOvW0IS0s

Or the French
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqUc1h7bZQ4

Maybe you should actually check what you post for accuracy before you post it.
The US preseident does not have a say in what other diplomats say to congress.
US congress decides who speaks before it. it has OPENLY stated they would not accept Putin addressing congress.


Noam Chomsky normally fairly astute but i would say hes been misrepresented in that excert
For instance this is what he said about Trump

1. Netanyahu Speech
Think that the important part in the first portion of text you presented was not
that various leaders have spoken to the US Congress, but that in this specific
case:

-Netanyahu went straight to the US Congress (Republican controlled) without
informing the US President (Democrat)
-Netanyahu used the platform to try and undermine Obama on the subject of Iran
(and a then-future agreement with Iran on its nuclear program)

A pity that you didn't (i) include the YouTube clip for the Netanyahu speech
to Congress 2015, or (ii) give a quick summary of the speeches you did list
(e.g. their general thrust; did they contain any contentious topics that might
have embarrassed the ruling US party ?).

Here's a scenario for you:

What if the US happened to "strongly support the Palestinian cause", and a US
President wished to speak in Israel on (say) "the humanitarian situation in Gaza"
or "new settlements continuing to be being constructed on Arab land within the
West Bank") ?

Do you think that a US president would get an opportunity to talk about those
topics in front of the Knesset ?

2. Noam Chomsky
Chomsky is a very knowledgeable commentator on world politics, but he is only
one of many. And his opinion is not necessarily the be-all and end-all on any
particular subject.

You're quite right in that (in respect to 911) he is not a qualified engineer,
so would not be in a position to comment knowledgeably on likelihood that
the Twin Towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition.

Which is quite a separate topic to "who might have instigated and performed
such an act, and why".

Please, don't try and tell me that the buildings came down because of airliners
colliding with them and subsequent fire.

Because the extent to which such buildings were over-engineered (5x), the lack
of an aircraft in the case of WTC7, plus the buildings' unimpeded "free-fall collapse"
make a lie to that story.

[husaberg]

1. Netanyahu Speech
Think that the important part in the first portion of text you presented was not
that various leaders have spoken to the US Congress, but that in this specific
case:

The fact the Israeli leader spoke to congreess was in what i quoted as being an extraordinary event it was not.

-Netanyahu went straight to the US Congress (Republican controlled) without
informing the US President (Democrat)
-Netanyahu used the platform to try and undermine Obama on the subject of Iran
(and a then-future agreement with Iran on its nuclear program)

The leader of any country if invited to speak to congress is allowed to say what ever thet they like they do not have to gain the US presidents approvial
If you think they do you are an idiot.

A pity that you didn't (i) include the YouTube clip for the Netanyahu speech
to Congress 2015, or (ii) give a quick summary of the speeches you did list
(e.g. their general thrust; did they contain any contentious topics that might
have embarrassed the ruling US party ?).

Why the US congress invited him to speak the US president did not nor does the leader of any country in the world have to have their speech topic or content vetted by the US president nor do they try to.
Do you think a leader needs to ask the US presidents approval for what words he says before US congress.

Here's a scenario for you:

What if the US happened to "strongly support the Palestinian cause", and a US
President wished to speak in Israel on (say) "the humanitarian situation in Gaza"
or "new settlements continuing to be being constructed on Arab land within the
West Bank") ?

The US president can say what ever he likes in Israel or Russia or in NZ

Do you think that a US president would get an opportunity to talk about those
topics in front of the Knesset ?

He would have to be invited to first and if he was he would be able to say what ever he liked its a democracy

Noam Chomsky
Chomsky is a very knowledgeable commentator on world politics, but he is only
one of many. And his opinion is not necessarily the be-all and end-all on any
particular subject.

I never said he was in fact i said something rather different

Noam Chomsky normally fairly astute but i would say hes been misrepresented in that excert

You're quite right in that (in respect to 911) he is not a qualified engineer,
so would not be in a position to comment knowledgeably on likelihood that
the Twin Towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition.

I never said he was i never questioned him or his opinion at all he even mentioned he wasn't an engineer.
But note the people that investigated and reached the conclusions of the WTC building collapses were.
But that will not suit your conspiracy theory will it.........

is quite a separate topic to "who might have instigated and performed
such an act, and why".

See above

, don't try and tell me that the buildings came down because of airliners
colliding with them and subsequent fire.

AS you don't read well i doubt if i told you anything you would understand it.

the extent to which such buildings were over-engineered (5x), the lack
of an aircraft in the case of WTC7, plus the buildings' unimpeded "free-fall collapse"
make a lie to that story.

Thats your opinion one which is not backed by the people that investigated it or who had all the evidence to assess.
#Note i never said anything about 911 Noam did.

[oldrider]

What If Everything We’ve Been Told About Recent History Is a Lie? https://russia-insider.com/en/histor...medium=twitter Really?

[yokel]

The Republicans spent years investigating Hillary and came up blank. Either 'cause they were stupid, or there was nothing to find, or more probably both.

The word treason is bandied about quite a lot but mostly with regard to Trump. Especially after his craven performance at Helsinki. It's a hard sell. The US legal definition of treason is quite tight. Basically there needs to be a war on.

The UK and the USA do 'collude', so to do Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. It's called "Five Eyes".

Heads may indeed roll but probably not the ones you have in mind. Like f'rinstance Trump's former campaign manager who goes on trial in less than seven hours from now.

Onward and upward.

Enjoy your show trial that has little to do with the Russian collusion delusion conspiracy theory.

[pritch]

Enjoy your show trial that has little to do with the Russian collusion delusion conspiracy theory.

There's nothing new in that. Unusually though for Fox and Friends it's almost factual. Almost. To accept that as fact you have to accept that the clocks all stopped eight years ago and nothing happened since.

Anyhoo yer a bit slow, we already mentioned that this trial is about applying pressure to Manafort. This trial is about tax evasion and money laundering and the next trial across the river in a few weeks is about breaching the FARA act. That's the bit about acting as an agent for a foreign country. Then there's the part about interfering with witnesses.

Keep watching Fox and Friends though, it's OK as long as you don't actually expect to learn anything.

[yokel]

There's nothing new in that. Unusually though for Fox and Friends it's almost factual. Almost. To accept that as fact you have to accept that the clocks all stopped eight years ago and nothing happened since.

Anyhoo yer a bit slow, we already mentioned that this trial is about applying pressure to Manafort. This trial is about tax evasion and money laundering and the next trial across the river in a few weeks is about breaching the FARA act. That's the bit about acting as an agent for a foreign country. Then there's the part about interfering with witnesses.

Keep watching Fox and Friends though, it's OK as long as you don't actually expect to learn anything.

I couldn't care less what those three Fox Muppets sitting on the couch have to say.

Only talking head on the idiot box I don't mind listen to is Tucker Cralson.

Down she goes.......

[yokel]

Hahaha.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/america...s-florida-tour

Check out @aaron_borgan’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/aaron_borgan/sta...956323840?s=09

https://qanon.pub/

[oldrider]

Trump's long time history with the banksters. (19 min clip) Adage:- "He who pays the piper calls the tune" - how are we (the world at large) enjoying the concert so far?

[oldrider]

So how is the USA doing today? - this guy is not happy with it's political direction - (apparently) - have a listen why he is not a happy chappy.

[oldrider]

US Military Aid to Israel Set to Exceed $3.8B, or $23,000 Per Year for Every Jewish Family Living in Israel https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-mil...israel/246996/ For "TEN" years?

[TheDemonLord]

Looks like Peter Strzok has been given the big heave-ho.

It's funny that he claims no bias - and yet in one of his Txt messages to his co-workers in regards to Trump possibly becoming president:

No. No he won't. We'll stop it.

(remembering this man was part of the Russia investigation and the Clinton email server investigation)

[Grumph]

Looks like Peter Strzok has been given the big heave-ho.

It's funny that he claims no bias - and yet in one of his Txt messages to his co-workers in regards to Trump possibly becoming president:



(remembering this man was part of the Russia investigation and the Clinton email server investigation)

Yeah, so ? The quote could just as easily have been referring to what was showing up in the Russia investigation. As has been reported elsewhere US intelligence was watching known Russian agents when members of the Trump family and organisation started showing up meeting the Russians. If that information had been made public at the time, it certainly would have cast some doubt on the election result.
Strzok has had nothing to do with any of the investigations for over a year now anyway.
Looks to me like you're buying into the Trump/Republican angle that it was a tainted investigation.

[oldrider]

The new round of sanctions this week unleashed by the United States on Russia has only one meaning: the US rulers want to crush Russia’s economy. By any definition, Washington is, in effect, declaring war on Russia. http://theduran.com/us-sanctions-are...russia-to-war/

[Katman]

By any definition, Washington is, in effect, declaring war on Russia.

Just like the Jews did to Germany 85 years ago.