The_donald sub has the most worker bees digging. They have gone from frog memes to deputized field agents.

Hillary brings out the best in everybody. She is already improving their skills.

She turned me in a phonebanker for Bernie and I created a Twitter account after the convention to support Stein.

Third party voters are sexy!

Is giant meteor considered a third party?

The last party?

VoteLastParty

It's like the last supper, but with more drugs.

I'll bring the drugs!

I'd vote for that.

I sure do hope so

If it's vote has a meteoric effect? probably.

and Who will it vote for? Surely not the Wicked witch of the Whitehouse? No self respecting meteor could behave suchly!

https://archive.fo/Wm8C2 member?

Location is in Hawaii it seems edit added archive link https://archive.fo/Wm8C2

https://imgur.com/a/v5PBg

http://is.4chan.org/pol/1478195672649.jpg

https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5az5xa/comment/d9kqvnh?st=1Z141Z3&sh=d4153640

https://np.reddit.com/r/BlackOps/comments/4fs7a8/question_why_would_there_be_30ish_wifi_networks/d2o3g16/ 196 days old

Edit: archive https://archive.fo/Wm8C2

Raises hand

Is mayonnaise considered a third party candidate?

Sephiroth was sexy, so yes.

Heeeeyyy, I am a 3rd party voter. what are you doing after the vote. ;D

But stein tho, I'm not a fan of her. She thinks wifi causes sickness, and is very against nuclear plants. She is also an anti vaxxer.

She's not an anti-vaxxer, and doesn't think wifi causes cancer. She's a doctor, not an idiot. She's trying to get all the voters she can, surprise, she's a politician. And many people are too scared of the two party system resulting in the other team winning to actually affect change. So she has to take what she can get. She doesn't want nuclear plants because of things like Fukushima or Chernobyl. I think climate change is enough of an issue to necessitate nuclear power, but the president is not a dictator. Unless they change the system.

Have you seen her AMA responses...?

Didn't say that in the ama at all.

Can't say I have. I expect Jill will disappear after this election, barring something insane. So it matters less. But other people have presented more detail beyond the usual "wifi causes cancer" complaint I've been hearing, and reasonable thoughts about the nuclear energy, which I also understand. I'd rather have someone who wanted to be more careful with nuclear power than less so (as Donald Trump appears to be considering his thoughts about nuclear weapons and Japan and South Korea) and is in favor of a peaceful foreign policy (unlike Hillary Clinton considering the aggression we are seeing toward Russia) and understands the problems of our criminal justice system and climate change, and has plans to fix it.

Things like Fukushima and Chernobyl were directly caused by people going against the advice of the engineers and scientists. In Chernobyl they turned off all safety measures and ignored all warning signs, at Fukushima the company which owns the plant were told they should increase the height of the Tsunami wall and move the backup generators to a nearby hill, but that would have cost money and Tsunamis are rare, right?

Furthermore, both those reactors are 1960s vintage, they're old, and have positive void coefficients, meaning if cooling fails they melt down, modern reactors have negative coefficients, meaning if cooling fails they just generate more electricity for a bit, which is entirely safe. They cannot fail beyond shutting down for a few days.

/u/AM_JESUS_AMA Never said that Jill Stein thinks wifi causes cancer, they said that she thinks it causes "sickness."

On wifi Jill Stein said: "A number of scientific studies have raised red flags about possible health effects of WiFi radiation on young children. I do not have a personal opinion that WiFi is or isn't a health issue for children. There is not enough information to know. I do however believe in science. Scientific research should go forward and find out. Countries including Switzerland, Italy, France, Austria, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Israel, Russia and China, have banned or restricted these technologies in schools.

These concerns were ignited by a recent National Institutes of Health study that provided some of the strongest evidence to date that exposure to radiation from cell phones and wireless devices is associated with the formation of rare cancers. "

She then links to an article which provides no citations and draws its information from an unpublished, non-peer reviewed paper.

Furthermore, wifi sends out radiowaves, which are just photons of a wavelenth not visible to the human eye, so essentially, she is scared that light causes cancer in children.

non-peer reviewed paper.

It is peer reviewed

The findings in this report were reviewed by expert peer reviewers selected by NTP and the National Institutes of Health.

It seems I believed what someone said without checking to see whether what they said was bullshit first. Sorry about that.

Fun fact from the study:

NTP found low incidences of tumors in the brains and hearts of male rats, but not in female rats

Common smear. Untrue.

[deleted]

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Pap smear. Undress.

She is not against vaccines. A quick Google search debunks that.

https://np.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5a2d2l/title_jill_stein_answers_your_questions/d9d867l/

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Yeah I was thinking, "I guess I'll just vote for Stein, then..." then I read her AMA and revised my thought to, "I guess I'll just vote for giant meteor, then..."

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

It's magical.

Praise Kek

In Kek we trust.

*Fucking auto correct.

Do you love orange soda?

In a modern world, Kel's love of orange soda would be considered racist.

I disagree. I was absolutely obsessed with orange soda for a good while. I'm about as white as it gets. You might say I'm the whitest. The most white. Supremely white.

[deleted]

:(

This is what's happening most likely and even tho Im not american and never planned on being, it sucks because literally everybody is being cruelly played here.

Let's hope we get that Firesign thing going on on election day at least

that Firesign thing

I'm in the dark. What is the Firesign thing?

https://youtu.be/42JSQ6DsC60

For lack of a better link, but it summarizes the pdf and gives you sources

Thanks!

Project blue beAm

/BF4hitreg

The weaponized Autism of 4chan will dig this.

weaponized autism would be a good new catchy name for 4chan.

That's what they've been calling themselves for a year or so now.

my bad...i only browse there at times when i cant find out any truths in the regular media.

[deleted]

Looking at it the wrong way, you don't ask 4chan for help. You challenge them by first flaunting what you found, then challenging them to find something more incriminating.

It's all about the presentation.

This is exactly how it works.

NYPA

What a load of bullshit. /pol is working just like the_donald to bring Hillary down. And "this got deleted from 100 subreddits" is crap as well. just post it in the_donald and be done with it like everyone else does.

Go try 8ch.net/pol/ over 4chan

I understand

My college Journalism professor once encouraged us to partake in selecrive plagarism - which was stealing & journaling 2-4 length word combos that we thought sounded especially great.... Weaponized Autism.. Imma steal that one so good. That's like one of the best two word combos I've ever read. Glorious work sir

you can gladly steal it it is not mine i stole it from anon on the 4chan.

Hmm.... redditors turned detectives...so this is going to end with a random completely innocent person being detained and questioned by FBI?

No its going to end with the 2nd American Revolution which is actually only the beginning. Drain the swamp.

It was meant to be a Boston bombing reference, when reddit "solved the case" and somehow law enforcement listened...

WE DID IT!

Go back to Redd......

Oh yeah, never mind.

I was around for the whole Boston Bombing incident, and it's weird how Reddit gets solely blamed for that fiasco when I distinctly remember the majority of the witch hunting threads were based on screenshots from 4chan.

There was a whole lot bullshit flying all over the net for the couple of days after the bombing yet the blame for the aftermath seemed to only settle here.

Even if it started on 4chan, Reddit spread it around.

I remember reading a conspiracy that stated whenever Boston bombings come up on reddit, there's always an account that shames us (reddit) for pooling our resources and working together. IIRC the conspiracy is that the gov't didn't like how effective so many random citizens can unite and cohesively operate. That's why they shame us, so we remember our 'mistake' the next time we think of doing it.

The wrong person was doxxed and hounded. That should be remembered, no matter the source. If it means the research gores slower, so be it.

Absolutely, most Redditors were just going off what was on local media and vice versa. The small media stations are also to blame.

I would blame 4 chan if I was posting on 4 chan... It's most fun to blame reddit when I'm on reddit ;-)

Law enforcement didn't listen, the mass media listened, and they ran with it.

God forbid those companies are responsible for the horse shit they air.

so you wish for the fall of the United states and an end to the civilization we know.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

so that's a yes? you wish for our country to fall. An end to the federal union? break-up of the states? You understand that is treason, right?

No it's not, it's literally the natural order for every major civilization on earth. There's no question of if it will happen, only when.

Maybe you should google that quote from my last reply. I have a feeling it might surprise you who said it.

He's not wrong about it literally being treason, but only if you're coming from the perspective of a preserver of status quo, or a British loyalist in that time.

From the perspective of the American revolutionaries, the way Britain was treating the colonies was a betrayal, and therefore treasonous.

The simple way I see it is that people fall into one of two categories. They either value freedom more than security or vice versa.

Government wants power and control and it feeds on the desire for security to get it. Eventually it will overstep it's boundaries, and the people who value freedom more than security will take action.

I see three groups. One who willingly sacrifice their freedom for security and comfort, one who sacrifices personal integrity for power and wealth, and one who just wants to be left the fuck alone.

Masters, slaves, and free men.

Good point, I haven't considered it like that before.

so you wish for the fall of the United states and an end to the civilization we know.

Right, just like the armed US revolution against Britain was an end to civilization

You realize the British tried seizing guns and enforcing strict gun control in the years leading up to revolution?

You should ask yourself, whose side would you choose if you lived then? Would you be a loyalist to Britain, the legal ruling government and preserver of status quo, or a traitorous, deplorable tea partier?

Holy shit is that what you think is going on? This is more of a "fall of Rome into a state of chaos for 1000 years" thing... not "citizens fighting for a sovereign nation" thing.

What do you think is going on? The city of Rome itself was essentially a sovereign nation ruling over vast territories. By the time of the fall of the Western Roman Empire it was an incredibly centralized authority rife with corruption and bureaucrats ignoring the will of their outer colonies. If you want to understand Rome read up on the history and politics of Rome the city itself, not just Rome the territory it ruled over.

just want to say i was there the day everyone was sifting through boston bombing photos and --

i, and thousands of others, clearly heard police officers say dude's name 5+ times. they confirmed it and spelled it multiple times. boston pd were the ones who first dropped his name on non-secure channel

the fact that a handful of users went on to leave voicemails on that (already deceased) person's parent's telephone is very unfortunate, but CANNOT be used to discredit reddit and/or crowdsourced investigations.

it's just the "discovery" phase that any real investigation goes through. a few users took it upon themselves to move to the contact phase. the whole incident is really fascinating and worth taking a second look at

How is it considered "investigation" if they are just listening to a police scanner?

sifting through photos

fbi released a trove of photos for the public. turns out the tsar bros weren't even in any of the released set.

They are out conspiracy-ing us. And it's fantastic.

CTR has more pull here. For example, they keep pushing the "3rd party vote" and people fall for this shit. It's now or never... 3rd parties can rise from the Democrat's ashes.

Or the democrat politicians will switch over to being "third party"

Special Agent Pepe reporting for duty.

Angent name taken

Agent Pepe

If Trump wins, T_D will go into history books for sure.

Archived on Nov 8th at 11:59pm would be epic

They have weaponized autists and memes at their disposal.

You can spot them by their use of CAPITAL WORDS

For real and still all people on reddit can do is shit on us. None of them can come up with any facts to back up their claims yet here we are digging up info that not even the fbi saw.

ETSpam pretends they're neckbeards making frog memes, little do they realize the silent majority knows how to do things too complicated for them. Like.. Word search.

Grass Roots.

our new motto

[removed]

Rule 1. No bigoted slurs. Removed. 1st warning.

I clearly meant it in the way that SouthPark used it to describe people who are huge tools. The context isn't anything about homosexuality.... You wouldn't happen to also be a mod of The_Donald would you?

I'm sorry but we don't rely on South Park for definitions of words.

Just when I think this election can't get any more bizarre.

Love it

Well if they dig too much they will find out Trump was on that island as well.

Weoponized autism

Agent Pepe

You sound like a white male teen, honestly.

Thank god for those racists.

You kids have fun. By the way, the Easter Bunny isn't real.

There's pretty solid evidence that team Clinton deleted their emails with full awareness that they were about to be subpoenaed.

There's proof of a lot of stuff. None of it matters without anyone to enforce it.

And if she gets in you can forget about it. But everyone keeps saying how many laws she broke, which she did. Who is arresting her? Either they are afraid or part of it. No justice is being done. Information is being released. What she has done disqualifies her, but here she is still on the ballot. It's now obvious to everyone who is paying attention that this government and the heads of agencies that enforce its laws are protecting eachothers interests. As bleak as that is, there is at least one positive. It's exposure. This is the most exposed our government has ever been.

[deleted]

Well they have been psychologically priming us for months for war with Russia.

I'd say years.The bad guys in the movies have been Russians for 20-30 years.

There was that whole "Cold War" thingy going on 30 years ago

As someone who was pretty much raised for this particular fight.

It's gonna be a giant shit show. These are not Stone aged 72 virgin types. We will lose from 20 to 80 percent of our population on this deal.

Wait what?? Screw that, why would you even obey??? If you're prepared to fight someone, you know where the White House will be... If not then do a Muhammad Ali and sit it out. Seriously if HRC is elected and declares a war, you'd literally be a terrorist marching off to fight under the orders of a corrupt criminal if you listen. We're humans, not drones! The Russian population consists of humans too, and Putin seems far superior to HRC right now. If it comes to it, I hope not a single bullet is intentionally fired for Hillary, what a tragedy that would be.

Huh, kind of like Erdogan after the "coup".

It would do no good to arrest her or bring forth any legal action while Obama is still in office. He can just issue pardons like Halloween candy. Surely, this is why he's campaigning with her now: so he can be close in case the hammer's about to drop. So close that the pardon is probably already written and just waiting for him to sign, so when agents come to cuff her, Obama waves the pardon at them.

The FBI needs to wait until Trump wins because then Obama's pardon wouldn't work. If Trump doesn't win, Hillary rigs the elections, or the electors just baulk, I'm sure Trump will cry foul, but then what? At that point, if he were to demand an investigation, we'd be in the same exact boat, but without any chances left.

I firmly believe this as well. That's why I'm so terrified of her becoming the POTUS.

Ugh.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=aB_rCHEMI-A

You say that as if you know it will actually happen. Not just a single war but multiple wars, major wars at that. Why do you think this will happen shortly after she's elected? No doubt she broke some laws, but how bad was what she did? I'm honestly asking, it doesn't seem like anything that she did really matters besides the fact that she lied about it. She's a politician, that's what they do. I would think if the information was that sensitive it would have some kind encryption, or is important info sent just as other email?

how bad was what she did

People have lost their security clearances for less. A lot fucking less. Losing your security clearance cost you your livelihood since generally speaking your skills are all tied to you having a clearance.

I would think if the information was that sensitive it would have some kind encryption

Exactly this, but to completely understand the duplicity involved, you need to know this fact. The US Federal Government operates several internet structures, which are completely independent of the internet everyone else uses. They each have different classification, so you have a SECRET internet access, a TOP SECRET internet access, and some number of CLASSIFIED internet systems which are only relevant for specific areas, ie Afghanistan has it's own classified internet access (at least it did, don't know if it is still up and active). To access these different internets, you have to have a computer, a special connection point (ethernet port), and an account to access the computer. So you login to the computer, the computer has the correct stuff (protocols and what not) to talk to the classified network, and can communicate securely to the rest of the classified network.

Clinton was bypassing that encryption by having her people access the data from a classified networks, transfer it to a USB drive, and then removing any marks detailing the the clearance level required to view the material. This gave the impression that everything sent over her server was not classified. However, removing it from a classified system is still a felony offense and punishable under anti-terror and espionage laws.

Also, you may have seen or read the term "SAP" (Pronounce each letter, it is not sap like the tree goo). SAP stands for Special Access Program. An SAP is not something that anyone with a specific clearance can access. Even if you have the highest level of security clearance, (TOP SECRET/SENSITIVE COMPARTMENTED INFORMATION) doesn't mean you have access to everything. Think of it as being need to know, like our drone program. The details of our drone program are a heavily guarded secret. You have to have a need in order to know those details. They are not given out all willy nilly to any one with a TS/SCI. Anyways, Clinton had SAP files on her server. Most people, myself included, just don't understand how you can have SAP files and not know what they are. SAP files are an entirely different monster from any other classified material. Dealing with classified information as long as she has been, she should have immediately recognized them for what they were, and not stored them on a system so easily compromised.

I've tried not to editorialize this post so much, and break it down to its simplest terms, but if you have any more questions just let me know.

So how do we know that she didnt set this server up as a way to sell government secrets? Just make it vulnerable enough where they can be 'stolen' and if there is any fallout you can blame it on the server meanwhile a large sum of money is deposited into the clinton foundation. Selling classified info with a measure of plausible deniability...

This guy knows what he's talking about. Thanks for typing it up simply and concisely

Are there any sources for the thumb drives or SAP files? Never heard any of that before.

This covers the SAP files.

Also, the thumb drive thing is a logical conclusion. They could've also printed off documents and then retyped them. Or have taken pictures of the screen. However, because of how SAP works, which to the best of my knowledge, all SAP files are on their own individual networks completely separate from any other network. Literally you walk into a room with a computer and the only thing on this computer is SAP files.

Great comments. Thanks.

I've never seen exactly what was going on with all this before, than you for taking the time to actually explain it without thinking i was a troll. I really appreciate it.

she should have immediately recognized them for what they were, and not stored them on a system so easily compromised.

It almost sounds plausible that the files were transfered to a lower security system in order to be hacked and leak / sell the files to whoever hacked them.

removing any marks detailing the the clearance level required to view the material. This gave the impression that everything sent over her server was not classified.

Could you expand? I haven't heard this mentioned previously.

removing any marks detailing the the clearance level required to view the material. This gave the impression that everything sent over her server was not classified.

Could you expand? I haven't heard this mentioned previously.

Sure, so at the top of every government document it tells you the classification. By default, 99% of all documents are C:FOUO, which means Classification: For Official Use Only. FOUO is some legal bullshittery that means the government can stop you from giving this piece of paper away or punish you if they find out you did it after the fact. I've never heard of Uncle Same doing this, but it's there if they really want to go after some poor schmuck and have nothing else.

Classified material will be marked C: SECRET or C: TOP SECRET or C: CENTRIX (Afghanistan specific classification).

On a memo, which is most communications, this is generally placed in the header area of the document, with the highest form of classification of the document. Then below in the body of the memo or document, you have paragraphs labeled very specifically with "S" or "TS" off to the side. These stand for, you guessed it SECRET and TOP SECRET. HRC was asked about those, and she said she didn't know what they were. However, most people know what they are, and if you can't deduce it you ask. They are every where, and they stick out. You don't miss them. They are in place because of how classifying documents works. A document might be marked TS, but the information contained within may be only secret or FOUO. It's only when it is all brought together that it becomes a higher tier of clearance.

Also, for images and other non-word documents the classification is even more in your face, since it is color-code. Green = FOUO, Red = SECRET / TOP SECRET, Purple = CENTRIX.

Anyways, Team Clinton scrubbed the header marks from memos/docs and deleted the color coding on the other things. Government email even comes encoded. If you are using the FOUO system (normal unclassified everyday running of operation system) all your emails are flagged as such. However, on higher clearance systems, which HRC should have been using for government business, you can set classification label. So your emails get marked appropriately. You can talk about things like overthrowing other governments or selling arms to rebels in Africa and flag it as being Top Secret. HRC's email system CANNOT have that system in place, since it is literally against the law. People in the email chain could probably guess they were dealing with classified information, but had no way of knowing for sure. So, the other people involved could feel free to share this information with any Tom, Dick, or Harry on the street, further jeopardizing US security interests around the globe.

It's a mess.

Wow. I've been reading about this scandal for a while but never herd anyone describe it in such detail. So thank you sir. Any chance you'd share your background with us?

Also, Clinton has used the excuse that she is technologically challeneged but I think it's clear that she is a smart lady and probably knew exactly what she was doing and what the potential consequences could be. So why would she do it? If you chose to editorialize would you have any working hypothesis? "For the sake of convenience" doesn't really sound legit to me.

Edit:can't word good durr

Ahh. Yeah that makes sense. In fact I think I even saw a video taken of her at some dinner party where she was saying something to that effect. Ahh here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxNfrxp-b5I Say Hi to Stan Lee

If you chose to editorialize would you have any working hypothesis?

As stupid as this sounds, it's because she thinks she is above the law. She has people she need to answer to, so she setup a system where she could communicate with them. Well she also had a need to conduct business with the government so she combined those two things into the entity she could control, her email server. It was a convenience thing, but the only reason you would do that is because you don't think national security protocols would ever apply to you.

I don't think it sounds stupid, I think that sounds like the most logical explanation. There are so many conflicting viewpoints that I often feel like I don't know what to believe. And they span from her being a good person trapped in a bad situation(due to some level of arrogance) all the way to her being power hungry, corrupt to the core and possibly involved in some of the most heinous crimes & conspiracies imaginable. But yeah the truth probably resides in the most logical explanation. At least I hope so

LOTTA negativity on this thread. Not buying it.

The American people are waking up fast. The FBI, NSA, NYPD, probably Russia, China, some punk kid in New Hampshire probably has those emails.

They're coming out.

We're already fighting on 7 fronts. This is the closest the world has been to war in some time. The election is just a signpost, it's not going to conclude anything besides the face on the market's mathematically inevitable correction. The war is already on.

CTR shill alert! Have fun being unemployed next week! 😂

Jokes on you, I'm already unemployed

They are supposed to sacrifice themselves for the republic, rather than sacrifice the republic for themselves. For a President, or someone seeking that office, this is that much truer. Hillary Clinton has, time and again, sacrificed the Republic for her own gain. Do you think when she becomes President she will cease aggregating power and money, at the expense of her constituents? Becoming President is merely a notch on her ambition belt that opens the door to checks with more zeroes on them. She is using all of us for her own personal gain and it's sad that some people refuse to believe that because it's clear as day.

You make her seem exactly like she is the political equivalent of Trump.

There is no equivalent in the private sector. You're conflating the two and you very well know you shouldn't.

It's just an observation, whether it's the private sector or not doesn't matter when making a general observation.

Except that is the fact that one is a politician and the other in the private sector is the foundation for the entire argument.

They are also both white. That's an observation. Is it relevant to the discussion? No, not really

It doesn't matter if it's private or political, ambition is ambition. Especially the way you worded it "a notch on her ambition belt that...for a check with more zeros". That's exactly what Trump has been doing for years. Hell most successful people are ambitious, but some (Clinton and Trump) go to any lengths to do so.

He's a BUSINESSMAN. In business the goal is to make money...PERIOD. She is a civil SERVANT. Her job is to work hard to make sure the country runs smoothly. THERE ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE A FINANCIAL INCENTIVE IN POLITICS!!!! How you can equate those two in your brain is beyond me. You're clearly missing the point.

I think you are missing the point. If you go back and read your original post, you describe Clinton as ambitious to the point of not caring what has to be done to gain power. You say it just another notch on her belt. The whole thing describes Trump very accurately. Ambition does not equal money, he's a business man, she's a politician. This doesn't change the fact that both are ambitious. He was after money while she was after power. Now that Trump is also a politician, hes using that same ambition to gain political power just as Clinton does.

So your point is that they are both ambitious...?

My point is that in your original post you could replace Clinton with Trump and it would read true

Except she and Bill sold political favors for $111 million after Bill left offfice and Hillary was in office or campaigned for office. So no, you can't switch their names. That is an illegal type of ambition and it's called corruption.

Wasn't anymore illegal than what Trump did to gain his money. They both used loopholes and walked a thin line of what's legal to get what they wanted.

Corruption is illegal. Using loopholes in the tax code is legal. Get your facts straight.

If it was illegal how come no charges were ever made?

That's a fantastic question. Her corruption is clear as day, I think the FBI and DOJ have some explaining to do. Hopefully this investigation will yield some results.

If she is elected, she faces an additional hurdle in the House, as they are, at that point, able to impeach her for something as little as, "conduct unbecoming of the President of the US".

Whether they would or not is up in the air, but she straight up lied to a congressional inquiry. That's a federal crime. For that alone she should be facing jail time.

Anything else is just piling shit on, she is a legit criminal.

in a democracy yes, but since both sides are kinda funded by similiar intrest one might be tin foiled.

Yeah, lots of money there to "buy" influence.

I fear career politicians don't have the balls to go after Clinton now.

If the end goal is world government, what does it matter if the USG looks bad?

Literally first time I saw this.

I think this sub is just so flooded with info right now that it's impossible to keep up.

If the end goal was one world government then how do you explain BREXIT?

The EU is designed as a buffer for the UK against Russian and the ME. The UK cannot be a part of defense buffer. It is the King that the buffer protects.

Just lol. Do you know anything at all about history?

A little. and what do you think is going on there?

A little is right. That's not the point of the EU at all. Lol. Wow.

Rip franz

Either they are afraid or part of it

or both

None of it matters without anyone to enforce it.

The Clintons are above the law. No doubt. We have a theory on how to bring down the foundation at t_d

The attachment is the most important thing I've seen on reddit. Have you checked the TYT video which Wikileaks retweeted? It refers to an email which mentions these "for-profit" activities and TYT point to it as the smoking gun. It is the one where they complain Chelsea is asking too many questions about her parent's activities and they tell Podesta she needs to back off. What you've found is more damning than that email. You should tweet it to Cenk and the team at TYT.

Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApcqXijVzYU

I thought it was just the Chelsea email Cenk mentions. Apols.

hey OP, http://imgur.com/a/cRPqr this is in regards to William Hague, he went on to work at Teneo... now he just took a job at Citigroup... quite the international crime ring

I am stupidly banned from the_donald so I cannot contribute or else I'd post this.

Nancy Schaefer spoke out against the use of CPS to kidnap children en masse and blamed a law that the Clinton administration passed in aiding the practice. She and her husband were both dead very soon after. Maybe she was on to something? Maybe the Clinton Foundation has programs that involve CPS? I think it's worth looking into.

http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/04/27/senator-nancy-schaefer-did-her-fight-against-cps-corruption-cost-her-life/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zKKkVrLpzc

It's loose but its something.

http://clintonfoundationinvestigation.com/2016/08/15/pedophile-networks-2/

What happened to that guy who got caught asking reddit how to erase emails for a "very VIP" .

I think they interviewed him, then he vanished...good point..

He wasn't asking how to delete emails. He wanted to change the to/from information in the emails. He was told that reason why what he wanted to do was difficult was because messing with records like that could potentially be illegal.

This is the same guy who they blamed as having an "oh shit" moment and used BleachBit to wipe the server after the subpoena had been issued. Supposedly he deleted all that information on his own, with no instructions from anybody else.

And he received immunity from the Department of Justice. Because apparently you just hand that shit out like candy. He was summoned to answer questions in front of a Congressional oversight committee but he chose not to come, citing the 5th Amendment.

Now, why a guy can't testify after he's already been given immunity, I have no idea. However, one member on the committee believes he lied to the FBI, which would void his immunity agreement. So, it looks like the federal government has handed out a bunch of immunity and received nothing from it.

ELI5 how immunity works?

Usually: If you cooperate with our investigation and help us catch a bigger criminal by testifying against them, we'll ignore the crimes you committed under that person.

But with Hillary: Fuck it, you get immunity. What do you know? Guy with immunity: My boss is innocent. I did the crime all by myself

Basically, it's a way to to get underlings to testify against their boss. This way you can jail the mob boss instead of just all the smaller fish who are easily replaceable.

But Combetta, the guy who came to reddit for help, received immunity, said he was the one responsible for deleting emails in an "oh shit" moment. Then refused to even come in front of Congress to answer questions.

Edit: Put in the wrong corrupt person in for Combetta.

I thought Combetta was the one who came to reddit for help? Am I mixing people up?

No you're right. I just all my corrupt criminals mixed up sometimes.

Is there a link for that guy coming here looking help? Sounds like an interesting read.

np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/53n2ky/stonetear_asked_reddit_for_help_a_lot/

He has since deleted all his comments. People even caught screen captures of his deleting them. It was quite the ride.

Thanks for the link

I mean if I didn't know I was deleting super important stuff, I guess I'd use BleachBit, but if I knew my life might be on the line... I might also take a drill to them...

Taking a drill is prudent, but properly wiped files are irrecoverable, regardless of what scaremongers will have you believe. Data wiped with 0s has never been retrieved with greater than 50% accuracy (ie no technique to recover data on hard drives wiped with BleachBit is better than a random guess at what that data may be)

This guy claims to have done it

Here's the thing which they mention in that thread. These guys put up a contest for $500 for anyone to recover it. This procedure is much more expensive to do. You use a scanning electron microscope apparently to produce the image and it's months of work.

It's months of work. Who the hell wants to win $500 for months of work? Who the hell is going to spend months of work to prove a point that people pretty much already believe? Generally the unpopular argument here is that it's fine to zero out a disk once, not that you can recover the data.

The theory is there, and apparently they have done this. It's prohibitively expensive.

The question is, how secure does your data need to be? Really you don't need to worry about this shit if you use full disk encryption anyway. And it's extremely easy to overwrite with random data with more than one pass and make it practically impossible. It's not an issue people will worry about if they encrypt their disk ahead of time.

If you're storing emails of this much importance, yeah, you should probably do more than overwrite once with zeroes. There's a chance someone might be willing to spend thousands and months on recovering it. But you're already an idiot if you didn't just use full disk encryption for shit like that. It's really a dumb situation to be in - you have data that someone might spends thousands and months to recover and you didn't bother to just overwrite it two or three times with random data? Or you didn't realize ahead of time that Hillary's emails should be on a fully encrypted disk? It's pretty fucking amateur, but if these guys do it for money, I guess it isn't that infrequent.

So just wipe it with 0s, then gring it into powder and then add water to it and make bread.

He was granted immunity before the reddit posts were found. I don't think we for sure whether the justice department knew about those or not when granting him immunity, but I could be wrong about that.

That was Combetta, aka stonetear. Plead the 5th a bunch then they made the connection to his reddit account and I think Gowdy may have requested a private something or other.

Held him in contempt, actually.

Combetta appeared but pleaded the Fifth. You're thinking of Bryan Pagliano. The contempt motion against him was postponed until after the election.

That's right! Thanks, I knew I was forgetting something.

Last I checked, FBI can arrest folks, right?

They can't prosecute anyone though...

True. But, hey, put her in cuffs just for funsies!

too soon and she gets a pardon.

I think she gets a pardon no matter what, but a pardon before the election is the death of her candidacy.

Inb4 Trump pardons Clinton. They have been buddies for a long time after all.

There are so many things that should have already been the death of her candidacy. If they haven't killed her chances yet, nothing will.

Yep that's the sad truth. At the end of the day, intelligent people are aware that the Entire system is rigged now, at every level. The only way to combat it now is to move offgrid and unplug....

that concedes to it. it doesn't combat anything.

Don't worry. The dude looking into it used to be a hotshot lawyer...

think he can look into this too?

Move over Al Capone, introducing the Clinton Crime Lords!!!

They are shocking! Beyond real life. Regular, everyday sociopaths and criminals shudder when they hear the name Clinton.

This

I mean.... the evidence isn't even light or speculative. It's straight the fuck up damning!

so corrupt at the top.

[deleted]

I think there's a nuke coming for her campaign this week.

a snuke...

There's also over a dozen women accusing trump of sexual assault, and a 13 year old of rape. Plus there's multiple videos and recordings of trump admitting to and bragging about sexual assault.

But hey, Clinton deleted some emails, so there's that.

there's as much evidence of Trump touching little girls as there is Hillary touching little girls, so don't start with that...

Same goes for sexual assault...

Not to mention the fact that something like 75% of Trump accusers have been proven either false or to be directly tied to the Clinton team.

Then there's the fact that Clinton has done a whole lot more than delete emails (like being instrumental in destroying the balance of power in the Middle East, rigging the democratic primary..........just took a look at your post history, you're obviously ctr so I'm done with you. good luck on the 8th, champ. oh and google "Hillary Clinton 1 in 77 billion"...there's also a study out of Stanford that backs up that notion...it's been 4 months and neither of these studies have been refuted or challenged.

bro, you are arguing with a shill account or a retard. there is no point, look at the comment history.

yeah I know. I had to blow off some steam though :)

Shill or not, you have to counter their bullshit. It's more for people reading this than the guy he's responding to.

You think you could do a better job than Hillary?why don't you run for office?all you do is whine ,trumpsters want chachi and amarosa in the Whitehouse.mo Ron's.

you're going to find that your ctr commentary will not be accepted here. Good luck.

75% of trump accusers proven false or tied to the Clinton team?

You've got to be joking me, right?

So, you don't believe 75 percent of them because people connected to trump say it never happened? O. Ok that makes complete sense.

Yet there's video and audio proof of trump literally admitting to sexual assault. I think you guys call it "locker room talk"?

What planet do you wake up on each morning? Because it isn't earth.

there exists, quite literally, one single video of Trump JOKING that he grabs women inappropriately. And technically, there is no "video evidence", you weak shill.

Frankly, I don't believe any of them, either. This guy has been in the public eye since the 70's and apparently these women waited until 1 month before the election to even mention a single word about it?

That's sounds legitimate.. /sarcasm

Oh and don't forget that team Democrat has been proven, several times over, during this election cycle, to lie, cheat, and steal at every opportunity. There is not a word that comes from them that has any merit. I'm not even Republican.............

Regardless, I don't know why you bother coming to r/conspiracy. Your ctr numbers are thoroughly overwhelmed here. Just stick to r/politics and all of the other shill subs.

Rofl. You seriously believe that "locker room talk" bullshit? You're not in your right mind. Yet you cask me a "shill". God I cringe every time I see that word.

Get a new buzzword already.

I will look for one. Maybe you can help... is there a Correcttherecord.com that has other buzzwords I can use? I assume you would know.

Shill.

So you condemn trump for sexual assault. Great. How do you feel about bill clinton and hillarys faithful support of him raping women?

First of all. Bill isn't running. Secondly:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/10/11/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-bill-clinton-accusers/index.html?client=ms-android-verizon

Your inability to answer the question speaks volumes.

I just answered it...seriously man?

No you didnt. You deflected.

Deflected?? Did you even read what I posted? I think it's hilarious when one of the Republicans biggest "arguments" is about bill Clinton. Not hillary.

And before you go all "but but, she harassed bill's accusers!!11!" Do some research. After that, get back onto the current issues.

And you are still avoiding the question. I dont care what you think about the question. I also dont care what you think the question means. The fact that you cannot directly answer the question tells everything.

I hear people say much worse things than saying he grabs them by their pussy's. Who the fuck cares

You hear guys say worse things than grabbing random woman by their pussies just because "they can"?

I'm sure you have buddy...

Uh yeah I have. Plenty of times? Why is that so hard to believe.

So you hang around guys that brag about walking up to women and touching them? You need new friends.

There's guy talk. Then there's bragging about sexual assault. One you've heard from your friends. The other, I hope you haven't...

No they say they do stuff trying to be funny with their friends. They don't do it. Just like sir trump. I have great friends, thanks. And my friends don't do that. I think it's silly and shouldn't be said. But who fucking cares? There are much more important issues that should be looked at

You think electing a president who claimed and bragged about sexual assault isn't an issue we should be discussing? Come on...

I'll probably get black bagged on a murder charge if he pops a brain aneurysm because I linked him to theredpill (sub not related to shitty MRA movie). Lulz++ to be had though.

O and you want to know why women waited until now to come out? Are you that dense?

If they come out earlier, not a single person would believe them. Trump is rich, in the public eye, he's not someone who would assault a woman...

Then he gets caught on video bragging about assault. Coupled with interviews of him bragging about going into the girls locker room at pageants and watching them dress.

Then one girl finally gets the courage to come out because people would understand what happened and believe them now. Then the other woman come forward.

It happens ALL the time. But hey. You go ahead and believe the pathological liar trying to save his sinking ship.

It's crazy people actually believe the guy.

If they come out earlier, not a single person would believe them. Trump is rich, in the public eye, he's not someone who would assault a woman...

Kind of like Bill Cosby, right?

I'm sure people would have dismissed their claims...after all, how could we be expected to believe that a rich, gentile famous person could be guilty of such crimes..? It's not as if it had happened before... /sarcasm.

Lol. Good luck buddy. It's not looking good for ya.

I like how all you Trump supporters are moping about how Hillary spilled government secrets with a private email server, while at the same time demanding that she release the emails. I'm sure The_Donald has been to at least a couple Eyes Wide Shut parties with Saudi princes. Don't investigate those ties though. It might disagree with your world view. Which is the neighborhood immediately outside your mom's basement.

Actually, I'm one of the people who thinks Trump's Lolitta expeditions need to be looked into, if in fact they exist. I am, also, however, a person who believes DJT is an incremental step in the right direction. He'll get enveloped (if he isn't already) but there's hope that the rampant corruption in DC can be abated somewhat... will it give rise to a new form of corruption? I would imagine believing anything otherwise would be quite naive. Either way, on the current course, there can only be one of a few outcomes (very few of them positive).

Thanks for the blind assumptions though. Good job.

Release them to the fbi. And its FAR more than that these days. Practically every day there is a new discovery of her shittiness. Now if anyone can provide as solid of evidence as the podesta leaks about trump, then so be it. As of right now, all I really see are accusations and him saying mean things.

Fun fact: if no one is shoving the Trump's time with Epstein in the public's face via the mainstream media, it's probably because it's fucking nothing.

They've shoved everything else in our faces, often even things that ended up being fake! So why would this be any different.

Because Clinton has ties to Epstein and since she controls most, if not all, of what is publicized about her....why would they?

Um. Nobody talked about most scandals in the news until they became news. I don't understand your logic here, that it must be "fucking nothing" since no one has talked about it yet.

Definitely post it to the_donald to gain traction, its crazy the amount of work the guys put in their research, they must be fulltime shitposters some of them

To be fair, FBIanon went on to say Trump maybe bribed some politicians for building permits.

Compared to international child trafficking, I'd still consider that relatively clean.

I wouldn't put to much over trump even if this is true, id hold the politicians much more responsible for takeing the bribes. Still bad on trump IF he did bribe them but not nearly as bad as accepting the bribe.

Trump openly admits it that he bribed.

[deleted]

https://youtu.be/UiVwA19DZ6g

Ha! That is a gem

Working within a corrupt system to get stuff you need done is no where near as bad as being the person who helped create and enforces a corrupt system. Trump wants to win because he knows the system is corrupt and he genuinely seems to care about normal people. Clintons are so out of touch with reality its insane.

Clintons are proven to be corrupt, Trump may not be corrupt, and Id rather have a shot at no corruption than no shot at all.

Plus all the propaganda and missinformation from the Democrats, combined with the corruption. Who could support that.

[deleted]

What is this?

Pam Bondi

^ Right there.

To do major construction when he was starting out in NYC, you had to work with organized crime - they had a hand in everything, he's definitely dealt with the mob before.

Still that's nothing compared to Hillary, and given the situation in NYC at the time isn't even really a black mark.

It's the difference between a speeding ticket and mass murder. I can deal with the speeding ticket.

If i remember correctly, goverment is slow AF, and bribing seem to speed up the proccess of getting permits. Not necessarily meaning he wouldn't get them before he died of old age.

And racketeering and fraud and tax evasion and denying apartments to blacks and possibly under age prostitution also.

Neither is even slightly clean, and Trump's proposals are even worse

Don't forget judging beauty pageant contestants on their appearance.

It frustrates me so much when he doesn't answer to the fact he called someone fat in the 80s and pivots to meaningless stuff like Isis, ILLEGAL immigration and corruption.

Ha nice goal post movement.

He's had 3,500 lawsuits, and settled or been found guilty many many times.

You think the issue is that he insulted people in the 80s? It's that he can't resist even while on a debate stage to insult someone, and likely raped and assaulted too.

"But bill Clinton!!" Yes, bill Clinton is bad too.

Your titles are the problem. It needs to be in all caps, start with "THIS IS IT!", and use at least one of: Shillary, MAGA, or "based". I'm not joking, people mostly just upvote the titles and move on.

Offer a RARE PEPE if the post reaches over 3k

Put that in the title

I got 15k karma in one day just 2 days ago

Also, it's an insanely active subreddit. Posts are submitted at such at rate that it's hard to sift through the storm. Mostly, the community has to rely on the mods to sticky posts in order to guide and concentrate the investigative effort.

Thats weird. Maybe needs some witty cringe title or something.

Yeah, those are really shitty titles

Yeah they will turn on you quick if you're not "one of them"

They got pissed off and banned me because i said i could hardly call trump a "constitutionalist"

I love all anti-hillary subs, so i had a strange affection for the place. But i knew i they would ban if i said the wrong thing. At least they're upfront about it in the rules. Shillary subs don't tell you why, or even that you've been banned.

No offence but that's ridiculous. The sub rules say it is explicitly for Donald supporters. If you got banned it's because you announced you weren't a supporter.

R/politics is supposed to be where anyone can go, but of course that got taken over by CTR a long time back.

But i knew i they would ban if i said the wrong thing. At least they're upfront about it in the rules.

Did you even read my comment before you started typing, you jabbering idiot?

Nice edit after the fact :)

If it was edited it would have an asterisk, you stupid fuck.

Stop talking

If think you put an asterix in your first post so it would disappear when you edited.

God damn you are stupid.

Goddamn you are easy to bait

You know that meme where the stick-figure is like "joke's on you, i was only pretending to be retarded"?

That one went over my head. I am but a simple farmer, tending to my bait.

That's pretty cool bro. Well good luck with your "look how retarded i am" schtick

That's bro! Good luck with your temperament issues.

Man you really got me such a clever trick

Its laughable how many people honestly think Trump is a clean non corrupted outsider businessman. If you can invite a president to play golf and to a wedding and they show up then you are part of the establishment. You can not make me believe an outsider can do that.

If you can pay off AG's, Senators, and state officials for favors and get away with it then you are not someone to fix the problem, you are a part of it. Especially if you brag about it. Trump seems human, but both him and Clinton are corrupt liars. He just is more persuasive.

You're missing the point big time here, beyond the point of persuasion

What I think the problem is, is that there is so many who post there I think so it might drown or it might rise

No no no no. We over there don't care. Post it so we can spread it. Unless you want me to...

i just posted in r/the_donald unchanged.... i gave you full credit in the edit. Thank you for putting this together. Everyone will be thankful for it.

It's because it's all vote manipulation on that sub. It's the only reason why they have dozens of post on the frontpage and the rising page constantly. Quite literally impossible to be that "high energy", it's mostly bots. 6k+ upvotes and less than 100 comments? Right...

Try messaging one of the mods from over there,they'll sticky your post.

If not one will at least x-post this over there and sticky it.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Well not if you count Mena Arkansas and Barry Seal.

The airstrip where they unloaded cocaine, it's well known, it's actually to include drug smuggling to the list.

This will be the modern Gemstone files, but authenticated.

http://www.madcowprod.com/2016/07/20/election-decides-drug-trade/ “Air America meets Traffic meets Pineapple Express”

A steady diet of movies like the upcoming ‘Mena’ starring Tom Cruise playing the supposedly-swashbuckling former Air America pilot Barry Seal, has given the movie-going public the idea that the real action in the illegal drug trade is in drug trafficking.

It's never RICO.

Lol wrecked. This comment saying she's entirely guilty, killed people, I'm just imagining Clinton executing someone like the sopranos.

Then ushering in thousands of illegal immigrants to put the cherry on top.

...wait, bringing in aliens? From a comment about dreaming of a world beyond borders? One she gave in a speech?

...you've got to be kidding me, you realize thoughtcrime isn't a real thing right?

So goofy.

You can't reason with people like OP, he has already decided Hillary is the worst person in the world and he's the only petson smart enough to stop her. Textbook definition of delusional.

R/political_recolition banned you from their sub? Why?

And every single one of them applies to Donald Trump.

Lmao maybe someone would take you seriously if you actually backed up your accusations with facts instead of just throwing them around.

So giving you the benefit of the doubt on the acts -- I think you misunderstand the purpose and scope of RICO.

x1. That's for state bribery laws. I'm not sure what state bribery laws you'd suggest she broke. I believe they generally apply only to state officials, and she hasn't been one since she became SoS.

x2. Money laundering -- I know you don't like the way the money moves here, but I don't there there's anything in the materials here (and yes, I read them) that suggest money laundering. Racketeering? Unless you explain further, I have zero idea what you're getting at.

x2a. Bribery is a bit strange -- but if what you and the people around here assert is true, I think there could be a RICO charge. My first thought was that the predicate offense was giving bribes, but the law (18 USC 1961) is drafted so that any violation of 18 USC 201 counts, and indeed, RICO has been used to prosecute such crimes. (edit: when I say "if what you assert is true" I mean the assertion that there is prosecutable bribery. I'm not convinced personally and don't think the info provided adds up to a triable case.)

x3. You don't get to rewrite the law. It's embezzlement of union funds, not any funds.

x4. Again, this is for securities fraud, which is a pretty narrow term and almost certainly doesn't apply to the administration of a §501 non profit.

x5. Are you saying that her purported goal of "open borders" = adding or assisting aliens in illegally entering? The link you provide seems to suggest that any failure to perfectly police all US borders is tantamount to "assisting aliens to illegally enter."

x6. Well, I'm not gonna go there.

They say it takes a lot more effort to rebut/ refute than to make up accusations -- and I guess they're right. In your shotgun spray of random guesses at the law, you hit exactly one thing. The receipt of bribes, as a violation of federal bribery laws is a cognizable RICO predicate act.

You didn't cite yours AT ALL. Do you know what citing is?

My sources are 18 USC 1961 and 1962, as well as 18 USC 201 where appropriate -- and your comment.

Weird. You cite a single source -- a guy who has written MULTIPLE books on Benghazi -- to suggest that everyone disagrees with me.

I dare say that a least a sizable minority of Hillary voters think there's no RICO case there.

I think you know there are plenty of people who don't think there's anything prosecutable there. I probably should have expected that you'd take me literally, such that citing a whole mess of people who dislike Hillary seems useful.

It would not be useful for me to cite political friends of Hillary saying she's innocent, and it's not useful for you to cite her enemies saying she's guilty. If you've got a respected and at least nominally non-partisan legal source, I'd love to hear it.

And not even because I doubt you, but because I'd love to hear a thorough and professional analysis on either side.

edit: incidentally, my guess is that this sort of vague influence peddling is so much "the way things are done" (read: lobbying) in congress and the rest of Washington that most of the elected government would not be keen on setting a precedent here.

I gotta do other stuff.

I wrote a kinda long comment trying to parse out exactly what the supposed charges are -- but I really have to work on some other stuff or I won't get to sleep tonight.

Far from it.

Cite checking is the pits.

Aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country - http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/ See #2

Dude, she's talking about changing the law, not breaking the law. Also, she claims she was just talking about trade, not people, but even she wants to change the law for people, that's not illegal, just dishonest.

Could you be more specific about securities fraud, embezzlement, bribery? I can't see what you're talking about.

I haven't watched the video but I read the links and I don't see what ever it is you're trying to show me.

Can you just give ne a storyline of what you're trying to point out with each link, and how they build on each other to make the case you're trying to make?

You'd either need to spend an unreasonable amount of time on this, or have a glossary. There are some many acronyms and terms that imply things, but one needs a glossary to reasonably parse this. Unless theyve followed every detail of the email crap, which most people on Reddit have not done. I skimmed your links... which one shows any of these things? I'm still not seeing it.

EDIT: I mean, seriously, there's nothing anywhere about securities or other investment vehicles other than thise typical with non-profits. Im not asking you to provide the burden of proof - though, if these things do exist in the emails, it would be easy to point it out - but to perhaps link to what, exactly, has anything to do with securities fraud.

[removed]

[removed]

Rule 10. Removed. 1st warning.

Rule 10. Removed. 1st warning.

Reasonable scrutiny isn't welcome here. Blindly accept Clinton is a soulless criminal kingpin (which I don't necessarily disagree with) or GTFO.

Haha yeah that's what I expected, this sub is hilarious.

You need to verify the evidence with at least two reputable sources.

Dude they're fucking going at it towards you. Keep it up!

Wikileaks is a primary source, not a verification. Someone has to say, "yup we did what that thing says." Glen Greenwald also seems to not trust your source material either. And Google is a search engine.

I don't even know what CTR means and I had to look up Glen Greenwald. Honestly I'm just seeing this stuff on my front page and it concerns me as a believer in journalism.

He absolutely did not vouch for it. Are you hilariously misunderstanding his tweet or is this parody?

How many have been proven to not be fake? That's not a guy saying that all of this material is true. At best he's saying to wait because some or all may be true.

If he had that he would 100% publish it because that's his job.

It's not a black or white. Parts of Wikileaks are definitely true and have followed a path of verification from secondary sources after publication.

Maybe. I'm not against it being true.

I'm no CTR but you've lost me at your comments here. Had high hopes. I lost all hope you had real proof when you said Clinton RICO'd on illegal immigrants because she stated dreams of a world beyond borders. You know talking about the future isn't a crime right?

You're a crazed loon, and I hope people scroll this far, to see how silly the "real charges" are.

Seriously, your link for cover up is just a bunch of emails talking a memo, for Bill? Right? Jesus dude. There's zero evidence here, unless you do a better job of presenting it. I agree with the mod that deleted your shit.

Then why present false ones with your shit?? Lol you realize that to convince people, you have to try? You drop all this here and circle jerk, and snap back at anyone challenging your "evidence". Even now, you're not trying to convince me, you can't even defend I just made that shows a huge part of your comments to be idiotic, the immigration shit. Why bother posting it, if you know it's wrong, and it's not a key part of your argument?

Right, because you'd be ok lying and twisting the facts to suit your own message. And I'm supposed to spread your message? How would I look? Pretty stupid if I think Clinton could be tried for bringing in illegal immigrants based on the quote about green energy and open borders in a future pipe dream.

Pretty much the leak this entire thread is about

Seriously, you aught to read/watch materials in op

Again, read the OP. Like, actually do that.

Like, dude.... It's all right there.

www.youtube.com

Dope sources and evidence bro. Back up your accusations with actual evidence (direct quotes from all the emails you just posted maybe) if you want anyone outside of /r/conspiracy to listen to you.

You really don't understand how accusations work. You can't just say someone is guilty of something and then claim "the evidence is out there go find it!". The burden of ACTUAL proof falls on you as the one making claims that someone has broken the law..don't get lazy now bud you're so close to bringing her down!

It's ok to admit it's past your reading comprehension. There's no need to be a dick about it:)

Lmao sure if that's what you need to believe to maintain your superiority complex. I read the post, I don't necessarily disagree with everything OP said. I was simply stating that an argument with sources (as in actual links to evidence or quotes) is going to be more valid and taken more seriously. But this sub only cares about circle jerking not making arguments that might actually convince someone to change their vote or volunteer for Trump.

Honestly I was just being a dick because all your comments were malicious. I've never been a fan of this sub but the amount of evidence, proof, sources they provide now revolving around the Clinton investigations and the email leaks are unprecedented (for this sub). I thought op drew rational conclusions from the sources provided. Also the new FBI statement that just came out kind og gives it more traction.

Exactly the sub you belong in.

This sub has never had more posters of valid and well sourced and researched material than right now. I've lost count this last few weeks of the sheer number of people who have found their way here with your exact same story. Welcome to r/conspiracy aka r/politicalreality.

I think it was yesterday, maybe the day before but there have been a few previous discussions of possible RICO investigations into the Clinton Foundation over the last few days. If you use the search feature you should be able to find them maybe you can find other points and documents you may not have seen.

This. I love how stuff gets checked out here and you can read in the comments if there is some validity. This has become my favorite sub. Hats off to all you frequent posters.

Same. I click in see it's bs, head back. See it's good, dig in!

Over on the right hand side bar you'll find a huge compiled list of Confirmed Conspiracies that tinfoil nutjobs turned into facts and truths.

Don't insult us, okay?

While useful I think the main issue that everyone has is this:

What's the success rate? Sure a broken clock is right twice a day, but are we talking 5/10 are right or 5/100? It's hard to find the legit stuff.

For me, it's not percentages. It's significance. There is false flag CT all the time to impact those percentages. There are things we are flat wrong about constantly. But that one time MKUltra, or falsified yellow cake WMDs, or project mockingbird... I'm not going to list them all. But these are significant. And I don't mind, in fact, I would rather be wrong all the time.

Umm.. almost every major historical conspiracy theory has been proven true. MKUltra mind control-true, False flag to start Vietnam War- true, rigging of most major trading markets- true, US funding terrorists they claim to fight- true, JFK- shot came from behind grassy knoll, NSA spying- true, Oligarchal cabal controlling most of worlds wealth- true, weird bohemian grove occult stuff- true.. do I need to go on?

To have a better idea we'd need to subgroup conspiracies. There's plainly stupid/impossible "Obama used HAARP to inject fluoride into African Babies with Monosanto" to "Monied interests are using increasingly consolidated media to shape the narrative presented to the public".

Nah, just people who admit to believing Clinton committed arson and slavery.

If those are the only two from that list that you think they haven't done, then the Clinton Foundation is kinda fucked... aren't they?

[removed]

Watch out for this guy, he's got his ad hominems and lack of sourced arguments on standby.

this

[removed]

I'll just let this comment speak for itself. Thanks for being a good sport!

Rule 10. No personal attacks. Removed. 1st warning.

Appreciate the warning, but you're mistaken; the attack was thoroughly impersonal. No credit is given for unsourced beliefs, even if I'm vitriolic in the making of the point.

I guess if you don't acknowledge directly being told how you are wrong, you can never in fact be wrong. That's the message I'm getting from this guy.

Still waiting for those arson sources. Human smuggling? Bribery? What you got?

Your source is a reddit comment with a link to youtube? Yup, you're on the right sub.

"The right sub"? Why ever would you think that?

This is the kind of guy that I mark as a friend so I can bust out the popcorn anytime I see the orangered.

Hur dur dur, if it isn't some news source or wikipedia, then it's so not true.

I don't think I can name one media corperation that has a 100% track record, don't include WikiLeaks as a corperation

Rule 10. No personal attacks. Removed.

Enjoy that CTR check. You've earned it.

Not that I wouldn't take it in a heartbeat, but I argue with the likes of you folks for free.

Is that why Gore lost the election? Because Nader was a better candidate?

I...what?

What about John Kerry? He was never "swift boated". That's not a thing. He was a terrible candidate and lost Ohio fair and square.

It's working! They can't handle their own tactics used against them!

No, I'm sure he's just finding out what swiftboats are, why it matters, what happened in 2004 in Ohio and about the guy that testified how he rigged the election for the GOP. It's like people forget what they fought for and against just a few years ago. Celibrate another woke mind.

While the basis for the argument is factual, the way of dismissing and otherwise derailing the argument regardless of the point of view of the other side has put the shill at a stumble.

Im confused. How do we use their tactics against them?

While the basis for the argument is factual, the way of dismissing and otherwise derailing the argument regardless of the point of view of the other side has put the shill at a stumble.

He sure gave up easy.

The thing is that everyone believes conspiracies. It's the stigmatism that lets this shit happen.

I think he gave up then, so he could keep playing. It seems to have gotten him the state department job.

John Kerry was never swiftboated? I hope you're joking and I just can't see the context. The term "swiftboating" is named after political attacks that were used against Kerry in his presidential run to demean his opposition to Vietnam despite being a veteran. The swift boats were mentioned in an ad and were the crux of the attack. That term wouldn't exist without Kerry and that election. So, again, I hope you're joking in saying "Kerry never got swiftboated".

Uh huh. Right, okay.

I think that just makes you stupid.

Be careful, you're probably violating federal law by saying this.

Mmm, yes. If only I could siphon enough money from The Clinton Foundation to feed my growing colony of lizard people.

She's going to prison. You might even be caught up in the indictment for participating in a criminal conspiracy for working at CTR.

If even 1 of those RICO violations was proven why would the post be banned? Oh probably because youre a piece of shit.

CTR shill detected!

Attacking users and the sub after a warning? Goodbye.

[removed]

Come the 8th I'll carry on moderating without all this political asshattery clogging up the sub. As a Brit I don't really think it particularly matters which representative of Goldman Sachs, the Deep State and the M.I.C you vote for, you're all fucked either way. I'm always OK with banning rule breaking though, like yourself. One more down.

You are the weakest link. Goodbye

So sad to hear about OP committing suicide

[deleted]

just relax and let the barbell consume you

Check your brake lines.

Tragic accident

Rockefeller Fondation:

$350,000 for CGI (Annual Meeting sponsorship), $850 for Haiti

Haiti doesn't get shrimp and champagne.

Relevant

Holy shit the shills are out in full force

They are in desperation mode!

Yeah, expect more posts like OP's in the next few days.

Fear not, the T_D_BOTS are out also

http://m.imgur.com/5GOibcl

Yeah they're going to be pissed when Trump stiffs them on their pay.

OP:

Learn how to present a case.

This is like when my clients send me an email with like 11 attachments and say 'Here's the supporting evidence.' I say: 'Fine. It'll take me at least an hour to peruse each of these emails, taking notes, cross-referencing one to another, trying to work out which bits of each attachment you think are relevant to the case you are trying to make, and then producing a written summary for my own use and finally responding to you to check that I've understood everything.

OR

You could put your argument in writing, referring to the attachments, so that I can understand in a few minutes what would otherwise take me a long time to work out.

One of these is going to cost you £100s, the other about a tenth of that.'

It's the same here. I have limited time to follow arguments people are making on reddit - I have a job, and a life.

If you say you have "proof" of wrongdoing, make your argument, and link to the supporting evidence as you go along. I'm not trawling through great chunks of text in the hope that I can work out what you think is 'evidence' - let alone 'proof'.

I'm sorry, my telepathy organs are malfunctioning right now.

Oh, wait. Sorry.

Edit: I don't watch 18 minute long videos produced by people I've never heard of allegedly setting out theories about wholesale conspiracies which run counter to my extensive experience of real life.

What I will do is read a paragraph summarising the allegations because that takes me 30 seconds and not a third of an hour.

The reason I take that approach is that in the 20 odd years since I first had access to the internet, too many of these videos that I have been invited to watch have been (quite apart from sometimes being almost unwatchable) complete and utter bollocks from start to finish, sloppy arguments, inadequate evidence, begging the question, logic fails, unjustified assumptions, jumping the gun, every sloppy technique.

'Proof' that Harold Smith got a blow job from Elaine Jones is a video in which they are both clearly identifiable and there's no evidence of tampering via Adobe Premiere Pro. Demonstrating that they were once at the same party and seen talking together and that Elaine has given blow jobs to other people and that Harold has had blow jobs from other people and that Daryl Hackenback wrote an email to his mother saying that he thought there was something fishy about them being at the same party - there's nothing there.

The video is basically just a guy reading Podesta emails/memos (released by Wikileaks) and talking about how they're linked, and why it's relevant, with supporting statements from journalistic sources such as the NY Times

So - time consuming and inconclusive. I'm not a speed reader, but I can certainly read an email a bloody sight quicker than someone reading it out aloud.

I wouldn't dream of linking to an 18 minute video without either i) saying exactly what the video is and probably ii) giving a time check for the relevant clip.

The Young Turks are liberal/progressive smart guys who have quite a following, and have for a while, although their popularity have fallen off. I watch them from time to time because they do their research, even if I don't share their politics and, therefore, their conclusions. You do yourself a disservice not to know them.

There are at least a thousand things I want to do. I'm currently working through the kings of England on Wikipedia, one at a time from William of Normandy.

There are some things, therefore, I don't have time for, and 18 minute conspiracy videos at first blush are one of them.

I felt I had to go and watch the O'Keefe video, because it was referenced so many times. Afterwards, I felt I'd probably lost some IQ points. So, if someone posts 'Proof! Somebody you know has been accused of fifty things she never actually did, has done something wrong', I'm going to want something more direct than a link to an 18 minute video before investigating.

I prefer to read as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-bill-clinton-inc-hacked-memo-reveals-intersection-of-charity-and-personal-income/2016/10/26/3bf84bba-9b92-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html

Thank you.

I read the article (lot less than 18 minutes of effort) but I don't see anything that constitutes

ACTUAL PROOF of Clinton[s] selling favors to foreign governments during her time as SoS.

...or in fact, anything that even makes that link at all.

Good job I didn't waste 18 minutes on that Young Turks video, right?

Up to you. You've spent the same time arguing that it was a waste of time.

I think the Washington Post article is a bit sanitized. The TYT vid actually shows the actual email snippets, but it doesn't constitute legal evidence. It shows that the lawyer, Band, being upset at Chelsea asking questions about things, stating that his clients don't really care about the fund, shows the millions that the firm has made for both the fund and Bill Clinton broken down by year, and he points out that they stand to earn $66M over the next decade, and that Chelsea's interference jeopardizes should the media find out.

Reasonable people can see the veiled threat, but it obviously it can be argued differently in court because the essential point, what the Clintons have done in return, is missing.

the essential point, what the Clintons have done in return, is missing.

Well, yeah. Since that's actually the crux of the allegation, since there's nothing suspicious let alone illegal in the Clintons receiving payments.

I felt I'd probably lost some IQ points

Well, to be perfectly fair, you started out with a deficit in that department.

Yeah, keep it up bozo.

[deleted]

I'm having a miserable time all round, thanks for asking. The last four weeks have been awful, what with one thing and another.

Doesn't affect my posting on reddit.

Lol, It's about to get a whole lot worse for ole Walt.

Just that guy you've never heard about is a pretty famous big deal. The Young Turks is a reputable, liberally biased, online only news station that has been around for well over a decade. Thanks for correcting the record on your lack of knowledge though.

Thanks for correcting the record on your lack of knowledge though.

Hey, no problem. There are, like, millions of things I don't know. If I stick with this internet thing, though, soon I'll know as many things as you, right?

That is the goal. Yes. Good luck to you friend.

In all seriousness The Young Turks is pretty much all we have for unbiased media.

Well, I've heard of them now.

Still unlikely to watch anybody's 18 minute video linked by someone saying 'ACTUAL PROOF' (hey, block caps - it must be significant, right?) of fundamental wrongdoing by someone who's regularly accused of wrongdoing by people who have a a grudge and a mental block but it always turns out that they're adding 2+2 and making 41, and the alleged proof is hardly even evidence, let alone proof.

It's a once-bitten-twice-shy kinda thing.

Lol so maybe do your own research like everyone else? If you've noticed, there have been several Clinton dumps over the last few weeks. It's in the examination process, notice how most of these posters are adding info they have found for themselves on top of what is posted. If you want a tl;dr than you have to wait until the evidence is examined more, you can't expect instant gratification in this it takes time. All these leaks add a few more pieces to a puzzle, it's impossible to give definitive answers at this point.

Tl;dr people really need to take some time and examine the evidence for themselves and draw their own conclusions with the facts laid out in front of them.

1. Is it likely that Hillary Clinton has done things that some people won't approve of? Of course. In the history of the human race has probably never been a politician whose every act met with universal approval.

2. Is it likely that Hillary Clinton has been involved in wholesale financial fraud or political deceit, as she is frequently accused of? No. It's not impossible, but it's highly unlikely. This is a conclusion which one would reach prima facie about any senior politician.

Therefore, if I'm browsing Reddit and I read the thread title "this is ACTUAL PROOF…" I am motivated to look and see whether – against likelihood – someone has produced solid evidence, or even proof, that Hillary Clinton is indeed the sort of person that Republican diehards accuse her of being.

I have absolutely no intention of spending hours trawling the World Wide Web in an effort to discover something which I consider to be highly improbable. But I will look at a Reddit post to see what it says.

So far every leak has turned out to be wishy-washy and every accusation has turned out to be unfounded, except for the original allegation that she used a personal server for her emails against department regulations.

Shouldn't the fact that there is a new leak on her every other day point to the direction of scum? The fact she knowingly broke the law by having her own unsecured server in an attempt to keep control of information should be enough to disqualify her from any political position, especially considering she very much ordered destruction of evidence. This is fact.

Then there's the actual security concern she ignored. That guy Guccifer wasn't a hacker, he was some guy who read Hillary's autobiography and guessed her password. He read her emails every fucking morning with his coffee, and gets extradited for imprisonment. All the while saying that she has no reason to believe annnnyyyone in the world could have possibly read any emails besides that one guy.

Political and presidential candidates shouldn't openly say politicians should have a public side and a business side, because they just shouldn't. It's immoral to lie to the people you represent. So much for having a president that inspires you.

in an attempt to keep control of information

There's no evidence of that. You are imposing your own conclusion on a fact. As a matter of law/logic you have to demonstrate that that was her motive.

Clearly, there were breaches of security. But the head of the FBI, a known Republican, was unable to find the evidence necessary to prosecute her.

There's no evidence she lied, either - so far as I am aware. People say, e.g. 'She said there were no confidential emails, but there were, she said there were not emails marked confidential, but there were'. In fact, she said there were no emails with 'confidential' headers and there weren't; the FBI accepted that she didn't realise that a portion header 'C' could mean confidential. And only 3 emails out of the bunch had even a 'C' portion header.

Yes, she made mistakes. Yes, she was culpable for those mistakes. But to constantly assert - as has been happening for the past six months at least - that she has lied and that she had some ulterior motives is simply to state a belief that is not grounded in the evidence, but represents a personal conviction.

I should say I'm English, living in England, so my assessment is as objective as it gets. (Apart from the fact that the prospect of a Trump presidency is truly terrifying.)

Okay so even though there are X many emails still unreleased, not a matter of national national security - ok. Just knowingly set up an insecure server. Whatever. How about the fact that she obviously rigged this election against the person that ACTUALLY was beating Trump in the polls. What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

And just one more time so you can't dodge the question:

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

She's a snake, and a liar and a cheater. It really doesn't take a genius to figure out she's scum. Stop arguing like a lawyer and think like a person. Just because something is in the grey area of legal doesn't make it right. I just can't see myself ever supporting a candidate I consider immoral.

It really doesn't take a genius to figure out she's scum.

This sort of language makes it clear that there is no point in discussing the matter with you.

Lol k you lose/are a loser grats

Dude. This isn't high school.

No it's the internet SUPER SERIOUS

You really took one line and decided that was how you were going to deflect. You're probs some CTR pussy, die bro.

Nice.

With people like you trashing Clinton on the internet, no wonder rational people are voting against Trump.

Lol nice assumption that since I'm trashing Hillary I must love Trump. I asked a question twice in one post so you couldn't ignore it and you still weaseled out of answering. What's the point debating with someone who's lying to themselves. I'd rather make funny of you for being a close minded dip shit.

Lol nice assumption that since I'm trashing Hillary I must love Trump.

See, this is why discussions with some people are pointless. Either you can't comprehend ordinary English, or you're too enraged to read carefully.

Let me explain: not only did I not make that assumption, but furthermore, nothing I wrote suggested that I had. For all I know you could be voting for that libertarian candidate, you know, the forgettable one.

Just so we're clear: it's that sentence including the word 'scum' that brought the discussion to an end, and then you started up with the insult flinging. Notice I didn't descend to your level.

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

Just so we're clear: it's that sentence including the word 'scum' that brought the discussion to an end....

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

What's the precedent for the head of the DNC stepping down after being implicated in being unbiased towards candidates, and then immediately made head of the campaign for the person she was accused of favoring?

Hahaha you're so pathetic bro you simply refuse to answer. I highly suggest you commit suicide.

I highly suggest you commit suicide.

Why would I do that, just when I'm having so much fun out-arguing you on reddit? :D

Refuses to respond to points he doesn't agree with - "out-arguing".

You're parents would be so mad you got onto their account.

I've tried to get my dad interested in reddit but at 80 years of age he's mostly interested in gardening and hanging out with his friends. My mum's a little younger, but she goes on the internet almost entirely to check the lottery, send and receive emails, and buy stuff.

Edit: an ing

First off, genuinely nice deflection. 2 how many friends can your dad really have? And 3 your mom would have better odds playing online blackjack than winning the lottery, why do you let them set their money on fire?

Also that other question I've asked twenty times you refuse to acknowledge.

My dad has quite a lot of friends. There's a couple of ladies that used to come over for 'doll classes' with my (deceased) step-mother - they used to make replica dolls, right through from making the heads out of clay and firing them, through to making their clothes. Then there's the widow of one of his best friends from the RAF. Then there's the six or seven people in his Thursday evening art group (more wine and gab than art, but still), and then his neighbours on both sides. Come to think about it, his social life's better than mine. (Although he grumbles a lot more.)

My mum gets several hours of pleasure each week thinking about what she'd do with her winnings: a £million to me, a £million to my sister, a nice new house with a big garden not more than a couple of miles from where she lives now, a new car for my step-father, a £million to my step-brother, a £million to my auntie... at £2 a throw it's better value than a cinema ticket!

I forget what we were arguing about. This is more fun. How about your parents?

If your mom was smart she'd study poker theory and get addicted to something a bit more rewarding, buy her tournament poker by Sklansky and maybe a hook her up with some poker forums, maybe she could make a return on investment instead of hoping.

My dad is actually manically depressed lately, on SSI for bipolar and living by himself. I'm the only person he has and I really don't know how to help when he reaches out to me as I'm 23 and supporting a household and struggle with bipolar issues as well. My mom's better now than when I was a kid and enjoys the freedom from having to support me as she had me at a very young age. I asked her if my gf and myself could move back home if we ever got behind on our rent and she assured me that would not be possible, so our relationship is strained. Poor families suck.

Also all that corruption mei nigz

My mum's not addicted to the lottery. My stepdad goes down to the shop once a week to buy two tickets. Then she luxuriates in all the pleasurable fantasies. Poker would be too-oo stressful.

Sorry to hear about your dad - and your mom. Also, that you are at risk of falling behind in your rent. That's rough.

I'm not entirely comfortable, but at this time I'm in no danger of being unable to pay rent. I have had problems in the past. One time while I was studying law my landlord said 'If you can't afford the rent, skip it for a while until your on solid ground'. He was a good bloke. (His father was a very nasty East End gangster.)

Bipolar - wow. I have no end of health issues but fortunately no mental health issues (is that acceptable terminology now?) I had a client who'd been diagnosed with schizophrenia - actually, my clients were his parents. His mother could not bring herself to accept that her son was really unwell - he'd stabbed his father in the neck and talked about aliens making him kill his brother - she thought that all he needed was regular meals and a mother's love. I suppose I'm trying to say that we all have shit to deal with and although you gotta play the hand you were dealt, other people know and sympathise with what you're going through and may be going through similar shit as well.

Eh not truly complaining just indulging my weaker side. I have my girlfriend, cat and weed to keep me happy, life is genuinely better than it ever was at home. I've spent a lot of time helping people in worse situations than myself these past few years, and appreciate I live much more comfortably than many others. As someone who grew up poorer than anyone I know, and being as observant and informed as I have always been, that's why I feel the way that I do about politicians being a shit show. Everyone my age knows the system is rigged against us so it makes it much harder for people like me who come from garbage. It's too easy to get trapped in the same ghetto you were born in, never seeing the world, never really living. Our country is broken, and it makes me sad how far conversations can stray without accomplishing anything. That's why I'm so sad about this election, nobody wins, just everybody loses.

Eh not truly complaining just indulging my weaker side. I have my girlfriend, cat and weed to keep me happy, life is genuinely better than it ever was at home. I've spent a lot of time helping people in worse situations than myself these past few years, and appreciate I live much more comfortably than many others. As someone who grew up poorer than anyone I know, and being as observant and informed as I have always been, that's why I feel the way that I do about politicians being a shit show. Everyone my age knows the system is rigged against us so it makes it much harder for people like me who come from garbage. It's too easy to get trapped in the same ghetto you were born in, never seeing the world, never really living. Our country is broken, and it makes me sad how far conversations can stray without accomplishing anything. That's why I'm so sad about this election, nobody wins, just everybody loses.

Eh not truly complaining just indulging my weaker side. I have my girlfriend, cat and weed to keep me happy, life is genuinely better than it ever was at home. I've spent a lot of time helping people in worse situations than myself these past few years, and appreciate I live much more comfortably than many others. As someone who grew up poorer than anyone I know, and being as observant and informed as I have always been, that's why I feel the way that I do about politicians being a shit show. Everyone my age knows the system is rigged against us so it makes it much harder for people like me who come from garbage. It's too easy to get trapped in the same ghetto you were born in, never seeing the world, never really living. Our country is broken, and it makes me sad how far conversations can stray without accomplishing anything. That's why I'm so sad about this election, nobody wins, just everybody loses.

I don't think it's right to say that the system is rigged. What it is, is that the rich and powerful have more ability to exploit the system, and the poor and powerless have very little.

It's important because this provides context. The rich and powerful have always exploited the system (or, nearly always). It's how England turned from a Saxon country to a Norman country, it's how the Confederate south funded the war, it's how Spanish and Portuguese royalty carved out empires in the new world.

But things are getting better. No-one was worrying about elections in the fifteenth century, because governments and administrations were monarchies and dictatorships. It might not have arrived quickly enough for you and your family, but the introduction of democracy is pretty much irreversible (like the appearance of atmospheric oxygen on Earth) and eventually societies will be fair - perhaps not totally fair, but enough so that it doesn't make a big difference.

Very true, and your point isn't lost on me. But at the same time, the people who have been in control have stood by as the world was destroyed, who support the people making the most money off of the most immoral things. We as a people can do far more damage in a much shorter time than at any point in history, thus requiring us to be more responsible as a whole because the failures would be more devastating now than they have in the past. Which we are not doing now, this entire election is irresponsible as fuck. Either way rights will be lost. The only thing the candidates agree on is that people on the federal watchlist (a list that requires no due process) should not bear arms (constitutional right). Hillary supports fracking and Trump doesn't even believe in global warming. This global climate is a travesty.

Oh dear, you're not in a good place, are you?

Believe me, if Hillary is elected, the US will be far more responsive to climate change issues than it has ever been. Plus, while I wouldn't want to encourage people in power to act as if global warming isn't a threat, the way it will work is this: as the problems get more imminent and more serious, more money and effort will be spent in solving the problems. People like Elon Musk are leading the way, but where I am - for example - they are constructing a huge wind farm out to sea - dozens of giant wind generators in long rows. Eventually, there will be a tipping point and suddenly renewables will be cheaper than oil, and then it will all change.

People are already working on atmospheric scrubbers, which will remove greenhouse gases from the air and do something useful with it; they'll do the same thing with sea water.

I'm not saying this is enough; already there are serious threats to peoples lives and livelihoods all over the world. But there isn't going to be a global disaster.

Edit: typo

I'm not entirely convinced that she would say no to big oil and yes to climate response. You're likely right about waiting for disaster before reacting but it's so frustrating watching these people piss our tax money away while people like me have never even come close to getting ahead. We could probably talk for days but it's really not getting anywhere. I understand she is the lesser of two evils, but I refuse to say I support either of them. It's just hypocritical by nature.

I'm sorry, my telepathy organs are malfunctioning right now.

Dude, you spent more time coming up with a useless rebuttal that tries to explain why you are intellectually lazy.

If knowledge were food you would be like a baby. You want your food chewed up and spit in your worthless mouth.

No, your telepathy is not the problem. It's your lack of a rational functioning brain.

You want your food chewed up and spit in your worthless mouth.

Excuse me? That escalated rather suddenly, didn't it?

It might take you 18 minutes to come up with my last post, but for me it was significantly faster than watching that video. Like, a tenth of the time.

However, since you descended into nasty insults in no time at all, you've removed all incentive I had to find out more on this subject so...

...buh bye.

you've removed all incentive I had to find out more on this subject so..

Horse laugh here. Like you actually had any incentive to begin with.

Nasty insult? No. I made a graphic comparison about your mental outlook. You want all information chewed up, predigested and spewed into your weak mind and then when I point this out in a graphic way to demonstrate your completely worthless viewpoints you claim I've insulted you so badly you lost incentive to do your own thinking. As if you ever did. Thanks buddy for making your dismissal so easy.

The temptation is so-o-o great, but I promised I'd give up arguing with morons.

[removed]

Who asked you, dumbass?

[removed]

Hmm, let's see.

I'm swapping insults with someone on reddit, but I'm the one who's getting the flak?

What's wrong with this picture.

I hate The Young Turks but they summarized it perfectly today on their channel

Agreed it's insane. But clinton voters now fall into two camps: the denialers and the uninformed

No, there's also plenty of Lesser-of-two-Evils folks fully aware of how bad she is, but believing Trump is worse.

Amazing how easily the republicans would win, if their candidate wasn't the single worst person to try to be president.

which brings us back to the whole conspiracy theory that Trump is actually hired by Clinton to run against her so that compared to him she will look like a good choice. I laughed the first time I heard that, now it seems to be making more and more sense every day....

Im honestly glad its Trump. As bad as a person people think he is, he is not a politician, nor had had a real career in politics. I think that adds a dimension to him that gives me hope.

Have you read much about his history as a corrupt, ruthless and often ineffectual businessman?

Three camps.... You're forgetting about the "Don't Give a Fucks" because... Trump.

Same could be said about trump voters.

*deniers

I've always detested Cenk. But this is amazing that he actually tells it like it is on this issue. He nailed it.

100% agree is a tool but he finally gets right here. Good to see he could see corruption for what it is instead of blindly adhering to all forms of liberalism be it crony or pure.

I just found these guys and the first few videos I watched were interesting. Then they started to go a little off the rails, more extreme views and outlandish claims that seemed to just be an advertisement for their subscription. I want my political revolution with more pragmatism.

I'd love to find a more common sense, moderate alternative.

I still listen to Jimmy Dore on his channel, because he rants better than Cenk ever could.

Which vid?

maybe this one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApcqXijVzYU

Wow, yeah. I generally can't stand Cenk, but he did great work there.

If you promptly summarize what they did, in a brief narrative, I will be sure to get it out by early tomorrow.

Something like, "Doug Band asked Bill Clinton to do X, for which he paid $Y. Clinton did it <date range>, but word leaked out in <date range>, causing the Foundation to cover up by doing Z."

MAGA

It was illegal for Bill to golf with Kelly?

What favors did she do for Dow Chemical following the meeting? What was the end result?

9B dollar trial outcome. Maybe watch the video?

I don't see a video anywhere in the OP. She was the ruling party at the trial? She influenced the judge to rule in favor of Dow? She threatened the opposing council? How did anyone in the Clinton foundation get involved. Paying for a round of golf with a big wig is not a crime.

This is the point.

It needs to be easily consumable. The majority of people need to be able to easily read it so it can gain traction

Something like this post proving intent:

http://m.imgur.com/TnMr9yR

Perhaps break yours down into bite size?

Sadly, it works

That was ...incredibly weak. Deleting emails does not, in and of itself prove that misdeeds were committed. It's extremely common in organizations that are subject to public records requests or are political in nature. These are all extremely shady characters to be sure but if that's the best anyone can come up with for prosecutable evidence I'm abandoning this thread.

thanks, will share your text as widely as I can

TYT did a segment on this story yesterday. I would watch it to get the major points. Cenk does a good job of translating what occurred and why.

A link please. I keep seeing it mentioned, no link. Scouring their YT channel now, no dice.

I got you

Thanks for summarizing so quickly.

It almost looks like this is already out there...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/11/02/cenk_uygur_doug_bandteneo_emails_are_rosetta_stone_of_clinton_corruption.html?src=ilaw

http://www.newyorker.com/news/benjamin-wallace-wells/the-trouble-with-doug-band

MAGA! Time to drain the swamp!

Curious so looked at your post history. Seriously think you've become unhinged and gone a bit mad.

Is this an auto response like "delete your account"?

Either way, completely useless comment.

Out of curiosity, was the evidence leading you to that conclusion something pertaining specifically to my own post history, or is it due to the generally high level of interest in conspiracy theories among so many centipedes like me at this time?

Just your general choice in words.

If anything comes to mind that I could do to sound less insane, I'd be happy to hear it.

Interesting. Thank you for telling me.

Perhaps I'm just being dense, but what does any of this mean? It just looks like some regular memo with semi-corrupt charity stuff, like what all charities do.

What happened to us, /r/conspiracy? we used to be trying to get to the bottom of huge world-government level conspiracies, and now we're just revealing that a politician is no different from other politicians

forgive me for being skeptical, but.... where's the beef. what do we have here? what is it evidence of? it doesn't look like much of anything to my untrained eyes. you obviously seem like an expert, but you haven't explained anything.

your post history makes you like some sort of nsa/hacker type. i'm naturally very, very, very, untrusting of anything presented by people with those sorts of skills.

i'm sorry are we watching the same video?

we have here cenk ugyur explaining that donations to the clinton foundation were rewarded with a favorable ear from the politicians involved. this is a pretty regular occurrence, actually, politicians are given money and in return those who give money are rewarded with attention. this process is called lobbying. generally, this attention is rewarded for contributions to campaigns rather than charity, which seems like pretty much strictly better. dont tell me you're naive enough to think that this sort of scandal isn't commonplace in DC

this ranks as a 2/10 on the conspiracy scale (2/10 for "Unsurprising or expected result, leak is ignored by mainstream media for lack of public interest, or is buried under other second page news within a few days", for context, Snowden was more like a 4/10). It's not a major conspiracy, nor the root of all evil, let alone a world-government level discovery. nobody died, nobody was killed and buried in a park, and nobody bribed somebody to stop investigating them in court... this is not even the biggest conspiracy to break this election season, not even the biggest clinton conspiracy this season. if i were you i would be a little bit less melodramatic and dig deeper to find something a bit more exciting

That's fair, it's still pretty uncomfortable and like definitely we need reforms to the political system to prevent stuff, but it's hardly remarkable. Clinton and insiders will continue to pull shit and nobody will be able to do anything. Honestly, for all the problems with Clinton i can't really hope she doesn't win the presidency, as Trump would most likely be worse.

I think we need to really continue to put pressure on the government over the next four years to have an independent leftist movement and so that we can start reforming at midterm season. Or I suppose I could move to somewhere with condorcet voting or something

I mean, in a narrow sense, yeah, but I would imagine that things expand far beyond the level of quid pro quolitics. As far as the email thing, if there's anything here, it's something big. The question is how much is connected. Kaine seems like a petulant child, so I doubt he's involved, and the Brazile thing is frankly just stupid (wait you mean there would be questions on the flint water poisoning in flint michigan?!?!?), but as for the emails are we looking at a huge structure or several small structures. Comey is a republican and the timing of the Weiner thing seems designed to affect the election, but it seems ineffective to the point that either Comey is relatively unimportant in the underlying structure, or he's a fool, or he's a fall guy for a conspiracy designed to look like the Clinton left is under attack.

Regardless, the efforts by the citizenry have been pretty pathetic up to this point. Like you don't even need a masterful conspiracy to deal with a bunch of dudes chilling in central park grilling hot dogs and filling out FOIA requests. Really if there's real change you want somebody deep on the inside, not a mook like snowden, but somebody with real power and influence, to go public and do damage, while becoming high enough profile that they don't just accidentally light their flat on fire

Here is a good example...

AccessHealthSource

Eleven defendants were indicted on RICO charges for allegedly assisting AccessHealthSource, a local health care provider, in obtaining and maintaining lucrative contracts with local and state government entities in the city of El Paso, Texas, “through bribery of and kickbacks to elected officials or himself and others, extortion under color of authority, fraudulent schemes and artifices, false pretenses, promises and representations and deprivation of the right of citizens to the honest services of their elected local officials” (see indictment).[33]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

A few of those apply.

This is a ring of conspirators that intentionally, knowingly, and maliciously conspired against the rights of citizens for honest representation, and Clintonworld did so for their own personal gains.

true, but is that ring of conspirators doing anything that doesn't get done constantly in washington. if you want to tell me that the government is corrupt, fine, if you want to present examples of crime under our noses, great, but dont' assume these people are dumb. if this were the worst thing out there, the real secrets, it wouldn't have been leaked. this is essentially the scraps that get tossed to the dogs on the outside to misdirect us from the real newsworthy stuff

It would have been so much more helpful if this information was out and available during the primary season instead of election. Now we're screwed either way.

If we would've gotten Bernie instead of Hillary, this election would be exceptionally exciting.

It would have been laughably one sided.

Hopefully on Bernie's end too!

Anyone remember the story "the boy who cried wolf"? Because this time people will believe you, right'

And Hillary is crying wolf! Desperation mode!

She's terrified of life in prison.

You are Correct!

FBI's Clinton Foundation investigation now 'a very high priority

You are now an approved submitter to r/freeworldnews.

Thanks

Can we PLEASE limit the deplorables from reposting their /r/The_Drumpf bullshit in this sub?

Just because Alex Jones is drinking the Kunty Koolaid doesn't mean /r/conspiracy should as well.

I think you're falling victim to the either or bullshit. Most redditors, and people for that matter, think that you either HAVE to vote Hill the Shill or Donald Dickhead. So because you posted anti-Hillary stuff, you must be a Trump supporter. It happens to me on here all the time. I can't stand either. They both should be in jail. Yet as soon as I point out any documented wrongdoing by either, their fanatic acolytes jump down my throat armed with fervor and willful ignorance.

I think we're also in agreement that the current predicament's fault lies with the dems. They colluded to oust Bernie. They did their best behind the scenes to get Trump the primary win because they thought he was the most beatable. This is the election the establishment dems colluded to give us. I don't think I've ever been so angry at the political climate in this country than I am right now.

Do you play civ 6 lol

Not 6 but I've played 5 a few times over the years. I'm sorry I don't get the reference.

wrong path James

well thats all the evidence i need.

Keep posting in enoughTrumpSpam...and do us all a favor and stay there

/r/Operation_Berenstain is a brand new sub created to crowd source information regarding the FBI docs. Keep in mind, this is a place that has NO TIES TO ANY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, ONCE YOU SUBSCRIBE ALLEGIANCES MEAN NOTHING. Your sole focus is sharing data with other users and connecting dots to put Crooked and the Gang behind bars. Please visit. AGAIN NO POKITICS, ONLY DATA AND RESEARCH ARE WANTED.

"No politics" except specifically witch-hunting one particular political candidate?

Information is information. If it implicates all of the candidates then so be it.

That's such a line of bullshit, though. Just look at the damned subreddit. It's entirely made up of crossposts from /r/The_Donald.

From their sidebar: "THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT CLINTON HAS COMMITTED TREASON LEVEL CRIME... WE MUST CONTINUE TO EXPOSE THESE SEVERE CRIMES SO THAT THE CLINTON ESTABLISHMENT CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY SEIZE POWER UNDEMOCRATICALLY." (Caps theirs, as apparently the entire subreddit is populated solely by people with broken Caps Lock keys).

This isn't some even-handed, sane, reasoned attempt to sift through released emails to determine the truth. This is a witch-hunt, plain and simple. It's ludicrous to claim that it's apolitical, when the clearly-stated goal is to destroy one candidate.

To destroy one candidate.. For right now.

Lol it's sponsored by the drumpf

That which is destroyed by truth, should never be spared it's demise.

Truth would be great -- but it's not what that subreddit is after.

I like the sound of that

The sound of a sizzling load of incoherent conspiracy bullshit just like this subreddit. Reddit managed to fuck up pretty badly in their hunt for the Boston bomber, why should I believe any of these capslock tabloid headlines? I've already seen and called out many Trump supporters making completely unbased claims while they, in the same sentence, link to an article that completely counters their argument. It's pretty clear these guys are just making shit up to instill some subliminal mind-control propaganda strategy. Come on. People are real quick to out Clinton trolls when nobody bats an eye over the garbage spewing out of /r/the_donald.

Reddit managed to fuck up pretty badly in their hunt for the Boston bomber

Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.

Less corrupt more organic United Nations focused on the 99% rather then 1%. Sounds good to me too.

There is just so much stuff that clinton did bad that I actually feel overwhelmed by the breadth and depth of it.

When my smart friends say, "She's the most qualified candidate we've ever had", your comment is what I'm thinking.

don't forget the sheer width!

Unfortunately it's not going to. This is very clearly a lesser of two evils election, and Trump basically financed his campaign with money from his foundation. This is without the long list of grievances that his opponents are already laying against him. Basically the vast majority of people in charge are going to plug their ears about this for the next several years because the alternative is much worse.

This is very clearly a lesser of two evils election

Really? Trump wants to return America to greatness and Hillary wants to dominate the world.

Trump really blew this one. He was up against one of the least liked candidates ever and managed to fuck up spectacularly

Who said he fucked up?? The election didn't even happen yet, trump is going to win in a landslide, mark this comment

RemindMe! One week

I will be messaging you on 2016-11-10 02:54:37 UTC to remind you of this link.

4 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.

^{Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.}

That's rather ballsy of you given the current poll aggregates. How do you define landslide?

He will win the popular vote by 4 million votes, and electoral votes by 40.. he'll get 305.. this is brexit 2.0.. why would you believe any polling? The media is covering up everything for Clinton, im not basing anything off what CNN says. I actually have a strong belief New Jersey is going red. I put 1k at 10-1 odds on it

I believe in the polling because frankly saying otherwise is bullshit. Obviously some polls are going to be biased, so I use 538's Poll Aggregate to average the good polls and weed out the bad ones. It was the most accurate estimate in the previous two elections.

Here is their most accurate estimate.

Keep in mind that the majority of the current Trump upswing is largely from Gary Johnson loosing 50% of his support over the past week.

Since you mentioned New Jersey specifically.

I personally would not consider the election rigged if it ends up anywhere close to this. This is what Nixon's rigging looked like, and he didn't actually mess with the voting process. To claim the system rigged on a very normal-looking map is garbage pandering, which may incite violence from some communities (especially if Trump refuses to accept the results).

Lol

Decidedly not a landslide, but congratulations nonetheless.

Depends how you look at it but he won almost every battleground state and took Wisconsin, in my book it really wasn't close. But I respect you giving credit.

TBH he would have had to win every "battleground" state to have a chance, but that conclusion was made before this crazy map started to unfold. Mind if I ask why you decided to vote for Trump?

Well to start off, she is the most corrupt and criminal politician I've ever seen. She should be in jail, it's amazing her followers were ignorant to this. I don't agree with everything Trump says but for the most part I agree with his philosophy. Cut corporate taxes, lower income taxes, increase fiscal stimulus, get the illegal immigrants out of our country.

I agree that Clinton was a terrible choice in candidate, and has some serious scandals that need to be resolved with her. If she was facing Romney I would have stayed home. However, saying supporters were "ignorant" of this is like saying you are "ignorant" of many of Trump's outlandish statements (which he either won't or can't act upon as president, which is why I'm not worried about the future like other people). Both sides took the flaws of their candidate and decided that they weren't as important as the other issues at stake, which is why they made that decision in the first place.

Least liked with deep pockets and deeper connections. *

LOL. Trump is 10+ in the polls and Hillary is prepping for jail.

Some of them, yes

what are you talking about?

the highest margins I can find in Trump's favor are about +5 (+1 among polls carrying any weight), and way more of the polls have shown him down by more than that.

It's tightening but she's still got an average 2-4 points on im and she's winning early voting polls too

10+ in the polls

As if this matters and not the electoral college

The only way Hillary will win is by cheating. We are seeing this now.

Just like Crooked Hillary used Donna to cheat at the debates.

http://tvline.com/2016/10/31/donna-brazile-fired-cnn-debate-questions-hillary-clinton/

Spin whatever narrative you want but Trump really fucked up after the primaries

You're not wrong. Trump is a fuck up. No doubt. He sticks his foot in his mouth at every chance he gets. I could say the same thing as he is with the same intention and nuance it so it would be politically correct. He just is a hamfisted blowhard.

However, I will vote for him because the alternative is horrendous. What is the choice, a jerk who says shit that is offensive and cringey as hell or a corrupt, pathological liar who may or may not get her enemies dead. People sure as hell have a penchant for dying after crossing the Clinton Crime family.

What is the choice, a jerk who says shit that is offensive and cringey as hell or a corrupt, pathological liar who may or may not get her enemies dead.

Pretty much, yeah

but i mean, that jerk is also a corrupt, pathological liar who's openly explained he's obsessed with revenge.

hell, most of the folks people claim the Clintons killed didn't even have anything to do with the Clintons. like that dude who got killed in a weightlifting accident- he wasn't set to testify to the FBI, there was nothing connecting him to the email case before it showed up on online rags after he died.

it's like, now I even see people trying to pin the death of Gareth Williams on Bill Clinton. the dude died in Britain in 2010!

Interestingly enough, some of Trump's verbal gaffes have led people to believe he is a corrupt, pathological liar who may or may not get his enemies dead as well. "Maybe second amendment people can do something about it"? Really?

Another one of his dumb "dad" jokes. Unlike Hillary who has had so many associates die they actually refer to the phenomenon as "Arkacide" . I wonder how long Huma is going to last before she has a chance to speak to FBI again.

Trump is just one giant Poe's Law. He and his campaign staff haven't given any indication as to whether he really meant that or not, his supporters assume he's kidding and everyone else is getting nervous. Especially since he followed up with "Why are we even having an election, why can't we just award it to me right now?".

"Why are we even having an election, why can't we just award it to me right now?"

Trump humor.

Hillary wanted to use a drone to kill Snowden, or was it Assange? I forget which. Her staff thought it was a joke but she didn't crack a smile and continued on as if she meant it as a question for planning and discussion.

If that's humor nobody found it funny.

You mean Trump's comments? I laughed.

Well, these sorts of comments are dangerously toeing the line of what is acceptable for anyone in modern society. What he describes as "locker room talk" is not really something people should be saying in the first place. Furthermore, several cases have arisen regarding past interactions of exactly what he described, that he will go to court for on November 28th. A few of the assumed victims have received enough death threats to back out of press conferences, which is not something I would consider normal human behavior.

Oh wait, did you see the Veritas videos? You know, the ones about instigating a riot? How they got their marching orders from HRC? Hmm?

I can't wait until the court hearings.

http://jezebel.com/heres-how-that-wild-lawsuit-accusing-trump-of-raping-a-1782447083

In all the videos of rally violence I've seen, Trump supporters scream obscenities at literally everyone else as police try to hold them back. This is further supported by Trump edging some of them on personally, claiming that he would pay their legal fees if they choose to do something more violent.

Also, I really don't see how jezebel.com is a relevant source to anything.

You must be a denier.

You're projecting.

Compilation shows Trump supporters being BRUTALLY attacked while media blames them

That's exactly what you are doing. You need professional help. I can't help you.

Sure, there have been a few cases where the favor was returned. However, unlike Trump nobody else encourages that kind of behavior. Immediately after the republican offices in North Carolina were attacked, it was immediately denounced. The difference in professionalism and respect for the democratic process is clear.

You are living in your own world. Trump is leading in everything.

Lol whatever you say

Everyone knows Hillary is a Weiner Sandwich.

RemindMe! November 9th

Well, he's done worse things with his foundation, has managed to insult every minority that has more than 1% of the voting block, refuses to release his tax returns, is currently under investigation for a number of alleged sexual assaults, plans on draining the federal budget $1 trillion, and has backpedaled on almost all of his major talking points.

Meanwhile his supporters continue to use violence and intimidation tactics, including burning churches and booby trapping campaign signs at election offices. He has also made statements to the effect that these people should not accept a Hillary victory if it happens, encourages them to physically attack protestors that show up, and say that they should try "exercising their second amendment rights" (AKA shooting people). He has been claiming that the election is rigged for moths before the election even started so that if he looses he already has a narrative spread out for people to latch onto.

It's not that hard to see why people would think he's worse off. Hell, I've talked to people who think his entire campaign was based off of controlling people through pandering, violence and fear.

You people are so lost and its so sad!

FBI's Clinton Foundation investigation now 'a very high priority

What do you mean "you people"? I'm just stating the facts here. Some people find the above considerably worse than the foundation scandal. That is all.

You know who you are. Why is that even a question.

I'm normally an independant. What I've said so far are valid complaints that I've heard from people. Clinton's foundation scandal is also a valid complaint. I'm not spinning this in either direction, I'm just pointing out a rather common opinion who apparently hadn't heard it before.

Honestly your reaction is a little over the top. One would think a supporter would be okay with the faults of their candidate, otherwise how could they justify making the decision they made? Nobody's perfect, so you have to take candidate's flaws into account as well.

[deleted]

Wait....Thats already done.

so when did America stop being greatness

When it destroyed the Middle East based on lies.

But when it destroyed Cuba and then the Philippines based on a plot to move newspapers, that was fine, right?

Not to mention the only fresh suggestion Trump's brought to the table regarding the Middle East is "we need to start intentionally killing civilians"

^{edit: the middle east is mostly the UK's fault anyway}

Wow...you people are nuts.

What about all the drug running "endless coke" the Clintons have brought in the US? Oh you don't want to talk about that now.

lolwut?

I'm pretty sure the Clintons weren't in charge of the CIA in the 80s... what are you even talking about?

Also what's nuts about what I said? The first part was just talking about the Spanish-American and Phillippine-American Wars and that was following up on a century of state-sanctioned slavery (350 years total) and a century and a half of state-instituted genocide. And Trump's suggested we kill the families of terrorists for... revenge(?) and that we stop giving civilians warnings (because that worked out so well in the early drone strikes right?)- between that and his hatred for nation-building how is that gonna un-destroy the Middle East?

The Wall Street Journal

President Clinton was asked at his Oct. 7 press conference about Mena, a small town and airport in the wilds of Western Arkansas. Sarah McClendon, a longtime Washington curmudgeon renowned for her off-the-wall questions, wove a query around the charge that a base in Mena was "set up by Oliver North and the CIA" in the 1980s and used to "bring in planeload after planeload of cocaine" for sale in the U.S., with the profits then used to buy weapons for the Contras. Was he told as Arkansas governor? she asked.

"No," the president replied, "they didn't tell me anything about it." The alleged events "were primarily a matter for federal jurisdiction. The state really had next to nothing to do with it. The local prosecutor did conduct an investigation based on what was in the jurisdiction of state law. The rest of it was under the jurisdiction of the United States Attorneys who were appointed successively by previous administrations. We had nothing - zero - to do with it."

okay, so not only was he not in a position to tell the CIA what to do (because it was the 80s), he didn't even know about it? what was this WSJ editorial supposed to prove?

The Crimes of Mena

As suspicious as I am of this source, even it says

In a mix of wild rumor and random fact, Mena has also been a topic of ubiquitous anti-Clinton diatribes circulated by right-wing extremists - an irony in that the Mena operation was the apparent brainchild of the two previous and Republican administrations.

and I don't see anything in there suggesting Bill Clinton, who is not Hillary Clinton anyway, was involved in said crimes

Does not matter. Congress is taking care of business. She is getting locked up!

Hell yeah! She just has to commit a jailable offense first.

https://twitter.com/amandacarpenter/status/794197438647173120

did you mean to link to a crime or are we complaining about Joe Lieberman now

Jail time! Its coming. Don't you have some other CTR work to do in /r/politics? They seem to be not trying hard enough to promote Crooked Hillary!

man Crash Team Racing was the shit

I know you're probably just trolling but I really like the idea that you're arguing on five or so accounts at once and frantically throwing together random links and slogans to keep up

How many people working in the CTR office?

https://youtu.be/lYAVnd2nwAY

Ain't it like 8, 15 people?

Actual office speakers suck though; was the point of that clip that Joe Biden doesn't like Anthony Weiner?

Joe Biden said Crooked Hillary should have given all her emails to the FBI in the first place.

so he's gonna LOCKER UP? for what?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI

you really got a solid 3-5 minutes of lies there... and none of them are jailable

Its a open and shut case!

What law? This one.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

emails aren't records, proceedings, maps, books, papers, or documents/other things filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States... are you saying she deleted affidavits or something?

Anytime you are working in government...they are. Is Hillary and her online CTR trolls trying to rewrite the rules of government? LOL

was she a "clerk or officer of any court of the United States"?

also wait are you making the argument that when you work for government, all private messages received are "documents deposited with a clerk"? because that's... several kinds of wrong.

who's rewriting the rules again? read what you just posted

Was she not the Secretary of State with her home brew server?

Yes, and that is neither a clerical position nor an official position of a US court.

Further, the server handled both private and work-related messages if I'm not mistaken- sending her either of those, but especially the former, does not constitute "depositing a document with a clerk or officer of any court of the United States"

Does not matter what you make up.

Any government worker or employee has to follow the rules. Those rules are everything any one does within the government regardless if its personal or government related communications, it is required to be archived. Every single thing. Emails, faxes or documents.

But the rules you cited only apply to certain positions in the judicial branch of government.

Now, she did violate a few rules in her use of a private server. But those rules were not laws and were frequently violated without incident prior to her doing so.

Sure! Still you or she cant rewrite the rules and lie about it.

Okay, but no one's rewritten the rules, and lying (and most of her denial has been weasel-wording rather than outright lying) isn't punishable with prison.

Otherwise every candidate in the primaries- besides maybe O'Malley, Carson and Sanders- would be serving life sentences

Not sure how long you and your team can hold on. You salary and days are numbered.

after clinton wins my salary goes up 20%! and maybe 50% over the next four years

LOL good luck with that BS promise.

I mean, it's one of her central issues... I'm assuming she'd want a second term.

The Clintons should pay you. Not the government.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money/

I see your ACTUAL PROOF and I wonder why it got deleted

You're not even trying to debunk it. Total fail.

Can some one explain these emails, even for /r/conspiracy these are really broad and have no context or specific details.

I did, and he didn't state any thing illegal, just traced the money around

well the money was given to bill Clinton, and what was the favor given? A meeting? A fairly normal thing to do when some one makes a large donation to a charity. Also what is shown is neither racketeering or money laundering and has no evidence to substantiate any sort of criminal acts, but then again this is /r/conspiracy

Does anyone know what proof is?

Does anybody remember laughter?

ooh i member that one

I'm not surprised this got deleted at r/political_revolution. They pass off as trying to continue Bernie's vision, but are just really a bunch of Hill Shills.

Shit hills

Same mods as S4P when it shutdown. At the end those mods were definitely shills. The top dog was caught talking shit on an anti Bernie sub. Why I never subbed to revolution, I knew it was ran by the same assholes that ruined Sanders for Pres.

come on dude that sub was crazy anti-hillary before the Democratic Convention

i mean, have you seen where bernie's been the past four months

[deleted]

hey thats a quid pro quo. youre turning into one of them!!

Alls I can say is I have not seen anything negative about Clinton on reddit in a few weeks. All anti Trump posts or posts that are trying to sway whoever said opinion on him to the negative.

There are a few subs that are constantly posting anti-Hillary stuff. Just go to r/all and look at all the pro Trump subs. It's such a disparity that i can't be certain what the truth is.

Bro, I blocked Trump spam and that pro Trump and the shit is still leaking out in the other sub. This election is embarrassing.

"Our business has almost nothing to do with the clintons, the foundation or cgi in any way"

Pffft good one

There it is again on Page 11. "BHP – $ 175 ,000 in 2012 BHP is hosting a board of directors meeting in June of 2012. We encouraged them to do it in NY and pay Presden t Clinton through Walker.The offer is currently at the state department being vetted ."

Duh.. she's a politician. All of them sell all kinds of shit to get what they need. That's how corruption in the US works.

Reddit admins are HRC shills. It's absolutely disgusting how the admins and moderators here have behaved this election. We need to have a purge after the 8th.

I'm ready to admit I don't understand this, it's over my head, can someone who is trained to deal with this level of jargon please explain if this is valid proof of what is being claimed?

Dncleaks and wikileaks would be good subs to try as well.

I'm trying to understand what is surprising? Is it me ?

But why single her out? They all are. It's the system.

Got ya. The hidden stuff is hiding in plain site. It's been written recorded and depicted in art work for centuries. It's time to put it all together.

Literally no proof of quid pro quo in that memo or the emails - and all of it refers to Bill, not Hillary Clinton.

the documents literally say DOW had meetings with both Clintons then paid them half a million dollars for the opportunities

and that's just one example

That's not evidence of a quid pro quo. It creates the opportunity, but, for instance, what do you think DOW got in return? The Clintons have very specific and unique knowledge about how government works and it's not too far beyond the pale to think that people and companies might pay for their input.

There's certainly the possibility of corruption, but one would think that would be pretty easy to identify if true. We should be able to see DOW getting preferential treatment in public documents.

Facts are sexist.

Our business has almost nothing to do with the clintons, the foundation or cgi in any way. The chairman of ubs could care a less about cgi. Our fund clients who we do restructuring and m and a advising the same just as bhp nor tivo do. These are real companies who we provide real advice to through very serious people.

The "can we have a call" but isn't really evidence of a cover up..,

Apparently a RICO case was already brought in, but who really believes that this case will still be open after her election?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/breaking-hillary-clinton-to-be-indicted-on-federal-racketeering-charges/5527829

You have to wonder how someone goes from ok to extremely rich in a few years without inventing an iPhone, social media website or being a hedge fund manager. My biggest fear is that the people that gave money will want something worth more than the money they gave. That would hurt anyone who didn't give and since that's most of us, we would lose.

Comment to track. Go go Op!

I feel like you might like r/c_s_t

briefly got excited when i read the sidebar. then i looked at the watery diarrhea posted there. Proof that a little bit of negative criticism is good for you

Post better stuff there then. The sub has been going downhill. Help make it better.

not my problem. plenty of good subs

Any that you recommend?

'Scuse my ignorance.. RICO?

Anyways, this looks like some juicy reading for after work. Saved.

Thanks.

FYI she's not guilty of RICO.

RICO?

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.

Thanks. Canadian, this is new to me (really shouldn't be though..)

So on a scale of 1 to potato vodka, how Russian are you?

/u/dataphreak

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_d9fzo5P7U

http://www.anonews.co/clintons-kill-list/

And new stuff always flowing in from Wikileaks and other political sub-reddit's

Will the FBI/DoJ do anything about this and reveal to the American sheep that our government officials are just as corrupt as the ones in China and Russia?

I doubt it.

I've heard, but Comey is still there and we know how he's connected to the Clintons through his brother. Can't trust that bitch for shit.

inb4 OP is 'kill'

Holy shit maybe Billy boy will be going to prison also!

Is there a TL/DR for what the actual findings are?

TL/DRs are never 18 minute videos.

Sure it's bad but is it career ending bad like republicans hope?

yea after reading more about it it looks worse and worse. Well I am cool with any president Trump will do just fine :)

who runs the foundation is it Bill?

Several people are on the board. Chelsea is one of them. She's been creating problems because she doesn't understand why so many seemingly useless people are getting a paycheck.

Spidy sense an "Accident"... Brain Clot ... sudden onset of SI for OP

Wow 22,669 votes!!!

Bravo sir. This is the type of stuff that makes this sub beautiful

Where did you post it too? Have you tried posting it to the_donald? I wouldn't post this in r/pics you might be surprised it would be deleted their also. You guys scream about CTR but you use the same tactics as them.

Oh okay so I should go through your post history? I can't wait for this election to be over. The only problem is if Clinton wins we'll have a thousand posts about election stealing. If Trump wins his supporters won't be happy till Clinton and most progressives are locked in The Hague.

ACTUAL PROOF

Where? Literally the next sentence in of of the emails is:

Dk and I built a business. 65 people work for us who have wives and husbands and kids, they all depend on us. Our business has almost nothing to do with the clintons, the foundation or cgi in any way.

You can always tell the thread is bullshit when it has words in all caps.

I also provided the sentence following one you quoted.

I love it when people use one sentence taken out of context out of a volume of data.

Funny how you're a hypocrite too.

Funny how you also failed to answer my question. Quote the damning evidence...

Quoted one sentence but left out the next then said:

I love it when people use one sentence taken out of context out of a volume of data.

Why can't you quote the damning evidence. I read the email links and there's nothing....

You have to link together information from multiple leaks over the past 3 months.

Then link them.

You said it was actual proof Clinton sold favors. So where's the proof? Caps doesn't mean it's proof.

That's what I thought. Nothing you provided is proof. You people are beyond delusional. At least you got karma. And a paycheck.

For lying in your titles* - you did not post ACTUAL PROOF (caps emphasis). You're full of shit and a liar. All in support of the worst presidential candidate in American history. Sad and pathetic.

Weird, you all keep saying that. Almost verbatim. Yet post bullshit threads like this. It's almost like you're being coached...

Trump proven communications with Russia. Trump Foundation illegally contributed to Trump campaign. And Hillary's the problem. Insanity.

Lots of ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. But most recently evidence Trump campaign servers have been communicating, then hiding communication with Russia.

Now you don't strike me as a particularly intelligent person but surely you realize Trump Russia ties, America's biggest enemy since WW2, is far more alarming than whatever bullshit you're trying to perpetuate.

Possibly nothing? Sure, I can admit that. But not only can you not admit that about this supposed Hillary email scandal you post threads stating "ACTUAL PROOF."

I absolutely read. In fact, I searched for the New York Times article it referenced. Because I'm interested in truth and facts. Did you bother to read that article? Of course not. If you had you would have realized:

The F.B.I.’s inquiries into Russia’s possible role continue

Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

You found the first article that vindicated your traitor candidate. That's called confirmation bias. Which is exactly what the emails thing is all about.

Another article. Dated the same day as your FBI announcement.

This is a great example of citing sources and evidence. You're either incredibly biased or incredibly stupid. Either way, you're not interested in facts. You're not even able to provide then to back up you "ACTUAL PROOF" claims.

I kind of nailed that not very intelligent thing.

First off, not my candidate. THAT is called confirmation bias

Confirmation bias - the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.

The first article you found confirmed your beliefs that Trump isn't communicating with Russia. But you didn't even bother to read the article it was referencing.

Article is as credible as the "Hillary suggested droning assange" article, and all sources predate the FBI report.

Maybe NBC is more credible to you. But then you'll just dismiss it as msm being against your candidate

Notice your inability to attack the validity of the claims while shifting the conversation away from original claim that you're unable to backup.

Also, caps do not make your statements any more believable.

Give it to The_Donald. They're our allies in this shadow war for the fate of the Republic.

Has this been forwarded to that guy in the FBI who brought this up again?

Someone save this repost to r/The_Donald

Bob Page approves.

[deleted]

jeez, youre first post in 5 years, and you say that?

Hey guys, I'm so sorry if this is an ignorant question, but what does CGI stand for?

Clinton Global Initiative

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative

Thank you!

CGI- Clinton Global Initiative CHAI - Clinton Healthcare Access Initiative

Thanks! :)

Thanks for taking the time to reply to me! Also, great find

"Selling favours to foreign governments"

As a foreigner who works in politics in Europe that is just a description of western neo liberal diplomacy, every1 is up to it.

That doesn't make it ethical, but it's hardly the scandal of the century and hardly reason to allow someone who is quite probably an actual medical psychopath into the white house, just be two cents

So.... I don't get it.

This isn't a conspiracy subreddit - it's just an anti-Clinton Reddit. Don't you have the Donald for that already?

Have you tried r/The_Donald and r/HillaryForPrison?

[deleted]

Not everyone working on this is a centipede. They still welcomed?

[deleted]

Weird question but did you notice a drop in nutty posts in the Donald about when the FBI letter to Congress drop?

[deleted]

No I just meant the constant fuck this cuck that and the kinda shit that was on the verge of being sexist and racist.

The memo doesn't say anything about foreign governments.

FBI: "There is an avalanche of new information coming in every day,"

suspicions confirmed ... they ARE reading 4chan/t_d

Going to bed now guys. Hope I live to see tomorrow. -_^

Yes, your life must be in danger because you linked to an episode of The Young Turks. LOL.

"/r/Conspiracy is my last bastion of hope." and /r/the_donald, and /r/hillaryforprison

Don't worry, there's supposed to be a HUGE leak coming out soon.

well done mods.

What a beautiful masterpiece. A true painting of the inside and what the inter-connected corruption web that fuels the actions of the world looks like and how it operates.

The love of money IS the root of all evil.

None of this will happen. It would be great to see anyone that has been above the law for so many years finally get taken down but there are just too many tiers of protection for people like that.

[removed]

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Gil Heron had a great song, called "The revolution will not be redditized"

I hate Trump but I hate him less than the US government politicians. I hate Hillary more than Trump.

My guess, Trump is likely going to win and whatever scheme Hillary pulls at this point will be her undoing. I'd rather see this country burn down as a result of its own inaction and elect Trump than see this country fall victim to the people like The Clinton's and ignorance as a whole.

[deleted]

You mean like how clinton wants a no fly zone in Syria against russians? Yea trump wants peace buddy. And world wars always start over a stupid conflict and drag allies in. The situation in Syria is just that. Putting in a no fly zone is playing chicken with the lives of our military. Trump doesnt want war unless we get directly attacked.

world wars always start over a stupid conflict

I mean, one did, but the other one was a series of pretty legitimate grievances

Trump doesnt want war unless we get directly attacked.

(or they make rude gestures at us)

(or they live near ISIS)

So y'all conspiracy theorists want Trump to win? Why not upvote this this stuff AFTER the election forcing her to resign?

So what does this make it? The fifth claim to have found the smoking gun?

God how many times does the boy cry wolf???

HOLY FUCK. Cubs win!!! That means Trump will win. MAGA!!!

Did you just ask for a source for the World Series score?

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Hey btw, the reason your posts get deleted is because this stuff is just untrue.

What are you talking about? I post real stuff in /r/politics and it gets deleted because its true.

Flight logs show Bill Clinton flew on sex offender's jet much more than previously known

Fox News troll article

Its over. Pass it along.

They won't stop. Thus sub is not trashed and these Trumpers just won't stop.

I figured out the current Trumppette strategy today. Find a whole bunch of nothing, connect it to Kevin Bacon then Clinton, claim conspiracy, hope everyone reads the headlines and doesn't read what's actually there or they'd see there is jack shit.

If it's an actual court case and a judge sees enough SOLID evidence for Trump raping kids to hold a court case, they'll just ignore that.

The real conspiracy is r/conspiracy becoming a Trump megaphone and infested by a bunch of on-the-knee, slobbering, idol worshipping fools.

Can't upvote this enough. This sub is dead, it's a bunch of Trumpettes living in their grandma's basement. Used to come here for cool stories now it's a bunch of anti HRC crybabies.

Omg can you fucking idiots jerk each other off somewhere else? Oh that's right, you're on the clock

If you're referring to us being CTR hacks (which there are many), based on your ability to write, my reddit account is older than you, which would more than likely preclude me from that.

The alternative is, you are older than six but some how learning how to coherently construct an idea has evaded your mental grasp. Possibly leading us to our current interaction and what I might presume is your support of Trump.

You want to know the difference between the left and the right at this moment? The left hates their candidate. They know she's a political sack of corrupt shit, but still think she's the better alternative, and it sickens them. The right praises Trump as god emperor worthy of all, redeemer of America, alpha male extraordinaire, faultless supreme leader.

You don't see the pile of steaming shit right in fucking front of you! I swear to high hell trumpettes do not deserve to be on this sub. You all lack the ability to think for yourselves in any meaningful way. Look at that sub...

He is a failure as a business person, he has admitted-boasted about sexually assaulting women, he does not pay his debts to contractors and Americans, he has raped women and most likely children, he is a free loading moocher that doesn't pay taxes, racist, ignorant, liar by which the country has never seen, embroiled in more lawsuits than possibly any other individual, and uglier than the predator without a face mask. We have evidence for all of this. It's in front of you! You don't even see the Trump-Russia connection which is point to point.

You're all tripping over some emails and struggling to prove intent and playing six degrees of Kevin Bacon.

A real conspiracy theorist, not a Trumppette, would see the ENTIRE INCLUDING TRUMP SYSTEM is corrupt. They would know Russia has bought and paid for Trump. They'd know Clinton is the political tool the U.S. powers have chosen for both parties and the election was already determined and we have no choice in the matter. They might even know the Trumps and Clintons are actually close friends, and Trump just happened to get himself into some trouble because he can't manage businesses or money for shit and he's trying to get out of it.

This is exactly how I feel.

Looks like you got lost, buddy. Here, /r/iamverysmart

The fact that you could construct an entire strawman argument on your own. Amazing. Hillary is a traitor and Trump is a crook, they're in this together.

You are a fool to believe there was ever any real election. It's the rich versus the poor. There is no left versus right, Reps vs Dems.

You are a sad, ignorant man.

You could also be brainwashed into seeing an illusion.

When two people see contradictory things, it is usually the person who is seeing additions to reality that is imagining them.

Understand: Trump supporters don't see him as anything other than a fantastic salesman. Emphasis on man: not a god, not a figurehead, just a man. You hang out with a man, talk shit with him and about him.

So you see Hilary as deeply flawed and corrupt, and now I convince you that the bad things you are hallucinating about Trump (thanks marketing departments!) are just that: hallucinations. I'm not going to go over them point by point, you can do that yourself one you're aware you could be hallucinating. So now who do you pick?

Don't wear yourself out trying to chase your thoughts around. Meditate, quiet and calm your mind, and the answer will come to you.

Lol, do you go to /the_donald? Tell me you all don't call him god emperor there and upvote all praises to him.

That's my whole point you illustrated PERFECTLY! ... You don't even see yourself saying what I told you you all say...

The bad things I see about Trump are due to marketing departments... Man I actually laughed out loud. I'm going to think about that comment throughout the day and laugh over and over again.

And he's not a good salesman. He's a good con artist. Possibly the most successful con artist.

/the_donald? Tell me you all

All? All all, or some all?

Source : somewhere up their ass

The burden to verify the evidence you're presenting is actually on you. It's acceptable journalism to throw out and discredit all of your work unless you can attach names and verify the information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail#Weaknesses

DKIP can be exploited in a variety of ways by a sufficiently sophisticated organization with knowledge of a server at the time of it's operation. I take it you're above denying that anyone knew about the server at the time of operation?

Wikileaks has John Podesta's Hacked Gmail which is not hillary's emails on her private server. You are conflating two separate things to sow confusion.

I'm not presenting any evidence. I'm saying you need a real person on record or multiple sources in confidence plus a reputation to put at stake.

I'm not presenting any evidence.

Got it.

Neither is OP. They have an unverified original source and DKIM keys that could have been faked by any organization with knowledge of the original servers at their time of operation. I'm asking for a single source that can be verified. For all the work shown above there is not a single verifiable source if you dig into it.

So you're saying Russia has compromised Gmail? Because that is what you are saying, and so everyone on Gmail should find another email service.

It looks like among other methods you can send an email from Podesta's account from that time period to any address and then reuse that key to fake whatever you want.

But this is just one of several DKIM vulnerabilities, all of which would be accessible to a sophisticated and motivated organization. This could all be hand waived and I could apologize for wasting people's time if a real human source collaborates this on the record.

So the Russians have been planting emails for 8 years to keep Hillary Clinton from becoming President? That they planned for this, to completely undermine her in the 2016 race? I think the burden is on you to explain how they planned and executed all this. And then maybe you can back it up with some kind of forensic evidence showing this to be true. Maybe one little piece, and not the dude from CrowdStrike! saying it's so (since, you know, he's talking his book and not building a real case).

Multiple security blogs have validated the DKIM on the wikileaks emails. The Russian story is pure baseless propaganda.

We're on /r/conspiracy so the Russian story is like super as believable if not more believable than all of these emails being published and no political actors or mainstream news outlets verifying them. It doesn't even have to be Russians. It could be some fat guy in his fat guy room.

Eleventy dimensional chess is sooo easy.

I'm taking way less logical leaps than OP is if you take a step back. The OP thread is insisting that A is true unless B has happened, but ignore B because it definitely hasn't happened. I'm saying that A is true if C is anywhere. So just find me that verified source and I'll be so happy for you.

OP has provided loads of sources and links. I'm done with you.

He hasn't. His argument mostly hinges on a loose understanding of DKIM which can be completely ripped apart by a quick internet search of "DKIM vulnerabilities" and the assumption that since there are a crapload of ways to fake it and a crapload of parties interested in faking it and no real people verifying this stuff with their real names and publications that there aren't any real world verifiable sources.

LOL Wikileaks vs your word? Ok boy. Your tendies are done, moms calling.

Anything on wikileaks needs to be verified. They're a publisher, not a source.

Wikileaks verifies what they are sent, then they publish.

What external verification has been performed in this instance? Who is on record besides Wikileaks?

You can't just say you did it if you didn't do it. Who are your human sources that are owning this material?

Someone needs to verify that someone said the thing that someone else is saying that they said. And then probably another person needs to do that too. Two sources would be great. Maybe we'll get them. Until then this isn't news.

People sources. Not possibly compromised data. Sources that can't possibly be faked. If you can do that you can swing your efforts into a real journalism endeavor if you so choose. It'll be great. You've put in a lot of effort already so just finish it.

I just said that your sources are vulnerable to tampering. You should care about this and should be looking for a firewall you can stand behind. An irrefutable source.

You're in a conspiracy sub, and have linked it to the Donald, you think you're looking at an unbiased audience?

He made a statement and provided evidence to back it up, then someone else said "Nuh uh", and provided no reasoning or justification whatsoever.

Dismissing evidence out of hand without any basis or reasoning or justification is not an argument. Maybe if you said "I think this is fake because" or "How do we know this is real" there would be a basis for a real discussion, but instead you're just being contrary, flipping up your nose and saying "Nuh uh, not good enough" careful not to mention any way to satisfy your nebulous standards in case someone tries to hold you to them.

I can make any dumbass claim and ask you to prove me wrong if that's how people think it works. You need primary and secondary sources, and a reputation to stake to say anything like this. It's what they teach you at journalism school.

[deleted]

Journalists are like millions of people worldwide. That doesn't make any sense. Even if someone you're thinking of on CNN is dumb there are so many other sources.

[deleted]

Did you just use the wrong account to reply to me? Talk about /r/conspiracy

Exactly.

The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Debate 101

If you want to debunk at bare minimum source your evidence. If theres any merit to the counter claim that is.

Listen and believe or trust but verify?

E: Burdon -> Burden

tl;dr this thread: OP gave proof, either disprove that evidence, undermine that evidence by questioning validity, or give opposite evidence. You can not just say "I disagree, prove me wrong." Because he did by providing the evidence in the first place. I want september to be over already.

I'm not the accuser. I'm accusing the accuser. That would be like if CNN said that Donald Trump was a Muslim, you disagreed, and then I said you needed to prove that he wasn't a Muslim and that CNN was doing great.

If OP wanted to state something that was widely accepted as true and then I told him it wasn't, then it would be a different situation. The burden is on the OP to verify before presenting. That hasn't been done.

I'm not the accuser. I'm accusing the accuser.

but... that... .... you're serious, huh. Burden of proof doesn't shift because you asked a question. The accused doesn't suddenly get the burden of proof because you decided they have to. ... especially when their evidence was already provided.

That would be like if CNN said that Donald Trump was a Muslim, you disagreed, and then I said you needed to prove that he wasn't a Muslim and that CNN was doing great.

huh? I don't see how that's relevant. in your example CNN just made some oddball claim with no evidence... OP made claims and has links to his evidence, hosted courtesy of wikileaks. His burden of proof is done and over with, it was provided. CNN's was not in your example and you're the idiot taking it at face value.

OP presented his evidence and all I see in this specific thread is people saying "But no, it's not" with absolutely no thought behind it. No evidence to the contrary. Just, "Shut up you're wrong".

Is that really how debunking should be?

Shit. Here, I'll just copy paste what's in the OP. Here's his evidence:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3183007/Memo-from-Bill-Clinton-aide-on-how-Teneo.pdf - The Memo

Source: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/35400

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36761 - "I'm also starting to worry that if this story gets out, we are screwed."

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/21978 - Fall out

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9665 - The cover up

You said,

It's acceptable journalism to throw out and discredit all of your work unless you can attach names and verify the information.

In these emails hosted on wikileaks both to and from are listed. you can download the emails yourself and verify that they're legitimate using [tools that i'm too lazy to google go here].

I have not read it. I do not agree or disagree. I just think it's fucking stupid to argue with no argument.

Here's a good example of someone debunking this thread:

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5arc3v/this_is_actual_proof_of_clintons_selling_favors/d9jamia/?context=3

That is what a well laid argument looks like. that is what debunking should look like. Research, thought and maybe even citations. Links to trustworthy sources at bare minimum.

E: I am in actual awe that someone thought your argument was worthy of an upvote.

Here's more:

If OP wanted to state something that was widely accepted as true and then I told him it wasn't, then it would be a different situation.

No. OP presented his evidence and beliefs on what that proof alluded to. it doesn't necessarily have to be 100% verifiably true, this is /r/conspiracy not /r/news.

In conspiracy theory forums it works like this: OP posts evidence and beliefs, users debunk to the best of their ability. You do your own research based on their evidence and debunk from there. You can't just outright ignore that it's there - as you seem to be doing throughout this conversation - and you should not take it at face value. That's why you do research. To get informed and prove or disprove something for yourself. Debunking is the process of sharing that information with other interested people so they don't have the same misguided beliefs as OP.

No it wasn't good evidence or good sources. There are no collaborating sources. I can say any dumb thing I want to and it will hold the exact same amount of weight. If it's true however there should be no problem finding collaborating sources.

If it was slam dunk sourced there would be more sources by now. It's unequivocally false and you can't defend it. Save this and look back at in twenty years and you'll be ashamed that you thought this way and worked to mislead people.

I didn't say it was good evidence or good sources. Don't skim read if you plan on responding. I read your whole post before i responded.

If you had, you would have noticed:

I have not read it. I do not agree or disagree. I just think it's fucking stupid to argue with no argument.

.

It's unequivocally false and you can't defend it.

I'm sorry but you'll have to prove that for me. Another person did in this thread but you're making the claim so, you know. Go ahead. Again though, I don't have any intention of defending the claims. but why should I take anything you say at face value if you can't even read my response to you? how can i know that you actually read the wikileaks emails or have absolutely any idea what you're talking about?

That is why debunking should take serious thought and research. Through research you learn and through learning you will gain the ability to actually know what you're talking about. This comes with the ability to properly source your findings like any intelligent human being would if they intended on being taken seriously.

Save this and look back at in twenty years and you'll be ashamed that you thought this way and worked to mislead people.

No thanks, I have nothing to be ashamed of. I am misleading no one.

Are you projecting, maybe?

Also, Lol. Actual lol, too. "Look back in 20 years". Isn't that a bit overly self important? who is going to give a fuck about this in a week let alone 20 years. In 20 years I'll be 46. What will you be, 34?

E: You edited yours so I'll also respond to that.

I can say any dumb thing I want to and it will hold the exact same amount of weight.

Uhhhhh ok. you don't really understand this at all do you?

If it's true however there should be no problem finding collaborating sources.

Yeah, that's kind of my whole argument. I'm glad we are finally on the same page. ... Is this even happening?

This is stupid.

Wrong, this isn't a Court case, so he doesn't have to do jack shit except say his piece, if he so wishes.

In the future, please exercise common sense. Shills have no power here.

Unless we're ready to concede that the information displayed can and should be of a lower quality than that in the mainstream media then I absolutely will not.

Do you have any reasoning or counter-evidence, or any sort of argument at all? Or are you just a contrarian troll?

If I have to point all these things out to you then it might be too late for you my friend.

Okay, just a troll then. Got it.

You must be a denier.

Yawn

Nah man. This is a conspiracy, and not just that a weak political game that is just extremely misleading and quite frankly, just sad. Trump campaign and Trump politics are all over this stuff and they have used this to make false claims by overreaching and making connections about things from very questionable sources.

The Washington Post actually went out and did the research to see if these claims hold true.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/13/did-the-clinton-foundation-raise-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-for-a-hospital-in-haiti-that-was-never-built/

Unlike the sources you have provided, they actually went out and gathered information, talked to relevant individuals, established oversight to the information collected, and published it in a sensical manner.

The podesta emails are rife with falsehood:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/13/did-the-clinton-foundation-raise-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-for-a-hospital-in-haiti-that-was-never-built/

Not to mention that wiki leaks has lost a lot of credibility and a lot of what is "leaked" is arguably injected by agendas.

Edit: I got gilded. Thanks! Goes to show... Stop swallowing these conspiracies. Do your research people and downvote me, I give 0 fucks. And for those that accuse me of "CTR" I had to google what that was. Sleuth my profile, I live in Canada. As far away as you can get from this filthy election. So no, I would actually rather gouge my eyes out then become a CTR. Don't stand too close to the microwaves, your tin foil hats might get ruined.

Can you bring up a single example of a falsehood in the Podesta e-mails? It should be easy if they're rife, right?

the emails are rife with falsehoods?! wrong sub for your ctr bullshit. the emails are undoctored.

Oh PLS. CTR. First of all I had to google that because I had no bloody clue what that was. If you think I give enough fucks to actually do shit like that you are oh so wrong. Sleuth my profile. I live in Canada. Far far away from this filthy election thankfully.

[removed]

CTR SHILL. PATHETIC VIRGIN!

Jesus do you even see yourself?

Removed, first warning for rules 10 and 6.

^"I'm going to shoot down primary evidence with a bunch of secondary evidence which is biased" seems legit.

WikiLeaks had never been wrong though and each of those emails has an intact DKIM key verifying authenticity. Why doesn't clinton scream from the rooftops that they are lies? She may lose an election over this and all they can say is how concerning it is that Russia would interfere with a US election.

You getting downvoted to hell. I would upvote you just because your rant is so wicked insane. Thanks for the laughs.

Lmao, what makes you think I care about the downvotes? This whole thread has given me wicked insane laughs. The crap people will believe.

The podesta emails are rife with falsehood

Do you need some more tinfoil for your hat? It's getting a bit thin.

[removed]

Removed, first warning for rule 10.

Nah, just people who admit to believing Clinton committed arson and slavery.

Over on the right hand side bar you'll find a huge compiled list of Confirmed Conspiracies that tinfoil nutjobs turned into facts and truths.

Don't insult us, okay?

This sub has never had more posters of valid and well sourced and researched material than right now. I've lost count this last few weeks of the sheer number of people who have found their way here with your exact same story. Welcome to r/conspiracy aka r/politicalreality.

I think it was yesterday, maybe the day before but there have been a few previous discussions of possible RICO investigations into the Clinton Foundation over the last few days. If you use the search feature you should be able to find them maybe you can find other points and documents you may not have seen.

No its going to end with the 2nd American Revolution which is actually only the beginning. Drain the swamp.

just want to say i was there the day everyone was sifting through boston bombing photos and --

i, and thousands of others, clearly heard police officers say dude's name 5+ times. they confirmed it and spelled it multiple times. boston pd were the ones who first dropped his name on non-secure channel

the fact that a handful of users went on to leave voicemails on that (already deceased) person's parent's telephone is very unfortunate, but CANNOT be used to discredit reddit and/or crowdsourced investigations.

it's just the "discovery" phase that any real investigation goes through. a few users took it upon themselves to move to the contact phase. the whole incident is really fascinating and worth taking a second look at

Fox News troll article

Its over. Pass it along.

He made a statement and provided evidence to back it up, then someone else said "Nuh uh", and provided no reasoning or justification whatsoever.

Dismissing evidence out of hand without any basis or reasoning or justification is not an argument. Maybe if you said "I think this is fake because" or "How do we know this is real" there would be a basis for a real discussion, but instead you're just being contrary, flipping up your nose and saying "Nuh uh, not good enough" careful not to mention any way to satisfy your nebulous standards in case someone tries to hold you to them.

The only way Hillary will win is by cheating. We are seeing this now.

Just like Crooked Hillary used Donna to cheat at the debates.

http://tvline.com/2016/10/31/donna-brazile-fired-cnn-debate-questions-hillary-clinton/

I can make any dumbass claim and ask you to prove me wrong if that's how people think it works. You need primary and secondary sources, and a reputation to stake to say anything like this. It's what they teach you at journalism school.

Spin whatever narrative you want but Trump really fucked up after the primaries

Exactly.

The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Debate 101

If you want to debunk at bare minimum source your evidence. If theres any merit to the counter claim that is.

Listen and believe or trust but verify?

E: Burdon -> Burden

tl;dr this thread: OP gave proof, either disprove that evidence, undermine that evidence by questioning validity, or give opposite evidence. You can not just say "I disagree, prove me wrong." Because he did by providing the evidence in the first place. I want september to be over already.

100% agree is a tool but he finally gets right here. Good to see he could see corruption for what it is instead of blindly adhering to all forms of liberalism be it crony or pure.

Someone needs to verify that someone said the thing that someone else is saying that they said. And then probably another person needs to do that too. Two sources would be great. Maybe we'll get them. Until then this isn't news.

forgive me for being skeptical, but.... where's the beef. what do we have here? what is it evidence of? it doesn't look like much of anything to my untrained eyes. you obviously seem like an expert, but you haven't explained anything.

your post history makes you like some sort of nsa/hacker type. i'm naturally very, very, very, untrusting of anything presented by people with those sorts of skills.

Wrong, this isn't a Court case, so he doesn't have to do jack shit except say his piece, if he so wishes.

In the future, please exercise common sense. Shills have no power here.

He will win the popular vote by 4 million votes, and electoral votes by 40.. he'll get 305.. this is brexit 2.0.. why would you believe any polling? The media is covering up everything for Clinton, im not basing anything off what CNN says. I actually have a strong belief New Jersey is going red. I put 1k at 10-1 odds on it

No you're right. I just all my corrupt criminals mixed up sometimes.

You think electing a president who claimed and bragged about sexual assault isn't an issue we should be discussing? Come on...

Pap smear. Undress.

It seems I believed what someone said without checking to see whether what they said was bullshit first. Sorry about that.

I'll probably get black bagged on a murder charge if he pops a brain aneurysm because I linked him to theredpill (sub not related to shitty MRA movie). Lulz++ to be had though.

I think she gets a pardon no matter what, but a pardon before the election is the death of her candidacy.

Thank you!

Except that is the fact that one is a politician and the other in the private sector is the foundation for the entire argument.

They are also both white. That's an observation. Is it relevant to the discussion? No, not really

np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/53n2ky/stonetear_asked_reddit_for_help_a_lot/

He has since deleted all his comments. People even caught screen captures of his deleting them. It was quite the ride.

did you mean to link to a crime or are we complaining about Joe Lieberman now

Joe Biden said Crooked Hillary should have given all her emails to the FBI in the first place.

Not sure how long you and your team can hold on. You salary and days are numbered.

The Clintons should pay you. Not the government.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-money/

If think you put an asterix in your first post so it would disappear when you edited.

Goddamn you are easy to bait

Ahh. Yeah that makes sense. In fact I think I even saw a video taken of her at some dinner party where she was saying something to that effect. Ahh here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxNfrxp-b5I Say Hi to Stan Lee

Depends how you look at it but he won almost every battleground state and took Wisconsin, in my book it really wasn't close. But I respect you giving credit.