[Plantagenet]

The Clinton sleaze is beyond belief, but it isn't being covered much in the MSM. The MSM is much more interested in bashing trump.

By the way---welcome back COG.

[Newfie]

FWIW I'm not buying that Russia is feeding Wiki or that the email has been altered until I see some proof. In fact I don't care who is providing the email, the content is what is important.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews. ... ent=safari

Quiet pressure from the U.S. government played a role in Ecuador's decision to block WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange from using the internet at Ecuador's London embassy, U.S. officials told NBC News.

"It was a bit of an eviction notice," said a senior intelligence official.

Ecuador's government said Tuesday it had partly restricted internet access for Assange, the founder of anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks, who has lived in the South American country's London embassy for more than four years. A source familiar with the situation says the Ecuadoran government has been frustrated with Assange and his presence at the embassy in London for months and has been considering how best to proceed.

The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC.

"The general view is he is a willing participant in the Russian scheme but not an active plotter in it. They just realized they could use him," said a senior intelligence official.

[Rod_Cloutier]

The truth about wikileaks:

https://youtu.be/O69SCJAhUdI?t=1s

This is an old link from about 6 years ago before this recent Clinton e-mail thing has broken. Great reason to be skeptical of the contents.

No one has time to read through the rumored 50,000 e-mails. I've read through a few dozen though, and the only thing that really hit me was the extreme immaturity of the content.

I write about 3 dozen e-mails a day at work, and the corporation I work for has professional standards that must be adhered to. If the e-mails are genuine, Hillary wouldn't qualify to work even where I work, little lone be trusted to run the highest office in the world. Character attacks, blither, really, really immature content proving that she has a shallow character, a narcissistic personality, and no real understanding of what real world problems are for most people.

Ugly, is all I can say for them. If you want to elect a member of the mob... who has narcissistic personality disorder...then vote Hillary.

https://youtu.be/sG7rvOsE2ws?t=8s

[Cog]

This is a related interview when Donna Brazile, chairman of the DNC, is asked questions about the Vertias undercover videos and also whether Donna Brazile had leaked a town hall debate question( source WikiLeaks email) to the Clinton campaign.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mladF5Bip8


Here are the Veritas videos

Rigging the election Part 1 Inciting violence at the Trump rallies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

Rigging the election Part 2 Voter fraud
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDc8PVCvfKs

[Cog]

I found this exchange interesting.

https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6008
RE: Thanks

From:[email protected] To: [email protected] Date: 2016-02-09 20:56 Subject: RE: Thanks

I am all in Sounds like it will be a bad nite , we all need to buckle up and double down From: John Podesta [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 4:36 PM To: Steve Elmendorf <[email protected]> Subject: Thanks Didn't think wet works meant pool parties at the Vineyard
RE: Thanks

A few days later Scalia dies on 2/12/13-16

Next email from the same source

https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/16642

From:[email protected] To: [email protected] Date: 2016-02-20 23:36 Subject: Re: Congrats !

Grazie
On Saturday, February 20, 2016, Steve Elmendorf < [email protected]> wrote: > This is big. Great job

Do I believe a hit would be discussed this causally in an email? Wet work is slang for a hit. I hope they are discussing something totally unrelated and probably are. No autopsy was performed on Scalia, so a mystery will always surround his passing.

[Cog]

CNN anchor says it is illegal to possess these stolen document but is not illegal for CNN. The arrogance on display here is breath-taking. Some items come to mind.

1) No it is not illegal to view them or possess them.
2) The media has no special exemption to possess stolen documents
3) CNN claims that only they can tell you what is in them and what they mean. I'd rather view them myself unfiltered.

The WikiLeaks Podesta emails started being released shortly before the Trump groping video was released. This is a separate leak from the hacked DNC emails which occurred earlier in the year. CNN then proceeded to run 24/7 coverage on Donald Trump. About three days into that scandal, they finally talked about some of the more mild email leaks. The way they went about this was to have a Democrat operative come on and dismiss them. 5 minute segments at max and back to 24/7 Trump groping. Don't get me wrong, the Donald sexual habits are indeed a story and needed to be covered. But surely there was other newsworthy items going on.

The twenty two second CNN video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X16_KzX1vE

[Rod_Cloutier]

Cog,

Thank you for this summary link !

To be clear, there are and will likely remain only two parties who can release the full 55k: State and us. Nobody else will have them.

It is clear only the DNC and the state department had these e-mails which are now being leaked through wikileaks. The FBI internal staff had promised that if Clinton wasn't indited that they would take action independently. The FBI is likely the source of the wikileaks Clinton e-mails:

http://truthfeed.com/judge-napolitano-i ... uth/10044/

[Newfie]

Frankly I had come to that conclusion, that she had perjured herself, with the scanty evidence I read, just from her contradictory statements in the debates and her FBI released testimony.

so it seems rather obvious to me that hers will be a failed Presidency simply because she will spend her tenure defending against impeachment. IMHO there is more prime facia evidence against her than against Nixon.

Establishment R's probably want her more than Trump at this point. Once he is out of the way they will turn on her. Sure they will loose a few seats this go but will win them all back in the mid-term. Then the R's will have their own kind of "roast" to gloat about.

Equally bad scenarios of Trump were to win.

That's why I've said that neither are patriots who love their country. If they were they would have stood aside and let less damaged people run. These are just two badly mangled egos in a heavy weight match without gloves or head gear. Ugly.

Anyway, that's my prediction. Probably wrong, usually are.

[vtsnowedin]

Frankly I had come to that conclusion, that she had perjured herself, with the scanty evidence I read, just from her contradictory statements in the debates and her FBI released testimony.

so it seems rather obvious to me that hers will be a failed Presidency simply because she will spend her tenure defending against impeachment. IMHO there is more prime facia evidence against her than against Nixon.

Establishment R's probably want her more than Trump at this point. Once he is out of the way they will turn on her. Sure they will loose a few seats this go but will win them all back in the mid-term. Then the R's will have their own kind of "roast" to gloat about.

Equally bad scenarios of Trump were to win.

That's why I've said that neither are patriots who love their country. If they were they would have stood aside and let less damaged people run. These are just two badly mangled egos in a heavy weight match without gloves or head gear. Ugly.

Anyway, that's my prediction. Probably wrong, usually are.

I quite agree about her perjury and other crimes but I think if she wins she can use executive privilege to stave off impeachment proceedings on all of her past crimes. With the help of her media lackeys she will use her voter mandate to silence her critics. They will just have to wait until they catch her committing a high crime from the oval office such as paying off a Clinton foundation donor with a clear " quid pro quo." Given the long list of donors and the amount of money involved it will probably only take a couple of weeks for the crime to be committed but might take a while to come to public attention.
I expect this to be the worst presidency sense James Buchanan and quite possibly the worst ever.

[Cog]

I agree with much of what you have posted Newfie except for this. Republicans are part of the same corrupt process. They won't try to impeach her. Sure, there will be hearings, accusations, and so on but impeach the first female president? No way.

To a large degree the RINO's want things to continue the way things are. They can act as the loyal opposition to Hillary, collect their campaign donations, and nothing changes. Trump has just as many enemies in the RNC as he does in the DNC. Like Obama, she will have the full protection of a compliant media, the power of the executive branch, and the DOJ, to protect her.

This is why she must not be elected and why she is desperate to be elected. We are headed for a kleptocracy on a huge scale.

[Cog]

The corruption in the DOJ is very deep. Which is why the DOJ has attempted to derail the FBI investigation many times. The FBI career guys are having none of that.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11 ... imony.html

A Justice Department official with close ties to Hillary Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta sent him a "heads up" last year to warn that lawmakers might question witnesses about the presidential candidate's private emails, messages released Wednesday by WikiLeaks show.

Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik, the official now in charge of informing Congress about the revived Clinton email probe, gave a personal status update to the Clinton campaign in the email sent May 19, 2015.

The message from his Gmail account to Podesta was titled: “Heads up.”

“There is a [House Judiciary Committee] oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division will testify,” Kadzik wrote. “Likely to get questions on State Department emails.”

The warning came just two weeks after Kadzik’s son had written to Podesta asking for a job on Clinton’s presidential campaign. Clinton spokesman Glen Caplin told Fox News that Kadzik's son did not ever work for the campaign.

In the same May 19 message, Kadzik also gave an update about a separate filing in a related Freedom Of Information Act case.

[Newfie]

Why don't we take this conversation over to the Will Hillary be Indicted thread?

This one has a nice clear title with a succinct message. It's a good reference. The more we post here the more we bury the original spreadsheet.