Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 52. (Read 234741 times)

Our presidents do not run the country.

I'd take Trump over Hillary anyday.  Time democrats get out off office.  America needs a change and if people can't see this.  Open u r eyes we are in serious trouble.  And all everyone seems to be worried about is Obamacare (ObamaFail) and climate change.

I belong to no party.  Prefer it that way.  Democrats see all this terrorism going on and automatically  say we need gun control.  That just takes guns out of our hands.  How many people think a criminal is gonna follow there rules.  They arent.  They never have.  They will always find away.  If it's not a gun it will be a bomb.  Democrats need to open there eyes and see what people want instead of what they want.  Political parties make no sense to me.  I'm gonna start a party called Lenore and make everyone belive my ideas are the correct ones.  Kind of pointless and causes more problems then it solves.  Has since well the beginning.  Look threw our history.  Political party sides seem to be a fail.  Democrats seem to be the worst.  Let's spend more money and try to control everyone.  Yeah that's what I want.
Currently if anyone else relies this but we are in a downward spiral economically.  We rely on credit immensly.  How long do you think that's going to last.  No forever.  The math proves that.   It's happened in history already. 19th I believe  and that was when we were just getting started.   Imagine if that were to happen now.   And we are headed that way.  And yes this is being caused by democratic spending.  Hillary is always talking about spending and how many trillions she wants to spend for this and that.  Yeah there ya go put us more in debt. 

Plain and simple we need a change and I don't mean Obama in a dress either.  (Hillary)

My worst fears have been realized. Hillary is simply a puppet of the rich Arab sheikhs in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. In case she becomes the POTUS in 2016, then the Arabs will be ruling the United States, using proxy. This can result in quite a few unwanted scenarios, such as the repetitions of this incident:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3281354/I-prince-want-Saudi-royal-Prince-Majed-bin-Abdullah-bin-Abdulaziz-Al-Saud-accused-cocaine-fueled-rage-threatened-kill-Los-Angeles-mansion-staff-watched-pleasured-male-aide.html

Well considering Hillary Clinton is supposedly a woman.. The answer is obvious there (For those of you not well versed in women, the answer is NO).

First they get a black dude in there.. Then Next a woman? Someone is seriously trying to fuck with america to play puppets in the shadows to get that sort of shit to happen. Poor America. Honestly I'd vote trump. He's and asshole but atleast you aren't going to expect him to go fucking beserker on some other country when he gets his period or whattever.

[...]
Clinton Foundation Donors. As has been widely reported, Hillary’s foundation took cash from virtually every corrupt regime on the globe, including Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar, and Oman. Bill was invited by multiple human rights violating regimes to speak for reams of cash. As Schweizer has documented, Hillary and Bill used the Foundation as a cash cow, raking in dough in violation of ethics agreements with the Obama administration.

Felons. Back during the first Clinton administration, Clinton infamously pardoned Marc Rich in the hours before he left office. It was no coincidence that Marc’s wife, Denise, had given $1 million to the Democratic Party and $100,000 to Hillary’s Senate campaign. The Clintons have also used as major fundraisers at least two felons.

China. In the first Clinton go-around, the Clinton administration worked with agents of China to raise cash for Clinton’s re-election. At approximately the same time, the Clinton administration released millions of pages of data on America’s nuclear weapons program. No wonder former Chinese intelligence official General Ji Shengde told illegal fundraiser Johnny Chung, “We like your president. We want to see him re-elected.”

Again, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. It doesn’t count Hillary’s support from Hollywood depravities like Lena Dunham (admitted to sexually abusing her sister, falsely accused a man of rape) or Black Lives Matter radicals or the Communist Party.

[...]


http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2015/12/11/left-targets-trump-finding-nutty-supporters-ok-lets-meet-obama-hillary-supporters/

Oh, her views on Muslims are probably important for the 8% of Democratic voters who are Muslim.  And for the percentage of the Democratic party who remain suckered into the Muslims-are-Victims hype.

I mean, that's all they have for a platform.  Old white faces repeating crap like....

Blacks-are-Victims.
Muslims-are-Victims.
Women-are-Victims.
Girls-are-Rape-Victims.
Transgendered-whackos-are-Victims...

Hillary Clinton is aiming to become the President of the United States of America. She is not campaigning to become the president of Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates. So her views on Muslims are not important at all. What is important is her foreign policy, and the stand on domestic issues. And in my opinion, both are disastrous.

I forget, what is the name of Hillary's whore bitch of a Lesbian Iranian?

Oh yea.  Huma Abedin.

Wait, so she was humping them like rabbits?  There was bunches of them?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/exclusive-hillary-clinton-lesbian-lovers-named-secret-emails

YES she is trustworthy; she is the best qualified candidate, Former First Lady, former US Senator from New York, former Secretary of State. Many people feel tenderly for the Clinton years, and it is easy to see why, eight years of peace and of prosperity that were followed by 8 years of 2 recessions and 2 wars.  Bill Clinton left office with the largest surplus budget in US history, and the first since the 1950s.  Who wouldn't want to bring back such an administration, especially after the disastrous Bush years. I am not seeing a downside here to another Clinton Presidency.  Let's hope Michelle Obama takes up politics in Illinois! Hillary Clinton is competent, highly intelligent, and well connected. She has all the skills necessary to be a great President, and as a plus point, her husband was one of the two best Presidents of the past 50 years.  Her political views, which are somewhat left of center, are in the right place to protect and continue the economic growth of the Obama years and to oversee the dramatic evolution to self-sustenance and ruler stability that is occurring in the Middle East. Her policy for Muslims is also very good and trustworthy, specially after the Trumps statement about Muslims.

HELL NO!!!

Definitely not. How many times Trump has lied about the political issues? And how many times has Hillary lied? Remember the sniper incident at Sarajevo airport, where she had to run for cover immediately after landing? If you don't remember, then watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc

Hillary = Trustworthy

That's like saying

2+2=10

She couldn't even save one guy in Bengazi.   What makes you think she can do anything to save us here in the US.

All she can seem to talk about is Trump and Gun Control.

We have bigger issues.

Not only that but she talks a lot about spending and what she plans on spending.  Which means she plans on spending more money they say we don't have.

She is Obama in a dress.

All these three leaders were acting as bulwarks against the Islamic expansion in the Middle East. I would add Mohammed Najibullah of Afghanistan as well. That takes the total number of secular leaders taken out by the United States to four. On all the occasions, the Americans were supporting the hard-line Islamist rebels in order to topple these leaders. 

Perhaps you should clarify what you mean by 'trustworthy'. Giving the people what they want and doing what's best for the country are two different things.

Hillary wants to revenge Bill, but has no idea about politics.

NEW EMAIL shows Pentagon ASKED Hillary to LET THEM send help to Benghazi, proving Leon Panetta LIED!!



[...]
But, if you want to know what forces were likely to be available, all you have to do is listen to, or read, the account from an ex Special Forces member who explained it to Bryan Suits on the “Dark Secret Place,” a popular radio show in Los Angeles.

In the interview from November of 2012, he explained why Panetta’s claim was a LIE, and described the CIF which stands for Commanders In extremis Force, that could have been sent to Benghazi:

    [The CIF is a] heretofore little known American option…You’ve probably never heard that before. It’s not secret per se, but it’s not publicized very much… the CIF, as it’s called is something that is available to every theater commander.

    The CIF are US army special forces soldiers who are specifically dedicated to being prepared at all times for months on end to leave with no notice, with little or no information to move by air or whatever vehicle, to a situation, that they have been determined to be the best immediate solution to. They oftentimes get in the air with absolutely no idea where they’re going or what the mission is. Oftentimes they are briefed in the air.”

    “The entire purpose of this [CIF]… in the extreme, there is no worse case than this. Something is happening right now, and we don’t have 24 hours to get Delta force in there. Something is happening right now, and that’s why these forces, the CIF are pre-positioned… to at the drop of a hat, to go anywhere and do anything.

    It’s time to explain what is angering so many people in the special operations community, because they’re aware of the CIF.

He then explained why Panetta was lying about there not being enough time to send them:

    The bottom line is this – did the president have an option? He did. What Leon Panetta said about “real-time information”, when Leon Panetta was saying that on Thursday, we know that’s a LIE. Because we’ve known for weeks that there was a predator drone orbiting the Benghazi consulate. Have US forces been sent places with less information? YES. I can personally vouch for being sent places where my initial mission was to find out what was going on.

    There’s no such principle that you don’t deploy people without information.

So there it is. Panetta and Hillary LIED to the American public over and over, and the media never pressed them enough to demand answers.

And this information has been available since a MONTH after the attack…


http://therightscoop.com/new-email-shows-pentagon-asked-hillary-to-let-them-send-help-to-benghazi-proving-leon-panetta-lied/

Yes, and what psychopaths love most of all is power over other people. And no, they´re extremely unlikely to come out on TV and announce that they´re totally certifiable. I think it would be a great measure in the interests of public safety to very carefully psychoanalyze people close to the top of the power pyramids of the world´s most powerful countries. And of course candidates for those positions. If you need background checks and scrutiny for people that want to buy guns you´re probably in desperate need of very thorough checks of people that can bomb entire countries one after the other into oblivion. The fact that these people don´t seem to worry about any consequences at all just carry on the more chaos, destruction, death and suffering they cause, makes them highly suspicious. In my humble opinion.

I think so.
The job she did until now did she also do good.

Politicians which are in power and trustworthy are very rare, especially in big powerful countries. Power spoils people big time.

When you have a population much of which has a pretty good clue about cheeseburgers, baseball, the width of Kim Kardashian´s butt and that´s pretty much it, you can´t have much of a democracy. They´d vote for Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse if the tube told them to. Over time you´ll end up with this mixture of man-children, lunatics of various degrees of psychosis, weirdos and morons in charge. I´m sorry to say this because I´m a great admirer of Americans, and I´ve known some that didn´t have a clue but I liked them all the same.