UN DNC sues Russian government, Trump campaign, WikiLeaks - Alleging conspiracy to help Trump win election

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
DNC sues Russian government, Trump campaign, WikiLeaks alleging conspiracy to help Trump win election
By Avery Anapol - 04/20/18 11:10 AM EDT

The Democratic National Committee is suing the Russian government, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks, alleging that the three entities conspired to help Trump win the election.

The Washington Post reported Friday that the DNC filed the multi-million dollar lawsuit in federal district court in Manhattan.

“During the 2016 presidential campaign, Russia launched an all-out assault on our democracy, and it found a willing and active partner in Donald Trump’s campaign,” DNC chair Tom Perez said in a statement.

“This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency."

The DNC is seeking millions of dollars in damages related to the hacked DNC emails that WikiLeaks published during the campaign, according to the Post.

The lawsuit alleges that hacking and publishing the DNC emails was part of a larger conspiracy to damage Clinton’s campaign and help Trump win the election.

The suit names as defendants several Trump campaign aides who met with Russian nationals during the campaign, including campaign chair Paul Manafort and Trump campaign deputy Rick Gates, both of whom have since been charged in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling.

The DNC lawsuit also names Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law and White House adviser Jared Kushner and on-and-off Trump confidante Roger Stone.

The suit comes months after Mueller indicted 13 Russian nationals and three Russian groups in his investigation on charges related to interference in the election.

The GOP-led House Intelligence Committee, one of several congressional committees also investigating possible collusion, shut down its investigation earlier this year, asserting that they found no evidence of collusion. Democrats on the committee blasted the panel’s decision to end the probe.

Trump himself has repeatedly dismissed the investigation into Russian meddling as a “hoax” and “witch hunt,” and has maintained that there was “no collusion” between his campaign and Russia.

http://thehill.com/regulation/court...-government-trump-campaign-wikileaks-alleging

(Archive to come later when story is fully updated, will also update OP text and repost in thread whenever that happens). (http://archive.is/19TLA)
-------------------------

@Null, Lolcow LLC thread when?
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
Like someone mentioned before, discovery will allow Trump's team to dig through the DNC's records regarding him, but since Russia/Assange is somehow a defendant as well, does that extend to them? Assange is the last person I'd want to open my closet to.
 
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I had a terrible evening last night and waking up to this has made me laugh like a hyena. I offer a heartfelt thank you to all of you magnificent bastards.

This has become some kind of surrealist film at this point. If I remember correctly didn't it just come out that Trump was not a target of any criminal investigation? Then there's the issue of the transfer rate at which the emails were taken off the servers which proves it was not a external intruder, the actual content of said emails they're suing over, and that whole issue with the DNC not actually providing funds to anyone but Hillary Clinton.

Do they really want this put in the public record like this? These things would come up in the defense I would imagine, correct? It seems like they're trying to destroy themselves permanently at this point. And as someone else already said, let it go. Everyone except for the most deluded of the left are sick and tired of this Russia bullshit, and midterms are in how many months? I don't understand why they don't get that they need to attract the independent voters to even have a chance of winning. This is not how you do that.

This is honestly one of the best slow-motion trainwrecks I've ever seen.
 
The 8 of Spades said:
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I had a terrible evening last night and waking up to this has made me laugh like a hyena. I offer a heartfelt thank you to all of you magnificent bastards.

This has become some kind of surrealist film at this point. If I remember correctly didn't it just come out that Trump was not a target of any criminal investigation? Then there's the issue of the transfer rate at which the emails were taken off the servers which proves it was not a external intruder, the actual content of said emails they're suing over, and that whole issue with the DNC not actually providing funds to anyone but Hillary Clinton.

Do they really want this put in the public record like this? These things would come up in the defense I would imagine, correct? It seems like they're trying to destroy themselves permanently at this point. And as someone else already said, let it go. Everyone except for the most deluded of the left are sick and tired of this Russia bullshit, and midterms are in how many months? I don't understand why they don't get that they need to attract the independent voters to even have a chance of winning. This is not how you do that.

This is honestly one of the best slow-motion trainwrecks I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

They did file the suit in Manhattan. Maybe they're expecting a hyper-progressive, anti-Trump judge. Regardless, a win at that level would get smashed in appeals, but if they get the small victory of winning the first case, that can be a huge focal point for claiming the left is stronger than ever. Kind of like that Hawaiian judge that shut down the travel ban only to be overturned at the very next step. He was the poster child for the #Resist movement for all of 15 minutes.
 
Last edited:
It's HK-47 said:
5f6e87481c32af51b02f2c2218d95934.png

I had to go back and read that article and the 66-page accusation over several times, and you know what? Fuck this, no. Holy mother of Christ, the gall of these people. You're the ones who fucking wiretapped his campaign, lied about it, and called him a conspiracy theorist and a baseless idiot before before finally sucking up and just flat-out admitting that you did it once you couldn't keep the FISA warrant suppressed anymore.

Oh, and what a big fuckin' surprise, they want to hurl an entire lawsuit at WikiLeaks, Russia, and the Trump campaign, but they want a super-special injunction to prevent any of the defendants from using evidence to prove their innocence. "We're going to blame you and an entire country because we ran the most unelectable sack of human waste this country has ever seen, and you're not allowed to defend yourself. Fuck you, pay us."

You spineless fucks tried to strip an American of his constitutional right to run for President, you falsified international evidence to try and frame him for treason, you very, very likely murdered Seth Rich for blowing the whistle on it, tried to falsify an impeachment and unseat a sitting President in defiance of a legitimate, democratic election, and did everything in your power to completely ruin a man's entire personal and professional life all because your disgustingly-incompetent bitch didn't get what she was "owed."

And now you want to blame him for it? I don't care what side of what political aisle you sit on, this behaviour is objectively unforgivable and I want to see every last person involved--right down to the son-of-a-bitch who bought them paperclips--thrown into an orange jumpsuit and marched down the cell block. There is no excuse for this; this is an absolute fucking travesty.
Click to expand...
I don't know, jail seems like too good a punishment for them. Or at least, not a good punishment on its own.

I know I harped on this before, but I'd rather see them banned from ever being politicians again (jail optional) and the DNC itself either go under heavy reconstruction to remove all the bullshit, or just dissolve completely and have a new party take their place. One that isn't as exceptionally braindead as Clinton and pals.
 
The DNC has to drop this, right? Like a hot potato?

I mean, just drop it quickly, quietly, and completely, and then play it off like it was just a little saber rattling and a political/PR/fundraising stunt.

There's no way they could possibly be exceptional enough to go forward with this, right? I mean, this is feasting-on-paint-chips exceptional. They have to drop it, and do it quick.

I'll rate myself :optimistic:
 
It's HK-47 said:
5f6e87481c32af51b02f2c2218d95934.png

I had to go back and read that article and the 66-page accusation over several times, and you know what? Fuck this, no. Holy mother of Christ, the gall of these people. You're the ones who fucking wiretapped his campaign, lied about it, and called him a conspiracy theorist and a baseless idiot before before finally sucking up and just flat-out admitting that you did it once you couldn't keep the FISA warrant suppressed anymore.

Oh, and what a big fuckin' surprise, they want to hurl an entire lawsuit at WikiLeaks, Russia, and the Trump campaign, but they want a super-special injunction to prevent any of the defendants from using evidence to prove their innocence. "We're going to blame you and an entire country because we ran the most unelectable sack of human waste this country has ever seen, and you're not allowed to defend yourself. Fuck you, pay us."

You spineless fucks tried to strip an American of his constitutional right to run for President, you falsified international evidence to try and frame him for treason, you very, very likely murdered Seth Rich for blowing the whistle on it, tried to falsify an impeachment and unseat a sitting President in defiance of a legitimate, democratic election, and did everything in your power to completely ruin a man's entire personal and professional life all because your disgustingly-incompetent bitch didn't get what she was "owed."

And now you want to blame him for it? I don't care what side of what political aisle you sit on, this behaviour is objectively unforgivable and I want to see every last person involved--right down to the son-of-a-bitch who bought them paperclips--thrown into an orange jumpsuit and marched down the cell block. There is no excuse for this; this is an absolute fucking travesty.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget the DNC's crimes against other Democrats, because it frankly deserves to be burned at the stake for those as well.

While the DNC has always been hated by pretty much every branch of the Democratic party at some point or another, either for putting horrendous candidates despised by the electorate into positions of authority and then throwing infinite money at those candidates whenever they faced a primary challenge, or actively taking steps to ensure that fucking nothing would get done during gridlock years, the DNC has tons of examples of offenses that any legitimately concerned citizen would happily shove them into a wood chipper over.

And yet somehow, impossibly, what the DNC did to the Democrats last electoral cycle was even worse.

They essentially destroyed any possibility of any Democrat from my generation (and there's a fucking lot) ever voting for a DNC-backed candidate until the organization is completely torn apart and then put back together, and with damned good reason: They gutted the entire primary election for the sake of coronating Queen Hillary of Clinton, will of the electorate and decision of the populace be damned. They lambasted anyone on the left who dared bring up that Hillary was an unlikable sack of shit whose entire platform literally boiled down to "vote for me or Trump will kill everyone." That alone is cause for never supporting anyone backed by them again, but don't worry - it gets much, much worse.

When the fucking leaks unambiguously showing that she'd essentially been handed the nomination by the DNC came down, not only did this trip the warning alarms of damned near every Democrat who remembers the 2000 election (and how the Democratic Leadership Council similarly undermined Howard Dean), but this was then chased by the knowledge that Debbie Wasserman Schultz had essentially allowed the Clinton Campaign to drain the fucking coffers of every other fucking Democrat in order to throw all of the money they could muster at helping "their girl" win, to the tune of leaving the Democratic party millions of dollars in debt. Schultz had refused to slash staffing counts, preferring to use them to force cronies into positions where they could be useful, and with no real control over where the money was going, the DNC fucked over the budget of every single state-level Democrat just so Hillary could have more cash. That included draining money from fundraisers and campaigns that had nothing to do with Hillary, just so her campaign could have its pound of flesh.

In all ways, the Hillary campaign had been allowed to perform a coup de'tat within the Democratic party, as revealed by the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America. Emphasis provided, as ever, in orange:

Politico said:
The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.
Click to expand...

The DNC hadn't just chosen to back Hillary in the face of common sense.
It had chosen to fuck over every single Democrat in the House and Senate, and every democratic voter, just to make it happen.
 
Jaimas said:
When the fucking leaks unambiguously showing that she'd essentially been handed the nomination by the DNC came down, not only did this trip the warning alarms of damned near every Democrat who remembers the 2000 election (and how the Democratic Leadership Council similarly undermined Howard Dean), but this was then chased by the knowledge that Debbie Wasserman Schultz had essentially allowed the Clinton Campaign to drain the fucking coffers of every other fucking Democrat in order to throw all of the money they could muster at helping "their girl" win, to the tune of leaving the Democratic party millions of dollars in debt. Schultz had refused to slash staffing counts, preferring to use them to force cronies into positions where they could be useful, and with no real control over where the money was going, the DNC fucked over the budget of every single state-level Democrat just so Hillary could have more cash. That included draining money from fundraisers and campaigns that had nothing to do with Hillary, just so her campaign could have its pound of flesh.
Click to expand...
Holy shit, dude.

I knew about how Hillary fucked over every other Democrat candidate just because it was "her turn" and underhandedly destroyed Bernie Sanders' campaign, despite the fact he was arguably the most popular candidate of that election. But this, I mean my God, this is just slimy and disgusting. The worst part about all this is where did that money even go to? Hillary ran a horrid campaign that said nothing and actively avoided blue collar states. And yet she spent million of dollars into this campaign, most of which wasn't even out of her own pocket, but rather the pockets of every state-level Democrat.

With every passing month, it becomes clearer and clearer to me how much of a colossal blunder Hillary's campaign was on every conceivable level. Not to mention fact that the DNC is adamantly refusing that Hillary lost because she's so damn unlikable coupled with her absolute failure of a campaign. They'd rather blame everything but themselves, and now they're suing literally everybody they believe prevented Queen Hillary from winning.
 
Last edited:
I feel like Seth Rich should be an honorary Kiwi. Imagine all the laughs we'd be missing out on if he hadn't decided to have a backbone, have integrity, and expose these lolcows who want to run the government. I still don't care what anyone says, they fucking murdered him for exposing their bullshit; no doubt in my mind.
 
Given its apparent trajectory, will there even be a Democratic party come the 2020 elections? They seem to be hell bent on destroying themselves, and if that does happen...what the hell comes next? Will it splinter into a half dozen different parties, leaving the Republicans the de facto ruling party of the whole country?

I find this entire thing both hilarious, and yet alarming. The US two party system seems undemocratic enough to me, but the self-annihilation of one of those two remaining parties, as awful as it fucking is, seems like a serious threat to democracy in general. If you don't have options, can you really say you have a democracy?
 
A Useless Fish said:
Given its apparent trajectory, will there even be a Democratic party come the 2020 elections? They seem to be hell bent on destroying themselves, and if that does happen...what the hell comes next? Will it splinter into a half dozen different parties, leaving the Republicans the de facto ruling party of the whole country?

I find this entire thing both hilarious, and yet alarming. The US two party system seems undemocratic enough to me, but the self-annihilation of one of those two remaining parties, as awful as it fucking is, seems like a serious threat to democracy in general. If you don't have options, can you really say you have a democracy?
Click to expand...
Eh, another would pop up. That doesn’t really worry me. The Whigs imploded and the Republicans came out of that. The people who have abandoned the Democrats to become independents could coalesce around a new party.

The problem would be shielding the fledgling party from being taken over by the extremists of the Democratic party when it explodes, because they’d be the noisiest.
 
A Useless Fish said:
Given its apparent trajectory, will there even be a Democratic party come the 2020 elections? They seem to be hell bent on destroying themselves, and if that does happen...what the hell comes next? Will it splinter into a half dozen different parties, leaving the Republicans the de facto ruling party of the whole country?
Click to expand...

I'm not as :optimistic:, unfortunately Democrats are on track to make large to massive gains across the board in the upcoming Midterms. Its especially unfortunate considering how much off the deep end they've gone, and instead of being punished by voters they'll be seemingly rewarded for it.. I really wouldn't want these crazy fucks as is anywhere near power, and I truly doubt they'll be going anywhere..
 
A Useless Fish said:
Given its apparent trajectory, will there even be a Democratic party come the 2020 elections? They seem to be hell bent on destroying themselves, and if that does happen...what the hell comes next? Will it splinter into a half dozen different parties, leaving the Republicans the de facto ruling party of the whole country?

I find this entire thing both hilarious, and yet alarming. The US two party system seems undemocratic enough to me, but the self-annihilation of one of those two remaining parties, as awful as it fucking is, seems like a serious threat to democracy in general. If you don't have options, can you really say you have a democracy?
Click to expand...
Probably, but it certainly wouldn't have the chucklefucks running it today.

If not, then I expect another party with a different name to rise from its ashes because of how the US government works, assuming they don't change the rules after this event.
 
frozenrunner said:
Nation states are always trying to influence, undermine, and control one another. Always. They have the power and resources to do it and no real accountability, so they would have to be doing it. (And there's no reason to believe that's new behavior this election just because the internet exists.) Hell, we know America does it all the time, influencing (and more) the events in various countries. Arguably they're doing it now, as we speak, with Bashar al-Assad with the dubious-but-don't-you-dare-question-it gas attack narrative which doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

It's quite funny because the "ASSAD WOULDN'T GAS HIS OWN PEOPLE WHEN HE'S ABOUT TO WIN!" line, is itself a narrative which doesn't take into account who Bashar is, or who is father is.

Back after the Israeli's seized the Golan Heights in 67 tensions continued to grow through and beyond, Syria was checked in the Yom Kippur War of 73 and by 76 mass protests had begun against Hafez Al Assad, including in Homs which he proceeded to blow to Kingdom come and back despite having the advantage militarily at the time. He then proceeded to mostly sit on the ruins where the Islamists had lived and endlessly blame the Israelis for Homs' shitty status despite having more than enough cash to rebuild it, and mostly blowing it up himself.
 
Last edited:
Jaimas said:
They essentially destroyed any possibility of any Democrat from my generation (and there's a fucking lot) ever voting for a DNC-backed candidate until the organization is completely torn apart and then put back together, and with damned good reason: They gutted the entire primary election for the sake of coronating Queen Hillary of Clinton, will of the electorate and decision of the populace be damned. They lambasted anyone on the left who dared bring up that Hillary was an unlikable sack of shit whose entire platform literally boiled down to "vote for me or Trump will kill everyone." That alone is cause for never supporting anyone backed by them again, but don't worry - it gets much, much worse.
Click to expand...
Do you know what was the most screwed-up part about them fronting Hillary so hard, honestly? Hillary Clinton has never done anything. Nothing. She's been in politics for longer than most younger people have even been alive, but she's never accomplished a single thing worth mentioning. Go ahead, think about it: Every single politician worth their salt--who's been in politics for decades--has some sort of flag-ship accomplishment that they're known for, some sort of sweeping legislation or hard stance they've taken that defines their career. Name one of Hillary's.

I would say: "Hey, let's go to her official, campaign website and see what policies and accomplishments she's lauded in the past!" but she's wiped that "with a cloth or something" and now her policies section reads off like a list that mirrors Donald Trump's accomplishments and campaign promises, and a bunch of miscellaneous DNC talking points. But that's okay, because the internet never forgets and I have crippling autism so I backed-up her "List of 9 Major Accomplishments" that she used to tout like a badge of bullshitted honour on her Hillary for America website.

I'm going to tuck this into a spoiler, otherwise I'm going to turn this entire page into one enormous rant about why I find Hillary Clinton an utterly detestable, two-faced leech who has never accomplished a goddamned thing, and I won't even need to go near any of her scandals or the conspiracies or her alleged crimes to do it.

775ec1d72ede09835f45075dccc09592.png
Oh, has she? Funny, I seem to remember her taking a very strong pro-abortion stance during the debate in April of 2016. That's a really strange thing to advocate so strongly for if you're all about children, isn't it? Also maybe we should cite some actual legislation, instead of just painting her as a generic, "passionate advocate." You're a politician, not a picket sign, do something of substance.

e1e04ecd0c95a7b49f3efde780f67fa2.png
​
Wow, she tried to do a thing and it failed. Way to add that glowing recommendation to your resume. Oh, and CHIP? Excuse me? Is she sure she's not thinking of Ted Kennedy, because she didn't have a goddamn thing to do with SCHIP. In fact, I seem to recall that the Clinton White House opposed the effort, originally.

92363162ca9bb72ee64dadd0f098c403.png
She "worked" on the issue. What does that entail, precisely? Did she strike off a couple of check boxes, shuffle some papers around, was she in the room while someone else made phone calls, what did she do? I know for damn sure that she didn't actually pass the 9/11 legislation because that happened long after she'd already left the Senate, and it was passed by two people I dislike only marginally less than Clinton: Schumer and Gillibrand.

6f2739370d1aa7735a0f45185bb79e83.png
Oh, this is one of my favorites. Hillary has a long, sordid history when it comes to tearing women down, from her constant attacks against Bill Clinton's accusers, the way she'd laugh about getting a convicted child rapist to plead down to a lighter sentence, to her Beijing trip in 2009 where she said that "human rights shouldn't interfere with other policies", she's never once made any meaningful efforts to support "women's rights" anywhere outside of an oft-lauded, flowery speech she made in China all the way back in fucking 1995, where she criticized the practice of selective, female abortion. Without having the spine to even call China out by name. Good job.

6194835a1a4873fe7abb5dd87d475b7b.png
​
I know the whole gay thing is in vogue right now, so that's why she's hopping on the bandwagon because now you can win votes with the gays, but there's kind of a problem, there. She made a speech about how she's not a supporter of gay marriage as late as 2004, and we brought a camera, so... No, you don't get to have that one, Hillary.

0aab455c43f653d1f90a16571c477194.png
Honestly this one is so generic that it might be true, so I've never done much research into it. At the same time, though, what sort of politician wouldn't support an act like this if they wanted to score some votes? I won't give her any credit, given her track history already and the fact that this legislation should be so obvious, but I won't fault her for this either. She gets one for free.

19a0a3f1e728f4b849abc8e97cdea55a.png
​
Is she even serious? Clinton was the Secretary of State for President Obama’s entire first term, and her most-significant accomplishment is helping negotiate the end of a week-long skirmish between Israel and Hamas?

That's all she had in there, too. Those are her big, fancy, flagship accomplishments to try and convince you--the American voter--that this woman who has been in politics for around 30-something years is worth your vote. Oh, she also claims to have enforced the strictest sanctions Iran ever faced, and claimed to be the first woman to make it on the Presidential ticket, but again: Victoria Woodhull, and honestly who hasn't sanctioned Iran's ass off?

This is the nobody that the DNC fronted for the 2016 election in lieu of a man who has actually accomplished things, even if he is a spineless socialist who sold out after he got screwed-over. This is a woman that they are still defending to the hilt all the way up to the current day with this disgustingly-idiotic lawsuit, the woman who has inexplicably done absolutely nothing worth noting in 30 years in politics.
 
Last edited:
It's HK-47 said:
You know what was the most fucked part about them fronting Hillary so hard, honestly? Hillary Clinton has never done anything. Nothing. She's been in politics for longer than most younger people have even been alive, but she's never accomplished a single fucking thing worth mentioning. Go ahead, think about it: Every single politician worth their salt--who's been in politics for decades--has some sort of flag-ship accomplishment that they're known for, some sort of sweeping legislation or hard stance they've taken that defines their career. Name Hillary's.

I would say: "Hey, let's go to her official, campaign website and see what policies and accomplishments she's lauded in the past!" but she's wiped that shit "with a cloth or something" and now her "policies" section reads off like a list that mirrors Donald Trump's accomplishments and campaign promises, and a bunch of miscellaneous DNC talking points. But that's okay, because the internet never forgets and I have crippling autism so I backed-up her "List of 9 Major Accomplishments" that she used to tout like a badge of bullshitted honour on her Hillary for America website.

I'm going to tuck this into a spoiler, otherwise I'm going to turn this entire page into one enormous rant about why I find Hillary Clinton an utterly detestable, two-faced leech who has never accomplished a fucking thing, and I won't even need to go near any of her scandals or the conspiracies or her alleged crimes to do it.

775ec1d72ede09835f45075dccc09592.png
Oh, has she? Funny, I seem to remember her taking a very strong pro-abortion stance during the debate in April of 2016. That's a really strange thing to advocate so strongly for if you're all about children, isn't it? Also maybe we should cite some actual legislation, instead of just painting her as a generic, "passionate advocate." You're a politician, not a picket sign, do something of substance.

e1e04ecd0c95a7b49f3efde780f67fa2.png
​
Wow, she tried to do a thing and it failed. Way to add that glowing recommendation to your resume. Oh, and CHIP? Excuse me? Is she sure she's not thinking of Ted fucking Kennedy, because she didn't have a goddamn thing to do with SCHIP. In fact, I seem to recall that the Clinton White House opposed the effort, originally.

92363162ca9bb72ee64dadd0f098c403.png
She "worked" on the issue. What does that entail, precisely? Did she strike off a couple of check boxes, shuffle some papers around, was she in the room while someone else made phone calls, what did she do? I know for damn sure that she didn't actually pass the 9/11 legislation because that happened long after she'd already left the Senate, and it was passed by two people I dislike only marginally less than Clinton: Schumer and Gillibrand.

6f2739370d1aa7735a0f45185bb79e83.png
Oh, this is one of my favorites. Hillary has a long, sordid history when it comes to tearing women down, from her constant attacks against Bill Clinton's accusers, the way she'd laugh about getting a convicted child rapist to plead down to a lighter sentence, to her Beijing trip in 2009 where she said that "human rights shouldn't interfere with other policies", she's never once made any meaningful efforts to support "women's rights" anywhere outside of an oft-lauded, flowery speech she made in China all the way back in fucking 1995, where she criticized the practice of selective, female abortion. Without having the balls to even call China out by name. Good job.

6194835a1a4873fe7abb5dd87d475b7b.png
​
I know the whole gay thing is in vogue right now, so that's why she's hopping on the bandwagon because now faggots can win votes, but there's kind of a problem, there. She made a speech about she's not a supporter of gay marriage as late as 2004, and we brought a camera, so... No, you don't get to have that one, Hillary.

0aab455c43f653d1f90a16571c477194.png
Honestly this one is so generic that it might be true, so I've never done much research into it. At the same time, though, what sort of politician wouldn't support an act like this if they wanted to score some votes? I won't give her any credit, given her track history already and the fact that this legislation should be so obvious, but I won't fault her for this either. She gets one for free.

19a0a3f1e728f4b849abc8e97cdea55a.png
​
Is she even serious? Clinton was the Secretary of State for President Obama’s entire first term, and her most-significant accomplishment is helping negotiate the end of a week-long skirmish between Israel and Hamas?

That's all she had in there, too. Those are her big, fancy, flagship accomplishments to try and convince you--the American voter--that this woman who has been in politics for around 30-something years is worth your vote. Oh, she also claims to have enforced the strictest sanctions Iran ever faced, and claimed to be the first woman to make it on the Presidential ticket, but again: Victoria Woodhull, and honestly who hasn't sanctioned Iran's ass off?

This is the nobody that the DNC fronted for the 2016 election in lieu of a man who has actually accomplished shit, even if he is a spineless socialist who sold out after he got screwed-over. This is a woman that they are still defending to the hilt all the way up to the current day with this disgustingly-idiotic lawsuit, the woman who has inexplicably done absolutely nothing worth noting in 30 years in politics.
Click to expand...

She's lying on extended family leave as well. She had no hand in that beyond generic platitudes, which is especially hilarious as it was a pretty non-partisan issue.

Black4STA said:
I'm not as :optimistic:, unfortunately Democrats are on track to make large to massive gains across the board in the upcoming Midterms. Its especially unfortunate considering how much off the deep end they've gone, and instead of being punished by voters they'll be seemingly rewarded for it.. I really wouldn't want these crazy fucks as is anywhere near power, and I truly doubt they'll be going anywhere..
Click to expand...

I somehow doubt this.

The congressional dems have nothing to run on and are a gigantic group of losers that will not be attracting donations from rank-and-file dems any time soon. And since Hillary spent half a billion flushing the entirety of the Democratic party's war chest down the toilet last election cycle, I sincerely doubt they'll be able to do fuck all to recover by then.

And that's not even counting the PR disaster that their Russia sperging has been.
 
Last edited:
I don't care if it turns into something worst then Bolsheviks or Nazis, I really want a third political party to destroy the two tumors of America politics.
 
Hillary planned on leaving the White House in 2000, and stepping into a generic senate seat for six years so she could call herself a politician, rather than a politiciam’s wife (which is what most of her “career” was). She then would start campaigning after one term of six years. Then she would be coronated as the first woman president and be escorted by singing cherubs as she triumphantly reentered the White House.

Except 9/11 happened. And she voted to go into Iraq. And an uppity nigger came out of nowhere during the 2004 Democratic National convention. Who ended up winning the nomination for 2008.

She ended up with Sec. of State to keep her from trying to destroy Obama through the DNC. I have no doubts she would’ve done something to utterly decimate Obama if she hadn’t been tied to his administration in such a way that such behavior would look just as bad on her as him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom