It Will Be Clinton Vs Trump; Both Are Bad For India, But Trump Less So (1 Viewer)

[Abbazorkzog]

It Will Be Clinton Vs Trump; Both Are Bad For India, But Trump Less So

A Trump victory will enable the world to see the real America – substantially racist, misogynist, and bigoted in many of its red-neck states. Under Clinton, this racism would be covert; under Trump it won’t be.

Trump is more anti-jihad than Clinton, and this means we may actually get more backing from him against Pakistan (or China) than his Democratic rival. The Clinton Foundation has received funds from major Islamic states, including Saudi Arabia and UAE, including Qatar, which backs terrorist organisations such as Hamas. So it is anybody’s guess how strong Hillary’s anti-terror stance will be. It may be as weak as President Obama’s – under whose nose we saw jihadi forces growing in strength, including the barbaric Islamic State. West Asian money flows covertly to the jihadis, and Clinton as a recipient of their money is worrisome.

It is no question that Hillary is the Candidate of the War Machine, those of us that are not 'with her' - particularly Bernie Sanders supporters - know that this "idea that she is bad on the corporate issues but good on national security has it wrong", and "Hillary and Bill Clinton’s close relations with Wall Street helped to stoke two financial bubbles (1999-2000 and 2005-8) and the Great Recession that followed Lehman’s collapse". We know that in "the 1990s they pushed financial deregulation for their campaign backers that in turn let loose the worst demons of financial manipulation, toxic assets, financial fraud, and eventually collapse. In the process they won elections and got mighty rich"

We also know "Hillary was a Senator and a staunch supporter of the Iraq War, which has cost the US trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and done more to create ISIS and Middle East instability than any other single decision of modern foreign policy. In defending her vote, Hillary parroted the phony propaganda of the CIA:"

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members... “

"After the Iraq Liberation Act came the 1999 Kosovo War, in which Bill Clinton called in NATO to bomb Belgrade, in the heart of Europe, and unleashing another decade of unrest in the Balkans. Hillary, traveling in Africa, called Bill: “I urged him to bomb,” she told reporter Lucinda Frank."

It should be clear, no matter what - if you are anti-war - it is your responsibility to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming President.

Continued in Next Post Due to Character Limit

 

[Abbazorkzog]

The Case for President Donald Trump

^It can be summed up with one article: Donald Trump Impeachment: How Quickly Could It Happen?

To answer that question with a quote from said article:

“Impeachment” is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress. From the right, Washington attorney Bruce Fein puts the odds at 50/50 that a President Trump commits impeachable offenses as president. Liberal Florida Rep. Alan Grayson says Trump’s insistence on building a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, if concrete was poured despite Congress’s opposition, could lead down a path toward impeachment. Even the mainstream Republican head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently tossed out the I-word when discussing the civilian backlash if Trump’s trade war with China led to higher prices on everyday items sold at WalMart and Target. On his radio show last month, Rush Limbaugh even put a very brisk timeline on it: “They’ll be talking impeachment on day two, after the first Trump executive order,” he said.

The rest of the article postulates on a prediction into the future involving the Trump White House - in which the UN would become involved as the death-toll involving family members of ISIL and other terror organizations rises to war-criminal levels, and his approval ratings plummet as he attempts the costly railroading forward of the 'Trump Wall' - which would likely lead to record-low approval ratings and calls from both sides of the aisle to impeach and possibly prosecute. After this the article goes onto say that anything short of this would make impeachment unlikely.

Nevertheless, the article goes on to say that if Trump wins by a slight margin, impeachment becomes a likely scenario.

So, will it happen? Can it? Perhaps the best sign yet as to whether Trump could make it through a four-year term will come in November. Impeachment may be a Washington battle, but this is really something that the American public gets to decide first.

Either way, if Trump screws Washington...hell hath no fury. He will be impeached, I believe. President Trump would not survive 4 years with both sides of the aisle and the Washington Establishment bearing down on him. The floodgates will open. He will be impeached.

President Hillary Clinton might not. The Clintons would rule the District of Columbia for 8 years - and we'd likely enter either a Third Global Confrontation or a Second American Civil War. The Columbian military-industrial complex will have complete and total dominion over the United States, and for the foreseeable future, freedom and liberty and peace will not be known. The Millennials will become a sacrificial generation.

Sacrament to the Gods of War.

She is even more of a Hawk than the Theocrat, Ted Cruz.

Senator Ted Cruz’s Middle East policy is somewhat unique among Republicans, particularly in comparison to former Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. Regardless of the success of their respective endeavors in the Middle East, both pursued actions that at least partially prioritized stability and democracy. In contrast, as revealed in his speeches and op-eds, Cruz’s primary conviction has been that the United States should only intervene militarily in foreign conflicts when the conflict or its actors pose a direct threat to the United States, yet he also emphasizes his belief that the United States should “restore [its] leadership in the world,” which is somewhat contradictory to his isolationist tendencies and necessitates soft power diplomacy.

Let that sink in. It is fairly obvious whose interests dominate our foreign policy, and the D.C. rule of our country. It sucks, it is truly abysmal, but our last chance to raise awareness of the rampantly-corrupt District of Columbia and its 'territories', and the threat this shadow state poses to our nation, may be to elect the most abhorrent and most-hated Presidential Candidate we have seen since Nixon. With Trump as the front-man for the Columbians, maybe we can finally be legitimized in our campaign to unseat the lopsided power they wield over America - those of us that are aware of the unjust influence war money and big money are playing in rigging this election to suit their interests.

As their preferred candidate is winning, it is no longer a 'theory' that Eisenhower's warning of an uber-powerful military-industrial complex, and Smedley D. Butler's warning against a fascist coup, has triumphed (or is currently in the process of doing so) over our country.

 

[clownboy]

Wrong forum, belongs in CT.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

Wrong forum, belongs in CT.

As their preferred candidate is winning, it is no longer a 'theory' that Eisenhower's warning of an uber-powerful military-industrial complex, and Smedley D. Butler's warning against a fascist coup, has triumphed (or is currently in the process of doing so) over our country.

/= :no:

 

[Orly?]

Who cares what's good for India.. We need to care about what is good for America..

 

[clownboy]

/= :no:

All it's missing is mention of the Illuminati. :lamo

 

[RAMOSS]

All it's missing is mention of the Illuminati. :lamo

OMG. A miracle happened. I agree with you.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

All it's missing is mention of the Illuminati. :lamo

WTF are you talking about?