It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The HRC BHO exit plan... be afraid.... very afraid

page: 2
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Obama has ALWAYS blamed others for EVERYTHING, so expecting him to ever own up to anything at all is simply delusional.

OBAMA is the pinnacle of never taking responsibility for a single thing in his pathetic existence. He uses the department of justice as a defense strategy rather than a prosecution strategy as it was originally put there for.

He purposely made sure there were no inspectors generals for the same reason, so there wouldn't be anyone to "inspect" anything under his watch.

Justice will eventually find him though, and it will be a very dark creature holding a scythe.




posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 12:48 AM
link   
George Bush Jr didn't look too good last month:



He used to be pretty perky.

Old George is well on his way out too.

Can't say much for Bill Clinton either, nor Hillary.

Hmm, almost like they have nothing to loose. Just pack the family into the DUMBs and let 'er rip.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: madmac5150

WWlll? way to over the top, too messy and not necessary. There is an agenda being followed, personal financial gain is just a byproduct.
It's going to happen anyway, the continued lowering of the American status. That powerful status as well as the personal pride in this country had to be neutered for the New World Order, One World Government, Globalization. What's in a name, it'll be glorious when all the crisis finally subside
If Obama had to he'd just implement it earlier, it wouldn't matter now.
The Press has always been effective for the cause. Recent developments have proven the hierarchy of the Republican party has proven, they too understand.

Implement the lack of EBT funding the first of the month. If the Emails prove too damaging to control with the press, then
Instruct the bank to take that holiday
Instruct the Fed to let the cards fall

The ensuing civil disobedience fills the News full time. The Internet is temporarily shut down "for the better control of the crisis" Afterwards Social Media filters unflattering feeds and posts. The previous Right of Center sites feature gardening tips, bird watching news and the like. Everything read by an FCC agent before posting.

You see, you're worrying about nothing.
Be safe citizen



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

Following Comey's decision to not prosecute after a full year long investigation, I doubt any prosecutorial body will ever find enough valid and usable evidence to be comfortable bringing charges against HRC, much less Obama.

What I do think the emails from Wikileaks, Judicial Watch and others represent is a slow constant news story that could eventually start to damage her presidential campaign. I am now convinced that there is very deliberate timing to these email releases with the intent to cause maximum damage. If my theory is correct, those making the releases are most likely holding back what they believe to be the most damaging evidence and will probably release that info as close as possible to the election so as to not allow any time for the public to forget the story and move on.

As luck would have it though, HRC is running against Donald Trump and, as far as many Americans are concerned, it won't matter what sort of scandal HRC is implicated in, there is a huge percentage out there that will never cast a vote for Donald.

Its just too bad that all of these people that are dissatisfied with both candidates don't wake up and give real consideration to either Johnson or Stein.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Slave2theTruth


Its just too bad that all of these people that are dissatisfied with both candidates don't wake up and give real consideration to either Johnson or Stein.


Well so far neither one of them has addressed the myriad of issues looming over this election cycle such as Terrorism, Immigration, Trade Deals, etc.

Johnson was on Comedy Central recently and could only bring himself to say that he's against big government and he's pro marijuana. He left out all the really really important issues. That tells me that even he is not taking himself seriously.

I haven't been following much of what Stein has said other than 'I am a woman and I'm not Hillary.'



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

Fair enough. Stein is too left for me and I have been a little frustrated with Johnson myself.

That said, I'd still vote for either of them if they were in head-to-head matchups with either of the two main candidates.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Dear OP,

I am sorry you have fallen into the pit of fear.

Let's look at this from a human perspective and not from "Hillary and Barak are MONSTERS!!!!" perspective.

They have kids, grandkids, friends, associates, people they love and care about throughout the world. Do you really think that they are so inhuman as to set off a nuclear exchange and destroy the planet??? Seriously?????????

Breathe. You have been reading and exposing yourself to too many alarmist fear-mongerers.

Trump is the one wondering why he can't "just use nukes." Think about that.

I wish you peace of mind and heart.

- AB



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard


Trump is the one wondering why he can't "just use nukes." Think about that.


Is this what you are referring to?

LINK


"Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can't we use them," Scarborough said on his "Morning Joe" program.


He wanted to know what the reasoning is behind our current administration's nuclear policy. I see nothing about him wanting to 'just use nukes' as you've put it.

In fact, I believe he said in a speech recently that he would be the last person to use nukes if elected.

It astonishes me how hard you AND the media are trying to spin this.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Dude read up,from what I've heard grand treason for one!



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   
How come I follow politics so closely and yet today is the first time I hear people even mentioning "HRC".. and all off a sudden just today HRC starts popping up everywhere.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: madmac5150

What crimes?



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: MrSpad


Considering the biggest criminal charge even talked about for Clinton was a misdemeanor I am guessing Obama would just pay the fine.


How about treason for arming the Islamic State with weapons procured in Libya?


If the Reagan administration is any indication, there would be a lot of hearings that go nowhere and a resurgence of the '80s catchphrase "I don't recall ..."



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Psychopaths have families for cover all the time. It's basically a requirement to hold most any elected position, especially president.

Now I'm not saying this is the case here, but the act of having a family or associates that could be mistaken for friends does not magically make a person suddenly decent or moral. A psychopath is a psychopath family or no family.

It's what makes them most scary, to a psychopath even their own children is a prized possession at best, or another pawn, and at worst a direct target of their sickness.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: madmac5150
No. I'd rather not listen to someone telling me to be afraid. It's usually sensational nonsense anyways, and seeing as how your thread is pure speculation, it looks like I was right.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: shell69
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I agree, NO need for anything quite that dramatic. IF everyone does their research and makes an informed decision, there is NO WAY a Clinton is going to be elected again! Hopefully, that means Trump is our next PRESIDENT!
Think about this, if HRC is elected that would mean a total of 20 years in the White House for the Clinton's.


Bill Clinton - President for 8 years.
Hillary Clinton - elected in 2016, President for 4 years.
8 + 4 = 12. Where are these other 8 years you are talking about? Hell even if Clinton is reelected (which I think you are strangely just assuming will happen) that would only be 8 + 8 = 16 years. Still not 20 years. I think you may want to go rethink your math, honey.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Puppylove

If you think she is a psychopath, then there isn't going to be any argument or anything in her history that I or anyone else could point to, to make you see her differently. You have diagnosed her, along with the majority of folks on this site, and are now seeing everything she is and does in the light of that diagnosis.

Trump has also been diagnosed as a narcissist and as a "dangerous" person, and as a full-tilt liar. I tend to see the majority of what he says and does through that filter. He terrifies me. I'm way more scared of him than I would ever be of Hillary. He speaks fear, and fear controls the masses, makes them willing to give their security to "the only one who can save us!"

I know you aren't a Trump supporter either. We still both like Bernie. Except for the label of "socialist" he had the cleanest record of any candidate that ran this year, and had such strong integrity. If Hillary was really a psychopath, I don't think he would be endorsing her or working with her at all. I think he would have made it known, very clearly, because that's who he is...

- AB



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

I don't think Bernie feels he has much choice in the matter. He's certainly not happy. He sold his soul, and took the hit to get the message out there. It's up to us to see past his sacrifice and remember the actual message. His endorsement was and is not real it's the price he had to pay to get the message out there.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Why do you diagnose Bernie as having integrity?

Are you using this term in a comparative sense, regarding to the other candidates?

I have a feeling you don't know him personally, or are aware of his history, and can not make any accurate statements about his character.

In the end, he was bought off, and now relaxing at his new summer lakefront home.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard


I know you aren't a Trump supporter either. We still both like Bernie. Except for the label of "socialist" he had the cleanest record of any candidate that ran this year, and had such strong integrity.


And let's not forget that when asked on the debate stage whether all lives matter or do black lives matter, Bernie responded with:

"Black Lives Matter."

In fact, none of them on the stage that night (and there were 4) could say that all lives matter. That's how PC culture is destroying America.

So yea, Bernie minus the socialism and minus the pandering to BLM (a domestic hate group) and he's a great candidate. It's too bad because I was really excited to hear how he was going to afford giving everyone free college.



posted on Aug, 11 2016 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

You know there is a reason why people who support BlackLivesMatter get offended when you try to say AllLivesMatter. They feel it belittles their cause by saying that the issues they are trying to point out don't exist.

The phrase BlackLivesMatter is also NOT saying, ONLYBlackLivesMatter. It's more akin to saying BlackLivesMatterTOO. But no one cares about that distinction in their rush to be all smug with their AllLivesMatter rhetoric.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join