Julian Assange: I Will Bring Hillary Down Before The Debate Stage On September 26th

a reply to: ColdWisdom

HYPOTHETICALLY, then... if a foreign power murdered another nation's leader, would it be wise to tell the public if you were unprepared for a major war?

a reply to: DJW001

A better question is:

At that point, would it matter?

edit: You know I just like messing with you. Of course there are instances in which it would benefit the public not to divulge the entire truth. In the case of JFK, though, I'm on the fence.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

You know I just like messing with you. Of course there are instances in which it would benefit the public not to divulge the entire truth.

Finally, a bit of genuinely cold wisdom. The issue here is to what degree Assange is actually trying to damage American security rather than simply presenting objective facts.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: burgerbuddy

You are making a jumble of things. The policy was a bad one, but it was not entirely of her creation. As for the Benghazi affair, there was nothing she could have done to prevent it, and, unlike you, she is not omniscient and had no idea at the time exactly what was happening and why. There is nothing wrong with trying to explain a tragedy to the best of your knowledge; exploiting a tragedy for political advantage, as the Republicans have been doing, is callous.

Callous? Are you serious?!

What she did was criminal! Look at europe now. Look at Libya.

And what policy was she following?

She f'kd up big time. Have you seen her laugh about Gaddafi's death?

People want to let her to control the nukes? lol.

Suppressing the truth about Libya, IS exploiting the tragedy for political advantage, don't ya think?

She is a dummy and dangerous. A bad combo and that's not speculation, it's been proven many times.

I hope Assange drops a 50kilo ton email on her.

Hillarys damn schedule is so busy with continuing devastating information coming out, I am having a hard time keeping up.

Fill in any blanks I am missing....

Coming up in September:

Sept 13: State Department has to release the Benghazi related emails found by the FBI over to Judicial Watch. They are going to try and stall as long as they can on releasing the other 14,870 emails... bet on it.

Sept 15: State Department has to release all security training documentation for Clinton and her top aides to The Daily Caller prior to that date or face depositions under oath. This is not a happy judge.

Sept 29: Has to answer questions from Judicial Watch as ordered by a federal judge. This is not a happy judge either. Seems to be a pattern with Hillary.

And the unknown rogue Assange...He could be a September surprise as well.


When you realistically start looking at the avalanche of bad news that is is lined up for Clinton... It becomes very hard not to see Trump pull to a significant lead by first to mid October.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: DJW001

See but I don't believe that a major foreign power acted in that capacity in the JFK assassination. I believe that was done from within the CIA.

Seeing as JFK was trying to actively prevent a nuclear holocaust from happening, I can't see why lying to the public about his murder would have done much to sway the other side.

Unless the other side (being Russia) saw the coup'detat from across the pond and thought to themselves "Hey! They're killing their own leaders, we had better stay the # away from them!" Or even better yet "Maybe we can learn a thing or two from them!"

Snuffing leaders should not shock Russians.

a reply to: Konduit

Isn't this guy wanted for rape? I find it hard to believe a fellow who is pretty much a fugitive from the law for crimes he's committed is being taken seriously. I mean really, the guy is a liar and a crook and how do you know he did not just fabricate everything right there in his moms basement or hide out or whatever?

Kind of strange where we are getting our information these days. Putin, Kim Jong un, this guy...come on.

We can do better than this.

a reply to: FlyingFox

I know. Remember Kennedy? I think they killed him.

And Bobby Kennedy? Russians too.

I believe they had a hand in the death of Martin Luther King as well.

No strangers to murder, those Russians. Watch out, they'll spike your drink.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ColdWisdom

You know I just like messing with you. Of course there are instances in which it would benefit the public not to divulge the entire truth.

Finally, a bit of genuinely cold wisdom. The issue here is to what degree Assange is actually trying to damage American security rather than simply presenting objective facts.

The business of "American security" is being perverted and misused and is most corrupt today, and Assange's business is simply exposing corruption, but since American security is as corrupt as it is, and being sold to the highest bidder, then maybe damaging that is not such a bad thing? If it wasn't so corrupt and hiding in the darkness, then Assange would not be holed up in some embassy.

My mom worked for JFK, we have snapshots of him in the family album. More or less a steady democrat, she has no probs with Hillary Clinton.

I explained to her the same people who killed JFK, that's who now works for Clinton.

a reply to: FlyingFox

I explained to her the same people who killed JFK, that's who now works for Clinton.

I think it's more like the same people who had JFK killed, that's who Clinton works for now.

originally posted by: Loveaduck
a reply to: FlyingFox

I know. Remember Kennedy? I think they killed him.

And Bobby Kennedy? Russians too.

I believe they had a hand in the death of Martin Luther King as well.

No strangers to murder, those Russians. Watch out, they'll spike your drink.

Ya know, I find it pathetic that people still talk about JFK's assassination as if it were some Russian thing, or Cuban thing, when in 1975, a US Congressional Assassination Committee, resulted in the members deciding that it was, in fact, a conspiracy and that there was no way that Lee Harvey Oswald could have been a shooter of JFK, and that there were obviously more than one shooters. When they ran out of money they recommended that a full commission investigate, but of course, not a penny was forthcoming.

It's also interesting that there are TWO people in the world, who were alive and sentient on 11/22/63, who claimed that they did not remember where they were that day. One of them is Richard Nixon, and there has been evidence found that when Nixon was referring to the Kennedy assassination, his code phrase was 'that cuban thing'. And wouldn't you know, in the Watergate tapes, he mentions that phrase when talking about E Howard Hunt and the fact he was in prison.

And E Howard Hunt has a death bed video on youtube, where he confessed to his son that he was one of the 3 hoboes, who were arrested and brought into the Dallas police, and then let go. And that he was one of the 3 assassins who killed JFK. So I find it ridiculous that there are people who are still trying to blame that day on the Russians or Cubans, when there is a TON of evidence, down to showing where ALL the bullets that were shot came from (2 different buildings and from a curb-height position that turned out to be a sewer opening that was mysteriously closed up a couple of years after the assassination.

There's also the confession of the ex-mistress of Lyndon Johnson, who said that the night before the assassination, Lyndon came to the hotel from some meeting, and told her 'those Kennedys won't be able to kick him around anymore after tomorow'. And there is also evidence that in the mansion of right-wing nutcase and owner of the Dallas Cowboys, Clint Murchison had a meeting, where J Edgar Hoover, George H W Bush, Richard Nixon (who was in town the day before 11/22) Lyndon Johnson, and numerous other conspirators showed up. This is according to a maid that worked there, and also the godson of a mafioso.

And gee, guess who the other person was who didn't remember where he was that day? George H W Bush. Well, an enterprising investigator came up with the information that there was an Oil Rig Convention in Dallas that week. In fact, he uncovered a copy of the pamphlet that was given out at the convention. And guess who the guest speaker was? George H W Bush. So now we know where Georgie boy was that day.

There is also evidence, from FOIA requests that a George Bush of the CIA called the FBI from Waco Texas within hours of the shooting, to try to blame the assassination on a republican in Houston, who just happened to be a rival to George H W Bush. There was also a memo written by J Edgar Hoover concerning a George Bush and the CIA and Cuban doings. When Bush was confronted with this info, he claimed that it was ANOTHER George Bush. Unfortunately for him investigators actually spent the time to hunt down the 'other' George Bush, and George said he was NOT that person, that he was hired a couple of months before the assassination, to do menial work, and was let go within months of the assassination.

And there is so much more evidence that it's ridiculous for anyone to try to pin this on Russians OR ANYONE ELSE, than who was REALLY INVOLVED, which was the CIA, Mossad and the Mafia. They all got together the night before at Clint Murchison's, and they all had reasons to want JFK and RFK dead.

RFK was after the Mafia using his position as the AG; the CIA was after JFK, especially that evil POS Allen Dulles, because JFK wanted to break the CIA up 'into 1000 pieces'; and Israel wanted him dead, because JFK had refused to allow Israel to acquire nuclear weapons and threatened to stop giving them any money if they kept trying. Of course, the first thing Lyndon did after he got into office, after he reversed JFK's executive orders on the Federal Reserve and Vietnam exodus, was to ignore what Israel was doing.

Anyone who tries to pin that assassination on JFK is nothing but a CIA shill. And all you're doing by trying to obfuscate the facts that are already out there, and way too late to try to spread disinfo on, is showing who you are...

Edited to add: When I said there's a MOUNTAIN of EVIDENCE, I wasn't kidding. That's what happens when people start dying...they want to bare their soul. And that is exactly what happened. Heck, even E Howard Hunt's attorney during Watergate is on record with a video about what Hunt told him about the assassination (and MANY OTHER THINGS HE WAS INVOLVED IN FOR OUR NEFARIOUS GOV'T). You should spend the time on youtube watching the first hand witnesses baring all in their confessions, including the evidence of analysts who have taken the video of the assassination, and using advanced sound technology, to figure out the exact number of bullets, and where they were shot from.

It's OVER. Everyone who spends a couple of hours researching on the internet these days, KNOWS EXACTLY WHO was involved in the JFK assassination, except of course the nefarious mainstream media, who still attempt to parrot the CIA disinfo, that Lee Harvey Oswald had anything to do with it...

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: FlyingFox

I explained to her the same people who killed JFK, that's who now works for Clinton.

I think it's more like the same people who had JFK killed, that's who Clinton works for now.

And worked for Bush 1 and Bush 2 and Obama...we haven't had an honest president since JFK...

originally posted by: Loveaduck
a reply to: Konduit

Isn't this guy wanted for rape? I find it hard to believe a fellow who is pretty much a fugitive from the law for crimes he's committed is being taken seriously. I mean really, the guy is a liar and a crook and how do you know he did not just fabricate everything right there in his moms basement or hide out or whatever?

Kind of strange where we are getting our information these days. Putin, Kim Jong un, this guy...come on.

We can do better than this.

Sorry, no one here believes one word of that. Nice try though. Maybe you should try fakebook. Some fools might believe you there. And it was NEVER 'rape'. He was accused of sexually fondling two women, and anyone with a peanut-sized brain or larger knows that when someone is going against the 'system', all of a sudden, either 'rape' accusations, or 'pedophilia accusers', come out of the woodwork. Only idiots and brainwashed people actually believe these things...

Here is something interesting. Don't know if it's been mentioned yet.
Not from Assange, tho. Couldn't figure out where to put this.


STATE DEPARTMENT
Clinton sent classified material over email after leaving State Department

Hillary Clinton apparently kept sending classified information over her personal email after leaving the State Department, according to documents obtained by the Republican National Committee.

www.foxnews.com...


Is this normal for an ex SoS?

Someone who has classified emails on her own server and NOT employed by the Govt?

Isn't that like instant jail?

I don't care who puts her at the bottom of the sea, gotta sink the Bismarck!

a reply to: burgerbuddy

It is illegal to have classified information on a unclassified server. That is the bottom line.

Definition of illegal: Something that breaks a law. Having classified information outside of its proper place of custody as mandated by NSA is in direct violation of several US laws.

But I do know the State Department allows all former SoS's to maintain a clearance. I would say that nothing much will come of it.

Why Clinton still has a clearance is a whole different thread. It should have been yanked months ago.

At last we will get to see the Hillary Huma sex tape, aka "Hillary goes DOWN". a reply to: Konduit

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Someone who has classified emails on her own server and NOT employed by the Govt?

Isn't that like instant jail?

Of course not. It depends on that person's security clearance and what the protocols for their clearance are. (Think defense contractors, academic consultants, etc, etc, etc.)

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: burgerbuddy

It is illegal to have classified information on a unclassified server. That is the bottom line.

Definition of illegal: Something that breaks a law. Having classified information outside of its proper place of custody as mandated by NSA is in direct violation of several US laws.

But I do know the State Department allows all former SoS's to maintain a clearance. I would say that nothing much will come of it.

Why Clinton still has a clearance is a whole different thread. It should have been yanked months ago.

Security clearaces remain in effect until there renewal date. Suppose I just got my sec clearance renewed in January but left my post in say march. My security clearness is still good until january.