Anonymous Release Bone-Chilling video of Huma Abedin every American Needs to See

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: Annee

That was my point. We don't need to know to form a view that is likely correct.
There was not enough evidence to convict OJ Simpson of murder, but everyone knew.

If OJ had run for President after the murders, how many people would say "well it's not proven he did it, so I am voting for him" .

There is a difference between conviction in a court of law and voting for a person you really know, without much doubt, is a criminal.

I was in Los Angeles during the OJ fiasco.

If he'd actually gotten tried by his peers (rich, mostly white folk) - - - there would have been a different outcome.

But, they moved the trial to inner city Los Angeles.

We all know he was guilty, but not enough evidence for the jury. That is the point.

I think he would have been found guilty if he'd been tried where he should have been.

You can think all you want, he was found not guilty.

Yes, I am aware. I lived there.

If the jury had been his peers - - - it would most likely have had a different outcome.

Do you understand the difference between his peers (wealthy, mostly white folk) - - - and poor inner city mostly black people who worshiped him as a hero?

I'm done. What does OJ have to do with this anyway?

I've already explained it. I didn't expect you to understand.

Annee...you probably don't support her.

You just want her to win because she's progressive and a woman. She pretends to subscribe to ideological, lefty, progressive instanity, or maybe she really does?

Now, I've witnessed enough to have noticed the patterns. I've read your posts in this and other threads.

You can't possibly expect me to believe you would favour Trump over Clinton.

Well...do you, hmm?

originally posted by: ThreeDots
Annee...you probably don't support her.

You just want her to win because she's progressive and a woman.

Her being a woman has nothing to do with it. Although, it would be nice and about time - - considering many other countries have had women leaders.

She pretends to subscribe to ideological, lefty, progressive instanity, or maybe she really does support them, eh?

I've never considered Hillary Left. Although, I do believe she supports Equal Rights/Equal Treatment of people. Which is major for me.

You can't possibly expect me to believe you would favour Trump over Clinton.

I do not consider Trump qualified for the position of POTUS. I have suggested he be given a lower level position to see if he could actually do a job that required mundane, every day, commitment - - that also requires compromise and working with others. He can't fire Congress if they disagree with him.

This quote fits Trump:

Of course he was narcissistic. That's why he made people believe in him the way he believed in himself. He had the exact traits of a narcissistic person, he loved himself more than anything, he always blamed others for his own actions, he never felt guilty about anything. He wanted to be worshipped, he was extremely manipulative, did not care about one's feelings. All he cared about was power and greed. That's a typical narcissistic person. By
Germinal Van, B.A. Political Science. www.quora.com...

It's in response to the question: Was Hitler a narcissist.

I am a Globalist in that I think there is only one logical direction to go - - - and that is seeing this planet as ONE - - - not as separated, individual continents. With the Internet no one is isolated anymore. Even the Bedouins of the Sahara Desert have satellite laptops.

Hillary supports International politics and trade.

As far as the GOP - - - I see them as the Religious Right - - not too different then ISIS (if not quite as radical).

That help you know where I stand politically?

Allright ...

So do you support her or don't you?

I have to say I did find it quite amusing.

The notion that you'd suggested Trump take on a lesser position.

You must work your way up the ranks and pay your dues, little man.

I suggest we let little Donald start as an office junior and we'll see how well he does before we let him loose with a position in Admin.

This isn't a regular office job, Annee.

Where do you suggest he start off, out of curiosity? Who did yu suggest this to, initially?

originally posted by: ThreeDots
Allright ...

So do you support her or don't you?

As I've said many times - - - I support the direction I want to go.

In the shark infested waters of politics - - - she is the shark swimming in the direction I most want to go.

The presidency is not One person. It's a team.

I have no need to single Hillary out and say "I support Hillary". I did vote for her because, as I stated - - - she's swimming in the direction I want to go.

The GOP is not.

originally posted by: ThreeDots
I have to say I did find it quite amusing.

The notion that you'd suggested Trump take on a lesser position.

Why? If he's really interested in politics - - I'd like to see what he can contribute.

You must work your way up the ranks and pay your dues, little man.

In a way, yes. Right now he's basically a Dictator of his own little "kingdom". I don't think that attitude will work in everyday politics.

It really isn't the "Big Shot" position he's used to.

a reply to: Annee

Nice analogy with the shark infestation.

Doesn't quite fit, however, as if you entered shark infested waters you'd most likely go in various separate direction.

Not through choice.

Still, it's a nice get-out clause. not so much sitting on a fence as opposed to clinging loosely to one side of it. they're a team, indeed.

So you don't support Hillary but you support her 'team'

A fitting excuse in this context but doesn't quite ring true somehow.

Your earlier response was telling - it would be nice to have a female, everyone else has!

originally posted by: ThreeDots

So you don't support Hillary but you support her 'team'

Enough with the games.

I get it - - - you want me to declare myself a Hillary supporter.

I did not say I supported Hillary's team, I said the presidency is not one person, it is a team.

Specifically I stated: "I support the direction she's going" - - - nothing else.

So stop trying to manipulate my words - - to mean what you want them to mean.

a reply to: Annee

He's as much a dictator as any candidate, past or present.

What exactly do you want or expect - a puppet?

Someone with no leadership qualities?

Why should he pay his dues?

He has a right, like any man in the free world, to pursue a political career.

Isn't that one of the great things about America? that notion that anyone, if they work hard enough, can one day be president?

Should anyone be denied that right? I don't much like the man, nor her, but it would appear to me that he worked quite hard to get there, he's campagined tirelessly as has Hillary.

I suppose if recent history has proven that the novelty of electing the first *blank* president pays off.

a reply to: ThreeDots

Obviously, you are off on your own little tangent.

I directly answered your questions, but you want to play games.

We are done now.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: ThreeDots

Obviously, you are off on your own little tangent.

I directly answered your questions, but you want to play games.

We are done now.

Thank you. Goodbye.

originally posted by: imthegoat

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
If you're still voting for Hillary you need to see this. Huma Abedin has all types of ties to radical Islam. Hillary Clinton is trying to destroy the West or she is totally incompetent. Huma Abedin has been carelessly granted access to National Top Secret documents she had no right to see. They are in deep trouble as the revelations continue to come out. Clinton should have been put away in July. That's the only mistake James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director has made.

Maybe we're looking at the 9/11 inside job conspiracy the wrong way? Maybe it's tied to Huma and the Clinton's rather than the Bush's and Bin Ladens?

The Clinton's are just as responsible as the Bush's and Muslims. The results of their progressive efforts. Progress towards destruction of anything good.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Annee

I can tell you what this video proves. Someone is trying reeeeaaaalllll hard to influence this election. All you have to do is plant the seed of doubt in people's minds. You don't really have to prove anything. Just say it as if it were true and have a bunch of photos, fancy charts, and arrows. It's got "truthiness", as Stephen Colbert said.

Oh, I know.

She's Muslim (strike 1)

Connected to other Muslims (strike 2)

Connected to Hillary (strike 3, etc etc etc)

What more do you need?

Connected to "other Muslim's"?

Those people aren't your average Muslim's. The ones mentioned in the video that were of concern are RADICAL Muslim's. You know, the kind that fly planes into buildings, strap bombs to children to suicide bomb...

Does this really have to be pointed out to you? I haven't read much of the thread and correct me if I am wrong but I haven't seen the claims made by the OP disproved thus far.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Huma Abedin has all types of ties to radical Islam

Her dad has ties to funding and supporting radical Islam according to your video. That doesn't mean that she does.

Further, the US Central Intelligence Agency gave money and arms to radical Islamists called the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. That money and weapons were used to kill 14,000 Russian soldiers who the US and Jimmy Carter accused of invading Afghanistan and accused Russia of political expansionism.

Now, Russia INITIALLY declined a request for assistance by the legally in power moderate Islamic government to fight against the radical Muslims. Eventually, Russia conceded and offered boots on the ground.

And now the US is starving North Koreans with economic sanctions because it does the same thing the US did in Afghanistan 30 years ago. And then the irony is that the US had to send troops to Afghanistan to do the same job the CIA killed Russian soldiers for doing. Ridding a nation of religious extremists. The same country.....the same purpose.

So, Huma's father should be given a job at the CIA arming religious extremists to kill Russian soldiers thereby facilitating a need to send US troops to do the same job because it was left unfinished.

Huma and her dad should fit well at the CIA.

Hillary Clinton - "The people we are fighting to day we funded"

She got everything right except for when she said that "Russia invaded" Afghanistan.

Russia tried to avoid getting involved. Eventually Afghanistan negotiated assistance from Russia in dealing with the Mujahadeen.

originally posted by: Annee
I've never considered Hillary Left. Although, I do believe she supports Equal Rights/Equal Treatment of people. Which is major for me.

USA is a land of morons.

want a proof? you've got two presidential candidates: a known criminal on the left, and a fool that thinks the corporate world will let him do any good, on the right. and first of all, you've got the corporate world pulling the strings behind them all. if your nation wouldn't be so retarded, they would get rid of that damn mafia long time ago, using the gun rights they have guaranteed by the constitution in a way they were meant to be used.

equal rights for morons? hell no. the fact that they're allowed to vote on any matter whatsoever is the reason you're in this mess in the first place.

but that's democracy. let everyone have a vote, no matter how stupid that person is.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Let me get this straight..... all the YEARS that Hillary has been associated with Huma, despite Huma's family being Muslim and having all these connections that are questionable and are not secret...... and all the people hired by Republicans to dig up whatever possible dirt of any type there might be on Hillary for YEARS as she was running for the Senate, running for President, being the Secretary of State, running again, or just plain being a Clinton.... and none of this came up before? And the video says all this info is fairly easily found be simply Googling it? That makes Zero sense.

originally posted by: jaxnmarko
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Let me get this straight..... all the YEARS that Hillary has been associated with Huma, despite Huma's family being Muslim and having all these connections that are questionable and are not secret...... and all the people hired by Republicans to dig up whatever possible dirt of any type there might be on Hillary for YEARS as she was running for the Senate, running for President, being the Secretary of State, running again, or just plain being a Clinton.... and none of this came up before? And the video says all this info is fairly easily found be simply Googling it? That makes Zero sense.

It's all come up before (many times), the video just summarises it well.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster

originally posted by: Annee
I've never considered Hillary Left. Although, I do believe she supports Equal Rights/Equal Treatment of people. Which is major for me.

USA is a land of morons.

want a proof? you've got two presidential candidates: a known criminal on the left, and a fool that thinks the corporate world will let him do any good, on the right. and first of all, you've got the corporate world pulling the strings behind them all. if your nation wouldn't be so retarded, they would get rid of that damn mafia long time ago, using the gun rights they have guaranteed by the constitution in a way they were meant to be used.

equal rights for morons? hell no. the fact that they're allowed to vote on any matter whatsoever is the reason you're in this mess in the first place.

but that's democracy. let everyone have a vote, no matter how stupid that person is.

I agree that a lack of knowledge / stupidity in the population leads to the crazy scenario of making a career criminal and satanist the President, but even then you can't exclude citizens from voting due to intelligence. Where would the exclusions end?