NBC News: Hillary Clinton ‘Covered Up’ Pedophile Ring At State Department

a reply to: Gryphon66

No you are dodging the real intent of my question. Here let me be more specific.

If pizzagate was revolved around Trump, would you be as adamant as you are now trying to disprove it?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm confused ... pointing out that the OP was partisan BS is questioning that child sexual abuse and trafficking exists?

Let me first point out that the comment in question was in direct reply to one of my comments, but for whatever reason the header showing it as such was removed by the poster, so the posted comment did not show that. So the poster was not addressing the OP. He was addressing my comment specifically.

So he specifically accused me of disinfo -- NOT the OP -- and then chose to hide that fact. I said our words will stand on their own merit... and they will... and I'm good with that.

That's just not true, Bo, and further, no one here is "blaming the victims."

Nor did I say anyone was... only that they could if they wanted to, just like Mayor Keenan.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I am shocked... astonished... gobsmacked...

Not that she would cover something up for political reasons... but that NBC would do a report on it and let it see the light of day.

Seems the Fake News is reeling from Trump's attacks and maybe it is Hillary getting tossed under the bus for once.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: theantediluvian

But what about Laura Silsby?

What about Laura Silsby? Has she ever been actually connected to a pedophile let along a ring of pedophiles? She led a bunch of Baptist missionaries from Idaho who took kids from Haiti to an orphanage in the DR. The parents of those children were told by the missionaries that their children were being taken to a mission for education from what I remember.

The link to Clinton? Huma Abedin forwarded some articles about the incident to Clinton that were in one of the WL releases or something?

Oh wait, @Wikileaks tweeted some crap from a Donald Trump subreddit right?

I read through a bit of it at the time and from what I remember at the end of the day, there was no actual pedophilia angle. Just some deluded First World wingnut with a savior complex who probably convinced herself that she was helping these children obtain a better life.

If I'm misisng something concrete here, that proves that Silsby is a child sex trafficker or that Clinton was directly connected to Silsby, please let me know.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I am shocked... astonished... gobsmacked...

Not that she would cover something up for political reasons... but that NBC would do a report on it and let it see the light of day.

Seems the Fake News is reeling from Trump's attacks and maybe it is Hillary getting tossed under the bus for once.

Hillary Clinton has done so many illegal things that Jeff Sessions could "spin the bottle" and wherever it stops, prosecute her for that crime first.

If Hillary starts to get serious about becoming involved in the 2018/2020 elections, we'll definitely see some type of charges brought against her. She'd best stay out there in the woods with Bill.

a reply to: carewemust
CWM - I honestly don't think she is smart enough. In her little mind she thinks they are sitting in NY waiting on her to decided on a mayor run. Her and Huma are plotting something I am sure. She is so clueless as to what the people really want.

Hell, I would demand an investigation of people that push all these fake news about child molestation​ if i was in the FBI. Could be peadophiles pushing fake news to get off the radar. So called Pizzagaters might be a bunch of predators covering up their own activities.

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: Gryphon66

No you are dodging the real intent of my question. Here let me be more specific.

If pizzagate was revolved around Trump, would you be as adamant as you are now trying to disprove it?

If the same ludicrous "evidence" were used against Trump or anyone, I'd have the same opinion.

Is your partisan curiousity satisfied now?

Care to go back to the topic, i.e. that OP is dredging up a settled matter from 2013 and acting like it's current?

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: carewemust
CWM - I honestly don't think she is smart enough. In her little mind she thinks they are sitting in NY waiting on her to decided on a mayor run. Her and Huma are plotting something I am sure. She is so clueless as to what the people really want.

So, this is not about child trafficking, it's about not being able to let go of Clinton hate?

That's sad Martin.

a reply to: Boadicea

Indeed! Parse it all you want... read whatever you want into it -- or out of it... rationalize, excuse, justify it however you want... or just misrepresent the facts (and my words) all you want... if you want to you can even take a page out of Mayor Keenan's book and BLAME THE VICTIMS!!!

What are you even talking about? What am I excusing? Justifying? What victim did I blame?

Are you that ready to believe absolutely anything that you're willing to liken me to a pedophile mayor because I'm not similarly inclined? Wow. Really? Don't get in the way of the hysterical, forcefully ignorant lynch mob! Good grief.

Is there something you can point to about the content of my post that was inaccurate? Or are you just going to try to shame me for not being gullible?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I have a hard time believing that, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

As for the topic; what's wrong with bringing up something that's 4 years old? It is quite relevant to today. So we should instead sweep this under the rug and move on because it didn't happen yesterday?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I am shocked... astonished... gobsmacked...

Not that she would cover something up for political reasons... but that NBC would do a report on it and let it see the light of day.

Seems the Fake News is reeling from Trump's attacks and maybe it is Hillary getting tossed under the bus for once.

Hillary Clinton has done so many illegal things that Jeff Sessions could "spin the bottle" and wherever it stops, prosecute her for that crime first.

If Hillary starts to get serious about becoming involved in the 2018/2020 elections, we'll definitely see some type of charges brought against her. She'd best stay out there in the woods with Bill.

.... and all pretense that there's any real concern here about child trafficking drops away.

At least we're getting to the real "issue" for so many ...

#retchandhurl

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: Gryphon66

I have a hard time believing that, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

As for the topic; what's wrong with bringing up something that's 4 years old? It is quite relevant to today. So we should instead sweep this under the rug and move on because it didn't happen yesterday?

Who cares what you believe?

Your posts are trivializing human trafficking and child sexual abuse as part of your political agenda ... and that's utterly disgusting.

Presenting something 4 years old as current? Pretending like it hasn't been dealt with? Pretending that Hillary Clinton is involved with it?

My problem with that is that it's deceptive and dishonest ... but it seems that your posts don't have an issue with that, either.

Everyone who thinks, that there are no pedo rings...is ultimatelly hopeless as a member of an evolved species of humanoids.

You poor naive souls.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly

Everyone who thinks, that there are no pedo rings...is ultimatelly hopeless as a member of an evolved species of humanoids.

You poor naive souls.

Precisely zero respondents in this or any other thread claim there's no organized sex trafficking of both children and adults.

Why must you resort to such an absurd straw-man argument? Desperate to distract from the fact that the OP is chock full of fake news?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Is there something you can point to about the content of my post that was inaccurate?

Sure I can... the fact that the header indicating it was a direct reply to my comment was removed. And unless and until I have reason to think it could have happened any other way, I have to believe that you knowingly and deliberately did so to make it appear you were responding to the OP and not to me.

Or are you just going to try to shame me for not being gullible?

If you are able to be shamed, it's because of what's in your heart --- not anything I could possibly say.

And as for the "not being gullible" part, well, "gullible" isn't the word I would use for your determined resistance to even an investigation, which could just as easily exonerate as incriminate... especially when you are quite happy to accept and promulgate as truth any and all unsavory anonymous rumors about Team Trump, but refuse to even consider any specific evidence against Team Hillary.

a reply to: Gryphon66

My political agenda? Lol

We've been through this before. It's as easy as clicking on my name and spending 30 seconds to realize I have NO agenda.

But you on the other hand, spend 247 dealing in partisan debate. Who has an agenda?

And as for the topic, it was news to me and I'm sure news to many others. It seems new things pop up daily only adding more credence to my belief.

But anyways have a good day.

a reply to: Gryphon66
I took his response to be in response to this thread.


Has there ever been a real pedophile ring???

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: Gryphon66
I took his response to be in response to this thread.


Has there ever been a real pedophile ring???

Why would you do that?

Sorry if we had confusion.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Maybe she IS guilty. However, I don't understand why people say "fake news" when the reporting is against Trump but then agree with news when it's against Clinton.