Are the Clinton's behind the Protests around the World?

I admit this is wild speculation. Please keep that in mind.

When President Obama was running against Hillary for the Democratic Nomination.

President Obama got into a fight with Bill Clinton. I think he inferred Bill was racist.

If you look at history. It is not nice to make the Clinton's mad. There will be revenge.

Now we all know that Bill Clinton is brilliant. Like him or not, he is the smartest guy in the room.

It's been reported the Clinton's had a promise to each other. That first Bill, then Hillary would be President.

Some critics called it inappropriate for the First Lady to play a central role in matters of public policy. Supporters pointed out that Clinton's role in policy was no different from that of other White House advisors and that voters were well aware that she would play an active role in her husband's presidency.[119] Bill Clinton's campaign promise of "two for the price of one" led opponents to refer derisively to the Clintons as "co-presidents",[120] or sometimes the Arkansas label "Billary"

Most remember the two for the price of one line.

Now Hillary is not getting any younger...

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton born October 26, 1947

Bill knows the clock is running out on his promise. In four years she will be 68.

It's 2016 or never for Hillary. Bill knows this. After what he put her through. He intends to keep his promise.

Well nobody understands the world like Bill. I really think he dislikes President Obama.

History has proven being an enemy of the Clinton's could be hazardous to your health.

It was not like Bill or Hillary to let Obama run over them for the nomination.

Bill knows what will take down a Presidency. He saw it with Jimmy Carter. This looks like 1978.

Is this outbreak of violence connected in any way?

Just putting this out there as another wild Conspiracy Theory.

I do admire Bill Clinton. I never made more money than when Bill was President.

Go easy now, I said this was just "wild speculation'.

Hillary's wiki page

reply to post by whyamIhere

Well she can still run in 2016 whether Obama wins re-election or not. However maybe you're suggesting that after 4 more years of Obama and a democrat, the country will be ready for a republican, and rather than have that happen, he's in some way trying to subvert Obama's current run and have him disqualified somehow? Barring that, I don't see the argument.

2016 she'll be 68. Plenty of time.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
2016 she'll be 68. Plenty of time.

If Obama wins re-election.

Bill knows there is no way Hillary wins in 2016. Not after 8 years of Obama.

Obama has to lose here. Running against Mitt sounds great to Bill.

Trying to follow 8 years of Obama. That's just not our history.

Also, it will be more difficult for a women over 70 to be elected President.

All just speculation...

If Hillary could be behind it, then Romney could also be behind it. He has more than enough money hidden away to pay off protest organizers. It gets people to question Obama's foreign policy while taking the focus off the abortion, medicare and the upper income tax cut issues.

Is it likely? No, not in either case in my opinion.

Originally posted by Kaploink
If Hillary could be behind it, then Romney could also be behind it. He has more than enough money hidden away to pay off protest organizers. It gets people to question Obama's foreign policy while taking the focus off the abortion, medicare and the upper income tax cut issues.

Is it likely? No, not in either case in my opinion.

Very good point....

However, they don't call Romney "Slick Willie"...

reply to post by whyamIhere


Nah, right now everyone is sort of expecting disaster. Four more years of Obama with trends of the last year continuing (slow growth) and Dems will be favored again in '16. The Republicans just don't really have anyone up and coming. Maybe Rubio, maybe Pawlenty, maybe even Giuliani.

Regardless, I think Hilary and NY Governor Cuomo will be viewed as stronger candidates.

An Obama reelection does not guarantee collapse, as much as the opposition would like to say otherwise.

Also, Obama is carrying out the Clinton agenda anyway. Let someone else take on the risk of the economic crisis, and Hilary will come in once things are more stable. I don't see this theory carrying much probability in terms of Clinton's vs Obama.

Now, if you'd said the Clinton's are involved as general members of the elite destabilizing the region, it might be worth consideration.

Are the Clinton's behind the Protests around the World?

NAAAAAAAH. If they had that much power, then Obama wouldn't be in the White House.
Hillary would be there. Obviously she isn't there and she's had to be under Obama.
So no ... the Clintons aren't behind the protests.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by whyamIhere

Wow.... You have one heck of an idea brewing there. I don't know if it's right, but it's food for thought. Hillary is ruthless. I'll give her that. I think she may be about tired and burned out. She looks it... However, if I'm wrong on that then her ambition knows no bounds in my opinion.

I think it's also accurate to say if Obama wins and 4 more years of this hope and change is what we get, the odds of a Democrat so much as holding a school board position in most of the states is likely slim and none. So... Hillary's best shot at President in 2016 is to insure Obama goes, Romney has 4 years to make people WANT a democrat again, and then step up for what she took to be hers in 2008.

Interesting scenario there...and what the heck. Clinton's only power to make this happen would be disasters of a diplomatic type and large enough to half drown Obama in garbage.

What do ya know, as I look across whole regions of the world.....from the Med Sea to the Persian Gulf to the South China Sea? Our diplomacy right now really really sucks....and Obama's legacy is recording all this, whether anyone likes that idea or not. You'd think the U.S. couldn't effectively mediate a traffic accident, as things appear now.

She may just be that crazy. Crazy like a fox......but in reality, so ruthlessly evil if that is what we're seeing on ANY level, too.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Question: What is the probability that Romney would let Hilary keep cabinet position?

He'd want to have a few token Dem's, right? She seems as likely a choice as any.

Not sure how that applies here, just a curiosity.

Edit: I really think Dem's will get 2012, and be favored in 2016. Following the Depression they had FDR for 4 terms and then Truman. Obama's second term will be unspectacular but okay domestically, but very successful in terms of foreign policy (by popular thought). My opinion.

But there is a major wildcard here. Don't underestimate the possibility that a movement gives rise to a third party that contents or changes the landscape.

I think the Republican party needs to either change drastically or die off. The fundamental Christian element is what mainly comes to mind, along with over the top American exceptionalism.

reply to post by whyamIhere


Will we even be the sovereign nation once known as the United States of America after this next election?

Given how our Constitution seems to be being ripped to shreads and our dollar being devalued by the FED and it's never ending QE bonanza also not to mention that all of our jobs seem to being outsourced to overseas outlets, just what will be left of America once we have four more years of a government being run by the banks and corporations?

How about the Amero that the globalists have been talking about in the past? Does anyone see what is coming besides me? When you look at how the FED is killing the dollar, judges and government officials trampling on the Constitution, I am not so sure we will have another president let alone an election in 4 more years.....

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17

Oh I think that's 0 on Hillary carrying on into a Romney Admin, even transitional. She's hitting the door at a run when the door gets unlocked...IF Obama loses. That's far from something I take for granted, even with all this happening on the tail end of his 4 years.

Romney, if he wins, he'll also be walking into perhaps the worst mix of bad bad elements a U.S. President ever has. The world is on the edge of war, semi-war or low level conflict in areas spread all over geographically and all seeming to get warmed up right about now. Taxmageddon as they call it, is absolutely no joke and an article I just read say the layoff notices for DOD Contractors are being sent out just before the election....

I'm not sure that timing will hold, but that was the article and the real economic nuke goes off on News Years Day since Congress can't get a deal done to literally save their own country right now. BOTH Senate AND House on that. (Reid and Boehner can both retire and make everyone's decade)

I think Clinton sees 4 years almost set up to fail out the gate...then she'll be welcomed as the wisdom of the past, come to set things right in 2016. Of course.. all just wild speculation.. lol... The stuff of novels. Isn't it?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Same type of stuff could have been said about 2008-12 during that cycle.

With hindsight, these next four years may be an even worse job with all this tension.

I'm with you on your original comment of Hilary being run down, I don't think she'll ever be president. They can exert significant influence with the foundation under less scrutiny, anyway.

Hillary needed this four years of Foreign Policy experience.

It's the one thing Hillary (a women) that was a valid criticism.

You can underestimate Hillary at your own peril.

Does anyone remember exactly what is was that Obama said about Bill?

It was late in the nomination process.

Something about Bill being racist was mentioned.

Am I wrong about that.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17

Yeah... and my original comment is my strongest sense of what we see with Hillary. Not that crazy level of ambition but burn out. Not that she isn't capable, which is why it's hard to tell the difference with her, IMO.

I don't know what precisely happened but it came between the State of the Union Speech for the year and the supposed raid on Bin Laden. Hillary had a visible change and I commented on it here and elsewhere as I recall. She looked like all the life went out of her face and had aged years in a matter of weeks or less. I don't know what they did, or she saw or learned....but somewhere around there, she seemed to just change and to the burned side for sure.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by whyamIhere

 

Will we even be the sovereign nation once known as the United States of America after this next election?

Given how our Constitution seems to be being ripped to shreads and our dollar being devalued by the FED and it's never ending QE bonanza also not to mention that all of our jobs seem to being outsourced to overseas outlets, just what will be left of America once we have four more years of a government being run by the banks and corporations?

How about the Amero that the globalists have been talking about in the past? Does anyone see what is coming besides me? When you look at how the FED is killing the dollar, judges and government officials trampling on the Constitution, I am not so sure we will have another president let alone an election in 4 more years.....

I really hope you are wrong....

Your many points are taken.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17

I think the Republican party needs to either change drastically or die off. The fundamental Christian element is what mainly comes to mind, along with over the top American exceptionalism.

Wow Patrick...

Tell us what you really think...

reply to post by whyamIhere


Hahaha. Sorry that came off way strong. I'm no full on Democrat, Obama supporter, believe me. I just think current GOP rhetoric is starting to seem more backward and out of touch. When it comes to ideology and principle I identify more with Republicans on national government structure.

I was trying to convey that the Republican party may be in jeopardy going forward. But they'll change and conform, happens all the time. Not too long ago Dems dominated the south, right?

I don't know, I'm scattered. Leave me alone.

I had just turned 18 in '08. Pretty sure Obama is some kind of hypnotist. I can't shake the original support I had for him then. I want to see his second term play out. I live in NY, so I might as well cheer for the home team for now.

But my true thoughts :they're all nonsense. I'm starting my own party, no joke. Screw all these clowns I will govern myself.

I believe its Agenda 21 and the 10 regions they wish to carve the world into. Middle East, Europe, even now China protesting Japan. And Agenda 21 is not pretty, it has to be stopped and people need to wake up. If China and the Middle East accopmlish this and then attack the free'er nations, we're in trouble, I think stating outright NO and waking up and seeing this agenda plainly and that they know most do, not the few, is the only way to get the upper hand.

And to stand up for each other, protect farmlands and farm to U sales and organic foods, not allow their plans into fruition.

We all need to see it.