James Carville Looses His Mind On Live TV, Attacks MSNBC Reporter Over Hillary's FBI Investigation

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: diggindirt

So ultimately this is hearsay. A claim made by a conspiracy theorist author with no corroborative evidence, but you believe him - or "we" need to believe him, because Clinton is inherently evil?

I think substance should guide a persons thinking - and not claims that have no corroborating support.

In other words, Trump has a whole history, from a KKK father to a slew of sexist comments - indeed, is it not obvious that he hates Megan Kelly because as a chauvinist, self-entitled megalomaniac, he simply isn't used to a woman speaking to him in an interrogative way - and questioning the Donald.

The nature of this man is clear for anyone with a well-working intelligence. Therefore, I think it more likely - given the structural nature of society - that there is a conspiracy against Clinton, before I believe that what has thus far been claimed about her.

see, this is why people laugh at you folks. Here we have a thread about Carville getting emotional. And you feel the need to bring Trump and all the things you feel he has done wrong into this to somehow make a point? what is your point? that you have ADHD? that you are clueless of the topic at hand?

a reply to: Astrocyte
I'm not sure whose post you're addressing but mine had no support for either candidate of a major party. I was simply commenting on the complete idiocy I saw in the posted video. It's weird---hearing someone blame an organization that was disbanded decades ago for leaks in a US presidential campaign. Crazy conspiracy theory indeed. But I suppose it is no crazier than Hillary's assertions back in the '90s that the blue dress scandal was all a vast, right-wing conspiracy.

a reply to: diggindirt

I was referring to your reflexive use of information (hillary selling uranium to russia) that hasn't even been proved. Ergo, it again presents a very false equivalence between the craziness of Trump and Hillary Clinton.

a reply to: Astrocyte
The New York Times seems to think it happened on her watch.
www.nytimes.com...

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.
Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

This deal smells worse than a five-day-dead fish.
IF I were a betting woman, I'd bet the Times did it's research prior to writing this story.

Carvill has lost his mind because there are people out there who are beginning to connect dots that he never expected to become public. Apparently this Clinton crew believed that their emails were private. Poor, ignorant fossils.

"It's the Russians! They're coming to get us! Re-institute the Duck and Cover drills in all schools immediately!"

a reply to: diggindirt

Interesting.

While I WOULD like an explanation for that, I think it is far too conspiratorial i.e. motivated by reflexive emotion (as you've demonstrated by you boisterous sarcasm below) to jump to the nefarious conclusions you are going to.

Would you acknowledge that the Clinton foundation is an actual charity, actually involved in charitable activities in other countries? Here, you've shown me evidence that Clinton was probably involved in the sale of uranium; this may have been motivated by a desire to get-more money for her charitable pursuits in other countries.

My issue is, you, like almost everyone else here, reduce the complexity of a Human being (which you yourself show) to a caricature - a simplistic "she is evil" a "liar" - the type of unconscious reflexively that demagogues act upon.

I've acted self-awarely I think by acknowledging this. On the other hand, you have paradoxically both mocked teh worry about the Russians, while at the same demonizing Clinton for selling uranium to the russians - a bad thing, I assume, because the Russians are not bound by democratic i.e. civilizing process, like in the United States and other western countries.

a reply to: Astrocyte
So when I show you the source of my belief that Hillary had dealings with the Russian companies who bought our uranium, it somehow becomes a demonization of her?
It seems to me that you are revealing more about yourself than about me---not the subject of the thread.

I'm confused as to why Hillary thought the Russians were a perfectly peaceful, trustworthy people with which to do business when she was Secretary but now believes that they are trying to take over our nation by using a defunct organization. Carville's robotic response to questions about Comey suggests long rehearsals of their plotted response.

I'm thinking that she's told that big lie so many times that she now believes the story she built. She's likely so brain damaged that she doesn't actually know the difference between her fantasy world and the real world.

Personally, I'd like to see both candidates led off the stage before the election. In my fantasy both of them would be put away in places where they care for the mentally ill in a kind way. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would be given prime tv time for a debate on Monday night. And may the best candidate win.

Let me be clear. I don't want either Hillary or the Donald being seen to represent me in any way. I'm a classical liberal. I fight progressives, authoritarians, and anarchists. In today's world being a classical liberal puts me square in the conservative camp, amongst those who want to conserve our classical liberty. Donald Trump is no conservative. Hillary Clinton is no liberal. I suspect they both may be aliens being controlled by their reptilian overlords.