Why Hasn't Trump Locked Hillary up Yet?
Submitted by snoopydawg on Sun, 11/18/2018 - 1:36am
Wasn't that what he lead his followers to believe during his campaign?
President Trump leads standing ovation for Clintons
[video:https://youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=7LpwGtuocFk]
Comments
For the same reason that JFK failed to break up the CIA;
the President is not actually in charge. In Trump’s case he is also under attack from both sides of the aisle. In a way this is a good thing, because he can’t do every stupid or destructive thing he might otherwise do. He’s too busy trying not to get impeached. The only things that he can do are those things that the other branches of of the government and the deep state both approve of, same as it’s always been.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
there's truth in your comment, but
i think the main reason is that he doesn't actually give a fuck about putting hillary in jail.
trump is a toddler. no matter how emotionally invested he seems at any given moment, in whatever he's discussing at that moment, ten minutes later he's moved on to the next thing. the only time he cares about Hillary's fate is when he happens to be thinking only about Hillary, which is presumably almost never.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
He only thinks about her
During his endless campaign rallies. Lock Her Up is such a great three syllable fascist chant. Right up there with U S A, U S A, U S A...
" In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry, and is generally considered to have been a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy "
Which reminds me of another 3 syllable chant
I along with millions of others chanted "Obama" with the same abandon as the rest of those poor suckers chanting "USA" and "Lock her up"! Hopefully, they will live to regret it like I have.
Well done is better than well said-Ben Franklin
@longtalldrink Personally, I see
Personally, I see nothing wrong with "Lock her up," except for the fact it's never going to happen.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@boriscleto The difference is,
The difference is, USA...USA...USA no longer means anything, whereas "Lock her up" definitely does.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@boriscleto Why is "Lock her up"
Why is "Lock her up" fascist? I'd argue that leaving her free while prosecuting others for similar crimes is closer to being fascist than applying the rule of law equally.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
??
"ten minutes later he's moved on to the next thing."
Trump is a toddler because he has a lot of ground to cover and addresses numerous topics?
dfarrah
did somebody hear an annoying whine?
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Maybe some people
who decry his fast pace ought to admit that they cannot keep up with him.
Different people think differently - some are very systematic and others race around different topics. While systematic people like you or me might think, "this guy is crazy, spinning around so much," he is likely thinking of the systematic type, "why don't they get the lead out?"
If you've seen interviews of him, they are usually very fast paced and cover numerous topics. The pace seems to be driven by the questioner and how many topics they want to cover. Ingraham is very fast paced; Chris Wallace is a bit slower.
dfarrah
I find him very cunning.
He and his campaign made great use of the Cambridge Analytics data lifted from Facebook and crunched by their AI set-up. I covered his rally speeches during the primaries. He was taking positions very much to the left of Hillary in some locations. The audience heard what they needed to hear.
He is cunning.
Is that bad?
And yes, he did take some positions to the left of HRC. Is that bad? He said he wanted to re-do the trade agreements, bring jobs back to the US, and reduce foreign interventions. These positions would normally be on the left, but the dems abandoned US workers and are as much warmongering as repubs.
Like most politicians, he hasn't done everything he promised; he has done some of the items on his campaign list.
dfarrah
Even if Trump wanted to do those things, he couldn't.
And I'm more or less with Caitlin Johnstone on this: Trump is the right's Obama. Probably he doesn't even give a shit about making real changes, but if he does, it won't matter, because he won't be allowed to make them--and he doesn't have the guts to stand up to those who benefit from the status quo.
I'm inclined to believe that 1)if he had total power, he probably wouldn't have invented this state of endless war, because it profits him less than some other arrangements, 2)he doesn't actually want the end of the world, because he's on top of the world, so he would actually be less interested in nuclear brinksmanship than some, 3)climate change, however, isn't going to end the world while he's still around, so he doesn't give a shit about stopping that, 4)if the state of constant war were made more profitable for him, he'd sign on in a second, 5) he doesn't actually give a shit about the working man or woman, so any changes to trade agreements or labor policy he makes are likely to be either window-dressing or reversed by upcoming agreements or bills.
And 6)the President doesn't actually have enough power to make significant lasting change anyway.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
True, true, and true.
All your points lead to the same correct conclusion — and they apply to Hillary as well.
Both candidates were welcome to do as they wished, if they were elected to the Presidency. Just as long as their first priority was to actively push the Neocon's quest for Empire, economically and militarily.
I don't see how anyone can seriously miss the irreplaceable fact that the US is under the rule of a coup government.
To me, this is the San Andreas fault of politics:
I don't see how anyone can seriously miss the irreplaceable fact that the US is under the rule of a coup government.
Only class is a more powerful dividing line.
The problem is that the use of reason will inevitably lead one to your conclusion. At least, I've tried to make the political equation come out differently, and have been unable to for eight years--and I haven't seen any convincing arguments on the other side. So the old division of reality-based vs faith-based politics is essentially gone, because reality-based politics requires evidence interpreted through the use of logic according to rational standards of discourse--and if you analyze politics according to those standards, you come to the conclusion that the U.S. is operating under a coup government.
When you're at the point of saying "Well, the elections aren't fixed everywhere, all the time, so keep plugging away! You might get a good result," you're approaching the logic of the casino.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The audience heard what they "wanted" to hear.
Big difference. Anyone really paying attention knew what was up, that Trump was just another lying asshole playing the sheeple like a dirty trumpet. I wrote quite a few essays about that prior to his fraudulent election. Trump was never really to the left of anybody.
Important distinction, Big Al n/t
Do most Americans expect campaign promises to be met?
I suppose many do, despite their consistent disappointments in the past. I think cynicism and passive aggressiveness may have played a big part in the 2016 outcome.
Donald Trump was essentially the "devil that they didn't know." The disenfranchised population was able to project their hopes on him because they didn't know where he was coming from. He had no political past. He made speeches that seemed to signal that their desires and concerns were heard. Moreover, Trump was not part of the establishment that had used them, betrayed them, and shut them out of the national dialogue. In fact, Trump had the establishment in a panic, and that was not a bad thing.
Hillary Clinton was the devil that they did know. They knew which policies she would pursue and they knew the social goals she would ignore. They knew exactly who she was and exactly what she had done. Also as member of the incumbent Party, Hillary was the continuation of the Obama administration, which began with two wars and ended with seven. The disenfranchised citizens knew that Labor issues would still be dead to Neoliberal-minded Democrats like Hillary. Health care would still be structured as a capitalist racket that was designed to betray them. Yje people saw austerity looming ahead. They knew their children's lives would be economically crippled by education costs; they would not likely find a place to live that they could afford. They knew their social security was already on the bargaining table. They knew their retirement would be sacrificed if Hillary needed to bail out the bankers again. It was clear that the plutocrats and deep-state authorities wanted Hillary to be President because she would provide cover for their many crimes; in order to protect herself. The disenfranchised population knew that the next eight years under Clinton would erode their security and wellbeing just as the last eight years under Obama had done. They definitely didn't want more of the same.
Trump did not keep the promises he made to the disenfranchised population. He promised to make peace with Russia, but he wasn't strong enough to keep that promise. The Diplomatic state is as ugly as it ever was. For all the gains he made in North Korea, he lost twice as many in Israel/Palestine. The Empire's ongoing wars are now every bit as corrupt and obscene as they were under Obama. In the US, human rights continue to crumble. Health care has been degraded for millions of vulnerable citizens because there was never a Plan B. The army of homeless and hungry parents and children is growing daily throughout the nation. The First and Fourth Amendments have left the room in disgust. The World Wide Web as we knew it is lost forever, and the blast of domestic propaganda is worse than ever — even when it is comically obvious. Trump did kill the TPP as promised, buying the American middle class a little more time with their heads above water, but he now regrets tearing up the perverted free-trade agreement. Americans are now holding more personal debt than they ever have before just to maintain their standard of living. while the military budget has exploded and $22 trillion cannot be accounted for. And, as always, every single thing the US military has touched in the past two decades has turned to shit and triggered mass migrations..
One thing is for sure, though: If Hillary is again the candidate in 2020, Trump will win a second term. She is that loathed
[Edited for clarity]
Hillary represented
the continuation of the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama administrations. Not that there's many people willing to see it like that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I trace it back to Reagon because it is reasonable to do so.
And it logically explains the entire dynamic. In fact, some of the original operatives are still in the thick of things. We are of like mind on that.
This is the real tell:
In fact, some of the original operatives are still in the thick of things.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Big Al I'm not sure
I'm not sure how one can judge such things in a situation where the CIA and their allies actually control policy. I think you have to make the best guess you can.
My best guess: Trump doesn't particularly want a nuclear war, especially not with Russia, with whom he'd rather make money. He doesn't particularly want the end of the world to come. He's enjoying himself too much. And I'll throw in this guess: he doesn't make his money directly off weapons, so he probably doesn't feel particularly invested in maintaining a state of constant war. But he'll bring us to the brink of nuclear war--or possibly even over the edge--and he'll maintain a state of constant war, because he's not gonna oppose the CIA and their friends on these things. It's not like he has an ethical commitment or something. Not like he'd be willing to risk himself.
As for the Clintons, all this began because he was doing a favor for the Clintons. And again, you've gotta make your best guess: did he actually refuse at the last minute to job for her, and is there a resulting rift between him and the Clintons? That's what I've been assuming, but it's quite possible the entire thing is a work intended to get the country to rally behind Hillary for 2020. I'm still going with Trump's ego getting the better of him once he realized he could actually become president, though.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
You could basically say the same thing about Obama,
or any of them for that matter. Just my opinion, but I've seen way too much leniency given to Trump by some on the left (not talking about you) when we all should know that presidential campaigns are nothing but lie festivals. Obama promised a lot of things too, made people cry when he was campaigning. But I don't see people, except the dem partisans, saying he couldn't do what he really wanted to do because of the CIA. Both Trump and Obama are liars who never intended to do any of what they said on the campaign trail.
I wrote a bunch of essays about Trump prior to his being elected where I made the cases that by reading thru the lines, Trump was not really saying much of what people thought he was saying when taking the totality of his positions, outright lies, omissions (9/11, etc.) and contradictions into consideration.
I really hate to say
Obama couldn't implement certain policies because of the CIA, because I'm extremely angry with Obama. But of course, if he wanted policies that the CIA didn't want, then the CIA would win. And I think that's what happened with Syria. Don't know if you remember, but there was a time when Obama was backing off on Syria. Then, suddenly, a video of a Western journalist getting his head cut off was all over the Internet--and Obama reversed his policies. In the speech where he announced this reversal, he made the memorable comment that "We know these policies will work because they succeeded so well in Somalia and Yemen." Which resulted in people all over the internet going "OH my GOD, Obama thinks Somalia and Yemen were successes!" But I always read it as a sarcastic statement, because no one born on this planet thinks that Somalia and Yemen are "successes."
In most cases, however, my main impression of Obama is that he was glad to be of service. Whatever the powerful want was fine with him. Just get Sasha and Malia seats on whatever lifeboats the rich have tucked away. And give him and Michelle lots and lots of money for whatever time civilization has left.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Of course, you're right that presidential campaigns are
lie-fests. Obama and Trump are noteworthy liars because of the nature of the lie they were telling (selling?). Both of them ran on the idea that something was fundamentally and profoundly wrong with the status quo, something that could be fixed with a combination of electing the right people, correct governance, and citizen activism. Both of them sold a politics of deep transformation, a response to endemic corruption. I hadn't seen something like that since Jimmy Carter ran in 76.
God knows Reagan didn't run on that, for all that his supporters liked to talk about the evil liberal bureaucracy--Reagan ran on the idea that it was morning in America. Both times. The only real problems were welfare queens and the Great Bear. I don't even know what George H.W. Bush ran on, except that no-one to the left of Reagan had a place in American politics. Bill Clinton ran on "Ideological conflict is for losers and fools. This left/right stuff is silly. We should all be non-ideological pragmatic problem-solvers." Both times. So the only systemic problem Bill Clinton recognized was that people get into silly ideological fights. George W. Bush, well. What the hell *did* he run on in 2000? It's hard for me to remember because it's all kind of overshadowed by him climbing up into the Oval Office on black people's faces. In 2004, W ran on "John Kerry is a shifty traitor."
So from 80 to 2004, nobody campaigned on transformation of the system--probably because in the post-Reagan era, the Way Things Are is sacrosanct and should Never Be Questioned. Unfortunately, there is a shelf-life to that attitude: when things fall apart beyond a certain point, you can't really get enough people to keep saying "Oh, the status quo is *fine*." Enter Obama (for the left) and Trump (for the right), saying "You're right; the status quo is horrible and I'll get you all out of it." Both times you have Hillary running on "No, the way things are is fine/inevitable; you're just too stupid to recognize it." Both times, unsurprisingly, the people rejected Hillary and went with whoever was willing to acknowledge that the status quo was shit and needed to be changed.
Or, at least, the people who still believe in electoral politics did that. In 2008, that was a lot of people, and Obama got voter participation like nobody had seen since 1968. In 2016, well...at first they said it was a record low: https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.... Then, later, they pushed the idea that they hadn't gotten it right immediately after the election and actually tons of people voted: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/324206-new-report-finds-that-vo...
You can probably predict what my opinion on that is. After all, we can't allow Americans to notice that a great many Americans no longer believe in their political system.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Good summarization
I'd have to add that Obama also represented a compelling racial element without ever having to spell it out. Changing the status quo along with an implicit racial "reparation" was a potent electoral cocktail. I'm not surprised Obama garnered the largest voting turn out since 1968. Hell, I did everything I could in NYC in 2008 to get people to vote for him.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
So did I.
I hate how I was tricked. For once, I let wishful thinking guide me, when his vote on telecom immunity (pro-surveillance state, pro-NSA) should have let me know exactly who and what I was working for.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I liken it to the dreamy boyfriend syndrome
We are just too enamored by the political bling, we knowingly over look the red flags waving in our faces.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
In this case
the "bling" was talking like a rational human being. It was the first time I ever saw a politician use rational argument the way some people use good looks.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Yes, he was quite good at that. Made me feel like, finally, we'd found the genuine article. Oh, the irony.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I was big on Obama in '08 too
But I had little patience for the rhetoric of "his hand are tied". OK great. We elected a president who is useless and who won't even fight in the bully pulpit. In the best case analysis, he's just so weak and spineless that he wouldn't even TRY to fight. So the absolute best I can say about him is that he's a weak, useless, coward.
Of course the more plausible explanation is that he never intended to fight anything to start with which just makes him plain evil.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
@Big Al As for
As for the left being too lenient on Trump, I think you're right, and I think it comes from the fact that clearly, Trump was not the result desired by a large portion of the MIC, the fossil fuel barons, and Wall Street. I believe he has a portion of the Pentagon part of the military industrial complex on his side. But Hillary has all the industrial and financial side of the MIC on her side--and part of the Pentagon and CIA sides as well. Most people on the non-Democratic left want to oppose those--I don't even know what to call them--factions? institutions? powerholders? black holes sucking the life out of the planet? So they like it when, for the first time in nearly forty years, the CIA and NSA and other spooks, the bankers, the oil barons, and the weaponsmakers DON'T get what they want. They enjoy the discomfiture of the fuckheads who got us onto this path of death and continue to protect it and its outcomes every day of their working lives.
I understand that.
But. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. Just not. Not in the case of Clinton, not in the case of Trump. One should never forget that Trump came into the race after a phone call from Bill Clinton. In other words, Trump is part of the fraudulent shitshow that is American electoral politics. He's a professional wrestler like the rest of them. It's just that he decided to freelance on Wrestlemania and took the belt when he wasn't supposed to. If you hate Vince McMahon, you might enjoy that. But that doesn't mean that that wrestler is on the side of the fans, or of truth. It just means he has a big ego.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
A Trump Defender
I'm almost tempted to suggest we enshrine any and all comments, going back 50 years to the present, that defends any branch of our government, put it in a time capsule, and when we've reached the tipping point of limited supplies of potable water and humanity is on the brink of extinction, they'll be fun to read in a sardonically wtf were they thinking kind of way.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
i think i've made it perfectly clear that i have no
interest in engaging you. i don't even have any interest in reading anything you've written. end of story.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
@UntimelyRippd I don't think he has
I don't think he has any interest in locking Hillary up either. Whether there's any actual animosity between them is hard to judge. There could be, if Trump became president because he refused, at the last minute to take a dive for her. But in that case, most of the ire would be on her side, since he got the better of her.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@ovals49 I thought JFK thought the
I thought JFK thought the President did have power, and was...convinced otherwise.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@ovals49
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
"It's a big party..."
as Carlin says, although not at all inclusive. It's always good to see the cracks in the phony facade though. It is a great reminder.
Because it is not going to happen
All these promises of draining the swamp and locking up the Clintons were empty ones aimed at firing up Trump supporters for the mid terms. For a while, I honestly thought that there might be a chance that we would see something come out of the Q posts, but I was wrong. As time has gone on, the Q posts have gotten lamer and more like political ads.
Donald Trump, who praised Julian Assange and Wikileaks in the past, is now allowing his DoJ to pursue Assange with some sort of nebulous charge for which he (Assange) will be tortured and probably killed. It will be the death of any semblance of journalism under our First Amendment. There is no clearer indication to me that either (1) this is a con of monumental proportions by Trump and/or (2) Trump is not in control of his administration. At this point, I tend to believe that it is both. And the kos kids are over there cheering it on.
This comment will also be the last time I post anything here in reference to Q or the supposed draining of the swamp. I would rather spend more of my own energy on trying to get a little more fit and less on trying to read the political tea leaves.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Yes, I feel the same.
Now, Pelosi is even using the expression.
She now wants to drain the swamp, too.
dfarrah
She is the original swamp rat!
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
She'll have her hands full
...trying to block Medicare for All for her corporate owners.
@dfarrah The cypress knee wants
The cypress knee wants to drain the swamp?
How droll.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I'm with you, gulfgal
I kept an open mind to Q just to see where it went and now it looks like it's going nowhere. Really fast too.
But I will admit that Q released a lot of information that we might not have known about otherwise. And we saw deeper into the Clinton's and others actions. The final straw was Sessions being fired after being told that he and Mueller were both actually wearing white hats. Now that Trump is going after Julian has burnt the straw to a crisp. Now I'm wondering how his supporters are going to react when Trump doesn't do anything about Hillary. Stay tuned, it might still get interesting.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
Sessions had been hanging
on by a thread ever since he recused himself shortly after he took office.
dfarrah
Because he's a fucking pig just like the rest of them.
And as long as he does his part to prop up capitalism, he has nothing to worry about.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
You don't lock up
members of your club. You might kid around about it, but you don't MEAN it!
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
Yes yes yes!
When will people realize they have so very much more in common with each other than they will ever have with us? We're the little people that don't count for anything, one of those tiresome things they have to put up with to maintain their wealth and lifestyles.
The People:
"Why am I in this hand basket? And where are we going?"
Always the last to find out.
It’s all kayfabe.
And the “Hillary goes to jail” storyline didn’t sell well with the powers that be so it’s ain’t gonna happen.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
ah, that's easy, snoopydawg;
this time it was the Tweeter-in-chief who asked Her to run against him in 2020, although raggedy ann is correct as well.
good sunday to you all.
pied piper strategy
Thus returning the favor he granted Her in 2016.
The victory of His Trumpiness wasn't the expected outcome, remember......
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
eggzackly.
rumor has it that they're both sharpening their fangs in preparation for the campaign season, which started...yesterday, dinnae it? ; )
Lock her up was a great campaign strategy
Lock her up was the easiest way to get elected. In America in 2016 the easiest way to get the most people out to vote for you in the most places was to say you were going to lock Hillary Clinton up. No other candidate took that tack and angle. It was smart when it came to telling the base what they want to hear. It worked. If only he had followed through and kept his word.
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better.
both - Albert Einstein
Trump hasn't locked her
up because he can't.
From what I understand, it was Jeff Sessions who was responsible for initiating any action against Clinton, and for whatever reason, he did not.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/come-on-jeff-trump-continues-pub...
dfarrah
Let's review:
Let's review:
Trump IS Clinton. Clinton IS Trump. Do not forget this!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
It's in the eye of the beholder
Do I have that right? Perception is whatever people want it to be, but reality is the truth. I think ..
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
Because he lied
Trump never had any intention to prosecute hilz. As he explained right after being elected.
Trump on the 'lock her up' chant: 'Now we don't care'
Right. Of course not.
OMG! Trump took a page out of Obama's playbook
as well as Nancy's 'impeachment is off the table" again. "I just don't think that's what we should be focusing on" after telling people that was what she was focusing on.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
@snoopydawg Let's look forward,
Let's look forward, not backward. We don't want to start a witch hunt.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Trump had an ongoing
feud with Jeff Sessions over Sessions' inaction.
I suppose this could have all been for show...we'll see if there is any progress since Jeff Sessions' resignation/firing.
dfarrah
You could also ask this:
Why hasn't the DOJ indicted Trump Jr? Or acting-President Kushner?
Along with Hillary, those are the only three people with credible physical evidence that points to Russia Collusion?
(Except for Mueller, himself, who hand-carried the uranium samples to Russia for the Clintons.)
Perhaps it's a standoff.
M.A.D.
Or Brennan and Clapper and Holder and ...
every one else who has lied to congress under oath. The only people who get locked up are the ones that expose the empire's crimes.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
I wonder how they are going to get out of this.
So many people are aware of the hoax. They can point the physical evidence and witnesses that prove that point. But they cannot safely speak. As usual, the security apparatus has no credible evidence to display; they didn't bother to look at thescene of the crime. They are gas lighting the American people to cover up their failed and illegal attempt to seize the election for Hillary. I assume that is why the DOJ and FBI barred Assange from testifying before the House and Senate investigation committees last last March. The paperwork was in place from the DOJ granting him immunity, the tickets were in hand for the next day. But James Comey and John Warner threw the gates closed and blocked Assange's visit.
Assange is still the only one who knows for certain who stole the emails from the DNC. He did not get them from the Russians. This is where things suddenly got real for the deep state. They likely executed the whistle blower. All investigations into his murder was blocked at the highest level. . Mueller has been stalling ever since. Too many people know what really happened.
If the US does get their hands on Assange, I don't think he'll make it to the United States.
@Pluto's Republic I don't think so
I don't think so either. And unfortunately, it's not just the U.S. Basically any English-speaking country or Israel would be just as bad.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Trump’s job is to be worse than Hillary
He tried, but not hard enough, in 2016. He’s still paving the way for Her in 2020.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X