Remember the leftist motto: accuse your enemy of that which you are guilty, it's true, everything they said Trump did they are doing or have done.
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy submitted a discussion of the video from The Duran.com:
Hillary Clinton is frightened of the Trump dossier revelation...and her body language shows her fear.
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are under fire after having to publicly admit to funding the disgusting and discredited ’Trump Dossier.’
The FBI under James Comey agreed to reimburse the Clinton campaign and the DNC for money it spent on the opposition research.
According to The Gateway Pundit, body language expert ’Bombard’ posted a video to YouTube analyzing Hillary Clinton’s facial expressions, vocal discrepancies and upper body movements and concluded they conveyed signs of worry following reports her campaign, along with the DNC, funded the now discredited ’Trump dossier.’
The video was of a fireside chat Hillary Clinton gave this week, where she claimed she didn’t want her supporters in ’defensive crouch’ after President Trump took office.
In remarks reported by ABC News, Clinton said she wanted her supporters to give the new president a chance before they immediately ruled him out.
"You know, I didn’t want everybody who voted for me just immediately going into kind of a defensive crouch," Clinton said.
Clinton said of Trump she initially thought that there may have been a shift from the "horrible rhetoric" and "divisive, insulting rhetoric that had fueled his campaign from the very first day."
[...]"Well that did not last long," Clinton said. "As Maya Angelou said, ’When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.’" Continues - Vid @ link.
Posted by: Herb McCoy7309 ||
10/31/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You squirm too if you were going from silk to prison polyester.
#4
Something is going very wrong for her. There's been something very wrong about Hilda since at least the 1970s.
It does seem there is momentum building with regards to Uranium One. That is but one of many things that could go wrong for her. There are the emails and espionage. Destruction of government records. Lying. There is the Clinton Crime Cartel Foundation. There is Haiti. Election fraud. Iran. The list goes on.
Has there ever been a former first lady or President indicted or convicted of anything?
There are many things that are egregious from the last administration but I have doubts that anyone in the DOJ has the cojones to do something about the criminality and on-going cover-up despite the need.
#5
The next move is going to be a "everybody deals with the Russians, nothing to see here" meme to appear in the media. She knows she's exposed in this, and a pre-emptive paradigm shift may be necessary. (It will require a narrative shift worthy of Pravda, though.)
Posted by: ed in texas ||
10/31/2017 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
She just heard from Morgan Freeman? (When you lost Morgan Freeman....)
#9
We've had uranium deals with Russia since the 1990's; we bought tons of Russian U235 weapons uranium, downgraded to reactor grade, to fuel our electric generating plants at a discount price. I don't understand what's the big deal with the current uranium sales going the other way - Russia has plenty of uranium ore and the means to enrich it. And we each still have plenty of bombs. I only get concerned if the stuff starts heading towards nutcase countries like Iran and North Korea.
[NYT] NEW YORK ‐ If, by appearing on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show on Monday night, John F. Kelly was trying to do damage control after the indictments of three of President Trump’s associates earlier in the day, it did not work.
Instead, Kelly, the White House chief of staff, resurrected the debate over Confederate monuments ‐ previously fueled by his boss, Trump, over the summer ‐ and the Confederacy itself. He called Robert E. Lee "an honorable man who gave up his country to fight for his state," said that "men and women of good faith on both sides made their stand where their conscience had them make their stand," and argued that "the lack of ability to compromise caused the Civil War."
[Breitbart] Monday on her nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Laura Ingraham dismissed claims that today’s announcement of a 12-count indictment aimed at former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates was a "bad day" for President Donald Trump.
According to Ingraham, if special counsel Robert Mueller had anything on Trump, today’s indictment would have been his and not Manafort and Gates.
"The idea that this is a bad day for Trump because it in any way alludes to a collusion with Russia ‐ you’ve got to be living on another planet if you think that. That’s just not what this is about. And maybe it’s an attempt as Saul Weisenberg said earlier on the show, who is a deputy counsel for Ken Starr during the Whitewater-Lewinsky investigation. He said this is a classic attempt to twist Manafort, put the big squeeze on him and Gates, try to get them to give something up on Trump."
"They don’t have anything on Trump," she continued. "If they had something on Trump, that would be the indictment today. They would have something on Kushner or any of these other characters, but they don’t. So they go for Manafort and Gates. So we’ll see. I mean, we don’t know anything more than we see in these 31 pages, but as far as a smoking gun that in any way casts aspersions on Donald Trump ‐ it’s a nothing-burger."
[National Review] The Paul Manafort indictment is much ado about nothing . . . except as a vehicle to squeeze Manafort, which is special counsel Robert Mueller’s objective ‐ as we have been arguing for three months (see here, here, and here).
Do not be fooled by the "Conspiracy against the United States" heading on Count One (page 23 of the indictment). This case has nothing to do with what Democrats and the media call "the attack on our democracy" (i.e., the Kremlin’s meddling in the 2016 election, supposedly in "collusion" with the Trump campaign).
Essentially, Manafort and his associate, Richard W. Gates, are charged with (a) conspiring to conceal from the U.S. government about $75 million they made as unregistered foreign agents for Ukraine, years before the 2016 election (mainly, from 2006 through 2014), and (b) a money-laundering conspiracy. There are twelve counts in all, but those are the two major allegations. The so-called conspiracy against the United States mainly involves Manafort’s and Gates’s alleged failure to file Treasury Department forms required by the Bank Secrecy Act.
Specifically, Americans who hold a stake in foreign bank accounts must file what’s known as an "FBAR" (foreign bank account report) in any year in which, at any point, the balance in the account exceeds $10,000. Federal law also requires disclosure of foreign accounts on annual income-tax returns. Manafort and Gates are said to have controlled foreign accounts through which their Ukrainian political-consulting income sluiced, and to have failed to file accurate FBARs and tax returns. In addition, they allegedly failed to register as foreign agents from 2008 through 2014 and made false statements when they belatedly registered.
#1
There's enough there to put Manafort away for the rest of his life, which might motivate him into generating a narrative implicating Trump. All Congress wants or needs is an excuse to rid themselves of the threat to the Deep State.
#2
Still a win for our side. Meuller may have hooked little fish Manafort but he also inadvertently snagged big fish Tony Podesta. The Podesta group is being dissolved at this minute and a run on Bleach Bit is being made. Manfafort should spill his guts about his dealings with the Podestas and any other Dems.
#5
The Podesta Group was hired by Paul Manafort on behalf of foreign clients because the company was perceived to have a direct line to powerful politicians, like Hillary Clinton.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qB-QfLOScjM
The chairman of one major presidential campaign colluded with a brother of the *other* major presidential campaign to enrich themselves by secretly advancing the interests of a foreign adversary. That happened. That's "the swamp" everyone is saying needs to be drained.
The Mueller investigation is no longer a search for Russian collusion with Trump in the 2016 race. It is now a much more far-reaching inquiry into corrupt lobbying practices all across Washington DC, the so-called "swamp". An investigation that is very likely to ensnare figures close to Hillary Clinton.
In press accounts, Mueller's investigation is still framed as a hunt for collusion between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the government of Russia, but that description is mostly bogus. The investigation has broadened now to determine which people and which organizations in Washington DC have spent years working *secretly* as de facto operatives on behalf of Russian government and business interests.
The Podesta Group is chief among these.
They are more focused on facilitators of Russian influence in America than they are on election collusion.
Posted by: Herb McCoy7309 ||
10/31/2017 7:26 Comments ||
Top||
#7
the Podesta Group financial records, where might they be now ?
They're on Hillarey's computer server - but it had a catastrophic hard drive failure and they were lost.
h/t Instapundit
You know, it has been asserted ‐ at Ace of Spades HQ among other places, and I made the point myself in a post here ‐ that the left has left normal behind.
Part of their primacy in the culture, part of the reason they inserted themselves into gatekeeper positions and managed to control the media-industrial complex, is that for the longest time they looked not only normal but, as far as the human instinct can perceive it (even in a "classless" society), "high class" and commanding and in control.
...I don’t know when that slipped. I started noticing some acts of truly bizarre public performance during the Bush years. It was as though, with Motor Voter and the ease of election falsification, they’d assumed no Republican candidate would ever displace theirs, and therefore they went utterly unhinged when Bush won. From trying to disqualify the election results, to bizarre displays including hanging him in effigy, they were off the reservation. On the other hand, I understand their public displays were always fairly unhinged, including the "marching around with giant papier-mache puppets." But even then I thought that "women dancing around in vulva" (unlike them, I know anatomy) "costumes" was a step beyond.
...I don’t know about you guys, but this is starting to get creepy. Sure, we wanted the left revealed for the fantasists they are.
But how does a country resume even vaguely normal life when at least 25% of it is throwing a massive tantrum because they didn’t get their Hillary ice cream?
How does one send a quarter of the country, many with bully pulpits, to their room for a timeout?
I don’t know. I offer only a glimmer of hope. Note that even in their fantasy they have nothing about Hillary winning an election.
Let us be grateful they’re sane enough to realize that she can’t do.
h/t Instapundit
[Townhall] As Jeff Flake joins Bob Corker in America’s political gimp box, perhaps our betters in the Grand Old Party should reflect on how two of their own came to this sorry end. Well guys, there’s this thing called "loyalty," and out in America we kind of expect it. You DC dwellers should investigate that concept in depth, not only in order to improve your characters ‐ you guys love babbling about "character," right? ‐ but to save your useless hides from the electoral accounting that’s coming.
Let me break it down in simple terms so you don’t have to go get one of your minions to explain the big words. Stop taking sides with the enemy against us or we are going to throw you out of your nice, comfy offices. Clear enough for you?
...The loyalty issue is just one component of the massive cultural/political upheaval we’re all living through. Normals are tired of being deceived, disregarded, and disrespected by those in power. Now we’re demanding loyalty, not asking for it. And we’re going to ruthlessly purge everyone who presumes to represent us who actually holds us in contempt, because the feeling is mutual.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
