Monday, December 05, 2016

Maybe This is Why Hillary Lost the Election!


Hillary Clinton Crimes In This Video Will Shock You !!
Published on Nov 30, 2016

Hillary Clinton's MOST Idiotic Moments 
Published on Nov 30, 2016

Hillary Clinton Body Count Documentary - Serial Killer for President!
Published on Sep 10, 2016
This is the definitive documentary on the Hillary and Bill Clinton killing spree that has been ongoing since they burst onto the scene in Arkansas. A trail of dead and mysterious deaths surround the Clinton's and I document 114 and more deaths in this film that they are directly connected to. Hill and Bill are Illuminati puppets, that are killing off anyone who might expose the 4th branches operations. Bill and Hillary are some of the most proficient serial killers of all time and need to be put into prison immediately. 

Hillary Clinton Exposed, Movie She Banned From Theaters
Mars Daniels
Published on Nov 6, 2013
Progressives Blaming their “Fake News” on Russia
Bent-out-of-shape lies of the progressives are fast becoming their hand-made version of THE TRUTH
By Judi McLeod —— Bio and Archives
November 30, 2016
It’s got to be the hypocrisy of all time that the same progressives who worked to advance Communism as an ideal in America—starting at the grade school level and moving outward— are now trying to advance the idea that it is the Russians and not dirty Democrats who are behind the wholly progressive-manufactured “Fake News” scandal.
Now that they’ve been caught, red-handed, blaming the very thing that they cultured, nourished and grew in America, the liars who blame “Fake News” on the Russians, should be outed onto the Public Square.
“Fake News” has been a societal curse for decades; been around for as long as there were newspapers.  It used to be called what it really was: “propaganda”.
Sad to say that the truth, and anything even close to resembling it, went out of style with the whalebone corset.
In the current day major mainstream media, recognizing their powerful marketing potential,  jumped on sanctimonious logos like ‘The truth lives here’ and ‘Fair and Balanced’.
Under ‘fair and balanced’ Fox News skyrocketed all the way up to Number One in Cable Network News never having to look back.
Surrounded by left-leaning news outlets with nowhere to turn,  millions of television viewers kidded themselves that Fox News was the only bastion of Conservatism left in the ever left-leaning news world.
They brought in talking heads from the far left in an effort to relay “balance” and over the years became more like the rest of the alphabet networks.
Then came Megyn Kelly, who at the first televised 2016 presidential primary debate, seemed to think getting even with Donald Trump for insulting gal pal Rosie O’Donnell and other women, was more important than finding out where he might stand on the issues of the day.
O’Donnell’s now out there carping against Trump’s 10-year-old son, Barron, claiming that he is autistic and that she can prove it.
Some people call getting even telling the truth.
ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, all members of the alphabet television media claim a phony monopoly on the truth.
Every single one of them tried to foist Hillary Clinton on the White House—and that’s the unvarnished truth.
According to the mainstream media of the day,  Clinton did not lie, cheat, leave four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens to die violent deaths in Benghazi, Libya; she did not expose national security by operating from a home-brew server,  or participate in the outrageous pay-for-play scheme of the Clinton Foundation.
The Russians made it all up!
And now we have the social media-led, self-anointed ‘Ministry of Truth’ trying to shut down with their outrageous lies, all conservative news outlets, society’s dwindling purveyors of truth.
“The flood of “fake news” this election season got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked the operation. (Washington Post,  Nov.24, 2016)
Let’s see the proof.
“Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery — including thousands of botnets, teams of paid human “trolls,” and networks of websites and social-media accounts — echoed and amplified right-wing sites across the Internet as they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers. The effort also sought to heighten the appearance of international tensions and promote fear of looming hostilities with nuclear-armed Russia. (Washington Post)
“Two teams of independent researchers found that the Russians exploited American-made technology platforms to attack U.S. democracy at a particularly vulnerable moment, as an insurgent candidate harnessed a wide range of grievances to claim the White House. The sophistication of the Russian tactics may complicate efforts by Facebook and Google to crack down on “fake news,” as they have vowed to do after widespread complaints about the problem.”
Wow!  Google, which ran Clinton’s digital election campaign, and Facebook, which marches to the requests of German Chancellor Angela Merkel,  and openly kow-tows to Communist China, are the heroes who will save American democracy at its most “vulnerable” moment.
How’s that for rolled out propaganda from the Ministry of Truth?!
“There is no way to know whether the Russian campaign proved decisive in electing Trump, but researchers portray it as part of a broadly effective strategy of sowing distrust in U.S. democracy and its leaders. The tactics included penetrating the computers of election officials in several states and releasing troves of hacked emails that embarrassed Clinton in the final months of her campaign.(Washington Post)
It was Clinton whose habit of operating emails from an unprotected server left her vulnerable for “hacking” and Clinton, not Russia, who embarrassed herself, by being seen by much of the world as lying and corrupt.
“They want to essentially erode faith in the U.S. government or U.S. government interests,” said Clint Watts, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute who along with two other researchers has tracked Russian propaganda since 2014. “This was their standard mode during the Cold War. The problem is that this was hard to do before social media.”
“Watts’s report on this work, with colleagues Andrew Weisburd and J.M. Berger, appeared on the national security online magazine War on the Rocks this month under the headline “Trolling for Trump: How Russia Is Trying to Destroy Our Democracy.” Another group, called PropOrNot, a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds, planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns. (Update: The report came out on Saturday).
“The researchers used Internet analytics tools to trace the origins of particular tweets and mapped the connections among social-media accounts that consistently delivered synchronized messages. Identifying website codes sometimes revealed common ownership. In other cases, exact phrases or sentences were echoed by sites and social-media accounts in rapid succession, signaling membership in connected networks controlled by a single entity.
Earth to research dweebs: That’s the DNC, and the Democrat Party relationship to the mainstream media described to a T.  Thank You.
“PropOrNot’s monitoring report, which was provided to The Washington Post in advance of its public release, identifies more than 200 websites as routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans. On Facebook, PropOrNot estimates that stories planted or promoted by the disinformation campaign were viewed more than 213 million times.
“Some players in this online echo chamber were knowingly part of the propaganda campaign, the researchers concluded, while others were “useful idiots” — a term born of the Cold War to describe people or institutions that unknowingly assisted Soviet Union propaganda efforts.
The Russian campaign during this election season, researchers from both groups say, worked by harnessing the online world’s fascination with “buzzy” content that is surprising and emotionally potent, and tracks with popular conspiracy theories about how secret forces dictate world events.
“Some of these stories originated with RT and Sputnik, state-funded Russian information services that mimic the style and tone of independent news organizations yet sometimes include false and misleading stories in their reports, the researchers say. On other occasions, RT, Sputnik and other Russian sites used social-media accounts to amplify misleading stories already circulating online, causing news algorithms to identify them as “trending” topics that sometimes prompted coverage from mainstream American news organizations.
“The speed and coordination of these efforts allowed Russian-backed phony news to outcompete traditional news organizations for audience. Some of the first and most alarming tweets after Clinton fell ill at a Sept. 11 memorial event in New York, for example, came from Russian botnets and trolls, researchers found. (She was treated for pneumonia and returned to the campaign trail a few days later.)
“This followed a spate of other misleading stories in August about Clinton’s supposedly troubled health. The Daily Beast debunked a particularly widely read piece in an article that reached 1,700 Facebook accounts and was read online more than 30,000 times. But the PropOrNot researchers found that the version supported by Russian propaganda reached 90,000 Facebook accounts and was read more than 8 million times. The researchers said the true Daily Beast story was like “shouting into a hurricane” of false stories supported by the Russians.
Before it’s all over, the millions who watched Hillary falling ill and having to be carted away from Ground Zero in a van, will be told they only imagined it.
“The way that this propaganda apparatus supported Trump was equivalent to some massive amount of a media buy,” said the executive director of PropOrNot, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid being targeted by Russia’s legions of skilled hackers. “It was like Russia was running a super PAC for Trump’s campaign. . . . It worked.”
There you have it, folks, the 60-plus million who voted for Trump did not do so of their own volition, it was Russia’s “super PAC for Trump’s campaign.”
We can now see clearly where all this is going.  It’s going to the latest lie of what the global-elite run progressives want the masses to think: Donald Trump did not win the election, Hillary Rodham Clinton did.
Bent-out-of-shape lies of the progressives are fast becoming their hand-made version of THE TRUTH.
Copyright © Canada Free Press

Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,, and Glenn Beck.
There's a simple reason for Clinton's shocking loss to Trump
Daniel Alpert, Westwood Capital
Nov. 14, 2016
In the aftermath of Donald Trump's shocking electoral victory over Hillary Clinton, it is time for very deep soul searching among Democratic Party leaders as well as the party's rank and file.
There are many things to blame for Clinton's loss, some obviously true (she is an awkward campaigner), some convenient but less true (Americans not being ready for a female president, which is nonsense, or an aversion to political dynasties, which have happened before).
But the very inconvenient truth that must be absorbed, by the technocratic Democrats of the Obama years and by the apparent plurality of voters who supported Secretary Clinton, is that the Obama administration did not deliver on its promises of hope and change, and broke the trust of many of those (enough, at least, to elect Donald Trump) who were counting on a sharp departure from business as usual following the Great Recession.
It is tempting to chalk up the Trump win to the nativist racism of opioid-addled, poor white males. But that would be a mistake, especially given the actual demographics of Trump’s electoral coalition. Trump correctly identified the broad swath of Americans feeling economically left behind and insecure, and his constituents are working class and middle class (and even some upper middle class) more than they are the poor.
Trump's voters have been economically disenfranchised, betrayed by Wall Street and other moneyed interests, and ignored (or worse yet, pandered to) by their government for decades.
Don't get me wrong: The Clintons certainly were responsible for making the bed they were ultimately tossed out of. The petit-scandals and tone-deafness of both Clintons mounted to the point of making it difficult to chalk up their problems to a "vast right-wing conspiracy." With an electorate furious with banking interests, what brand of hubris defends taking piles of money for speeches to Goldman Sachs?
Yes, Americans find it unattractive when their politicians cash in after leaving office, and the Clintons seem like poster children in that department. But they just elected a boorish reality-TV star to the highest office in the land, so the notion that the electorate's sensibilities are all that delicate is a bit far-fetched.
No, the legacy of this election — perhaps, sadly, to become a part of the legacy of President Barack Obama's administration as history is written — is that so many of our families, our homeowners, our middle-aged and aging workers and parents, have been harmed, perhaps irrevocably, by declining real disposable incomes, deteriorating or vanished wealth, no prospects for a reasonably comfortable retirement, and healthcare and education costs that have eroded the little they were able to preserve.
And after eight years of the Obama presidency, despite all the faith they placed in change in 2008 and, somewhat less convincingly in 2012, they wondered:
Why was the administration crowing about job creation when the majority of the jobs created were low wage/low hour full-time positions and gig jobs that were supremely inadequate replacements for the steady, better-paying jobs that preceded them?
Why did the administration do so little to relieve homeowners who lost so much during the crisis and then pat themselves on the back for the cheap-debt-fueled growth in home prices that was concentrated on the coasts and did little for the balance sheets of households in places like Michigan and Wisconsin, Iowa, and Ohio?
And why, in God's name, was that administration touting the benefits of global trade agreements that were negotiated in secret and so patently devoid of benefits to US workers, while these same voters observed that everything they were buying at the store was putting people to work in China, Vietnam, Korea, and Mexico?
Finally — notwithstanding the insanity of the Republican obstruction of a truly responsible national healthcare program for all (which is supported by 58% of the electorate) — instead of the thoroughbred health-insurance policy campaigned for by President Obama, the nation got a two-humped camel, in the form of the Affordable Care Act, that is now limping at best. The chief benefit of ACA, insuring the poor and the young, were not felt by Trump's electorate; all they see are rising insurance premiums (for employer-provided as well as Obamacare-provided healthcare insurance).
US President Barack Obama greeting doctors from across the US in 2009 after making remarks on the need for health-insurance reform.Jim Young/Reuters
Imagine what it must feel like to be told that Obamacare is a "signature accomplishment" of the past eight years if you are not a member of the political or intellectual elites and don't know or don't care about how difficult the ACA was to achieve politically.
Being told what "can't be done" is cold gruel in comparison to being told America can be made great and "I, alone, can fix it."
But the deepest cut for many who ultimately voted for Trump, and I believe the proximate reason for his ultimate success, was the Clinton/Obama effort to squelch the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders. While the recent WikiLeaks disclosures were somewhat damaging to Clinton, they only confirmed what most people generally felt or, like me, knew. I, however, voted for Clinton — others went a different way or didn't vote.
It was clear over the summer that Sanders would have been a much more formidable candidate than Clinton against Trump. And I have no doubt that he would have won the election this past Tuesday.
Because this election was not about experience in the echo chamber that is Washington, it was not about being grateful for having been rescued from crisis; it was not about the glass ceiling or competence.
This election was about being heard. And just as Sanders heard the anguish of the many, so too (to the anguish, now, of many) did Trump.
Read the original article on Westwood Capital. Copyright 2016.
Hillary Clinton Blames F.B.I. Director for Election Loss
By Amy Chozick
Nov. 12, 2016
Hillary Clinton on Saturday cast blame for her surprise election loss on the announcement by the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, days before the election that he had revived the inquiry into her use of a private email server.
In her most extensive remarks since she conceded the race to Donald J. Trump early Wednesday, Mrs. Clinton told donors on a 30-minute conference call that Mr. Comey’s decision to send a letter to Congress about the inquiry 11 days before Election Day had thrust the controversy back into the news and had prevented her from ending the campaign with an optimistic closing argument.
“There are lots of reasons why an election like this is not successful,” Mrs. Clinton said, according to a donor who relayed the remarks. But, she added, “our analysis is that Comey’s letter raising doubts that were groundless, baseless, proven to be, stopped our momentum.”
Mrs. Clinton said a second letter from Mr. Comey, clearing her once again, which came two days before Election Day, had been even more damaging. In that letter, Mr. Comey said an examination of a new trove of emails, which had been found on the computer of Anthony D. Weiner, the estranged husband of one of her top aides, had not caused him to change his earlier conclusion that Mrs. Clinton should face no charges over her handling of classified information.
Adviser, Ties China and North Korea to Jihadists
Her campaign said the seemingly positive outcome had only hurt it with voters who did not trust Mrs. Clinton and were receptive to Mr. Trump’s claims of a “rigged system.” In particular, white suburban women who had been on the fence were reminded of the email imbroglio and broke decidedly in Mr. Trump’s favor, aides said.
After leading in polls in many battleground states, Mrs. Clinton told the donors on Saturday, “we dropped, and we had to keep really pushing to regain our advantage, which going into last weekend we had.”
“We were once again up in all but two of the battleground states, and we were up considerably in some that we ended up losing,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And we were feeling like we had to put it back together.”
Presidential candidates have a long history of blaming forces outside their control for their losses. In 2004, John Kerry linked his defeat to a videotape of Osama bin Laden that appeared days before the election, stoking fears about terrorism. In 2012, Mitt Romney told donors he had lost because President Obama had vowed to bestow “gifts” on Democratic special interests groups, namely African-Americans, Hispanics and young people.
Mrs. Clinton’s contention appears to be more rooted in reality — and hard data. An internal campaign memo with polling data said that “there is no question that a week from Election Day, Secretary Clinton was poised for a historic win,” but that, in the end, “late-breaking developments in the race proved one hurdle too many for us to overcome.”
Mrs. Clinton lost narrowly in several battleground states, and by the time all ballots are counted, she appears poised to win the popular vote by more than two million votes.
Still, Mrs. Clinton’s instinct to shun any personal responsibility angered some Democrats. Several donors on the call, while deeply bitter about Mr. Comey’s actions, said they believed that Mrs. Clinton and her campaign had suffered avoidable missteps that handed the election to an unacceptable opponent. They pointed to the campaign’s lack of a compelling message for white working-class voters and to decisions years ago by Mrs. Clinton to use a private email address at the State Department and to accept millions of dollars for speeches to Wall Street.
“There is a special place in hell for Clinton staff, allegedly including Cheryl Mills, that okayed the email server setup,” Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former senior aide to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, wrote on Sidewire, a social media site, referring to a longtime aide and lawyer to Mrs. Clinton.
Clinton Staff Memo Cites ‘One Hurdle Too Many’
Hillary Clinton's campaign staff distributed an internal memo on Thursday detailing why it thought the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had played a role in Mrs. Clinton's loss.
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign was so confident in her victory that her aides popped open Champagne on the campaign plane early Tuesday. But that conviction, aides would later learn, was based largely on erroneous data showing that young, black and Latino voters and suburban women who had been turned off by Mr. Trump’s comments but viewed Mrs. Clinton unfavorably would turn out for her in higher numbers than they ultimately did.
Exit polls conducted by Edison Research found that among people who said they had decided in the final week before Election Day, 47 percent voted for Mr. Trump and 42 percent for Mrs. Clinton.
As early as Wednesday morning, aides began to explain to Democrats shaken by the loss that the campaign’s sophisticated data modeling had not taken into account the bombshell F.B.I. announcement.
Mr. Comey’s letters to Congress went against the F.B.I.’s longstanding tradition of avoiding decisions that could affect elections, but he told aides that he felt he had no choice because he had already weighed in on the case so publicly. In July, he had taken the unusual step of publicly announcing that the F.B.I. would not charge Mrs. Clinton.
At the time, she believed she had finally put the issue to rest. And after the final debate on Oct. 19 in Las Vegas, she emerged in such a strong position that she began to focus on campaigning for down-ballot Democrats and planned a campaign stop in traditionally Republican Arizona.
“We felt so good about where we were,” Mrs. Clinton told donors. Before Mr. Comey’s first letter to Congress, she added, “we just had a real wind at our back.”
Mr. Trump seized on the letter, telling voters in Nevada the Saturday before Election Day that “the F.B.I. has reopened its criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton,” and that the matter “would grind government to a halt” should Mrs. Clinton win the White House. The F.B.I.’s examination of the new emails did not in fact reopen the investigation
Democratic pollsters attributed Mr. Trump’s laser-thin victories in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — states that President Obama had won — largely to a drifting of college-educated suburban women to the Republican nominee at the last minute, because of the renewed focus on Mrs. Clinton’s email server.
“We lost with college-educated whites after leading with them all summer,” a Clinton spokesman, Brian Fallon, said on Wednesday. “Five more days of reminders about Comey, and they gravitated back to Trump.”
Before Mrs. Clinton spoke on Saturday, her finance director, Dennis Cheng, thanked the donors on the call, each of whom had raised at least $100,000. The campaign brought in nearly $1 billion to spend heavily on data efforts, to disperse hundreds of staff members to battleground states, and to air television advertisements — only to fall short to Mr. Trump’s upstart operation.
Donors conceded that, ultimately, no amount of money could match Mr. Trump’s crisp pitch, aimed at the economically downtrodden, to “make America great again.”
“You can have the greatest field program, and we did — he had nothing,” said Jay S. Jacobs, a prominent New York Democrat and donor to Mrs. Clinton. “You can have better ads, paid for by greater funds, and we did. Unfortunately, Trump had the winning argument.”
Mrs. Clinton has kept a low profile since her concession speech at a Midtown Manhattan hotel on Wednesday. On Thursday, a young mother with her 13-month-old daughter spotted Mrs. Clinton walking her dogs near her home in Chappaqua, N.Y., posting a photo of the defeated candidate on Facebook that quickly went viral along with the hashtag #ImStillWithHer.
On Friday night, Mrs. Clinton thanked volunteers on a nationwide conference call. “Look, I’m not going to sugarcoat it,” she said, sighing. “These have been very, very tough days.”

A version of this article appears in print on November 13, 2016, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Clinton Blames F.B.I. Director for Her Defeat. 

Hillary’s MASSIVE MELTDOWN If that f ***ing bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!  
Published on Nov 6, 2016
Published on Oct 22, 2016
I do not own this video. This video is owned by Bill Still