★UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 2016★

refuting it complete doesn't change the fact that it exists because its now a fact and documented read the wiki leak emails and you will know how connected the dems and msm are in countless emails, here are just a few.

1. Clinton Staff hosts private “off-the-record cocktail party” with 38 “influential” reporters, journalists, editors, and anchors (from 16 different mainstream media outlets including CNN, NBC, CBS, NYT, MSNBC, and more) with the stated goal of “framing the race.”

2. Donna Brazile (CNN contributor at the time, and current DNC Chairman now) leaked CNN town hall questions to Hillary Clinton’s staff prior to the debate.

3. Clinton campaign and the New York Times coordinating attack strategy against Trump.

4. Glen Thrush, POLITICO’s chief political correspondent and senior staff writer for POLITICO Magazine, sends John Podesta an article for his approval. Writes: “Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this. Tell me if I fucked up anything.”

5. Huffington Post contributor, Frank Islam, writes to John Podesta in an email titled “My blogs in the Huffington Post”, says “I am committed to make sure she is elected the next president.” “Please let me know if I can be of any service to you.”

6. Clinton staffer “Placing a story” with Politico / New York Times: “place a story with a friendly journalist” “we have a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico” “we should shape likely leaks in the best light for HRC.”

7. John Podesta receiving drafts of New York Times articles before they’re published.

Clinton staff “placing a story with a friendly at the AP (Matt Lee or Bradley Klapper).”

More media collusion: NYT and AP “helpful” to Clinton campaign.

8. Clinton staff colluding with New York Times and Wall Street Journal to paint Hillary’s economic policies in a “progressive” light.
9. CNBC panelist colluding with John Podesta on what to ask Trump when he calls in for an interview.

10. Clinton staff appearing to control the release times of Associated Press articles.

 

Software should be in the public domain or under GPL, every american citizen has the right to freely audit it.

Hillary is the reptillian, the batshit insane woman is jill stein.

 

how is she crazy when she clearly avoids all the batshit insane stuff her party pushes? its clearly a "i can either associate with these people and catch midnight news or just not do anything"

 

I know it isnt, but every single one of those points should be illegal to do

 

If Hillary wins, Corruption wins.

Also I'm glad to say that Michael Moore, a RAGING LIBERAL who thinks all white people should hate themselves due to slavery that happened almost 150 years ago, realized finally that Trump is bound to win. He also explains why Trump is going to win. What he says is... pretty profound.

 

I agree, apparently a software developer came out and said the "glitch" seen in Texas was intentional... Glad they are starting to pull machines. The owner of that company is a Mexican who hates Trump (apparently).

Can we say she is a Crooked Reptilian?

 

The good thing that came out of htis is that discussions actually come with a source now instead of random stuff. Except donald trump he just still uses massive lines of text to prove a point without actual proof.

 

I've given PLENTY of evidence before and do you know what it was met with in this very thread?

"That's too long" "What did you do, copy paste that?" "That's fake"

I could give plenty of sources, but what's the point when you guys will just rule it fake? In fact, that was back in the time that Blizzerd started taking my side because I was arguing with immense fact but everyone who was arguing me kept dismissing everything I had to say and saying I was racist even though I kept linking source after source to them to prove my point.

All of the points I have made recently I have given proof for in the past such as the oversampling, the primaries rigged, I've linked to that very article that Complete linked only it kind of is a positive. Plus, some of the points dont exactly need proof when it is common knowledge, such as "WMD's" in Iraq.

 

https://twitter.com/drjillstein/status/715230945679380481
???

 

I've never said or done that before. Keep linking sources imho, if your source is shit people will call you out for it if its not they wont and if they say its fake then it reflects badly on them ( the entire MSM crap, its not because it gets reported on there that its not true ). Its easyer to dismiss something to be fake then to actual do your research enlighten yourself and refute it with another source/ counterargument.

 

Then I shall from here on out. It was quite demoralizing when Space_Oddity, Complete, (I believe) Flashce, and a couple others kept hounding on me when I was making logically based arguments with source after source after source by just refuting me by calling me racist and such.

 

This is exactly why I think you are very ill informed vicki. I like that you link sources but you arent critical about your sources. Its not because you believe in your so called non-MSM media that they are correct in any form. I've read your first 3 articles and mails in full. (which I hope you have too, but I doubt it )

The first one is a cocktail party with journalists yes, but they way you depict it is like they are having a conspiracy diner which it isnt if you read the announement I will copy below.

1) Give reporters their first thoughts from team HRC in advance of the announcement
(2) Setting expectations for the announcement and launch period
(3) Framing the HRC message and framing the race
(4) Enjoy a Frida night drink before working more

So if you read this its basicly a gather for a drink where the campaign team gives a select amount of journalist
1.an insider about the hillary campaign
2. Giving them information on what to expect for the announcement
3. Framing the HRC message and Race as in giving them context on what the campaign is going to be about. If you only take out one except, here: framing the race, people might think and you probably did aswell, that the HRC team wants to cheat the race. But with framing they mean giving context and a general direction of the campaign.


The 2nd source you linked is credible and does exactly mean what you said, hillary got 1 question in advance, not questions, 1. She might have gotten more from elsewhere but the source you gave lists 1 so saying she got more and linking that is not credible and makes you look like you didnt even read the thing.

and ow boy, ow boy the 3rd one is the best one yet. I honestly honestly doubt you read the mail cause it is in no capacity what you imply it is: a coordinated attack on trump.
What they talk about in the mail is:
1. That Trump is a formidable opponent and will probably be the republican nominee for the president ( this is in the prelims so the DNC is actually complimenting trump and expecting him to win cause hes a great opponent which they say multiple times )
2. The new york times asks the DNC what they think about trump because they are doing a piece on him -> DNC replies that hes great BUT he has 1 big weakness the fact that he says outrages things about polarizing subjects.

So all in all what happend was the DNC got asked what they think about trump and told the times-> Trumps going to win prelims, but he has weaknesses. In no way does it at all in any form or way mean that they are coordination an attack on Trump.

Vicki Im not attacking you as a person or what ever, Im honestly trying to make you be more critical about the things you read because its important not just for your presidential elections, but in all thingsyou read and hear ( Im not trying to convince you to vote for hillary caus eyou arent ). I feel like you are getting very polarized , in a bad way, towards hillary because your getting fed misinformation just like you are feeding us misinformation. You can respectfully not vote for hillary, but having the hate you feel towards hillary because of misinformation causes you more stress and harm than it does good on yourself or others.

 

you are really missing the whole point and all those sources are emails from and to HRC's campaign.
the fact that any question was given before hand to one candidate and not the other is extremely bias and if you read the others emails how they conspired against Bernie you would understand that.

the fact that thye ask anything of the dnc hrc or her campaign shows bias, they do not do that for the gop

the fact thye invited all of the MSM outlets but NOT any conservativbe news outlets ie FOX or breitbart shows completel bias

as I said theres a lot more than just those few emails and living outside the USA its difficult to convey or make others with preconceived notions understand the seriousness of all this is

and frankly I'm tired of having to prove what is already known and factual here in the USA. its not my job to convince people who are misinformed whats true or not.

 

the fact the New york time goes to the HRC campaign to get a story about trump okayed by them??? how can you see that's not bias..
I don't know about your country and how they do things but journalist are not supposed to do this, thye are supposed to be impartial and report news, not take a side like they are doing.

I guess as I said before being from different parts of the world its hard to convey what we consider right or wrong I'm sure each country has their own ways of doing things

 

how can you say this is not bias as well
number 8
"As I mentioned on our call on Thursday, both the WSJ and the NYT are working on stories about how HRC might approach economic policy issues as a candidate. Both will have a dose of personnel name-gaming, and I've spoken to both to steer them towards progressive names, which they seem to both have on their own."

wsj is the wall street journal and NYT is the new York Times

 

number 4
"Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains> to u> Please don't share or tell anyone I did this> Tell me if I fucked up anything"

that's from politico (another news outlet)wanting to get approval HRC's campaign approval on their article..
have you read any of these emails paradox?? how can you say thye are not in bed with HRC? its plain in black and white

number 9
Turns out now that Trump is calling in between 8 and 8:10. So I am going>> on at 7:45 in order to be in place for to call>>>> I am trying to craft one question to ask him in case I get a chance. Any>> thoughts?
CNBC (news outlet MSM) asking hrc campaign for questions to ask trump.......geezus couldn't be plainer

 

Number 5
huffington psot another MSM outlet to podesta

I hope all is well with you. Many thanks for your leadership on being> campaign Chair for Hillary Clinton. I am committed to make sure she is> elected as the next President of United States. I am reaching out to my> friends to raise money for her campaign. Please let me know if I can be of> any service to you.

its all so clear and I am done trying to convince anyone who is misinformed if you can't see how blatantly it shows the MSM is bed with them..

 

He's not for trump, but for a while now he's been saying trump will win. he wants Hillary to win, but realized that everyone is just so pissed off at the globalist and political class that it won't happen. if you watch the full thing, at the end he begs everyone to vote Hillary.