edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not sure what you mean. Wikileaks isn't a news network. As far as I know they just disseminate huge piles of raw data with no editorial oversight whatsoever.
As far as what constitutes a conspiracy, I don't really have a definition but I know it if I see it. If, for example, it's a story that would cause a massive, campaign-destroying scandal for Hillary Clinton if it got out, but somehow it can't seem to spread past InfoWars and Breitbart then I figure it's a [nonsense] conspiracy theory. If Wikileaks dumps 12,000 page of evidence that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist and his wife is his fixer then the story will go mainstream - not because it will be too big to cover up with political assassinations, but because, unlike now, it will be supported by concrete evidence.
So are you telling me that Wikileaks is going to pop my bubble by proving InfoWars and Breitbart correct? That seems unlikely, but I'll brace myself just in case.
I'd say the sights of Wikileaks are raised a bit higher than the Clintons rapisodes against women, but otherwise, let's wait and see. I'm surprised that you seem to give credit to Wikileaks as normally "your kind" lump it all together as a conspiracists war on Hillary. Perhaps I misunderstood you.
"Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 10:13)
edwardmurphy wrote:I'm not sure what you mean. Wikileaks isn't a news network. As far as I know they just disseminate huge piles of raw data with no editorial oversight whatsoever.
As far as what constitutes a conspiracy, I don't really have a definition but I know it if I see it. If, for example, it's a story that would cause a massive, campaign-destroying scandal for Hillary Clinton if it got out, but somehow it can't seem to spread past InfoWars and Breitbart then I figure it's a [nonsense] conspiracy theory. If Wikileaks dumps 12,000 page of evidence that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist and his wife is his fixer then the story will go mainstream - not because it will be too big to cover up with political assassinations, but because, unlike now, it will be supported by concrete evidence.
So are you telling me that Wikileaks is going to pop my bubble by proving InfoWars and Breitbart correct? That seems unlikely, but I'll brace myself just in case.
Liberals sure did like Wiki-Links when they were releasing info about the Bush administration and they sure did not think it was conspiracy theories back then. But now they are releasing info that exposes Clinton corruption it is called a conspiracy theory. Actually liberals in the biased mainstream news media are the ones putting out conspiracy theories about Trump,like he's a "conman" - Conspiracy theory. Just like this tax stuff - conspiracy theory.The Russians hacked into our system - conspiracy theory. Almost everything they report is a conspiracy theory. You can ignore what these Wiki-Links leaks have exposed,blame it on the Russians hacking in order to distract from what is in these leaks,but the majority of people have'nt.More are coming soon too and it is going to be devastating to Hillary. What if he releases the 30,000 e-mails Hillary deleted that were found and saved before they were deleted? Of course though, you'd ignore it.
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.
Kurieuo wrote:When you have Hillary laughing about getting a rapist of a 12 year old girl off, talking very proudly about it and laughing about it all, it all seems apparent she doesn't have an empathetic bone in her body and is quite amoral. Shows to me she just sees many things as just a game, no matter whose life or at what cost.
Here's a new video relevant to Hillary being a defender of rapists, oh hang on, that's defender of women isn't it?
Kurieuo wrote:When you have Hillary laughing about getting a rapist of a 12 year old girl off, talking very proudly about it and laughing about it all, it all seems apparent she doesn't have an empathetic bone in her body and is quite amoral. Shows to me she just sees many things as just a game, no matter whose life or at what cost.
Here's a new video relevant to Hillary being a defender of rapists, oh hang on, that's defender of women isn't it?
Yep and people want to bash Trump for an stupid error in speech made 11 years ago by someone who may have been looking for a way to set trump up by setting the tone of the conversation 11 years ago
Midst all the stuff about HRC...
Amazing...
-
-
-
Science is man's invention - creation is God's
(by B. W. Melvin)
Old Polish Proverb:
Not my Circus....not my monkeys
B. W. wrote:Yep and people want to bash Trump for an stupid error in speech made 11 years ago by someone who may have been looking for a way to set trump up by setting the tone of the conversation 11 years ago
Any other politician would have been crucified for that comment, and you know it. Trump has actually gotten a pass on dozens of comments that would have disqualified anybody else. This latest revelation could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but it's dishonest to pretend it's an isolated incident. The latest scandal is a big deal because it's undeniable confirmation of rumors and allegations about Trump's conduct that have been swirling around forever.
And setting him up by setting the tone? Are you saying that when Trump, at 59, bragged about trying to sleep with a married woman and using his star power as an excuse to sexually assault attractive women he was actually lying to impress Billy Bush? So he's not appallingly sexist, just really shallow and insecure? And that's better...?
B. W. wrote:Yep and people want to bash Trump for an stupid error in speech made 11 years ago by someone who may have been looking for a way to set trump up by setting the tone of the conversation 11 years ago
Any other politician would have been crucified for that comment, and you know it. Trump has actually gotten a pass on dozens of comments that would have disqualified anybody else. This latest revelation could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but it's dishonest to pretend it's an isolated incident. The latest scandal is a big deal because it's undeniable confirmation of rumors and allegations about Trump's conduct that have been swirling around forever.
And setting him up by setting the tone? Are you saying that when Trump, at 59, bragged about trying to sleep with a married woman and using his star power as an excuse to sexually assault attractive women he was actually lying to impress Billy Bush? So he's not appallingly sexist, just really shallow and insecure? And that's better...?
Really Ed?
Science is man's invention - creation is God's
(by B. W. Melvin)
Old Polish Proverb:
Not my Circus....not my monkeys
Yes, it's Infowars, but a must watch video. Trump punked the media again, this time they walked into a room prior to the 2nd debate to see four women who have suffered at the hands of the Clintons.
Seriously, if this was Trump, all mainstream media would report it. Instead, as even Ed pointed out, "I haven't heard of those particular charges, nor do I find them likely...." and "nor is it reported by "the Wall Street Journal, or FOX News, or you know, anywhere other than the lunatic fringe."
Well, I suppose these women are on the lunatic fringe. Come on Ed, I know you don't like Clinton, but hate Trump worse. So there's no real need to be in denial, it's horrible what happened.
lump it all together as a conspiracists war on Hillary. Perhaps I misunderstood you.
