Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Fargus]

I tend to look at things like that in terms of what is most likely.

Do you think it is more likely that an ardent partisan, who has previously manipulated/misconstrued footage to push his agenda, has once again done the same thing?

Or do you think it is more likely that these random, apparent leaders of a secret DNC initiative would go sit down for lunch with random people and lay out the plans of their secret DNC initiative for apparently no reason?

I wouldn't call them random if these people have been slowly building trust for a long time to get into such a position in the first place. That is the most likely explanation considering the admissions that have been made. People who want to keep secrets are not going to reveal them to random people.

The Hillary Campaign and DNC are paying and training protesters to harass people outside Trump events in order to get reactions and give, via media coverage, that 1.) regular every day people are so upset at Trump and his platform and 2.) give the impression that Trump rallies are violent events.

Moreover, there is a lot of collusion between the Hillary Campaign and the DNC and various super PACS (illegal).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

Highlights:

"The campaign (Hillary Clinton) pays DNC (Democratic National COmmittee), DNC pas Democracy Partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval Group, the Foval group goes and executes the shit on the ground."

- Scott Foval - National Field Director at American's United for Change.

"Wherever Trump and Pence are gonna be we have events, and we have a whole team across the country that does that. Both consultants and people from the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party apparatus and people from the campaign, the Clinton campaign. And my role in the campaign is to manage all that."

- Bob Creamer - Founder of Democracy Partners.

"The thing that we have to watch is making sure there is a double blind between the actual campaign and the actual DNC and what we're doing. There's a double blind there. So they can plausibly deny that they knew anything about it."

- Scott Foval - National Field Director at American's United for Change.

"We have to have people prepared to go wherever these events are, which means we have to have a central kind of agitator training. Now, we have a built-in group of people in New York who do this. We have a built-in group of people in D.C. who do this. We have a group of people in Vegas. We have a group of people in Colorado. We have a group of people in Minneapolis."

- Scott Foval - National Field Director at American's United for Change.

"So the Chicago protest when they shut all that, that was us. It was more him (Bob Creamer) than me, but none of this is supposed to come back to us, because we want it coming from people, we don't want it come from the party. So if we do a protest and its branded a DNC protest, right away the press is going to say its partisan. But if I'm in there coordinating with all the groups on the ground and sort of playing field general but they are the ones talking to the cameras, then its actually people. But if we send out press advisories with DNC on them and Clinton Campaign it doesn't have the same effect."

- Aaron Black - DNC Rapid response coordinator.

"No, I'm saying we have mentally ill people that we pay to do shit, make no mistake. Over the last twenty years... But the reality is, a lot of people, espefcially, our union guys, a lot of union guys, they'll do whatever you want. They're rock n' roll."

- Scott Foval - National Field Director at American's United for Change.

Considering WikiLeaks has shown various large media outlets working with the Hillary campaign, even going so far as to give her questions prior to a debate and get her campaign to proof read news stories to make sure they approve of them, and considering the Hillary campaign is paying agitators to try and get negative news coverage and to try and get Trump events shut down (like in Chicago, that was admitted on this tape), one has to wonder what the motives are.

The most clear cut answer is to move public opinion in the direction they want it to go. They're actively trying to rig an election. Not via direct cheating, but through propaganda.

Apparently all these admissions, on film, are manipulated and misinterpreted! Yup, nothing to see here.

I can't really see how they'll spin their way out of this one. Perhaps they'll blame voice morphing technology?

[I Push Buttons]

I wouldn't call them random if these people have been slowly building trust for a long time to get into such a position in the first place. That is the most likely explanation considering the admissions that have been made. People who want to keep secrets are not going to reveal them to random people.

But they are random... The creator himself explained he used eight undercover agents using fake identities for a year.

So you are telling me that someone can just show up one day, with a completely fabricated background (and name even), with no actionable references (no one in the establishment would know them and vouch for them) and infiltrate the highest echelons of this PAC's secret initiative? And not just someone, but eight different someones in several different PACs. And not only infiltrate it, but get the supposed leaders to invite them to lunch where they lay out their evil plans for apparently no reason?

Every single step of that process is so fucking far-fetched........ It is absurd.

[Fargus]

But they are random... The creator himself explained he used eight undercover agents using fake identities for a year.

A year is long enough to build trust and good relationships.

So you are telling me that someone can just show up one day, with a completely fabricated background (and name even), with no actionable references (no one in the establishment would know them and vouch for them) and infiltrate the highest echelons of this PAC's secret initiative? And not just someone, but eight different someones in several different PACs. And not only infiltrate it, but get the supposed leaders to invite them to lunch where they lay out their evil plans for apparently no reason?

Every single step of that process is so fucking far-fetched........ It is absurd.

It wouldn't have just been "one day", it would have taken quite some time to gain trust. Do you have any other explanations for these admissions? I mean, did they have a gun to their head or something?

Before Trump announced his running for president, people were saying him contesting for presidency was much more far fetched. Don't underestimate people's arrogance and stupidity.

- - - Updated - - -

You really think they'd be this fucking careless?

Most cases of corruption have been broken open because the people involved have been careless. They're only human.

There's zero evidence that the people mentioned in the video are even real people.

This must be the most stupid post in this thread. Honestly. You're denying actual reality now.

Sorry, but Bob Creamer is a real person. So is Scott Foval. Next you'll be telling us Trump isn't a real person because how can someone so stupid exist on such a level.

[Fargus]

None of those people even exist.

I can't find evidence that any of those people in that video are even real. I've asked others for it a few times but they never replied.

Flat out admissions by who and to who? Why would they be so open about this shit to a random stranger? The incompetence would be outstanding.

Are you really this stupid?

I posted evidence earlier, one from Democracy Partner's actual website and one from LinkedIn.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure doctored footage or not all the footage, as has been the case with his previous bullshit.

Do you have evidence of doctoring on this video?

<snip>

I don't care about these other videos, I only care about this one because this one's actually on topic. When you have people saying they use disabled people to commit violence... well... I don't really see how you can spin that.

It really is as simple as that and this guy has a year of recordings, of which we see minutes. And has done that exact thing before.

Apparently there are two more videos coming out.

[Fargus]

Careless yes, but idiotic to the point of admitting to multiple felonies to complete strangers? No, that is far and beyond a step above "careless".

You're the first person that gave me actual evidence beyond the video itself. I couldn't find anything with a quick google search and wasn't going to look much into a known liars claims.

I look forward to having the full context of the videos. I just can't imagine these people admitting some of these things to anyone they don't know very well.

What were you actually searching on Google? Because when I entered those names with it came up with the Democratic Partners website and a LinkedIn profile on the first page.

I don't think you searched at all, otherwise you would have found it too.

[Fargus]

You posted it after I said that, calm down. The video is obviously cut and edited together, that is doctoring.

Right. Including full statements when they are obviously saying what they are? I'm not sure how you wave their admissions away with a magical wand by claiming doctoring. I mean, it's pretty black and white - admissions that they incite violence using disabled people? That they do not care about ethics? Are these sort of statements the kind of thing you can explain by doctoring, or actual genuine unethical or perhaps even criminal behaviour?

You'll find that most videos on Youtube, mainstream or otherwise, are edited. Separate the wheat for the chaff, however, and look at what they said in isolation. Less than a day and already over 2 million views, more than what the Trump video got iirc. Doctored or not, this is probably more damaging to Hillary than what that video was to Trump.

[Symphonic]

You posted it after I said that, calm down. The video is obviously cut and edited together, that is doctoring.

I assume any commercial on TV should be ignored as well, as they're cut and edited together.

[I Push Buttons]

I don't care about these other videos, I only care about this one because this one's actually on topic. When you have people saying they use disabled people to commit violence... well... I don't really see how you can spin that.

There isn't really much else to discuss if you just hand wave away the other videos. They literally speak directly to the authenticity/agenda of this video.

Also they never say they use them to commit violence. The guy said they use them to bird dog Trump supporters into attacking them and thus make Trump look bad. Once again, this assumes the video is even an accurate representation of what was discussed, which it is almost assuredly not if you take the creator's past actions into account.

[lockedout]

Young Hillary Voters Can't Name An Accomplishment Of Hers.

[Deleted]

This is the end of Donald Trump.

Hey Skroe - this is Part 1 of the end of HRC.

#ForeverTrump

Not sure if this video was posted:

But what do Hillary supporters have to say about this?

[paralleluniverse]

Over 50 liberal economics professors endorse Clinton and her policies to fix the most serious economoic problem of our times: rising inequality.

The letter is worth a read, and aligns with what economists like Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz have been saying:

WHY WE SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT

We as a nation face a major economic problem that threatens our democracy—drastic increases in income inequality have created a deep malaise among many Americans who are increasingly excluded from the promise of a better future.

The facts are clear: the share of all income going to the top 1% of income earners increased from 10% in 1981 to 23% in 2007, and was still 22% in 2015. The share of the top 10% of income earners increased from 35% to 50% in 2007, and remained at 50% in 2015. Since the mid-1970s, US family incomes increased by 1.2% per year, but 58 percent of that increase went to the top 1%. During the Bush expansion in 2002-2007, family incomes increased 3% per year, but a record 65 percent of that increase again went to the top 1%.

Sure, it is better to average 3% growth than 1.2% growth, but if two-thirds of income increases goes to a tiny group of families, just improving economic growth does little to help most Americans and does even less to solve the current crisis of our democracy.

Things could get even worse. If we pursue the economic growth policies being proposed by the Republican Party platform and the Party’s current nominee, the percent of income going to the top 1% would likely go back to Bush levels or even much higher. Donald Trump’s tax plan would reduce taxes on the highest income earners and would restore the trickle down economic policies that have contributed so much to our current inequality crisis.

We believe that Hillary Clinton’s economic policy proposals, backed by the most progressive Democratic Party platform in four decades, will both promote growth and reduce income inequality.

What are those proposals?

--Raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour and make it easier to organize and join unions.

--Establish equal pay for women.

--Invest ambitiously in improving our infrastructure—roads, bridges, water, airports, energy, and rail systems, creating tens of thousands of well-paying, middle class jobs.

--Make the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, including a surtax on millionaires.

--Develop a national strategy to combat poverty, including more federal resources for communities that have been left out and left behind.

--Guarantee universal pre-school education.

--Provide relief from crushing student debt and make tuition-free public college for families earning less than $125,000 a reality.

--Fight to guarantee health care for every American by working for a public option and extending Medicare for those over 55 years old.

--Develop a green energy strategy that drastically reduces carbon emissions, creates new jobs, and makes the US a world leader in renewable energy.

These proposed policies are both progressive and practical, and all progressives and moderates should support them. They will increase the share of benefits going to middle and lower income Americans as the economy continues to grow. They will go a long way to including the excluded. By doing so, they will reduce the paralyzing divisiveness that is undermining our democratic ideals.

We believe that Hillary Clinton knows how important it is to enact these proposals and how important they are for the future of our society in a period of immense economic change.

Hillary Clinton’s entire adult life has been dedicated to working for greater equality, and we think that this is exactly what she will do as President.

We urge you to vote for this agenda and for her in November.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/ent...b0dd54ce34697c

[zmp]

Young Hillary Voters Can't Name An Accomplishment Of Hers.

No worries though, i doubt the kids know how to vote anyway.

[Skroe]

Hey Skroe - this is Part 1 of the end of HRC.

#ForeverTrump

Nah it's not.

How's those massive polling deficits working out for yah?

[tikcol]

How can anyone support such a monster? Trump might say he grabs women by the pussy but Hillary has been murdering people for most of her political career.

Let's pardon and forget all that and elect her to be one of the most powerful humans alive.

People voting for her should be ashamed. If Trump isn't an option for you, vote third party. But not for this fucking monster.

[I Push Buttons]

How can anyone support such a monster? Trump might say he grabs women by the pussy but Hillary has been murdering people for most of her political career.

Let's pardon and forget all that and elect her to be one of the most powerful humans alive.

People voting for her should be ashamed. If Trump isn't an option for you, vote third party. But not for this fucking monster.

Utter nonsense.

[DeadmanWalking]

How can anyone support such a monster? Trump might say he grabs women by the pussy but Hillary has been murdering people for most of her political career.

Let's pardon and forget all that and elect her to be one of the most powerful humans alive.

People voting for her should be ashamed. If Trump isn't an option for you, vote third party. But not for this fucking monster.

Link some proof, oh right.... it's all conspiracy theories.

Voting third is a vote for trump and no one wants that monster in office. especially for a party that tried to destroy bill over him sticking his dick in everything that moved.

[zenkai]

Link some proof, oh right.... it's all conspiracy theories.

Voting third is a vote for trump and no one wants that monster in office. especially for a party that tried to destroy bill over him sticking his dick in everything that moved.

A. You mean sexual assault and perjury.
B. Voting for 3rd could be a vote for Hillary, it works both ways.

[DeadmanWalking]

A. You mean sexual assault and perjury.
B. Voting for 3rd could be a vote for Hillary, it works both ways.

Not when he is talking about 'instead of hillary vote 3rd." Come on man, you are smarter than this.

[zenkai]

Not when he is talking about 'instead of hillary vote 3rd." Come on man, you are smarter than this.

I am talking about in general, it's something I hear all the time. But with that being said he wrote:

"People voting for her should be ashamed. If Trump isn't an option for you, vote third party. But not for this fucking monster."

He said people who vote for Hillary should be ashamed so vote for Trump but if Trump isn't an option vote for 3rd Party.

[Dangerfield]

Right. Including full statements when they are obviously saying what they are? I'm not sure how you wave their admissions away with a magical wand by claiming doctoring. I mean, it's pretty black and white - admissions that they incite violence using disabled people? That they do not care about ethics? Are these sort of statements the kind of thing you can explain by doctoring, or actual genuine unethical or perhaps even criminal behaviour?

You'll find that most videos on Youtube, mainstream or otherwise, are edited. Separate the wheat for the chaff, however, and look at what they said in isolation. Less than a day and already over 2 million views, more than what the Trump video got iirc. Doctored or not, this is probably more damaging to Hillary than what that video was to Trump.

I appreciate your effort friend but what you have to understand is that some of the people in this thread have been so utterly demoralised by years of propaganda from the media, government and hollywood. You cannot change their mind even if you give them authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black. You cannot change the basic perception and logic of their behaviour. In other words the process of demoralisation is utterly complete and irreversible. Exposure to true information does not matter anymore, even if you shower them with authentic documents, pictures, videos, hell even if you took them by force to be present in the interviews show in the video they will refuse to believe it.

This isn't even about who is the better candidate its about the huge amount of cognitive dissonance needed to mentally brush away information like this where idiots straight up admit on camera to being corrupt multiple times in one long take. I have no idea about what O'keefe has done in the past nor would I presume to tell you he is a completely reliable journalist but this video is so blatant it speaks for itself. But hey for anyone else who is not quite so demoralised extra proof is on their own website

https://beta.fec.gov/data/disburseme...12%2F31%2F2016

They have records of paying one of the activists (RODRIGUEZ, ZULEMA) who appears in the video admitting to being behind inciting riots.