“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Trump and Sanders have a secret weapon: Bill Clinton








Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign moved directly into the scandals over Bill Clinton’s extracurricular sexual antics on Monday, releasing a brief online ad that features the voice of Juanita Broaddrick explaining how Clinton bit her lip and she tried “to pull away from him” during a 1978 encounter she has long described as rape.
The words come from Broaddrick’s 1999 “Dateline” interview that recently has come back into focus for newly stated network claims that her contention has been “discredited,” even though NBC’s interviewer at the time was convinced of the legitimacy of Broaddrick’s complaint.
The black-and-white clip runs only about 20 seconds and features Broaddrick speaking while an image of Bill Clinton, cigar in mouth, is on screen. It ends with the words, “Here we go again,” while Hillary Clinton’s unmistakable laugh is in the background.





32 comments:

  1. Bill is starting at times to look really bad, standing there chewing his lower lip, blank confused stare on his face.

    I don't think he is capable of much more hanky-panky.

    What he did in the past was enough for any one life.

    ************

    President Obama seems to be doing a good job with his speech in Hanoi, on Fox now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad you put up that last video.

      The Clintons are human scum.

      Delete
  2. That is a great shot with the cigar. Funny shit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He deserves to have it shoved, lit, up his backside.

      I might get a chuckle outta that....

      Delete
  3. Intimidation "Q"Nit: U Cal Irvine


    University of California Irvine: Angry mob screaming “F**k Israel, long live the Intifada” chases Jewish student
    By Robert Spencer on May 23, 2016 10:51 am

    University of California Irvine: Angry mob screaming “F**k Israel, long live the Intifada” chases Jewish student

    Jewish students are physically menaced by anti-Semitic Leftists and Islamic supremacists all over the country. Administrators, ideologically in line with the neo-Brownshirts, do little or nothing to rein them in. “‘F**k Israel, long live the Intifada’ angry mob screams at Jewish UC student,” by Hannah Broad, Jerusalem Post, May 22, 2016: Second-year Eliana Kopley was […]

    Read in browser »


    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/05/university-of-california-irvine-angry-mob-screaming-fk-israel-long-live-the-intifada-chases-jewish-student

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should make several people here happy.

      Delete
    2. No perm victim, haven't ya heard deuce? We shoot back now...

      Just ask those savages in Gaza....

      :)

      Delete
    3. Just live for the day when your friends try to lynch a Jewish student on a campus and he pulls out a Glock and wastes a few...

      I got a special 21 year old Macallan JUST for that...

      No more perm victim for me....

      Time to shoot the savages if they try to do violence.

      Delete
    4. But the good news?

      The whole world is waking up to the ISIS and Hamas types...

      and even in America we are bombing them on a daily basis...

      Delete
    5. The only way to fight back against savages and thugs?

      Disproportionate violence in response.

      Delete
  4. I have to wonder, just how many times can the republicans fire this particular gun before it backfires?

    We're going to find out, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bimbo eruptions......

      LOL

      Vince Foster

      LOL

      Whitewater

      LOL

      Bill Lied, Bill got IMPREACHED

      LOL

      Hillary, as 1st Lady stood by as Mrs Arafat accused Israel of poisoning water wells, then embraced her.

      LOL

      Hillary's Sniper FIRE lies.

      LOL

      Remember under Bill's watch the Rwandan genocide?

      lol

      Travel gate

      LOL

      Theft and trashing the Whitehouse when they left for the Bush?

      LOL

      Putin's RESET button?

      and the list goes on and on..

      Delete
    2. It works both ways, Rufus.

      Yup, we're going to find out.

      Delete
  5. Kathleen Willey, one of the women who famously accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault, used a radio interview on Sunday to call on other female victims of Bill Clinton to contact her and consider going public.

    Stated Willey: “As we get closer to the election, I would like to ask once again if there are any women out there who have been assaulted, sexually harassed, raped by Bill Clinton to please, please find the courage to write to me and tell me about it.”

    ReplyDelete
  6. Vince is back in the news -

    VINCE FOSTER LIVES!
    TRUMP LAUNCHES NEW LINE OF ATTACK....DRUDGE

    ReplyDelete

  7. Sex, Bill Clinton and Trump

    In the 1990s, Bill Clinton taught us that only bluenoses worry about a pol’s treatment of women.

    Main Street Columnist Bill McGurn on how Donald Trump is using the Clintons’ campaign strategies against them. Photo credit: Getty Images.


    By William McGurn

    May 23, 2016 7:24 p.m. ET

    Those of a certain age will recall the 1990s, the good old days when James Carville warned America that only “an abusive, privacy-invading, sex-obsessed” hypocrite could even think a president’s personal behavior toward women had anything to say about his fitness for public office.

    Today it seems like ancient history, now that Donald Trump’s treatment of women has become a political issue. True enough, there was a day when Americans would have blanched at the thought of a candidate bragging about his adultery or using a presidential debate to boast about his genitalia. But in the 1990s we learned that only bluenoses care about these things.

    We had it from no less than the Big Dawg himself. On Aug. 17, 1998, just hours after a grand jury session in which he’d tussled with prosecutors asking about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, he delivered a defiant, nationally televised address admitting his earlier denials had been misleading. Still, he insisted, whatever he had done with that young intern was between him and his family.

    “It’s nobody’s business but ours,” he said. “Even presidents have private lives. It is time to stop the pursuit of personal destruction and the prying into private lives and get on with our national life.”

    Even perjury didn’t matter in this case, because, as New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler put it, it was “perjury regarding sex.” All that mattered was that Mr. Clinton was good at his day job.

    The American people seemed to agree, with a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll on the eve of the House vote to impeach showing only a third of the public in support.

    Here’s the kicker: Donald Trump was on the Bill Clinton side of the argument.

    For Mr. Trump, this was all much ado about Monica. Mr. Clinton’s mistake, he said, was that he’d lied about the sex instead of sticking with the argument it was irrelevant. In a September 1998 New York Times forum that ran under the headline “Can Clinton Find the Road Back?” Mr. Trump gave this advice:

    “Accept complete responsibility for personal failures, be lucky enough to have enemies with their own shortcomings, and hold steadfast to your political agenda. After the initial shock is past, the American people are less interested in sexual transgressions than they are in public achievements.”

    Nearly two decades later, Mr. Trump continues to live by this reading of the American people.

    This past week brings more evidence it’s working. For no sooner had the New York Times published an exposé subtitled “How Donald Trump Behaved with Women in Private,” than two women featured complained the Times had twisted their words to fit the reporters’ negative narrative. So scarcely a week after it appeared, it is the Times story that has now blown up, not Mr. Trump.

    But if Mr. Trump is winning this fight, it’s not just because the Times ought to have been more careful. It appears to have escaped the Hillary faithful that Mr. Trump may be winning in good part because he has proved a more steadfast adherent of the Clinton argument of the 1990s than she has.

    While at Wellesley, a young Hillary Clinton famously wrote her senior thesis on Saul Alinsky, the community organizer and author of “Rules for Radicals.” The two kept up a correspondence after she entered law school at Yale, and Alinsky is said to have been a great influence on her thought.

    But while Mrs. Clinton may have studied Alinsky, Mr. Trump is showing himself the better Alinskyite. Especially with his use of Rule No. 4: Force your opponents to live up to their rules and values....

    http://archive.is/OFKWR

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There’s no better example than the war on women. Mrs. Clinton started out all set to run the standard playbook against what she presumed would be a standard Republican opponent. But Mr. Trump has now turned it on her, putting her in the position of running against her husband.

      Whenever Mrs. Clinton brings up women, Mr. Trump throws Bill Clinton right back at her.


      She's in the position of running against her husband....heh heh

      Delete

  8. India: One State, Many Countries

    May 19, 2016 As the rest of Eurasia slides further into crisis, the only thing getting in India’s way is India.


    ...In the end, it comes down to this. India is not one country. It is a hodgepodge of many different countries. India is often touted as the world’s largest democracy. But India is actually an unwieldy collection of semi-autonomous states and union territories. India’s constitution designates Hindi and English as the country’s official languages, but India has no true national language. States within India can specify their own official languages, and there are 22 such languages spread throughout the entire country. India has no fewer than five active separatist movements, some peaceful and some violent. That is without counting the ongoing Maoist insurgency in eastern India being carried out by the Naxalites.

    Readers familiar with our writing know that when we look at the world, we see Eurasia in a state of systemic crisis. India is the exception – but that does not mean India is stable. India is in a state of perpetual crisis. It is no more or less chaotic than it always has been. Strategically, India is in a rather nice position. It is stronger than its only regional competitor, Pakistan. Russia and China are both absorbed with internal challenges, which potentially gives India room to maneuver in the Indo-Pacific. Because of a global economic destabilization and a dearth of other options, foreign capital is flowing into the country. Wealthy companies are braving India’s regulatory systems to enter its markets in the hope of cracking a secret code to profitability in the country. Meanwhile, the U.S. wants India to be its friend, and India can enjoy the attention and the perks that come with U.S. solicitations while maintaining a level of relative neutrality with China and other claimants in the South China Sea.

    But that still leaves one insurmountable problem. India’s greatest challenger is India. In our forecast for 2040, India does not play a very big role, because it’s not a challenge we expect New Delhi to overcome in the next 25 years.

    https://geopoliticalfutures.com/india-one-state-many-countries/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Global Agenda

    This map shows every country’s major export

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/this-map-shows-every-country-s-major-export

    ReplyDelete
  10. AP: Hillary dropping gender argument after study shows no one’s interested and no one cares


    posted at 12:41 pm on May 24, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

    What if you threw a gender party and no one came? A nice catch from the Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross allows us to add this to the Buried Lede Department. The Associated Press reported a couple of days ago on Team Hillary’s delight over Donald Trump’s personal attacks on Hillary and Bill Clinton, but only offered this nugget at the very end of the report. It turns out that claiming her physiology as a unique qualifier turned more voters off than on:


    Trump’s eagerness to make gender a major issue has complicated the delicate balancing act she already faces as the first woman to head a major party ticket.

    Clinton has stopped explicitly mentioning her role in history and joking about being the “youngest woman president.” That’s by design: Those kinds of direct appeals weren’t working with voters.

    “De-emphasize the ‘first’ talk,” advised a research report done by Emily’s List. “They already know she’d be the first woman president,” the report said of donors, “but we don’t get anything by reminding them.”

    Ross notes that recent polling showed that the gender argument may have alienated the other gender:


    But while the strategy has worked to increase Trump’s unfavorable ratings with women, it could potentially backfire if Clinton’s focus on gender ends up alienating men.

    Two national polls out this weekend suggest that that may be occurring. A Washington Post/ABC News poll has Trump leading Clinton 46 percent to 44 percent. Trump has a larger margin of support with men than Clinton does among women in that poll.

    An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows the opposite. Clinton leads Trump 46 to 43 in that poll. She leads Trump 51 to 38 among women. Trump leads Clinton 49 to 40 among men.

    Perhaps, but some of that may reflect a normal general-election gender split. In 2012, Mitt Romney won male voters by a 52/45 margin, not far off from the NBC/WSJ result, while Obama won women 55/44. Both results are within the margin of error from the NBC/WSJ splits. In 2004, the numbers looked different but the overall gender gap was similar; George W. Bush won men 55/44 while John Kerry won women 51/48, for a gender gap of +8 to the winner. In 2012, the gender gap was +4 to the winner, and now it’s +4 to Hillary, who leads in that poll.

    So the issue may be less of “backfire” than of sheer ineffectiveness. The results from the Democratic primaries have already demonstrated that much, with Bernie Sanders competing well among women, and of late winning women on his way to a string of primary victories. Those trends began forming long before Trump started focusing his attacks on Hillary Clinton. The gender card does not appear to carry much weight even among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, so why would anyone think that it would have more impact among general-election voters? That shouldn’t have taken a study from Emily’s List (!) to figure out, but … that’s Team Hillary in a nutshell.

    Voters aren’t interested in a candidate’s victimology self-assessment. They are interested in their own issues and concerns, and how those candidates address them. No one who made $57.5 million while serving as Secretary of State is going to convince anyone that she’s had a tough life on the margins or that her gender has impeded her progress to success. Those few who care about this already have their minds made up, and the rest couldn’t care less … as Democrats have already demonstrated far ahead of the general election.

    Note: The headline was adapted from a classic Saturday Night Live Weekend Update joke … from a long time ago.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/05/24/ap-hillary-dropping-gender-argument-after-study-shows-no-ones-interested-and-no-one-cares/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Without the gender card what's the old hag got left ?

      Delete
    2. Lots of Bernie's supporters are thinking of going Trump.

      Delete
    3. Many Bernie supporters must like buffoons, then, going from one buffoon to another.

      Delete
  11. Meanwhile, comes a Huge number for New Home Sales:

    Highlights
    The new home sales report has sealed its reputation as the wildest set of data around. April's annualized rate came in at 619,000 which is not a misprint. This is the highest rate since January 2008 and dwarfs all readings of the recovery. February 2015's rate, way behind at 545,000, is the next highest rate this cycle. The data even include a very large 39,000 net upward revision to the two prior months, a gain that reflects annual revisions which are included in the data. The monthly 16.6 percent surge is not only far beyond expectations but is the biggest monthly gain since way back in January 1992.

    The data also include a big jump in prices, up 7.8 percent in the month to a record median $321,100 while the year-on-year rate, which was negative in the March report, is at plus 9.7 percent year-on-year.

    But the surge in sales is a negative for supply as supply relative to sales fell very sharply to 4.7 months from 5.5 months. The total number of new homes for sale was little changed, down 1,000 at 243,000.

    Regional data show a more than 50 percent jump in the Northeast where however the number of sales relative to other regions is very low. The same is true of the Midwest where sales fell 4.8 percent in the month. The two main regions for new home sales both show outsized gains with the South up 15.8 percent and the West up 23.6 percent.

    Year-on-year, total sales are suddenly up 23.8 percent, this at the same time that the median price is now well past the 6 percent rate where housing appreciation had been trending. Even though new home sales are volatile, which reflects the report's small sample sizes, and even though low supply will limit future gains, the outlook for housing just got a big boost. Talk will build for a greater contribution from housing to overall growth. Watch for FHFA house price data on tomorrow's calendar where another month of solid appreciation is expected.

    New Home Sales

    ReplyDelete
  12. Convention of States

    http://www.conventionofstates.com/

    ReplyDelete
  13. Opinion

    Why 'Crooked Hillary' is likely to stick

    Michael Brendan Dougherty


    Justin Sullivan/Getty Images


    May 24, 2016

    Donald Trump has a knack for nicknames. Low-energy Jeb caught something of Jeb's entitled aura. "Little Marco" got at something truly juvenile and naive about Marco Rubio. And "Lyin' Ted" was an effective way of branding Ted Cruz's dishonesty. Lately, Donald's been trying new nicknames for Hillary Clinton, but he seems to like his original "Crooked Hillary" best.

    And his first instinct is best. The Clinton Foundation and other associated concerns really are a kind of globalist grift.

    Funded by the rich, the foundation allows the Clintons to travel around the world and to network with other high net worth individuals. It even pays the salaries of Clinton friends and other flunkies. And where does the money come from? Bill Clinton would often raise it from people who had direct financial interests at play in the U.S. State Department when Hillary was there. One such deal resulted in a Russian company, Uranium One, obtaining control over one-fifth of the world's uranium production.

    As Peter Schweizer's book Clinton Cash details, Hillary's loyalty could be well-bought. Consider the financial interests of Mohammed al-Amoudi, who committed $20 million to the Clinton Foundation in 2007. Al-Amoudi profits from the Mohammed International Development Research and Organization Companies, which could have been harmed by U.S. policy changes in Ethiopia, particularly if the U.S. government scrutinized Ethiopia closely for human rights violations, as required by U.S. rules on foreign aid. Clinton dutifully gave a waiver to Ethiopia during her time as secretary of state. Bill Clinton would praise Ethiopia's leaders as a new guard for the continent, even if their rule included extra-judicial killing and plunder.

    There are dozens of other sordid little tales, like that of Claudio Osorio, currently in federal prison for fraud. The Clintons, to whom he donated generously, helped his firm InnoVida obtain a $10 million loan from the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. More evidence of financial corruption may be coming now that Charles Ortel, who uncovered wrongdoing at General Electric, is examining the Clinton Foundation's disclosures. He's already describing their work as "charity fraud."

    There's also the matter of Hillary's speaking fees....

    http://theweek.com/articles/625896/why-crooked-hillary-likely-stick

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And there's a potential new Hillary scandal -- the Terry McAuliffe business....

      Delete
    2. No wonder she is ducking debates....

      Delete