Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Post Reply

Topic: Assange: "Trump won't be allowed to win"
Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Thu 11/03/16 11:00 PM
" Assange dismissed the prospect of Trump, who is behind in the polls, winning as unlikely – and not necessarily due to his standing with the electorate. “My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.” Exclusive interview by John Pilger. https://www.rt.com/news/365299-assange-pilger-saudi-clinton/ Do you think Assange is right? In your opinion, what would be the repercussions on international relations between East and West, if any, if Clinton is elected? Thanks for posting your reactions.

Robxbox73 Joined Sun 12/27/15 Posts: 5302	Fri 11/04/16 01:39 AM
I think it will start the next American civil war.

SassyEuro2 Joined Wed 04/29/15 Posts: 11102	Fri 11/04/16 02:15 AM Edited by SassyEuro2 on Fri 11/04/16 02:17 AM
" Assange dismissed the prospect of Trump, who is behind in the polls, winning as unlikely – and not necessarily due to his standing with the electorate. “My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.” Exclusive interview by John Pilger. https://www.rt.com/news/365299-assange-pilger-saudi-clinton/ Do you think Assange is right? In your opinion, what would be the repercussions on international relations between East and West, if any, if Clinton is elected? Thanks for posting your reactions. "'Trump won’t be permitted to win' - Assange interview with John Pilger (Courtesy Darthmouth Films)" http://youtu.be/JQ7lYRnF1F8/ 4:59 RT News Nov 4, 2016 As Wikileaks releases another batch of emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign, RT presents the next part of an exclusive interview given by the whistleblower website's co-founder Julian Assange to renowned documentary maker John Pilger and Dartmouth Films. ___________ Assange: Clinton & ISIS funded by same money, Trump won’t be allowed to win (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE) — RT News http://www.rt.com/news/365299-assange-pilger-saudi-clinton/ ------------- Assange: WikiLeaks did not receive Clinton emails from Russian govt (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE) http://www.rt.com/news/365164-assange-interview-wikileaks-russia/ Clinton knew Saudi Arabia, Qatar provide ‘clandestine’ support to ISIS – WikiLeaks http://www.rt.com/usa/362312-clinton-saudi-arabia-qatar-isis/ ‘Slaughter Donald for Putin bromance’: #Podesta15 emails reveal ISIS strategy diversion for Clinton http://www.rt.com/usa/363779-clinton-trump-putin-isis/

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 02:32 AM
I think it will start the next American civil war. I hope not. But consider this: "Former Illinois congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh appeared to invite armed insurrection when he tweeted that he was "grabbing his musket" if Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump in the presidential election." "On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump," Walsh tweeted. "On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket."

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 02:37 AM
" Assange dismissed the prospect of Trump, who is behind in the polls, winning as unlikely – and not necessarily due to his standing with the electorate. “My analysis is that Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he has had every establishment off his side. Trump does not have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment,” said Assange. “Banks, intelligence, arms companies, foreign money, etc. are all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the media as well. Media owners, and the journalists themselves.” Exclusive interview by John Pilger. https://www.rt.com/news/365299-assange-pilger-saudi-clinton/ Do you think Assange is right? In your opinion, what would be the repercussions on international relations between East and West, if any, if Clinton is elected? Thanks for posting your reactions. "'Trump won’t be permitted to win' - Assange interview with John Pilger (Courtesy Darthmouth Films)" http://youtu.be/JQ7lYRnF1F8/ 4:59 RT News Nov 4, 2016 As Wikileaks releases another batch of emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign, RT presents the next part of an exclusive interview given by the whistleblower website's co-founder Julian Assange to renowned documentary maker John Pilger and Dartmouth Films. ___________ Assange: Clinton & ISIS funded by same money, Trump won’t be allowed to win (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE) — RT News http://www.rt.com/news/365299-assange-pilger-saudi-clinton/ ------------- Assange: WikiLeaks did not receive Clinton emails from Russian govt (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE) http://www.rt.com/news/365164-assange-interview-wikileaks-russia/ Clinton knew Saudi Arabia, Qatar provide ‘clandestine’ support to ISIS – WikiLeaks http://www.rt.com/usa/362312-clinton-saudi-arabia-qatar-isis/ ‘Slaughter Donald for Putin bromance’: #Podesta15 emails reveal ISIS strategy diversion for Clinton http://www.rt.com/usa/363779-clinton-trump-putin-isis/ Thanks SassyEuro

Robxbox73 Joined Sun 12/27/15 Posts: 5302	Fri 11/04/16 02:37 AM
I think it will start the next American civil war. I hope not. But consider this: "Former Illinois congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh appeared to invite armed insurrection when he tweeted that he was "grabbing his musket" if Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump in the presidential election." "On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump," Walsh tweeted. "On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket." Yup, i hope it doesnt get to that.

SassyEuro2 Joined Wed 04/29/15 Posts: 11102	Fri 11/04/16 02:40 AM
I think it will start the next American civil war. I hope not. But consider this: "Former Illinois congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh appeared to invite armed insurrection when he tweeted that he was "grabbing his musket" if Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump in the presidential election." "On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump," Walsh tweeted. "On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket." I think it is just an expression. But I am sure all the anti 2nd admendent / Socialists will twist it. I am sure they already are. *Pushing the ' Homegrown Terrorist' adgenda. _______ No, I don't think Trump will be President. A lot can & probably will, between now and January 20th.

Conrad_73 Joined Sat 09/29/07 Posts: 22488	Fri 11/04/16 04:26 AM
nothing so exotic! http://www.steynonline.com/7216/the-undocumented-branch-of-the-electoral-college The Undocumented Branch of the Electoral College by Mark Steyn Hannity on Fox News October 7, 2015 ~On Tuesday night I joined Sean Hannity on Fox News to check the state of the Republican race, and a certain structural advantage the Democrats have. Most people are aware that the President is elected not by the popular vote but by the votes in the Electoral College. And most people are also aware that the more densely populated states have more electoral votes than smaller states: California has 55 votes, Vermont has three. But most Americans, I would wager, assume that those proportions are based on the number of citizens in each state. Not so. As Politico reports, each state's share of the Electoral College votes is calculated by using the "whole number of persons in each state" - including those who shouldn't be there. So the more illegal immigrants you have in your state, the greater the votes you have in the Electoral College. Thus, the armies of the undocumented don't need "a pathway to citizenship" in order to change election results - or, as Politico's headline puts it, "Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary": This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. So, as I said to Sean, California's illegal immigrants have a greater representation (five votes) in the Electoral College than my entire state (New Hampshire's four votes). Which seems a very perverse system. So Democrats don't need to nurse illegals through to citizenship; simply moving them into California and other blue states bulks up the Electoral College math in their favor.

IgorFrankensteen Joined Thu 10/01/09 Posts: 5444	Fri 11/04/16 04:27 AM
Assange and his rather odd opinions don't impress me positively. He has shown himself to be a fanatic who picks and chooses what to view as "facts."

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 04:28 AM
I think it will start the next American civil war. I hope not. But consider this: "Former Illinois congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh appeared to invite armed insurrection when he tweeted that he was "grabbing his musket" if Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump in the presidential election." "On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump," Walsh tweeted. "On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket." I think it is just an expression. But I am sure all the anti 2nd admendent / Socialists will twist it. I am sure they already are. *Pushing the ' Homegrown Terrorist' adgenda. _______ No, I don't think Trump will be President. A lot can & probably will, between now and January 20th. These are very uncertain times for sure.

SassyEuro2 Joined Wed 04/29/15 Posts: 11102	Fri 11/04/16 04:36 AM
Assange and his rather odd opinions don't impress me positively. He has shown himself to be a fanatic who picks and chooses what to view as "facts." He likes to scare the villagers with the truth. I think I love him.

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 04:37 AM
nothing so exotic! http://www.steynonline.com/7216/the-undocumented-branch-of-the-electoral-college The Undocumented Branch of the Electoral College by Mark Steyn Hannity on Fox News October 7, 2015 ~On Tuesday night I joined Sean Hannity on Fox News to check the state of the Republican race, and a certain structural advantage the Democrats have. Most people are aware that the President is elected not by the popular vote but by the votes in the Electoral College. And most people are also aware that the more densely populated states have more electoral votes than smaller states: California has 55 votes, Vermont has three. But most Americans, I would wager, assume that those proportions are based on the number of citizens in each state. Not so. As Politico reports, each state's share of the Electoral College votes is calculated by using the "whole number of persons in each state" - including those who shouldn't be there. So the more illegal immigrants you have in your state, the greater the votes you have in the Electoral College. Thus, the armies of the undocumented don't need "a pathway to citizenship" in order to change election results - or, as Politico's headline puts it, "Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary": This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. So, as I said to Sean, California's illegal immigrants have a greater representation (five votes) in the Electoral College than my entire state (New Hampshire's four votes). Which seems a very perverse system. So Democrats don't need to nurse illegals through to citizenship; simply moving them into California and other blue states bulks up the Electoral College math in their favor. It works also to favor the Reps, when it's in the globalists' interests. As in the Bush vs Gore race.

SassyEuro2 Joined Wed 04/29/15 Posts: 11102	Fri 11/04/16 04:45 AM Edited by SassyEuro2 on Fri 11/04/16 04:45 AM
Quote: It works also to favor the Reps, when it's in the globalists Quote: Trump & Clinton ARE 18th cousins from the British Crown. In fact, we have only had ONE President who was not of the bloodline. Ugh...

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 04:48 AM
Assange and his rather odd opinions don't impress me positively. He has shown himself to be a fanatic who picks and chooses what to view as "facts." Ah, you mean like every other political pundit? There's no doubt Assenge has a dog in this race. The current U.S administration threatens his freedom and possibly his life simply for having put the truth out there. Frankly, I don't think the U.S will be better off with either of these two clowns. One of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth and who do you got running? Hansen and Gretel

SassyEuro2 Joined Wed 04/29/15 Posts: 11102	Fri 11/04/16 04:59 AM Edited by SassyEuro2 on Fri 11/04/16 05:00 AM
One of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth and who do you got running? Hansen and Gretel The one with the MOST royal blood wins. But.. in this case, they are equal (the same royal guy) except one interesting fact. Trump's bloodline is legal. Clinton 's bloodline is basterized. The mistress had 4 children out of wedlock, then he married her. Which legitimatized her children, but does NOT make them heirs to the throne.

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 05:14 AM
One of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth and who do you got running? Hansen and Gretel The one with the MOST royal blood wins. But.. in this case, they are equal (the same royal guy) except one interesting fact. Trump's bloodline is legal. Clinton 's bloodline is basterized. The mistress had 4 children out of wedlock, then he married her. Which legitimatized her children, but does NOT make them heirs to the throne. It's a damn circus. I only hope Europe won't be as dumb as be used as a shield between to psychopaths.

greeneyes148 Joined Fri 12/25/15 Posts: 5830	Fri 11/04/16 07:46 AM
Trump did to politics exactly what the American people have wanted someone to do for a very long time. He bucked the system,, told both parties to go screw themselves. Forced Politian's to finally understand that America has had enough of their " good ole boys" clubs... both sides He is not PC... and neither is most Americans.. He is not afraid to speak his mind. He does relate to the average American. And both side do not like it because it disrupts their clubs.. their ways. It disrupts business as usual. I hope the man wins.

Conrad_73 Joined Sat 09/29/07 Posts: 22488	Fri 11/04/16 08:07 AM Edited by Conrad_73 on Fri 11/04/16 08:27 AM
nothing so exotic! http://www.steynonline.com/7216/the-undocumented-branch-of-the-electoral-college The Undocumented Branch of the Electoral College by Mark Steyn Hannity on Fox News October 7, 2015 ~On Tuesday night I joined Sean Hannity on Fox News to check the state of the Republican race, and a certain structural advantage the Democrats have. Most people are aware that the President is elected not by the popular vote but by the votes in the Electoral College. And most people are also aware that the more densely populated states have more electoral votes than smaller states: California has 55 votes, Vermont has three. But most Americans, I would wager, assume that those proportions are based on the number of citizens in each state. Not so. As Politico reports, each state's share of the Electoral College votes is calculated by using the "whole number of persons in each state" - including those who shouldn't be there. So the more illegal immigrants you have in your state, the greater the votes you have in the Electoral College. Thus, the armies of the undocumented don't need "a pathway to citizenship" in order to change election results - or, as Politico's headline puts it, "Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary": This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. So, as I said to Sean, California's illegal immigrants have a greater representation (five votes) in the Electoral College than my entire state (New Hampshire's four votes). Which seems a very perverse system. So Democrats don't need to nurse illegals through to citizenship; simply moving them into California and other blue states bulks up the Electoral College math in their favor. It works also to favor the Reps, when it's in the globalists' interests. As in the Bush vs Gore race. Bush won the Vote in Florida! OwlGore lost! Besides,Voting was still going on in the Panhandle,when the MSM called the State won by Gore,yet Bush still had enough votes to win the State,and therefore enough Electoral votes! Guess by next Weekend everything will be over but the crying,and the Great Exodus to Canada begins!

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 08:26 AM
Trump did to politics exactly what the American people have wanted someone to do for a very long time. He bucked the system,, told both parties to go screw themselves. Forced Politian's to finally understand that America has had enough of their " good ole boys" clubs... both sides He is not PC... and neither is most Americans.. He is not afraid to speak his mind. He does relate to the average American. And both side do not like it because it disrupts their clubs.. their ways. It disrupts business as usual. I hope the man wins. That's what it comes down to, I agree.

Rooster35 Joined Wed 05/27/15 Posts: 1776	Fri 11/04/16 08:32 AM Edited by Rooster35 on Fri 11/04/16 08:33 AM
nothing so exotic! http://www.steynonline.com/7216/the-undocumented-branch-of-the-electoral-college The Undocumented Branch of the Electoral College by Mark Steyn Hannity on Fox News October 7, 2015 ~On Tuesday night I joined Sean Hannity on Fox News to check the state of the Republican race, and a certain structural advantage the Democrats have. Most people are aware that the President is elected not by the popular vote but by the votes in the Electoral College. And most people are also aware that the more densely populated states have more electoral votes than smaller states: California has 55 votes, Vermont has three. But most Americans, I would wager, assume that those proportions are based on the number of citizens in each state. Not so. As Politico reports, each state's share of the Electoral College votes is calculated by using the "whole number of persons in each state" - including those who shouldn't be there. So the more illegal immigrants you have in your state, the greater the votes you have in the Electoral College. Thus, the armies of the undocumented don't need "a pathway to citizenship" in order to change election results - or, as Politico's headline puts it, "Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary": This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. So, as I said to Sean, California's illegal immigrants have a greater representation (five votes) in the Electoral College than my entire state (New Hampshire's four votes). Which seems a very perverse system. So Democrats don't need to nurse illegals through to citizenship; simply moving them into California and other blue states bulks up the Electoral College math in their favor. It works also to favor the Reps, when it's in the globalists' interests. As in the Bush vs Gore race. Bush won the Vote in Florida! OwlGore lost! Besides,Voting was still going on in the Panhandle,when the MSM called the State won by Gore,yet Bush still had enough votes to win the State,and therefore enough Electoral votes! Guess by next Weekend everything will be ove but the crying,and the Great Exodus to Canada begins! That's for sure. No matter who wins it won't be an easy pill to swallow for the rest. The Democrats are ready to burn the country down and the Republicans are ready to mount an insurgency... Not the best of endings for this election cycle.