|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2016 : 20:50:55
|
This story from Doubtful News: Demonic leaders: Ain’t that something
| It’s not uncommon for hyperbolic religiously-inclined commentators to refer to people they mightily disagree with as the Devil. We might view it to be the ultimate display of desperation – you have no real defense that will stick against this person, so let’s call them bad names. In the case of Alex Jones, promoting the idea that Hillary Clinton and President Obama himself smell like sulfur (Because they are demons from Hell, duh!) seems to represent an appeal to people who fear nothing more than they fear the Devil. Fear-mongering has been a key feature in the Trump campaign. He enhances Trumped-up fears about immigrants, terrorists, crime and lawlessness, and a dark future for America if Clinton wins the election instead of him. So, why not throw fear of the devil in there too? |
And it's more than just Alex Jones. This has been a crazy year in politics, and it just keeps getting crazier.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1486 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2016 : 12:08:20 [Permalink]
|
How divisive. Claim your opponents as unhuman.
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2016 : 20:14:12 [Permalink]
|
Not just unhuman, but evil incarnate. After all, calling Clinton a fluffy bunny would be dehumanizing her, but not demonizing her.
But Trump doesn't need Alex Jones to do this for him. During last Sunday's debate, he did it himself:...because Bernie Sanders, between superdelegates and Debra Wasserman Schultz, he never had a chance and I was so surprised to see him sign on with the devil. I watched that debate as it happened, and that was an "oh, shit" moment for me. I really didn't think Trump would go lower, live on a national stage, but there he was, literally demonizing her directly, instead of allowing his surrogates to do it.
By the way: a new song about Trump. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1486 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2016 : 09:28:04 [Permalink]
|
"It's just a harmless li'le bunny, isn't it!"
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2016 : 08:56:05 [Permalink]
|
The Occult Hillary Clinton
You've heard the rumors. Millions of Americans are wondering about Hillary. Is she a…
* Shapeshifting Blood-Drinking Reptilian * Satanic Priestess * Antichrist 666 * Voodoo Mambo * Demon-Possessed Witch * Communer with the Dead * Servant of Strange Entities from Other Dimensions * UFO Quisling * Conspirator * War Criminal *
This unique book seeks to answer these and many other questions. The Occult Hillary Clinton gathers the best facts and arguments behind such startling yet widely held beliefs. See why so many millions of Americans believe!
* Learn about the secret organizations where Hillary conspires with the rich and powerful ruling elite to shape the future of all mankind.
* Learn what Hillary's TRUE politics are -- and why they are stranger and more ominous than the mainstream media will dare admit.
* Explore the terrifying charges of mind-control, blood sacrifice, monstrous secret experiments on unsuspecting American citizens, and communication with the dead!
And more! See why many people of all backgrounds and from across the political spectrum believe Hillary is far more than just another politician. Why millions believe she is in league with the Forces of Darkness -- and a threat to all human life on earth.
This book offers nothing less than an alternative history of politics, power and the occult in America. You will never look at the world the same again!
“The biggest mistake of the American press is thinking they know her.” – Maggie Williams, Hillary's former Chief of Staff. |
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2016 : 01:27:50 [Permalink]
|
| she's a crook. If she is elected, I predict impeachment within a year. |
 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2016 : 13:51:02 [Permalink]
|
And now she's a Satanist bent of world destruction, literally.
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
she's a crook. |
Got any evidence? No? $100 million worth of congressional investigations and, later, the full force of the FBI couldn't find enough to make a case, either. Republicans have been prying into her life for 30 years, and have yet to come up with evidence for anything worse than the unintended mishandling of classified info, which is hardly ever prosecuted against anyone.| If she is elected, I predict impeachment within a year. |
On what grounds? Nevermind, the grounds are whatever the House dreams up. Not a chance she gets removed from office after impeachment, though. Two-thirds of the Senate will require a bunch of Democrats to agree that she needs to go. Won't happen. It'd just be a repeat of her husband's impeachment, at best, and thus a tremendous waste of the taxpayer's money.
Not that Republicans give a damn about wasting other peoples' money. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2016 : 20:19:09 [Permalink]
|
it's a prediction, just for fun. There's enough smoke around the Clintons that I'm betting someone will find the fire eventually. If she isn't a crook then there's a good chance she is possessed by some kind of she-devil, I'm not saying she is a crook 100%. That would be libelous. But she's definitely, DEFINITELY a crook.
Good to see you're pre-emptively blaming a republican conspiracy for any charges though. Great skepticism there. "She's innocent of everything and if she isn't the house dreamt it up"
Hilary is without a doubt the worst democratic candidate since... oh yeah her crook, rapist husband who she supported because of her career. Terrible example of the first female premier if she indeed does get into power. Unlike Thatcher or Merkel who got there by strength of character, the first female president will be someone who connived and married their way into power. Any other candidate would obliterate trump, but Clinton is so dirty and inept she's taking it down to the wire.
If I had evidence I would probably share it with the authorities before posting it here. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 11/06/2016 20:27:56 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2016 : 22:02:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
There's enough smoke around the Clintons that I'm betting someone will find the fire eventually. |
The smoke has been created by the right wing, coupled with the irresponsible media that prioritizes ratings over truth.| Good to see you're pre-emptively blaming a republican conspiracy for any charges though. Great skepticism there. |
That's the direction all the evidence points. Show me evidence of an actual, actionable crime, and I'll change my mind.| "She's innocent of everything and if she isn't the house dreamt it up" |
You obviously don't get it: the House of Representatives can write anything into its articles of impeachment. Clinton doesn't need to actually break the law in any way to be impeached, the House just needs to get a 50% vote on a document that says "here's why Clinton shouldn't be President any longer." What those reasons are don't have to be related to any legal issue whatsoever. Grounds for impeachment are literally anything the House says they are. "She likes peach ice cream" could be one of the articles. If 50% of the House agrees, then she's impeached, period.
Getting 66% of the Senate to agree to remove her from office based on the articles of impeachment is a different matter altogether. The House may indeed impeach her within a year. But she'll still be President after impeachment, just like her husband was.| Any other candidate would obliterate trump, but Clinton is so dirty and inept she's taking it down to the wire. |
Your faith in her corruption is quite astounding.| If I had evidence I would probably share it with the authorities before posting it here. |
If ANYONE had evidence, there would have been charges filed already.
Do me a favor: name one crime you think she might be guilty of that's deserving of all the insults thrown at her. I'm not asking for evidence, just a charge. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 11/07/2016 : 23:50:07 [Permalink]
|
http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/here-they-are-hillarys-22-biggest-scandals-ever/
Just pick one. I'm sure you're right though it's all a massive right wing conspiracy *rolls eyes*.
Both Clintons are just scumbags in general. I heard the former rapist in chief Big billy clinton charges like $100k to give crappy speeches at charity events. Maybe he throws in a saxophone solo for free, I'm not sure, but it's still not worth it.
|
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 11/07/2016 23:54:17 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2016 : 11:02:41 [Permalink]
|
WND? Really?
[Edited to add: go ahead and count for yourself how many of the below began with accusations from right-wingers, and went nowhere.]
1) Clintons turn IRS into ‘gestapo’ The crime was supposedly what?
2) Covering Bill’s dirty deeds Not very successfully. But where's the crime?
3) Looting the White House None of the serious accusations could have been leveled at Hillary. She wasn't prez.
4) Filegate: FBI files on GOP enemies Larry Klayman? Seriously? The only references to Alexander vs. FBI et. al available are to... that one Larry Klayman quote. Looks like Klayman made it up.
5) Hillary’s ‘Muslim Brotherhood princess’ Hillary's association with Huma Abedin is not a crime. It's not even a "scandal" except to the racist/islamophobic WND and its readership.
6) Vince Foster’s 1993 death Yeah, right. 
7) Emailgate: ‘She should go to prison for this’ Nope.
8) Chinagate: Sale of high-tech secrets Klayman again. If he were to claim that the sky is blue, I'd go outside to check. If Klayman accuses someone of a crime, it's likely that the behavior isn't actually criminal.
9) Travelgate: Always room for friends Ethics violations are not crimes.
10) Whitewater: Jail for friends, but not Clintons Mere "impropriety" is a crime, now?
11) ‘Landing under sniper fire’ in Bosnia If being mistaken lying were illegal, there'd be nobody left to run the prisons.
12) Hillary’s ‘missing’ law firm billing records And the crime is supposedly what?
13) Pardongate: Hillary Senate contributions And the crime is supposedly what?
14) Hillary’s cash cows and 9,987 percent profit And the crime is supposedly what? Were it Trump, he'd be bragging about what a smart investor he was.
15) Clinton body count: ‘You find dead people’ This is a repeat of the others, essentially, and so doesn't count.
16) Hillary’s radical pal, Saul Alinsky Not a crime.
17) Hillary laughs about defending child rapist Not a crime, and false to boot.
18) Hill ca$hes in: Iranian fundraising No crimes.
19) Clinton Foundation: Scandals keep coming No crimes.
20) Benghazi: 4 American lives lost What, exactly, is the "crime" Clinton supposedly committed with regards to Benghazi?? I've been hoping some conservative would explain this to me.
21) Peter Franklin Paul: Another Hillary friend goes to prison It's a crime to distance oneself from criminals?
22) Watergate: Fired for being a ‘liar’ No crimes.
Bonus! Gift-gate WND is really reaching with this one. They don't even try to deny that the "Clinton aide" was correct.| I'm sure you're right though it's all a massive right wing conspiracy *rolls eyes*. |
Like there's never been any such thing.| Both Clintons are just scumbags in general. |
Which doesn't mean they're crooks. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2016 : 11:26:40 [Permalink]
|
Furthermore:Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I heard the former rapist in chief Big billy clinton charges like $100k to give crappy speeches at charity events. Maybe he throws in a saxophone solo for free, I'm not sure, but it's still not worth it. |
Conservatives should congratulate Bill Clinton on his being able to charge whatever the free market will bear. Doesn't matter whether it's worth it to you. What matters is whether it's worth it to anyone, and it clearly is.
A penny is too much for me to spend to see Lee Greenwood, but I won't spite him for the fact that he can get $55 a head at his concerts. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2016 : 17:20:03 [Permalink]
|
I don't see accruing as much personal wealth as possible as the kind of behaviour desirable in a world leader. But that's just me.
And sure, Hillary isn't convicted of anything, she's innocent, just like Michael Jackson and OJ...
The fact you're bothering to defend someone with such a lack of moral compass just shows how deep down the rabbit hole you are. I've heard some people voting Hillary but actually being pragmatic about it, admitting that she's a terrible candidate, a liar, possibly (definitely) a criminal and power/money hungry demon... and still better than trump. But your p[articular brand of support is the most self deceiving kind that isn't befitting a so-called "skeptic".
I'm not saying she's evil (she definitely is), but she seems completely amoral. And you seem to be going completely off the deep end with your conspiracy theories lately, Dave. No wonder you ran off most of your regulars. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 11/08/2016 17:21:45 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2016 : 20:16:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I don't see accruing as much personal wealth as possible as the kind of behaviour desirable in a world leader. But that's just me. |
Nevermind the fact that Bill Clinton is no longer a world leader.| And sure, Hillary isn't convicted of anything, she's innocent, just like Michael Jackson and OJ... |
Nevermind that she hasn't even been charged with anything, unlike Jackson and OJ.| The fact you're bothering to defend someone with such a lack of moral compass... |
That's your position, yes. I'm asking for evidence, but all you can give me is far-right innuendo and speculation from the WND.| ...just shows how deep down the rabbit hole you are. |
And the fact that you're bothering to attack her as a criminal without benefit of evidence shows just how deep down the right-wing rabbit hole you have gone.| I've heard some people voting Hillary but actually being pragmatic about it, admitting that she's a terrible candidate, a liar, possibly (definitely) a criminal and power/money hungry demon... and still better than trump. |
That's the picture the media have painted, yes. Because the right keeps on repeating such crap, and the irresponsible media keeps on reporting on it without spending time on the facts because a made-up controversy is better for the bottom line than the truth. That's why the major networks spent three times as much air time on the email "scandal" than they have spent reporting on the policy positions of the candidates since Hillary declared. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox and even NPR are all complicit in portraying Clinton as somehow nefarious without (just like you) providing evidence of evil intent or actions. The manufactroversy is the story, not reality.| But your p[articular brand of support is the most self deceiving kind that isn't befitting a so-called "skeptic". |
A skeptic asks for evidence. You have none. I'm not the one being anti-skeptical. Your entire position is based on faith that Hillary is evil.
Oh, wait: you - being the Christian you are - are taught to believe that the default human is evil and sinful. Thus, I suppose, you feel that the innocence claims are the ones that must be backed by evidence, while the null hypothesis is that Clinton is amoral filth. That explains quite a lot about you.| I'm not saying she's evil (she definitely is), but she seems completely amoral. |
And what evidence is that "seems" based on?| And you seem to be going completely off the deep end with your conspiracy theories lately, Dave. |
I follow the evidence where it leads. The right has been trying to stick shit on Hillary Clinton for over 30 years, and has failed because it's almost all made-up or innuendo built upon coincidence.
Again: the right wing in Congress has spent $100 million in taxpayer money in congressional investigations into both Clintons, impeached one of them, and all they've managed to do with all that money and 34 years of trying was get Bill to pay a six-figure fine. Then they managed to get the full weight of the FBI on Hillary's case, and the FBI found no evidence of a crime that would warrant prosecution.
If she were guilty of even a tenth of the stuff she's been accused of, and has hidden her guilt so well that nobody with authority to investigate has been able to find the evidence, she'd already be Presidente for Life of the United Clinton States.| No wonder you ran off most of your regulars. |
Yeah, this is why. Because I demand evidence before I agree to a proposition. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Hillary suffers from demonic possession
