US Elections 2016

[Justin Z]

The reality that people are complex and do both good and bad in their lives is a hard one to understand, huh?

Fixed that...

[John Findlay]

I want to feel sorry for the American electorate in the choice of candidates they have for president. I can't. You reap what you sow.

[Norm]

I am right and so are millions of others that can see right threw the likes of yours and others lies and deflections.

 

This link that I left proves that I am right and you are at it because of his age when he comes out with what he does.

Did you not notice how old he was in the link or were you hopping that no one else would notice?

 

How old was he when he was Clintons mentor and how old is he in that clip?

 

Again, your at it and it is sticking out a mile.

 

Clinton's mentor not only started up his own chapter of the KKK, he was the head of it.

That clip is from 2001. In 2003, he was one of only 17 senators to get a 100% rating from the NAACP with regards to his voting in line with their ideology. In 2005, he proposed an additional $10,000,000 of funding for the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial. Those are hardly the actions of a lynching racist.

[AlphonseCapone]

Wee daft nibs still at it haha

[aussieh]

Wee daft nibs still at it haha

Its now beyond rational, Al.

Everybody is something or other.

Anger and hatred.

[aussieh]

Wee daft nibs still at it haha

They all use the same insults and shout you Down in organised packs now.

Watch for the keywords.

Infest is a favourite.

[Bridge of Djoum]

So, things have changed. It's now Trump or Soros.

 

Now, what was I saying about the Open society Foundation.

 

People really need to look for the truth in places other than the MSM.

 

This stuff Isn't rocket science. 

You know zero.

 

Every single post refers to the 'MSM'. You then proceed to post videos and links to MSM sites to back up your bizarre points. Seriously, using FOX as a source for news and truth is like using a toothbrush to open a door. 

 

Of course the MSM media, in fact ALL media outlets have an agenda, but you cannot decry them, then use them to 'prove' your point. 

 

Can we just give you and ML your own thread to post increasingly worrying shite, while you touch each other and giggle at us 'sheeple'?

[Seymour M Hersh]

I want to feel sorry for the American electorate in the choice of candidates they have for president. I can't. You reap what you sow.

 

How exactly are ordinary Yanks reaping what they sowed John?

[Seymour M Hersh]

Is the brewing "cash for access" row going to derail Shillary?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Is the brewing "cash for access" row going to derail Shillary?

 

Well, the fact that Trump appears to have even worse problems with his foundation aren't helping the story get legs: http://linkis.com/jQ1y7 

 

Clinton's poll numbers have dropped a bit, but Trump's haven't really come up noticably -- he's still pretty rooted to around 40%.

 

Ultimately I can't see her Milibanding this.  Labor Day weekend (this weekend in the US) is traditionally when broader segments of the population start actually paying attention, so we'll see from here.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Well, the fact that Trump appears to have even worse problems with his foundation aren't helping the story get legs: http://linkis.com/jQ1y7 

 

Clinton's poll numbers have dropped a bit, but Trump's haven't really come up noticably -- he's still pretty rooted to around 40%.

 

Ultimately I can't see her Milibanding this.  Labor Day weekend (this weekend in the US) is traditionally when broader segments of the population start actually paying attention, so we'll see from here.

 

Deflection, deflection, deflection.

[John Findlay]

How exactly are ordinary Yanks reaping what they sowed John?

Simple. The very fact they are standing back not doing anything to stop these two charlatans running foe the office of President. If they have any sense they will abstain en masse

[Seymour M Hersh]

Simple. The very fact they are standing back not doing anything to stop these two charlatans running foe the office of President. If they have any sense they will abstain en masse

 

Well they could I suppose John but where would that get them? One of the clowns will still get in. I don't the joe public has created this situation in US politics but is being forced to vote on poor, poor candidates.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Deflection, deflection, deflection.

 

You did ask a question. I gave you an answer backed by data, it just wasn't the answer you wanted.

 

Off with ye.

[Peebo]

Simple. The very fact they are standing back not doing anything to stop these two charlatans running foe the office of President. If they have any sense they will abstain en masse

They can't abstain until the election...and I'm sure millions will.

[Bridge of Djoum]

They can't abstain until the election...and I'm sure millions will.

I became a citizen 4 months ago. Although I consider myself left of centre, democrat leaning, Trump hater, etc,  I cannot find a reason to give Clinton my vote. Yes, she is the most qualified candidate, perhaps ever, but there is just something about her I do not trust. A view echoed by many Democrat supporters I talk to. 

 

It's a catch 22, almost. Cannot vote for Trump, do not trust Clinton.

[Peebo]

I became a citizen 4 months ago. Although I consider myself left of centre, democrat leaning, Trump hater, etc, I cannot find a reason to give Clinton my vote. Yes, she is the most qualified candidate, perhaps ever, but there is just something about her I do not trust. A view echoed by many Democrat supporters I talk to.

 

It's a catch 22, almost. Cannot vote for Trump, do not trust Clinton.

Yes, the choice for many is totally unpalatable. And many won't vote because of that.

 

It really is quite amazing how such a massive, diverse country has such a shit political system, with only two viable parties.

[Bridge of Djoum]

Yes, the choice for many is totally unpalatable. And many won't vote because of that.

 

It really is quite amazing how such a massive, diverse country has such a shit political system, with only two viable parties.

And such a complicated system. I admit I'm only just learning now about US politics, and my post was simplistic, but it feels un-democratic to only have 2 choices, neither of which speak to great swathes of the country.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

The FBI report about the Clinton email schtuff is out.  I haven't read it because I have other things to do with my free time than read hundred page FBI reports, but on a quick survey of the reporters digging into the report, the reactions are about like this:

 

Right wing internet and talks shows (Rush Limbaugh, Daily Caller): "OMG LOOK AT ALL THESE SMOKING GUNS THE FBI FOUND!!!"

 

Big city establishment newspapers (NY Times, WaPo, LA Times, etc.): "Hmm, this is all very concerning, unclear what it all means, but it casts a shadow over Clinton."

 

Hard left magazines (The Nation, Mother Jones): "Oh FFS there's nothing there, THIS is what we're supposed to get upset about? Look, we don't like the Clintons, but..."

 

Center-left bloggers (TalkingPointsMemo): "There's nothing there but the big papers like the Times sure seem to want to talk darkly about it for no reason."

 

Center-right internet news (Politico, RealClearPolitics, Forbes): "Whee!  Fun!  Juicy nuggets! But seriously y'all nothing here except Washington gossip. Clinton did exactly what she's been saying she did."

 

Alt-right internet (WND, InfoWars): "Clear evidence of Clinton's treason (even though we didn't actually read the report), she deserves at least a decade of prison if not summary execution."

 

This is the bit that has everyone aflutter the most:

 

 

Page 11: On January 23, 2009, Clinton contacted former Secretary of State Colin Powell via e-mail to inquire about his use of a BlackBerry while he was Secretary of State (January 2001 to January 2005). In his e-mail reply, Powell warned Clinton that if it became "public" that Clinton had a BlackBerry, and she used it to "do business," her e-mails could become "official record and subject to the law." Powell further advised Clinton, "Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data."

[elvoys]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/08/25/iowa-professor-thinks-hawkeyes-mascot-is-too-mean-looking/#comments

 

Aside from the scary possibility that der Trumpf might have a rather itchy red button finder should he come to power, the more serious threat to national security could be the mass suicides or tear drowning that such a 'triggering' would induce amongst the growing snowflake minority population. 

[elvoys]

The FBI report about the Clinton email schtuff is out.  I haven't read it because I have other things to do with my free time than read hundred page FBI reports, but on a quick survey of the reporters digging into the report, the reactions are about like this:

 

Right wing internet and talks shows (Rush Limbaugh, Daily Caller): "OMG LOOK AT ALL THESE SMOKING GUNS THE FBI FOUND!!!"

 

Big city establishment newspapers (NY Times, WaPo, LA Times, etc.): "Hmm, this is all very concerning, unclear what it all means, but it casts a shadow over Clinton."

 

Hard left magazines (The Nation, Mother Jones): "Oh FFS there's nothing there, THIS is what we're supposed to get upset about? Look, we don't like the Clintons, but..."

 

Center-left bloggers (TalkingPointsMemo): "There's nothing there but the big papers like the Times sure seem to want to talk darkly about it for no reason."

 

Center-right internet news (Politico, RealClearPolitics, Forbes): "Whee!  Fun!  Juicy nuggets! But seriously y'all nothing here except Washington gossip. Clinton did exactly what she's been saying she did."

 

Alt-right internet (WND, InfoWars): "Clear evidence of Clinton's treason (even though we didn't actually read the report), she deserves at least a decade of prison if not summary execution."

 

This is the bit that has everyone aflutter the most:

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439676/clintons-fbi-interview-what-was-cheryl-mills-doing-there?platform=hootsuite

 

Not a fair summary of  traditional conservatives. Andrew C McCarthy (ex Assistant US Attorney) at the National Review has been consistently adamant that she should be impeached over the emails. 

Edited September 5, 2016 by elvoys

[Dawnrazor]

In an extremely condensed review, can someone tell me what was in the emails in question please? I keep hearing about them but don't want to troll through hundreds of pages of files.

[Norm]

Some stories floating around that Trump will refuse to take part in the debates unless my man Johnson is there.

 

I'm beginning to soften to Trump.....

[elvoys]

Some stories floating around that Trump will refuse to take part in the debates unless my man Johnson is there.

 

I'm beginning to soften to Trump.....

 

I doubt it's down to his innate sense of fairness. I think I heard that historically the challenging party has a much bigger chance of winning if the third candidate gets plus 10% of the vote.

[niblick1874]

 

 

You know zero.

 

Every single post refers to the 'MSM'. You then proceed to post videos and links to MSM sites to back up your bizarre points. Seriously, using FOX as a source for news and truth is like using a toothbrush to open a door. 

 

Of course the MSM media, in fact ALL media outlets have an agenda, but you cannot decry them, then use them to 'prove' your point. 

 

Can we just give you and ML your own thread to post increasingly worrying shite, while you touch each other and giggle at us 'sheeple'?

When I post stuff from youtube that is not from the MSM concerning the point of the thread you go on about conspiracy nutjobs. When I post stuff from the MSM on youtube saying that something is up because a story that should be headline news is not mentioned in any shape or form, you tell me I can't do that.  You avoid the point of what was said in the link I left and go after the poster like the troll you are.

 

How about you tell us what you think of the Soros email leek about how to manage the situation in the Ukraine and who to put in charge of it (and they were) that was sent to Clinton, or the one about the open borders in Europe?

 

You can provide the links this time, or you can once again spout gunk and show yourself up for the know nothing troll that you are.  

 

You say I know zero, prove it, as apposed to just coming on here without anything to back it up.  

Edited September 5, 2016 by niblick1874

[Watt-Zeefuik]

In an extremely condensed review, can someone tell me what was in the emails in question please? I keep hearing about them but don't want to troll through hundreds of pages of files.

 

The first thing to know is that the signal-to-noise is incredibly low.  There's an awful lot of chatter about not very much.  

 

Basically, when Clinton got to State, she was told that policy was that you could get official emails on an official Blackberry (oh the days!) but not personal emails.  She didn't want to carry two devices, so she asked Colin Powell, who had been Secretary from 2000-2004, who told her to get someone to set up a private server and get both through that.  The IT security folks at State advised her against it but there was no actual policy forbidding it (per the recently released FBI report).

 

When all of the Benghazi shit hit the fan, congressional Republicans demanded an investigation.  Clinton said it was all on her private server, and that her attorneys would remove personal emails (of which there ended up being 55,000, I believe) before turning it over.  And from there it descends into silliness about 13 devices and what was in the deleted emails and dark questions about a second hosting company and so on and so forth.

 

So what originally was supposed to be about Clinton's oversight of the Benghazi embassy attacks turned into whether she read classified documents on a non-compliant email server which then turned a "what is she hiding?" whisper game.

 

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439676/clintons-fbi-interview-what-was-cheryl-mills-doing-there?platform=hootsuite

 

Not a fair summary of  traditional conservatives. Andrew C McCarthy (ex Assistant US Attorney) at the National Review has been consistently adamant that she should be impeached over the emails. 

 

Fair point, and to be completely fair traditional conservatives didn't fall into any of the categories above.  That said, traditional conservatives, particularly intellectual ones like the folks at National Review, have seen their influence plummet in the days of the Tea Party and Trumpism.

[niblick1874]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439676/clintons-fbi-interview-what-was-cheryl-mills-doing-there?platform=hootsuite

 

Not a fair summary of  traditional conservatives. Andrew C McCarthy (ex Assistant US Attorney) at the National Review has been consistently adamant that she should be impeached over the emails. 

 

Oh look, the truth.

 

They also have her on perjury. She blatantly lied under oath for all to see and under the law she's guilty but because of the deflection and lying threw omission by all that should be doing something about it, nothing. 

The worst thing about this is the use of a blackberry if you are going to believe UA, he is lying. This explains it in more detail showing there is way more to it than UA will want you to know about the email scandal

 

There is way more to this than some on here would have you believe.

 

Seymour M Hersh was spot on when he posted deflection deflection deflection in response to UA. Anyone that knows the first thing about it can see right threw him.

 

Showing up Clinton for what she is is like shooting fish in a barrel. As I keep saying, people need to have a good look at her masters that are her up front and behind the scenes backers, the influence they have around the world, and what they are doing with that influence. 

[Bridge of Djoum]

Oh look, the truth.

 

They also have her on perjury. She blatantly lied under oath for all to see and under the law she's guilty but because of the deflection and lying threw omission by all that should be doing something about it, nothing. 

The worst thing about this is the use of a blackberry if you are going to believe UA, he is lying. This explains it in more detail showing there is way more to it than UA will want you to know about the email scandal

 

There is way more to this than some on here would have you believe.

 

Seymour M Hersh was spot on when he posted deflection deflection deflection in response to UA. Anyone that knows the first thing about it can see right threw him.

 

Showing up Clinton for what she is is like shooting fish in a barrel. As I keep saying, people need to have a good look at her masters that are her up front and behind the scenes backers, the influence they have around the world, and what they are doing with that influence. 

Hijacked another thread with your conspiracy, "I know things no one else does''.

 

Bravo.

[maroonlegions]

When I post stuff from youtube that is not from the MSM concerning the point of the thread you go on about conspiracy nutjobs. When I post stuff from the MSM on youtube saying that something is up because a story that should be headline news is not mentioned in any shape or form, you tell me I can't do that.  You avoid the point of what was said in the link I left and go after the poster like the troll you are.

 

How about you tell us what you think of the Soros email leek about how to manage the situation in the Ukraine and who to put in charge of it (and they were) that was sent to Clinton, or the one about the open borders in Europe?

 

You can provide the links this time, or you can once again spout gunk and show yourself up for the know nothing troll that you are.  

 

You say I know zero, prove it, as apposed to just coming on here without anything to back it up.  

 

 

 

The first thing to know is that the signal-to-noise is incredibly low.  There's an awful lot of chatter about not very much.  

 

Basically, when Clinton got to State, she was told that policy was that you could get official emails on an official Blackberry (oh the days!) but not personal emails.  She didn't want to carry two devices, so she asked Colin Powell, who had been Secretary from 2000-2004, who told her to get someone to set up a private server and get both through that.  The IT security folks at State advised her against it but there was no actual policy forbidding it (per the recently released FBI report).

 

When all of the Benghazi shit hit the fan, congressional Republicans demanded an investigation.  Clinton said it was all on her private server, and that her attorneys would remove personal emails (of which there ended up being 55,000, I believe) before turning it over.  And from there it descends into silliness about 13 devices and what was in the deleted emails and dark questions about a second hosting company and so on and so forth.

 

So what originally was supposed to be about Clinton's oversight of the Benghazi embassy attacks turned into whether she read classified documents on a non-compliant email server which then turned a "what is she hiding?" whisper game.

 

 

 

Fair point, and to be completely fair traditional conservatives didn't fall into any of the categories above.  That said, traditional conservatives, particularly intellectual ones like the folks at National Review, have seen their influence plummet in the days of the Tea Party and Trumpism.

 

There are 1000s of her e-mails that have been released by Anonymous and Wikileaks.

 

That in its self is food for thought. 

 

The FBI have surfaced i see in this, shock..lol;  

 

There is still  more to be released by Wikileaks and Anonymous soon.

 

These guys are no tin foil  hat conspiracy nut jobs .. lol;   they have proved they know what they are doing and are relentless in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2016 by maroonlegions

[Bridge of Djoum]

There are 1000s of her e-mails that have been released by Anonymous and Wikileaks.

 

That in its self is food for thought. 

 

The FBI have surfaced i see in this, shock..lol;  

 

There is still  more to be released by Wikileaks and Anonymous soon.

 

These guys are no tin foil  hat conspiracy nut jobs .. lol;   they have proved they know what they are doing and are relentless in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And, right on cue.....

[Sidelight]

UA, he is lying. 

 

 

 

I doubt UA is lying, you may not agree with his bias, but you do yourself no favours by calling him a liar.

Like you I view Hillary and Bill as a set of untrustworthy cheating rats. If she is somehow elected, then the NWO is here and elected governments are history.

Edited September 5, 2016 by alfajambo

[niblick1874]

 

 

Hijacked another thread with your conspiracy, "I know things no one else does''.

 

Bravo.

 

 

Millions upon millions in America know what I know and that what I say here is true. You on the other hand have said nothing about anything whatsoever and have proven my point where you are concerned . You are a clueless troll.

 

For the Trump supporters this is about whether they want a free America or to leave it in the hands of the globalists. It's as simple as that and people need to realize that for them it is tantamount to war. God help America, because the shit will hit the fan in a way that most can imagine but few will think will happen.

 

Have a look at what can happen to a country when one side thinks the election was rigged. The ducks are all in a line.

 

 

I doubt UA is lying, you may not agree with his bias, but you do yourself no favours by calling him a liar.

Like you I view Hillary and Bill as a set of lying cheating rats. If she is elected, then the NWO is here and elected governments are history.

 

He can't clam to be so immersed in it to the extent he does and miss the truth by such a wide mark, can He?

 

Maybe you are right, maybe he is just a ostrich and I should give him the benefit of the doubt reverting to insults and innuendos as he does.

 

I get your point and will take it on board.

Edited September 5, 2016 by niblick1874

[Sidelight]

Millions upon millions in America know what I know and that what I say here is true. You on the other hand have said nothing about anything whatsoever and have proven my point where you are concerned . You are a clueless troll.

 

For the Trump supporters this is about whether they want a free America or to leave it in the hands of the globalists. It's as simple as that and people need to realize that for them it is tantamount to war. God help America, because the shit will hit the fan in a way that most can imagine but few will think will happen.

 

Have a look at what can happen to a country when one side thinks the election was rigged. The ducks are all in a line.

 

He can't clam to be so immersed in it to the extent he does and miss the truth by such a wide mark, can He?

 

Maybe you are right, maybe he is just a ostrich and I should give him the benefit of the doubt reverting to insults and innuendos as he does.

 

I get your point and will take it on board.

 

The coughing is back!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774941/Clinton-says-coughing-fit-allergic-reaction-Trump.html

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Right, Julian Assange and Wikileaks, the guy who thought it was a good idea to out some gay folks in Saudi Arabia and expose the names of victims of domestic abuse who were hiding from their former spouses.  **** that guy.  Snowden is a hero, but Assange is a wank.  The base difference between the way Snowden (and Greenwald) handled leaks and the way Assange does should be obvious.  Just because they're both being (wrongfully) chased by the Obama administration doesn't make them equivalent.

 

And once again, for those who can't keep up, the classified material originally thought to have been "exposed" by Clinton, as erroneously claimed by James Comey in his press conference, was later discovered to have been declassified by the time Clinton shared it.

 

So once again we're back to whisper campaigns.

[Bridge of Djoum]

Right, Julian Assange and Wikileaks, the guy who thought it was a good idea to out some gay folks in Saudi Arabia and expose the names of victims of domestic abuse who were hiding from their former spouses.  **** that guy.  Snowden is a hero, but Assange is a wank.  The base difference between the way Snowden (and Greenwald) handled leaks and the way Assange does should be obvious.  Just because they're both being (wrongfully) chased by the Obama administration doesn't make them equivalent.

 

And once again, for those who can't keep up, the classified material originally thought to have been "exposed" by Clinton, as erroneously claimed by James Comey in his press conference, was later discovered to have been declassified by the time Clinton shared it.

 

So once again we're back to whisper campaigns.

But, Fox News!

But, Right wing commentators!

But, Glenn Beck!

But, Sean Hannity!

But, Infowars!

 

You can't tell me these outlets aren't telling us the truth.

Edited September 5, 2016 by BK 11215

[niblick1874]

The coughing is back!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774941/Clinton-says-coughing-fit-allergic-reaction-Trump.html

One of the best known doctor in America with his own TV show, when asked to comment on Clintons health and allay fears about it, told them that he had a look (including medical records) and was very worried about her health. Next week, no more TV show.

 

All whispers you understand and anyone that doesn't get that is not keeping up.

 

 

 

?

Edited September 5, 2016 by niblick1874

[Bridge of Djoum]

One of the best known doctor in America with his own TV show, when asked to comment on Clintons health and allay fears about it, told them that he had a look (including medical records) and was very worried about her health. Next week, no more TV show.

 

All whispers you understand and anyone that doesn't get that is not keeping up.

 

 

 

?

What is the subject of his TV show? And which doctor is it?

[Bridge of Djoum]

One of the best known doctor in America with his own TV show, when asked to comment on Clintons health and allay fears about it, told them that he had a look (including medical records) and was very worried about her health. Next week, no more TV show.

 

All whispers you understand and anyone that doesn't get that is not keeping up.

 

 

 

?

Oh, and a doctor just happened to have a look at someone's private medical files?

 

You really are a gullible lad.

[Sharpie]

I am aware of Dr Oz, and Doctor Phil, I saw both on TV today,  it has been a while since I seen Dr Finlay or Dr Kildare, thats about all the TV doctors I know.

[niblick1874]

But, Fox News!

But, Right wing commentators!

But, Glenn Beck!

But, Sean Hannity!

But, Infowars!

 

You can't tell me these outlets aren't telling us the truth.

Well well well, thanks.

 

Seeing as you mention one of the scummiest backstabbers ever to be on TV, Glenn Beck, it gives me the opportunity to tell everyone that he did two shows that they say got him fired. One of them was about Soros and was close to two hours long. Apart from the inflation stuff (and his theatrics) it is right on the money. It should be watched by those that want to know about what is really going on (don't watch it UA, it's scary stuff). 

 

It's not where it comes from but the facts involved and what you make of them. This one has more than enough facts concerning Soros to enable you to put two and two together and see how close we are, and why, to the shit hitting the fan. As you will be told by Beck, don't believe him (I wouldn't) as it's all out there for you to see, and it is.

 

Here's the show 

[Bridge of Djoum]

Well well well, thanks.

 

Seeing as you mention one of the scummiest backstabbers ever to be on TV, Glenn Beck, it gives me the opportunity to tell everyone that he did two shows that they say got him fired. One of them was about Soros and was close to two hours long. Apart from the inflation stuff (and his theatrics) it is right on the money. It should be watched by those that want to know about what is really going on (don't watch it UA, it's scary stuff). 

 

It's not where it comes from but the facts involved and what you make of them. This one has more than enough facts concerning Soros to enable you to put two and two together and see how close we are, and why, to the shit hitting the fan. As you will be told by Beck, don't believe him (I wouldn't) as it's all out there for you to see, and it is.

 

Here's the show 

I'm good, thanks.

[Bridge of Djoum]

I am aware of Dr Oz, and Doctor Phil, I saw both on TV today,  it has been a while since I seen Dr Finlay or Dr Kildare, thats about all the TV doctors I know.

I've a feeling i'll be waiting a while on the answer.

[Bridge of Djoum]

I am aware of Dr Oz, and Doctor Phil, I saw both on TV today,  it has been a while since I seen Dr Finlay or Dr Kildare, thats about all the TV doctors I know.

Dr Who!!!!!

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I've a feeling i'll be waiting a while on the answer.

I'm pretty sure it was Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman.

 

Meanwhile, while I'm not a big fan of the WaPo, this is an impressive list they've put together: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/05/trumps-history-of-corruption-is-mind-boggling-so-why-is-clinton-supposedly-the-corrupt-one/?utm_term=.f65ed491b80f

[AlphonseCapone]

Oh, and a doctor just happened to have a look at someone's private medical files?

 

You really are a gullible lad.

 

That's what I was thinking, the boy is a moron.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

That's what I was thinking, the boy is a moron.

 

FWIW, because of a US law called HIPPA, any doctor that actually did what niblick is claiming would not only be violating about 8 sections of the law, he would be subject to a fairly hefty lawsuit and would be pretty definitely stripped of his medical license at the earliest point an AMA hearing could be convened.  Not only that, he'd open up whomever his employers were to a hefty lawsuit as well.

[Bridge of Djoum]

Nibbles will disappear for a while now, as someone has de-bunked his complete nonsense Thing is, he will make a triumphant return with more You-tube clips and articles from esteemed Right-wing agencies. His classic deflection default.

[Bridge of Djoum]

FWIW, because of a US law called HIPPA, any doctor that actually did what niblick is claiming would not only be violating about 8 sections of the law, he would be subject to a fairly hefty lawsuit and would be pretty definitely stripped of his medical license at the earliest point an AMA hearing could be convened.  Not only that, he'd open up whomever his employers were to a hefty lawsuit as well.

Indeed.

 

As regards to Hippa, when I changed Dr over here, I had to fill out a plethora of forms, and show quite a few forms of ID. And those were MY files. But yeah, Nibbles' doctor just ''had a look over'' the Secretary of State's and presidential candidate's medical history. Of course that happened.

[Bridge of Djoum]

One of the best known doctor in America with his own TV show, when asked to comment on Clintons health and allay fears about it, told them that he had a look (including medical records) and was very worried about her health. Next week, no more TV show.

 

All whispers you understand and anyone that doesn't get that is not keeping up.

 

 

 

?

Any answer as to who the Dr was, and why his show was cancelled?

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

Any answer as to who the Dr was, and why his show was cancelled?

 

It was Dr Drake Ramoray