HILLARY CLINTON: DEMOCRATS WON'T BE CIVIL TO REPUBLICANS UNTIL WE TAKE OVER
October 9, 2018
There are rare things in this world.
Waterfalls in the desert. Sunny days in Seattle. And something like a moment of honesty from Hillary Clinton. It's very partial, but still entirely implausible.
Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that civility in America can only begin again if Democrats win back the House or Senate this fall.
We won't be civil to you... until we take over.
At least Hillary comes close to admitting that this is about power. And that the Democrats will do destroy any public norms to get it.
"You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about," Clinton said in an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "That's why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that's when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength."
All Republicans seem to respect is strength?
Who wore it best, Mussolini or Hillary?
"There can be no democratic norms, until we take power. But we're only doing it because strength is the only thing the other side understands," every tyrant ever.
"I remember what they did to me for 25 years -- the falsehoods, the lies, which unfortunately people believe because the Republicans have put a lot of time, money, and effort in promoting them," Clinton said.
The Republicans have even managed to shamelessly convince folks that Hillary Clinton didn't bring peace to Northern Ireland, try to join NASA or land under fire at an airport.
Or get named after Sir Edmund Hilary.
All these Republican lies are a serious problem. Like the time Republicans tried to convince people that Chelsea Clinton wasn't jogging around the World Trade Center on 9/11.
"So when you're dealing with an ideological party that is driven by the lust for power, that is funded by corporate interests..."
Projection is a sad and unmerciful disease.
Clinton said. "I want to stop the degrading of the rule of law. The delegitimizing of elections."
She said while delegitimizing the election that she lost
GOOGLE WORKED TO RIGGED THE
ELECTION FOR THE SWAMP EMPRESS TO KEEP THE FOREIGN INVADERS COMING SO WAGES ARE
KEPT DEPRESSED!
Clinton said. "I want to stop the
degrading of the rule of law. The delegitimizing of elections."
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2018/09/google-rigged-it-so-illegals-would-vote.html
The Clintons, through their
fraudulent Clinton Foundation, looted the poor of Haiti to fill their pockets…
google it!
1.
Globalism: Google
VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates
around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”
2.
Hillary Clinton’s Democratic
party: An executive nearly broke down crying because of the candidate’s loss. Not
a single executive expressed anything but dismay at her defeat.
3. Immigration: Maintaining
liberal immigration in the U.S is the policy that Google’s executives discussed the most.
HILLARY CLINTON’S GLBALIST VISION:
SURRENDER OF OUR BORDERS WITH NARCOMEX AND SUCKING IN
GLOBAL
BRIBES FOR THE PHONY CLINTON FOUNDATION
Even though it has gone
virtually unreported by
corporate media, Breitbart News has extensively documented the
Clintons’
longstanding support for
“open borders.” Interestingly,
as the Los Angeles Times observed
in 2007, the Clinton’s praise for
globalization and open
borders frequently comes when they are
speaking before a wealthy
foreign audiences and donors.
The Democrats' Moral Confusion
Victor Davis Hanson makes an important point in his American Greatness column, "One Ford Narrative Too Many." Christine Blasey Ford's accusation against Judge Kavanaugh was deeply unethical.
I am confused by the bipartisan outrage solely directed at Senator Dianne Feinstein's or her staff's lowdown leaking of Ford's name. Of course, it was unethical and so typical of the twilight years of the senior senator from California. But, then again, so is authoring an anonymous hit piece without any corroborating evidence but with misleading written assertions (such as how Ford sought "medical treatment" for the assault – without disclosing she meant marriage counseling 36 years after the fact.) It seems far less noble to charge Kavanaugh with sexual assault anonymously than to have come forward at the outset and demonstrate the charge transparently. The cloak of anonymity does even more damage to the idea of jurisprudence than does the unethical removal of it by a would-be enabler.
Indeed, it is wicked to ruin a man's life with an anonymous note.
It is unethical to destroy the career and reputation of an outstanding man over something as small as being jumped and groped at a drunken teenage party. Blasey Ford wants us to believe that the episode was a rape attempt by two strong boys, in which her clothes were not removed, she was not raped, and she was easily able to run out of the room without opposition. Nothing actually happened except that she was scared something would happen.
It is unethical to humiliate a good man and his family before the nation.
It is wicked to rob someone of one of the greatest and happiest days of his life, a day he worked hard for his entire life, yes, from those very teenage years.
It is unethical to purposely besmirch the honor of the nation by besmirching a revered and precious institution with gutter politics.
How wicked that it was done to protect federal backing and funding of abortion without limit!
It is wicked to lie in order to make your charges seems more plausible. Ford wanted us to believe that such an episode haunted her for life – or haunted her after she recalled it in marriage counseling thirty years later. She claimed before the nation that it restricted her ability to live in a normal house (a lie), fly in airplanes (a lie), or have a healthy marriage.
Bearing false witness is of the utmost seriousness as a moral breach. It breaks the Ninth Commandment, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." It is right up there with murder and stealing, because it partakes of both.
The warning against bearing false witness is so important it is repeated 30 times in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. It is so important that it is repeated twice at Mount Sinai: "Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment."
It is one of the six commandments Jesus cites as the most important of the Ten Commandments, if one wishes to be saved (Matthew 19:19). It is one of the seven things the Lord hates (Proverbs 6:16-19): "a false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren."
At the end of his life, Moses spells out in detail God's teaching on how to safeguard an innocent man from false accusations. One witness is not sufficient to lodge an accusation. Two witnesses do not suffice. There must be three witnesses.
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established."
Moses also spells out the need for consequences – that is, punishment – for bearing false witness.
If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
The Jewish Kabbalah tradition teaches that he who lies against the true witness lies against the entire Bible.
Politicians do not operate in the realm of ethics. They can't even tell a false witness from a credible one, if it seems politically risky.
If Judge Kavanaugh had not stood up for his own innocence with righteous indignation, the scumbags would have triumphed.
The Democrats think anything goes ethically in their drive for power, because they have defined their desire to rule as ethical in itself, and their political opponents as evil. We have just experienced what happens when a just cause – to end sexual abuse and assault – is twisted to serve a partisan political purpose.
America has become morally confused. Good and evil do not lie along party lines. To follow that moral reasoning leads to horrors.
IT WAS BILL CLINTON WHO UNLEASHED WALL STREET’S BIGGEST
CRIMINAL BANKSTERS…. And haven’t they sucked up the banksters’ gratuities
since?
Only Barack Obama has serviced banksters more than Hillary
and Billary!
“Clinton also failed
to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his
presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in
part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street
bankers.”
OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS: You were wondering how many jobs
went to illegals and how well Obama’s crony banksters have done???
The sputtering economic recovering under
President Obama, the last to follow a major recession, has fallen way short of
the average recovery and ranks as the worst since the 1930s Great Depression,
according to a new report.
Had the recovery under Obama been the
average of the 11 since the Depression, according to the report, family incomes
would be $17,000 higher, six million fewer Americans would be in poverty, and
there would be six million more jobs.
Hillary unleashes the thugs
Unless sobriety suddenly and miraculously returns to Democrats driven insane by their unexpected loss to Donald Trump, the United States is headed for a downward spiral of political violence of the sort that has destabilized democratic regimes (Weimar Germany and Taisho Japan) and led to fascism and world war. Only by the grace of God and the bravery of the Capitol Police was a mass assassination of the House Republican Caucus avoided.
That is the context in which we must understand the irresponsibility and reprehensibility of Hillary Clinton's statement to CNN's Christiane Amanpour during an interview in Britain.
"You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for."
Hillary Clinton: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for" cnn.it/2y9cm0S
The use of the word "destroy" is a deliberate attempt to portray violence as justified. If she had used the more appropriate term "oppose," the thuggish intent would be less clear. Elections are – or least have been up to the present moment – the way we determine which party's policies are followed and which are "destroyed." But now that Hillary lost her precious lifelong goal, that bulwark against might-makes-right politics is to be discarded.
The lists of incidents of violence and threats of violence against Hillary's opponents is already alarmingly long. With Maxine Waters and Cory Booker calling on their followers to harass people they disagree with, and with the mental hospitals closed and firearms available, this kind of incitement can produce horrific consequences.
Senator Rand Paul was hospitalized with several broken ribs at the hand of a neighbor of progressive bent, and his wife Kelley says she now sleeps with a loaded gun at her bedside. Antifa thugs roam the urban landscape, the "youth wing of the Democratic Party" as Tucker Carlson correctly labels them, attacking as they wish with ineffective to no pushback in liberal enclaves like Berkeley and Portland, Oregon.
Are there any Democrats with a sense of decency remaining, aside from Alan Dershowitz? The Washington Post pompously proclaims that "Democracy dies in darkness," but in fact, democracy dies in violence replacing elections as the determinant of politics.
The WaPo, shamefully, now is a denier of leftist mob violence, instead blaming the right:
“An angry mob”: Republicans work to recast Democratic protests as out-of-control anarchy and shift attention from an unpopular president. My latest with @costareports: washingtonpost.com/politics/an-an…
The memo apparently went out, as lesser minds parroted the Party Line defined by Bezos's minions: Maxine Waters; Don Lemon; and, unintentionally hilariously, Brooke Baldwin:
We already are so far down that path that the unthinkable is possible: the loss of our constitutional republic to armed conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment