The Liberal's problem with the hacked email scandal illustrated in one Meme...by Bruce Tarleton
By Bruce Tarleton
I was perusing the Yahoo news feed last night. I like to see what articles they list, as it becomes painfully obvious that they are completely in the tank for liberals. It's kinda like they are the answer to Drudge Report.
Any way, I saw an article which stated that Debbie Whatshername Schultz succeeded where Reince Priebus failed. You know I had to read it.
I can't remember who wrote it, what site it was on, or even the complete title of it. Clearly it was written by a liberal. And clearly, it missed the point.
The author was making his case that DWS was able to keep her party from straying, where Priebus didn't. In other words, DWS made sure that the party favorite ultimately succeeded in securing the party nomination. It's no secret that the RNC are not happy about Trump being the nominee. And it's no secret that Hillabitch was always the prefered choice of DWS.
But the author clearly misses the point. In order for DWS to secure Hillabitch as the nominee, she had to cheat. She had to lie. She had to basically rig the process, and ignore the will of the people of her party.
On the RNC side, the RNC choice never had a chance. Straight out of the gate, ALL of the party backed candidates polled terribly. And when the votes started being cast in the primaries, it became clear that the PEOPLE were not going to stand for a Rpublican Stuffed Shirt. Trump's closest rival, Cruz, was a party outsider himself. He had too many enemies in the Republican Senate. Although a politician, he didn't always play by the political rules.
The author was correct in his assessment that the chairman of the RNC was unable to stop THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. Because, that's what it came down to for the Republicans. Tired of the same old empty suits, they chose someone THEY wanted.
The Democrats were on their way to doing the same thing. That's not to say they were going to chose a non politician. Bernie is nothing if not a politician. No, the liberals were on their way to choosing the candidate THEY wanted. Not the candidate the DNC insisted on. But DWS made sure that didn't happen. And the author writes about this as if it's a good thing.
But the author ignores the fact that DWS did so in a most unethical and immoral way. She lied and cheated to ensure that Bernie didn't stand a chance. And that was made clear to the world with the release of the hacked DNC emails.
And this is where the DNC and liberals have a huge focus problem. You see, the Hillary Whores are now raising a stink about who hacked the emails. This is clearly a damage control effort to shift the focus away from the fact that they cheated, and lied.
They want you to think that the hack was from Russia, and that it means that a foreign government is trying to influence the election. Now, I'm not going to go into the past issues of Chinese donors to the democratic coffers in an attempt to influence an election. Or Saudi donations.
No, instead I'm going to focus on the hypocrisy of the liberals in their feigned outrage of the possibility of the hackers being in Russia.
And that pretty much sums it up. Like the author of the article I read, the liberals want to gloss over the fact that their leadership IGNORED the will of the people and MANIPULATED THEIR ELECTION PROCESS. The hacks exposed the TRUTH. Explain to me how exposing the TRUTH is manipulating our election.
I don't give a shit who hacked the emails. When it brings to light the shenanigans, the lies, the cheating, the utter hypocrisy of a party, then we need more of it. If you think exposing the truth is manipulation, you clearly have your head planted firmly up your ass. Or Hillabitch's ass. Seek professional help.
Tags
Who is online
45 visitors
If I could put two thumbs up for the photo statement in the original article above, I would. I think it's right on.
But, you'll note that not many of the "nay-sayers" will comment on the truth.
No they won't be commenting. They are working overtime doing damage control. Belittling the crime by passing the blame off on someone else and then doing everything they can to let it all be forgotten as quickly as possible. The government media hung out on it for a few minutes and spent days on Melania's speech.
But that is to be expected and they have been doing it for as long as I can remember.
I already notice quite a few things I had have been expunged from the internet. Who wants to bet me if Hillary does get elected anyone saying anything against Hillary will not suffer in one way or another and you won't be able to find anything on the internet that goes against the Progressives?
The idea that the DNC decided the election is ridiculous.
Those ten words are more than the premise of this article merits.
Ha! That's perfect.
Notice there is not a single word in this article Bruce wrote that claims to explain how the election was "rigged" for Clinton.
Should there have been more debates at more prominent viewing hours?
How would that have helped Sanders when Clinton was perceived as having won most of their debates?
and then there is this
forget the emails for a second. The main problem with the notion that the DNC rigged the results for Clinton is that it requires one to assume the improbable.
The DNC had no role or authority in primary contests, which are run by state governments. Clinton dominated the primaries. The DNC, through state parties, had a bit more influence over caucuses … where Sanders dominated Clinton.
None of the thousands of leaked emails and documents show the DNC significantly influencing the results of the nomination.
Furthermore, if it is true that last fall Clinton campaign chair John Podesta tried but failed to have DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz sacked, the underlying premise of the entire WikiLeaks dump—that Wasserman Schultz machinated to deliver Clinton the nomination—is hard to believe .
All this fake ass handwringing by the right wing of this site , which would throw Bernie sanders under the bus in a nanosecond, is ridiculous and pathetic.
Notice there is not a single word in this article Bruce wrote that claims to explain how the election was "rigged" for Clinton.
Here's some words.
Thanks 1ofmany I doubt you will get a response from the partizan hack though....They aren't interested in the facts.
right or left, we are most all here Americans. The right wing thinks it an exceptional country while the left one wants to fixate upon and pick at the scab of every little mistake we've ever made, wishing it were attached to another entity.
Like the EU.
what if I told you to read my avatar?
Excellent synopsis of the left's hypocrisy, bigotry, and fraud. Let the deflection continue!
So there is no hypocrisy, bigotry and fraud in the right? Please do enlighten me.
Ah, the other side probably does it too argument... Always effective.
Both sides do it. Doesn't make it right, only the norm for the two parties. I find it amusing that they accuse each other of the very acts they themselves have perfomed.
The question remains the same.
If we all pee in the pool, then it becomes a latrine. So that's our new norm for government . . . a huge stinking toilet.
Glad John stopped by to represent the Dems and try to justify their amoral approach to the election process. Super delegates committed to voting for Hillary before the first ballot was cast. The DNC actively trying to squash support for anyone else. Everybody 'might' be bad. The DNC proved it.
Election tampering like this should be a wake-up call for their supporters. But, it won't be.
"Election tampering like this should be a wake-up call for their supporters. But, it won't be.'"
You got that right just ask John.
The DNC's anti-Bernie plan didn't stop with the primaries. Here's how they screwed the Bernie supporters at the convention.