Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Shadow Presidency of Hillary R. Clinton The Shadow Presidency of Hillary R. Clinton

01-07-2018 , 02:13 AM
Read this whole thread to learn about fbi guy McCabe's link to the Clinton's (or maybe not).



https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/...34366133456896
01-07-2018 , 02:16 AM
I look for some deeper explanation for the gullibility of the right for fake news, bad policy, and conspiracy theories, but I just keep coming back to the fact that they are, by in large, dumber than average.
01-07-2018 , 05:12 AM
01-07-2018 , 06:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
You know that giving your buddies contracts isn't a crime, right?
It should be, though, and is in most modern countries.
01-07-2018 , 06:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Davis
You make one lukewarm take and they empty the clip at you.
01-07-2018 , 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplicitus
thanks for the international labor discussion..so illuminating and is no doubt bringing joy to the idiot Clinton foundation troll.
Despite this thread you can't mean Michael Davis.
01-07-2018 , 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6ix
Did this dude just try to triple-reverse it with 'western-splain' right after he got done explaining that, no, Third World Denizen, three pennies and a suicide net is not exploitation, it is The Local Wage.
You call me illiterate and then post this?

Factories in third world countries that attract workers who choose to work in them make their workers better off. Period.

The notion that these workers would be better off severely impoverished back in the countryside is laughable considering they are the ones choosing to work in factories. It also makes the suicide references disingenuous. How do suicide rates among Chinese factory workers compare with the overall Chinese population? Since you brought up suicides, surely you have some facts to introduce to the discussion!

If you want to say that low wages are exploitation, fine, just recognize that the word loses any real meaning when referencing people making a rational decision to be exploited.

When people would be definitively worse off if not for having the choice to be "exploited" what's the point of using that term? Might as well use that term to describe any situation where someone benefits from another person. Have sex with your wife? Exploitation. Buy a product from a company that employs unskilled labor? Exploitation.

My problem with Bob's post was him talking about how life in rural China really isn't all that bad and how that goes to show how terrible these factories are. The implication is that he knows better than the people who make conscious and rational decisions to leave the countryside to become migrant factory workers what their best employment option. The arrogance of that is astounding.
01-07-2018 , 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainierWolfcastle
You call me illiterate and then post this?

...
Whoa.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RainierWolfcastle
You criticize my intelligence and then post this?

...
01-07-2018 , 11:30 AM
I'm done with this. There's no point arguing with someone who just doesn't understand why all companies simply don't pay excellent wages and provide excellent working conditions to all workers in all countries.
01-07-2018 , 01:02 PM
good, be done with it in the other ****ing thread too while you're at it
01-07-2018 , 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainierWolfcastle
I'm done with this. There's no point arguing with someone who just doesn't understand why all companies simply don't pay excellent wages and provide excellent working conditions to all workers in all countries.
If only there was a median between slave wages and excellent wages, between working in death traps and ergonomic heaven.
01-07-2018 , 02:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I actually came across that article, among the dozens of other Hillary/Haiti conspiracy garbage dumps being refuted.

That goalpost sure got moved quickly from "THEY DID THE ILLEGAL STUFF" to "Uh, Chelsea said they could have done a better job".

Good effort man.
I cant imagine why UN and ineternational aid groups would want to bypass the Haitian government given their successful track record.
01-07-2018 , 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainierWolfcastle
I'm done with this. There's no point arguing with someone who just doesn't understand why all companies simply don't pay excellent wages and provide excellent working conditions to all workers in all countries.
Let's assume I'm an ignorant idiot. Fine.

But what about everybody else? You can't assume everybody else also doesn't grasp these basic concepts, right? So, maybe the point they're making and the point you're reiterating are not meeting in the middle.
01-07-2018 , 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjou812
I cant imagine why UN and ineternational aid groups would want to bypass the Haitian government given their successful track record.
That's not what happened.
01-07-2018 , 03:29 PM
The FBI isn't investigating Haiti. AFAIK they're investigating if anyone who donated to the Clinton Foundation got special treatment from Clinton while she was Secretary of State, something that was litigated extensively during the campaign and no one found anything that would lead people to believe it happened.

Maybe the FBI finds something but it's have to be something buried deep.
01-07-2018 , 03:55 PM
Don’t forget, we need to comb through every text message, email, and tweet of the investigators to make sure they’ve never so much as criticized Hillary, because if they have then by the rules of trumpism they are disqualified from investigating her.
01-07-2018 , 09:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by estefaniocurry
It should be, though, and is in most modern countries.
So it should be illegal for a charity to hire the best company for a job if the person who founded the charity knows the person who runs the company?

Sorry, but that's insane.
01-11-2018 , 07:31 PM
01-11-2018 , 07:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Davis
Somewhat ironic of you to ask for a cite.

I'm pretty sure Politico is right up your alley right, that's where you get your news from?

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...n-email-213110

No specific mention of corruption, just an internal memo from Chelsea Clinton (I'm sure if you crane your neck to the left you'll see her statue) about how crummy of a job they did.

No specifics here (it's not really my job to prove there is fire, just that there is enough smoke), but here's the right-wing source wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrup...iti_Fund_funds

General piece about Clinton in Haiti, mostly a desperate attempt at edifying you. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/h...uake-martelly/

And another about the Foundation generally: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/08/h...ion-president/

None of these sources lay out the case explicitly for corruption or crimes. My belief that crimes are committed is because I do not think organizations like this are ever not criminal and is based on my general observations of the Clintons, who are quite obviously sociopathic.

I could be wrong about this stuff. But being jumped on as if I'm coming from some right-wing position reflects more on you guys than it does me. There's no hope for true believer Loki, but I'm genuinely disappointed in Matty Lice.

This is some insane stuff on your part. So the article outlines Chelsea writing a memo to her parents about Haiti. While both her and her dad were on the ground shortly after the earthquake trying to get things done. Not sure if you know this but the Clinton foundation was not responsible for rebuilding Haiti. Certainly you could place more blame on the US government which included Hillary at the time but in light of Puerto Rico that would be an extremly lol point to make.

On top of all that you point to this as a likely thread to lead to illegal conduct. You literally use a memo by Chelsea bemoaning the United Nations and some how you feel that is a big gotcha for the Clinton Foundation.
01-11-2018 , 07:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Davis
It's not my fault you guys are either sycophants or incredibly bad at recognizing the preconditions for corruption.

From the second Jacobin article above:







Does this stuff warrant an investigation of the organization or not? My original post was a one off that said there was dirt on the Clinton admin as compared to the utterly fraudulent voter fraud committee. You guys don't think any of this qualifies as dirt?

I'm reading the Wolff book and I'll try to just enjoy you guys posting about that instead of reflexively dropping groupthink.

Another strong gotcha where you note the Clintons used their power to extract large sums of money from people to use in charitable relief. Definitely should be a crime if it’s not already.
01-14-2018 , 06:08 PM
The Clinton Foundation is one of the most monitored charities on the planet. The fact people can't find actual dirt says a lot about how well the Clintons run the organization.
01-15-2018 , 10:43 PM
That article isn’t accurate . Literal fake news as even the morons at weekly standard have admitted .
01-15-2018 , 10:47 PM
and no credible news source is reporting this because... they're all paid off? all inducted into the secret clinton cabal? not even fox news goes with the murder conspiracy theories bro get a grip
01-15-2018 , 10:49 PM
Dunno how we missed him for so long.
01-23-2018 , 04:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplicitus
I look for some deeper explanation for the gullibility of the right for fake news, bad policy, and conspiracy theories, but I just keep coming back to the fact that they are, by in large, dumber than average.
Social media bubble. Modern social media is designed on filtering; to surround you with stories you like, not stories you dislike. This makes ads more powerful. As you become more active, your bubble will grow stronger. Contrary to the intuitive explanation of people being confrontational and thus enjoying news that rips on what they dislike, it exploits the human tendency to avoid conflict and surround ourselves with like-minded people.

The last phase is when the bubble is complete, conflicting information will not make it through. Your social media will look like almost everyone agrees with you and like any opposing view is a lie.

      
m