Hillary Clinton labelled ‘psychopath’ after ‘lying’ about her relationship with Jeffrey Epstein

Sure, Sky News Oz is totally off to the right, but it's always fun to watch. Rita Panahi may not be totally correct about lefties, as is the case with most of the rest of the talking heads. I mean Oz has a lot of the policies they criticise as being lefty, with really strong immigration control to boot. 

 Australia's tough on immigration, as is the case with the rest of the commonwealth, is something I agree with. It's dumb for people on the left to want to support open borders for a plethora of reasons. Unless they are doing it to highlight the idiocy of US imperialist, warlike policies, but that action is really lost in translation.

Revenons à nos moutons!

I've made it clear that I wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton even if ranked Choice was an option. She would definitely come in behind my write in votes for my dogs and Bozo the clown if there were still choices.

But this video shows that Hillary is up there with 'Orrible 'Arris for bad candidates fielded by an awful party.

No Russians involved! Unless Russians run the DNC.

 

And about that photo of Ghislaine Maxwell at Chelsea's wedding: It's easily searchable at Getty Images. There are at least three copies: https://media.gettyimages.com/id/103183991/photo/chelsea-clinton-marries-marc-mezvinsky-in-rhinebeck-new-york.jpg?s=2048x2048&w=gi&k=20&c=hwRpJ3P-iRaanxtDIQ_yWaQL3LNMJoz-ddvP7bP1ans=

How did two of the worst candidates ever manage to become president and vice-president?

OK, I know the "Russian Interference" in the 2016 election was BS. Unless the Democratic Party is run by Russia, but there is foreign influence in US elections. No one is going to talk about it...in public. There's a post on how to steal elections in the US without having to stuff ballot boxes (hint--the system is rigged).

OK, maybe no one is talking about the worse foreign influence yet, but it is coming out slowly thanks to Palestine.

Here we have a candidate who pulled out early on because her campaign never caught momentum who somehow got onto the worst ticket ever. This video may demonstrate one of the reasons her campaign never caught on.

 Five Thirty Eight: Why Kamala Harris's campaign failed

No means No

The reality is that I said "No" three times:

1. The 2008 Primary
2. the 2016 Primary
3. And the 2016 General Election

The likelihood of my voting for Hillary Clinton was next to non-existent.[1]

And the Russians had fuck all to do with it.

Unless, of course, Russians run the democratic party, which in retrospect seems to be the case since they pretty much trashed the 2016 election.

Especially since Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, yet LOST IN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE.

The problem is that the duopoly wants to pretend that a vote for a third party is anything but a vote for that party. 2016 was liberating for me since I saw that my vote didn't count.

It doesn't count in primary elections and it also doesn't count in the general election.

Having a "right to vote" is meaningless if the voting is not done in a truly free and fair election with a secret ballot and parties that actually represent the people.

So, please, stop saying that third party voters are spoilers.

Unless we are spoiling the illusion for the duopoly.

Footnote:

[1] I might vote for Hillary Clinton if Ranked Choice Voting were in place, but she would be somewhere after a write in vote for all my dogs and maybe one of the legitimate candidates.