Oct. 19, 2016 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:10:00
3460 More Truth About The Hillary Clinton Wikileaks Scandal
Wikileaks has begun releasing emails from Hillary Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta, which provide a very interesting look into the Democratic Nominees campaign and raising some significant questions. In an attempt to deflect criticism regarding the information contained within the leaked emails, the Clinton Campaign has promoted the baseless assertion that Russia and Vladimir Putin are behind the leaks and working to actively sabotage Clinton’s campaign. What is the Truth About The Hillary Clinton Wikileaks Scandal?Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3yUUOf-9AMFreedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
Hi everybody, this is Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Main Radio.
I hope you're doing well.
Here I go, once more, diving into the amoral squalor sewage of the Podesta email dump from WikiLeaks, because I guess I'm just an immigrant doing a job that Americans just don't want to do.
Okay, in this case, I'm an immigrant to Canada doing the job that the mainstream American media, Hannity accepted, just won't do anymore.
Because they are the pets of the Democrats in power and pets know which side of the bread is buttered for them.
So let's dive straight in and talk about needy Latinos.
So Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta emailed Hillary Clinton a message titled Needy Latinos and one easy call on August 21st, 2015.
Wherein he said...
Bill Richardson, I had heard that you were upset that I encouraged a call between William Jefferson Clinton and Richardson to bury the hatchet.
I did that at the request of Jose Villarreal, who pushed me and made the point that Richardson is still on TV a lot, especially on Univision and Telemundo.
And notwithstanding the fact that he can be a dick, it was worth getting him in a good place.
Needy Latino dick.
Hey, but enough about my search history.
Went on to say, he had a good conversation with the President and has been good in his interview since.
I have pressed Bill, but I think it will take a call from you to get a formal endorsement.
He's on Meet the Press on Sunday, probably worth a quick call to ask him to stay stout and publicly endorse.
But if it's getting too galling, don't bother.
Needy Latino.
Needy Latinos and a guy who can be a dick.
So I guess that is their respect for Hispanic culture in a nutshell.
But hey, if you vote Democrat, they'll come and tickle you in unseemly places once every couple of years just to get your vote.
And then it's a voting booty call and they are gone like the morning mist as soon as they've got what they wanted.
It's the walk of shame, really.
Out of the voting booth, what can I tell you?
Food groups.
See, sometimes you're just needy dicks and sometimes you're a food group.
John Podesta to Hillary Clinton on March 17, 2016.
Let me know if there are people you would like to see added or removed before we begin the process.
Cheryl, Robbie, Jake, Uma, Jennifer and I also did a first cut of people to consider for VP. I've organized names in rough food groups.
So...
Now, this is kind of interesting because for a year or so before this, Tim Kaine was saying he was going to VP for reasons we went into in a previous WikiLeaks presentation, but I guess they're dangling things in front of people just to get, I guess, control over people.
According to the Daily Caller, the email didn't explicitly identify the food groups, but the labels are obvious.
Hispanics, women, white men, African Americans, military, business people, or philanthropists, and the Bernie Sanders slash Democratic Socialist wing of the party.
As if that's a wing.
Sorry, let me continue.
Here are the name, grouped as they were in Podesta's email.
Hispanics, Javier Becerra, Julian Castro, Eric Garcetti, Tom Perez, and Ken Salazar.
Women.
Tammy Baldwin, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Claire McCaskill, Jeannie Shaheen, Debbie Stabenow, and Elizabeth Warren.
Okay, white men.
Michael Bennett, Sherrod Brown, Martin Heinrich, Tim Cain, Terry McAuliffe, Chris Murphy, and Tom Vilsack.
African Americans, Steve Benjamin, Cory Booker, Andrew Gillum, Eric Holder, Deville Patrick, Cassim Reed, and Anthony Fox.
Hey, wasn't Eric Holder the guy who said that affirmative action for blacks has barely even begun 50 years after it was implemented?
There's a great government program.
Looks like we've solved it all.
Military.
John Allen, Bill McRaven, and Mike Mullen.
Hey, that's kind of a short list.
Normally the Dems are so in tight with the military.
Well, I guess they're getting more in tight with the military now they're moving all the social justice warriors and girls to the front of the line and the front of the front, because that always works out so well.
From the private sector.
Mary Barra, Michael Bloomberg, Ursula Burns, Tim Cook.
Bill Gates.
Melinda Gates.
Actually, I think she would also be in the women category.
Muhtar Kent.
Judith Rodin and Howard Schultz.
Other.
Bernie Sanders.
So these are the food groups of potential vice presidents, even though it seems to have already been a lock with Tim Kaine, but I guess they're still dangling it for favors and power.
The Iran deal.
I've said this before.
I'm sure I'm going to say it again, because this seems to me exceedingly important.
John Anzalone emailed John Podesta a message titled, You Call It!
on July 15, 2015.
Quote, This agreement condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf.
This is the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler.
That was Senator Mark Kirk, Republican from Illinois, quoted by BuzzFeed on the nuclear deal reached with Iran.
So this is, he says, you call it.
In other words, do you think that this is a valid statement?
This agreement condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf.
Hey, you know what is not limited to the Persian Gulf in terms of its effects?
Nuclear war!
John Podesta responded, yep!
Hmm...
Now, I've read quite a bit about the Iran deal, and the Iran deal was reportedly what drove Donald Trump into his running for presidency, but in the selling of the Iran deal to the American people, I don't remember much about saying, well...
This deal will condemn the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf and is the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler.
Just for those who don't know, when Hitler took over at least the western part of Czechoslovakia, got the Skoda armaments works, it basically gave him all the material he needed to fund the first half of the Second World War.
So...
At least the Second World War wasn't a nuclear war, at least until the very end.
That's just important that this is what they're talking about internally and you compare that to what they're telling you publicly.
Joel B. Pollack from Breitbart wrote, There is no evidence that the deal is actually working.
Iran has repeatedly violated the UN Security Council's version of the deal, which includes restrictions on ballistic missile tests.
Now, it's funny, you know, Hillary Clinton threatened to nuke Iran off the map when she was running for office in 2008, and then she was Secretary of State.
I wonder why the Iranians don't feel particularly obliged...
To follow the deal made with an administration whose Secretary of State threatened to wipe them off the map with nuclear weapons.
People without empathy simply can't negotiate effectively.
Joel Pollack also wrote, Last week it emerged that the Obama administration and other powers agreed to secret exemptions for Iran from the terms of the agreement, hoping that it would eventually comply.
Okay.
And now Iran is moving Russian S-300 missiles to defend key nuclear sites like Fordow, which it should have no reason to protect.
Yeah.
You know, I've got a great idea if the Obama administration really feels that if you just give exemptions, people will just eventually comply.
I've got a great idea.
Let's see if the Democrats would go for something like this.
What do you think?
Let's just, you know, snowball.
Let's just brainstorm.
If you give people exemptions from rules, they will eventually comply.
Let's just get rid of, say, the US tax code.
Yeah, that's a great idea.
Well, get rid of the US tax code and people will just eventually pay their taxes voluntarily.
How about you get rid of affirmative action and just, you know, let people hire the best people, which of course would include all of the highly competent minorities that have gone through all these wonderful government schools in these poor neighborhoods and have all of this amazing economic value because the Democrat-controlled government system is so excellent at giving people great skills.
So let's just get rid of, I don't know, environmental regulations.
People will just comply on their own.
I wonder if that will work.
If that's sort of a theory.
Now, of course they know they're not going to comply.
And governments do things to provoke conflict so that there can be more government.
And that's not going to be limited to the Middle East.
That I can guarantee you.
Hillary's emails.
John Podesta to Cheryl Mills on March 4, 2015.
Quote,"...think we should hold emails to and from POTUS, President of the United States.
That's the heart of his exec privilege.
We could get them to ask for that.
They may not care." But I seems like they will.
All right.
Executive privilege.
John Podesta to Nero Tandon.
March 10th, 2015.
They will go after the server, but that takes us back to Benghazi, which is good for us.
I'm adding the laugh.
It's a creative license based on a mostly real human being.
So it's better for the Democrats if it takes the conversation back to Benghazi.
In other words, the murder of a U.S. ambassador by al-Qaeda operatives on the anniversary of 9-11 shortly before an election that was suppressed and lied about by the Democrats in order not to lose That election.
Well, it's better if we go back to just the murder of the U.S. ambassador and supporting personnel rather than talk about the server.
I think that might make people understand how bad the server thing is if, well, look, a pivot back to the murder of a U.S. ambassador by Al-Qaeda on the anniversary of 9-11 is way better for us.
There's not enough moral loofah in the world to get the stain of these syrupy, relativistic, power-hungry emails off my body.
Nero Tandon responds, I mean, they would go after the deleting of the private emails, but at some point this will just have to run out of steam, especially as they see minimal electoral consequences.
Sigh.
Clinton political consultant Philip Raines to Clinton Associates on March 17, 2015.
To be clear, there are, and will likely remain, only two parties who could release the full 55k, state and US. Nobody else will have them.
Gowdy will only end up with what's relevant to his committee, which won't grow that much beyond what he has.
Probably not get anywhere close to 500...
Near attendant to John Podesta, August 22, 2015.
I know this email thing isn't on the level, I'm fully aware of that, but her inability to just do a national interview and communicate genuine feelings of remorse and regret is now, I fear, becoming a character problem.
More so than honesty.
People hate her arrogant, like her down.
It's a sexist context, but I think it's the truth.
I don't think that it's actually sexist.
I think that people of any decent conscience really dislike anyone of either gender who's done something genuinely wrong and can't communicate any genuine feelings of remorse and regret.
Her inability to communicate genuine feelings of remorse and regret.
Huh.
Inability to communicate genuine feelings of remorse and regret.
Huh.
I wonder if you were to go to a psychiatrist with those symptoms, what that psychiatrist might say.
Now, here's another interesting thing as well.
So, the strategy with regards to these deleting of the emails, we'll say, you know, we'll just wait it out.
We're going to wait it out.
You know, just eventually it's going to just...
Well, why?
You know, why didn't, say, Nixon just wait it out?
Well, the reason why...
Hillary Clinton could wait it out is because the media is refusing to report it.
And when they do report it, they minimize it.
And when they can't minimize it, they blame someone else.
And I mean, all of this stuff goes on.
So when you have the media against a particular narrative, they're kind of like waterways away the stone.
It's kind of tide going out.
There may be waves, but they're retreating down the beach.
And that is a strategy that, of course, we can see going on, which is, you know, just a couple of weeks before the election, Hillary Clinton has now been AWOL for, what, eight days now?
I mean, it's incomprehensible.
So it's like, well, we'll just let the media do the job, and we'll have her away from the press so she doesn't have to answer questions about James O'Keefe's videos, the Project Veritas videos, which you have to see.
Again, you're going to need that moral loofah sponge to get the oog off you afterwards, but you've really got to go watch those videos.
We've done the rare step of featuring them on our website.
channel because this is really really really important we'll get to those towards the end of this presentation But she doesn't want to answer any of these questions.
So they can wait it out because they've got the media on their side.
They've got the media campaigning for them so they can just wait things out.
And it's a very, very important context to understand that the media is the publicity arm of the Democratic Party.
They are the enforcers.
What was it?
96% of journalists donated to the Democrats?
Oh yeah, but they're just all about the objectivity, don't you know?
Ah!
Brian Fallon to Nick Merrill on June 24, 2015.
All in preparation for the possibility that the State Department may acknowledge as soon as today that there were 16 Sid Blumenthal emails missing from the 55k pages of material produced by HRC. I wanted to circulate the below draft plan for responding to the inquiries that Nick will get.
Nick Merrill to Brian Fallon.
Just spoke to State a little more about this, a few updates.
What that means specifically is that they are going to turn over all the Blumenthon emails to the committee that they have, along with some other HRC emails that include a slightly broader set of search terms than the original batch.
That, of course, includes the emails Sid turned over that HRC didn't, which will make clear to them that she didn't have them in the first place, deleted them, or didn't turn them over.
It also includes emails that HRC had that Sid didn't, as Brian noted.
And you'll see this.
Well, this is going to give the impression.
How do we spin this?
How do we get this to be viewed differently than what it is?
This sort of twisty brain pretzel manipulation stuff.
This Mobius strip of projected unreality is really all the way through.
You kind of have to, like...
I can go into these like a pearl diver clutching a knife of opposition going down and looking for pearls in an oyster.
You've got to get back up to the surface and shake your head.
It's like having an unblinking contest with Gar from the Jungle Book.
Trust in me.
Okay, so he goes on to say, They do not plan to release anything publicly, so no posting online or anything public-facing, just to the committee.
That said, they are considering placing a story with a friendly at the AP, Matt Lee or Bradley Clapper, that would lay this out before the majority on the committee has a chance to realize what they have and distort it.
See, you want to put a story with a friendly at the AP, I assume that means a friendly reporter or somebody who's going to give the spin that they want.
So we want to give it to a friendly so it can be distorted in our favor.
So that the committee doesn't have a chance to realize what they have and distort it.
Lefties always project.
He goes on to say, On that last piece, we think it would make sense to work with State and the AP to deploy the below.
So assuming everyone is in agreement, we'll proceed.
It would be good to frame this a little, and frankly, to have it break tomorrow, when we'll likely be close to or in the midst of a SCOTUS decision taking over the news hyenas.
Now, of course, we all know this.
Dumb things late on a Friday, so I guess by the time Monday rolls around, the squirrel-like attention span of the American public, if not to speak of the American media as a whole, will have already moved on to something else, and I don't know, maybe one of the Kardashians will have tripped, in which case, it's the end of the world as we know it.
All right.
Pay for play.
Me and Nagoyan send a message called Hillary's Victory Fund to John Podesta on December 4th, 2015.
I'm swinging way above my weight class here, and I'm 100% sure this is out of protocol.
I'm trying to land the campaign a big, fat whale that can give between $100,000 to maybe a million dollars, if their ego can be reassured, that they won't just be treated just like any other donor.
If it's 100% inappropriate, I understand.
Actually, I don't think you really do understand.
First of all, just as a personal note, I kind of dislike this, you know, it's way above my pay grade.
I'm swinging way above my weight class.
It's just this colloquialism.
It's just kind of...
Anybody who uses those kind of really cliched bromide and colloquialisms, it's just kind of annoying.
You know, come up with your own analogies and metaphors.
I can do it.
It's not that hard.
So, yeah.
This person can give between $100,000, maybe a million dollars.
If their ego can be reassured that they won't be treated just like any other donor, so how will they be treated?
And what does it mean to treat this person a big fat whale with a lot of money?
How does it mean to not treat them just like any other donor?
That's interesting.
I mean, again, this is all stuff that we know happens, but seeing it there in stark black and white, actually, it's more shades of amoral grey, that is what is a huge relief, you know?
It's sort of like, you think you're being followed, you think you're being followed, you think you're being followed.
Maybe you're paranoid, maybe you're crazy, maybe you're seeing things, and it's like someone taps you on the shoulder and says, actually, I'm following you.
It's not great, but it's kind of a relief when things are laid out that clearly.
Jordan Barham, or Jordan Barham 2, John Podesta, January 16th, 2016.
I think it could be powerful to use dip jars to galvanize small dollar donations to send a strong message that there is grassroots support for Hillary at a time when she is being painted as a candidate only supported with huge checks.
Now, this is something Ann Coulter's written about this before.
And...
The Republicans get a lot of small checks as a whole.
I mean, they have their big donors and so on, but Republicans get a lot of small checks.
They have real grassroots support.
If you think about the people who support The Democrats, I mean, they get a lot of big money.
Of course, they've got the media, they've got a lot of academics, they've got the reporters, they've got a lot of big corporations.
Barack Obama took more money from Wall Street than any other candidate in the history of the Republic.
Well, what used to be called the Republic, and now is called a democracy, a mob rule.
And so they know that this is an optics problem, that the Democrats get a lot of big donations, which...
Makes people think that's powerful special interests are running the Democrats to game the system.
As if we'd want to think that.
That'd be crazy.
Wait, someone tapped me on the shoulder and said that the Democrats are...
Okay.
So, small dollar donations.
So they want a bunch of small dollar donations so they can record it.
So what that does is it takes down the average donation size and hides the large donation base of the Democrat Party.
And again...
It's not like they say, well, listen, we're taking too much money from big special interests.
It's going to really cause us to have a moral drift towards the people who are funding us.
You know, he who pays the piper calls the tune.
So what we really, really need to do is cut back on the big donors and start to make a real grassroots advocacy to get smaller donations.
I don't say any of that.
It's just, you know, let's just find some way to get small dollar donations.
It's not a policy.
It's just optics.
He goes on to say, Last summer there was concern from the campaign about the inability to capture employer information from the donors.
However, if you keep the suggested dollar amount low, $20 and below, and use the names of donors that we provide, you could easily ensure that nobody is going beyond the legal limits.
Hmm.
Use the names of donors that we provide.
Um...
That doesn't seem quite right to me.
Doesn't seem quite right to me at all.
Clinton Foundation Director of Foreign Policy Amitabh Desai to Associates on April 16, 2012.
Last Thursday, April 12th, I met individually with the ambassadors from Qatar.
Qatar would like to see William Jefferson Clinton quote for five minutes in New York City to present one million dollar check that Qatar promised for WJC's birthday in 2011.
Qatar would welcome our suggestions for investments in Haiti, particularly on education and health.
They have allocated most of their $20 million, but are happy to consider projects we suggest.
Now, if I remember rightly, when Bill Clinton was president, he did have a number of, I'm guessing, five-minute meetings with, say, an intern or two.
But generally, they involved knee pads and stains on the moral character of the republic.
So, if you're going to have a five-minute meeting with Bill Clinton, I'd suggest, you know, three things.
I guess you're going to bring your knee pads, you're going to bring a check.
And at this point, I would suggest a hazmat suit.
That would be my particular personal preference.
And what on earth is Qatar doing wanting to put out massive investments in Haiti?
Well, I guess maybe running them through the Clinton Foundation?
I don't know.
Maybe they don't want to end up like Gaddafi.
It could be a number of things.
And remember, we talked about this before.
Hillary Clinton has openly stated that Qatar is involved in supporting and funding terrorism.
And yet, a million-dollar check for your birthday for a five-minute meeting.
It's all about the Benjamins.
All about the Benjamins.
Karuna Sashasai to Uma Abedin and Associates on April 4, 2015.
The policy would be to not allow any currently registered foreign agents, those who register with Farah, to contribute or raise for the campaign.
If someone terminates their registration, they would be allowed to contribute or raise for the campaign.
Okay.
Again, I'm blue-skying a little bit here.
I don't know exactly what this is all about, but it seems to me that foreign agents shouldn't contribute or raise for the campaign.
Well...
I think Donald Trump is saying, let's just make that a rule.
Foreign agents can't contribute a raise for the campaign.
To which most people said, wait, that's not a rule already?
How is that possible?
And what's interesting here, again, this is what you really have to keep your eye on with the Dems, that they're all about the appearance of virtue, not virtue itself.
So not to allow any currently registered foreign agents to contribute a raise for the campaign.
Now, they didn't say if someone is no longer a foreign agent, in fact, in general.
They're just saying, no, if someone terminates their registration, okay, then that's fine.
Terminates their registration.
Not if they actually change their allegiances, just if they change their paperwork.
You know, like if I say, okay, if someone writes, I'm a doctor in crayon on a piece of paper, hey, we can open a hospital because the paperwork has been changing reality.
It's like, no.
That's the really, really fascinating thing.
Dennis Chang said, Hi all!
We do need to make a decision on this ASAP, as our friends who happen to be registered with Farah are already donating and raising.
I do want to push back a bit.
It's my job.
I feel like we are leaving a good amount of money on the table, both for primary and general, and then DNC and state parties.
And how do we explain to people that we'll take money from a corporate lobbyist, but not them?
That the foundation takes dollars from foreign governments, but we now won't?
So the policy would be to not allow any of these registered foreign agents to contribute.
And he's like, well, we've got to make a decision because that's already happening.
Now, what he doesn't say is, well, we better stop this donation thing until we figure out what our policy is or what the policy is.
And...
Robbie Mook said, Clinton Communications Head Jennifer Palmieri said, Take the gun!
Leave the cannoli!
No, wait, sorry, I misread that.
My apologies.
She just said, take the money.
Take the money.
I mean, I know it's longer than Strunger Together, but you could argue that take the money is quite a bit more accurate.
Media collusion.
Well...
This is, again, the thing that everyone has known about for donkey's years, but to have it finally spelled out in moral gray, black, and white is really quite a relief to a lot of people.
And simply because it's no longer, like, you can just say, look, there's this, right?
So the people who accepted it accepted it.
I've known about it for years, but people who didn't accept it now have reality to contend with.
Now, of course, a lot of them will be able to bypass reality, but a few of them may not be able to.
So the Clinton team arranged private off-the-record dinners at the homes of John Podesta on April 9th, 2015, and Joel Benenson on April 10th, 2015.
The total invitation list included, and I'm sorry if this wasn't you, if you weren't included in this, you know, maybe the invitation just got lost in the mail.
Check your spam folder.
Maybe it's there.
From ABC, Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopoulos, and David Muir.
From CNN, Erin Burnett, Gloria Borger, John Berman, Jeff Zucker, and Kate Boldin.
From MSNBC, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Alex Wagner, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Phil Griffin, Beth Fuhi, and Thomas Roberts.
And that I find quite interesting because...
Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski were, I thought, actually fairly even-handed and fair.
Pretty great on Donald Trump early on.
Towards the end of the primary, both, but particularly Mika, just turned on him like a cornered weasel.
And I wonder if this may have anything to do with this.
It's just a possibility about what might have happened and what might have been planned.
From the New York Times, Amy Chosig, Maggie Haberman, Pat Healy, Jonathan Martin, and Gail Collins.
From Bloomberg, John Heilman, Jonathan Alter, and Mark Halperin.
From CBS, Gayle King and Nora O'Donnell.
From The New Yorker, Ryan Leaser and David Remnick.
Ariana Huffington from Huffington Post.
Savannah Guthrie from NBC. Glenn Thrush from Politico.
More on him in a moment.
Matt By from Yahoo!
Sandra...
Westfall from People.
Charlie Rose from PBS and his dimples.
Alyssa Mastra Monaco from Vice.
Mike Feldman from GPG. Ben Smith from BuzzFeed.
Mike Oreskes from NPR. Betsy Fisher-Martin from Moore.
And Jeff Earle from New York Post.
And did these people all go for meetings with the Republicans?
No.
I'm going to guess not.
I'm sure the meal was great.
You know, probably a little bit of fish, maybe some mashed potatoes, and a side dish of the death of the republic.
Just guessing what was on the menu.
And more media collusion is in the wings.
The Hill journalist Brent Budowski sent John Podesta a link to his article, Megyn Kelly's Murrow moment, discussing Megyn Kelly's war on women question to Donald Trump on September 1st, 2015.
You'll enjoy how I handled Trump's attack against Uma, among other things.
Budowski sent a link to the article, The Magic of Bill Clinton, to Podesta on May 20th, 2015.
John, hope this helps.
Brent.
It's great that they're on a first-syllable basis, and it's great that they're sort of crowing about the attacks on Republicans, because...
Apparently they're just all about the even-handed objectivity.
We bring the facts, you bring the conclusions.
Journalist Glenn Thrush.
Isn't Thrush a fungal infection of the mouth as well?
I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
Journalist Glenn Thrush to John Podesta on April 30th, 2015.
Because I have become a hack, I will send you the whole section that pertains to you.
Please don't share or tell anyone I did this.
Tell me if I fucked up anything.
Yes, you did, Glenn!
Yes, you did!
Huffington Post contributor and co-founder of VoteVets.org, John Saltz to John Podesta on November 10th, 2015.
We have gotten intel that Neil Cavuto plans to ask a veteran's question of the GOP candidates tonight.
As you can guess, the candidates are very likely to attack the Secretary in their answers.
Huh.
Huh.
So, a veteran question of the GOP candidates tonight.
So they're having advanced notice of questions.
Very interesting.
Very interesting indeed.
There's more to come in this regard.
He went on to say, your press team therefore may find it useful to get this to reporters as independent scientific evidence that veterans are closer to the Secretary than Republicans on these issues.
So they're being fed questions, which they can then feed to reporters to manage the narrative.
Putting a coin slot in a newspaper machine is just like giving your money to the devil itself.
Reuters reporter Mark Hosenball to John Podesta on April 21st, 2015.
I have read across a rather interesting document which outlines in detail the principal current objectives of the House Benghazi Committee and was wondering if you might have a minute or two to discuss this.
Huh.
If you are anywhere near 1333H in next day or two, I might even show the document to you.
I'm out on Thursday, however, though I am reluctant to hand out copies at this stage.
Principal current objectives of the House Benghazi Committee.
Would you like to see it?
Where did you get it?
Is it even remotely right to hand it over to somebody so close to somebody being investigated?
You know, when I was a kid, boy, if you got the answers to a test ahead of time, man, you'd be punished.
I mean, that was just terrible.
I mean, teachers would lock it up.
I mean, I never did.
But I know kids who were trying to go through the teacher's desk and find the...
Some people claim to sell answers.
We couldn't take them, couldn't afford them.
And it's wrong.
But that's astounding.
Now, you could argue that the principal current objectives of the House Benghazi Committee are just a little bit more important than the questions in the Grade 6 Spelling Bee.
But boy, you get punished a lot when you're a kid, but when you get to be an adult and a Democrat, it's a life with no gravity, no physics, no rules, mere Nietzschean will and manipulation.
And I don't think we've found anything in particular where they're sharing material with Republicans.
He doesn't finish that.
Well, to be fair, we also have to share this with other people as well.
Mark goes on to say, It is a document which raises some questions about the bona fides of the committee's investigation rather than about anything specific a certain former sex state might have done.
Released emails also show coordination between Newsmax Media CEO Christopher Ruddy and John Podesta on June 10, 2014 and June 25, 2014.
On July 14, 2014, Christopher Ruddy published an article on Newsmax titled, Embrace Obama's Border Security Bill, where he criticized the GOP Congress for not passing the legislation.
From the website 100% fed up or effed up, I'm not sure, The real question is, why is the CEO of a, quote, conservative news publication feeding what appears to be inside information to Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, leftist John Podesta, who in turn sent his email marked priority to the White House?
Yeah, that is a question.
I gotta tell you, I think I know the answer, and I think everybody listening to and watching this knows the answer, but it is a question.
Juanita Broderick.
So for those who don't know, she claimed that Bill Clinton brutally raped her and bit her lip almost in two back in the day.
So you have to understand that context.
David Kendall sent a message titled, History of Juanita Broderick Allegations to John Podesta on January 7, 2015.
Pursuant to our call last night, here are four documents which I mentioned.
The first is the affidavit and cover letter from her lawyer.
The second is a redacted copy of the same document, deleting her name and referring to her simply as Jane Doe No.
5.
The third document attached hereto is a portion of one of the appendices to the Starr Report, the Office of Independent Counsel's own history of the Paula Jones litigation.
Finally, the fourth document is a report of the statement I made on the President's behalf about Broderick's NBC interview with Lisa Myers, which ran shortly after the Senate impeachment trial concluded.
Please let me know if there's anything else I can provide about this slime fest.
See, rape allegations, just a slime fest.
And these are the people who claim to be victorially couching, fainting couch sharks.
Bring me my smelling salts.
Lord above, I heard a dirty word from locker room talk.
Get me my vapors.
I'm going to end up starring in a Terlisi Williams play.
So, rape allegations, assault allegations, it's just a slime fest.
But apparently it's, you see, the Republicans who have a war on women.
Sex work legalization.
I've had a quick look.
I put on my hazmat suit, had a quick look at Hillary Clinton's website.
Couldn't find much about this.
So Black Lives Matter activist question to Hillary Clinton on October 9th, 2015.
This is a private meeting.
Can't find this in her policy platform.
The question was, and so I'm just wondering, what...
Do you think your role would be as president to kind of work on the decriminalization of the black LGBT folks, and specifically around, like, decriminalization of sex work, decriminalization of marijuana?
Those things have historically been used to oppress us.
Hillary Clinton.
Yeah.
You know, first of all, just as I've said before, I just can't even imagine the kind of pressure and the constant anxiety and insecurity that you and so many others live with.
This was back in 2015.
Once Donald Trump threatens to appoint a special investigator to further pursue Hillary Clinton, she might be feeling a little bit now.
She went on to say, From my perspective, we do need to look hard at decriminalizing behavior that is not harmful, that is not leading to violence, and try to figure out how best to do that.
I mean, there is a difference between an adult sex worker and a child trafficked into being a sex worker, so you cannot just make a blanket statement.
You have to figure out what the different work situations are.
So, talking about decriminalization of sex worker prostitution and so on, and...
Why is that?
Oh, wait, sorry.
Yeah, yeah, that's right.
No, she actually did already explain that.
She said that she has a private and a public face, private and public positions.
This is a private meeting, so why on earth would this be available to the public?
This is just a place we can put this.
It's not about sex work.
Cheryl Mills wrote to John Podesta and Tina Flournoy about a news story.
Who is the energizer?
Who has been Clinton's secret lover?
And scheduled a conference call about the topic on July 26, 2014.
A new book on the hidden lives of presidents claims that former U.S. President Bill Clinton has had a mistress codenamed Energizer.
One woman on the suspect list is socialite Julie McMahan.
And again, it's apparently really shocking when Donald Trump talks about trying to bed a woman who, I think he later found out, was married, but married Bill Clinton, having an affair with someone codenamed Energizer.
And Doesn't matter.
I think a lot of the women that Debo Clinton had sexual encounters with were also energizers in terms of running away and sometimes failing to be quite tragic about it.
Obama criticism.
Christy Fuxer on John Podesta regarding Obama criticisms on January 9, 2008.
So this is how they were going to try and take on Obama's run for presidency.
Obama, Obama, was the only candidate at a recent event not to cover his heart during the national anthem, and he has stopped wearing an American flag pin.
Obama, Obama, would personally negotiate with the leaders of terrorist nations like Iran and North Korea without preconditions.
Actually, that turned out to be fairly prescient.
She went on to say, Obama, Obama, father was a Muslim, and Obama grew up among Muslims in the world's most populous Islamic country.
Obama, Obama, supports giving driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants.
Obama, Obama, describes his former use of cocaine as using a little blow.
Boy, I could just count on the fingers of one hand how much that phrase, a little blow, has cost the Democrats.
Well, it would have if the media wasn't covering it up.
Um...
And this is just before, right?
It's important, right?
Because Obama allowed his publisher to say he was born in Kenya for about 20 years and then got really shocked and appalled when people said, hey, maybe you weren't born in America.
You know, just check out his bio on his books.
Born in Kenya.
Want to run?
I guess I'm eligible now, too.
Anyway, John Podesta to Marlon Marshall on May 14th, 2015.
High importance.
I met with Jim and Mike in Denver.
They are both old friends of the Clintons and have lots of experience.
Mike hosted our Boulder Roadshow events.
They are reviving the 08 caucuses, where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters.
They want to organize lawyers for caucus protection, election protection, and to raise hard dollars.
They are not just Colorado-focused and have good contacts in the region.
Flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters.
Vote manipulation.
Vote fraud?
Question mark?
Huh.
If only there was ways to figure that out later with shaky video.
Wait.
Thanks, James.
You've done a great service to democracy, or rather to the republic against democracy.
Bernie Sanders.
I have a lot of sympathy for Bernie Sanders supporters.
You were looking outside the box of traditional politics and he did talk a good talk and he had some pretty great ideas early on, particularly about bringing the US back from its endless foreign invasions and engagements and manipulations and overthrows and funding of this and arming of that and so on.
Really liked that stuff.
I guess you felt the burn of practical Democrat politics.
And I guess he did promise you free education and for an average donation in the low $20 range.
You got schooled.
And I'm sorry about that.
I really am.
There are, of course, still alternatives, which I'm constantly dangling before you, as well as to the Jill Stein supporters.
But CEO of Fairview Insurance Agency Associates, John Graham, to John Podesta and Uma Aberdeen on September 22, 2015.
John, Uma, just had lunch with the chairman and his top advisor, Bill Maher.
Both stress the importance of giving the chair his reassurances for the captioned.
Presently, the chair has given the line to Hillary in 20 of the 21 counties, which only assures that Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, will not be a factor in New Jersey.
Also, all of the major city mayors are aligned with us as well.
Us.
Aligned with us.
Us.
Not the voters.
He wanted to say, with this being the commitment, I feel that you, John, as head of the national campaign, should discuss the process directly with Chairman Curry.
He and his outstanding loyal staff deserve that courtesy.
John Podesta to Neera Tanden regarding the China deal on December 13, 2015.
Thanks, Nira.
Can you believe that Doofus Bernie attacked it?
Ben Happy?
Doofus.
Again.
It's not exactly something out of a Scesi movie where a mobster stubs his toe on a body, but, eh, referred to him as a doofus.
Adrian Watson to Teddy Goff titled, Vermont has fourth highest Afro-American incarceration in USA, February 24th, 2016.
Maybe.
Maybe.
There's a point about how he was for nearly a decade silent on a growing problem covered repeatedly by his own state's press.
Not even a statement, if that's true.
Was he not paying attention to his own press clips and now he wants to address it?
I know he obviously wasn't the governor, but still.
Right.
Fourth highest Afro-American incarceration rate in the USA. Vermont, of course, Bernie Sanders' territory.
Did he talk about it?
Well, certainly not as of February 24th, 2016, according to Adrian.
George Soros.
Uma Abedin to campaign manager Robbie Mook on October 7th, 2014.
She is having dinner with George Soros tonight.
Do you know much about...
As Greg Speed explained to me, they are the coordinated campaign for various outside groups.
Soros is a big supporter of the group, and he's going to ask her tonight if she will come to a fundraiser for them at his house in December.
Thoughts?
Robbie Mook to Uma Aberdeen.
I would only do this for political reasons, i.e.
to make Soros happy.
Now you can of course look up George Soros.
He is a billionaire who likes to spend his money on various progressive causes.
And you can look up what kind of things...
Make George Soros happy, and then you can come to your own conclusions about people who want to make George Soros happy.
Ah, the fake Craigslist ad.
So Christina Freundlich to Team Clinton on May 18th, 2016, quote...
Digital created a fake Craigslist jobs post for women who want to apply to jobs, one of Trump's organizations.
This will be a microsite and we still need to send it to Perkins since we will be pitching this.
Need your approval, please.
Seeking staff members for multiple positions in a large New York-based corporation known for its real estate investments, fake universities, steaks, and wine.
The boss has very strict standards for female employees, ranging from the women who take lunch orders, must be hot, to the women who oversee multi-million dollar construction projects, must maintain hotness demonstrated at time of hiring.
Job requirements.
No gaining weight on the job.
We'll take some before pictures when you start to use later as evidence.
Must be open to public humiliation and open press workouts if you do gain weight on the job.
A willingness to evaluate other women's hotness for the boss's satisfaction is a plus.
Should be proficient in lying about age if the boss thinks you're too old.
Working mother's not preferred.
The boss finds pumping breast milk disgusting and worries they're too focused on their children.
About us.
We're proud to maintain a fun and friendly work environment where the boss is always available to meet with his employees.
Like it or not, he may greet you with a kiss on the lips or grope you under the meeting table.
Oh, God Almighty, we have come a long way from Alice to Tocqueville, haven't we?
Mark Zuckerberg.
Sheryl Sandberg.
And John Podesta on August 3rd, 2015.
I guess she's leaning into the pit of moral relativism.
She wrote, I can't imagine you have any free time at all, but in case you do on this trip to the Bay Area or another, wondering if you'd be willing to spend some time with Mark Zuckerberg.
Mark is meeting with people to learn more about next steps for his philanthropy and social action, and it's hard to imagine someone better placed or more experienced than you to help him.
As you may know, he's young and hungry to learn, always in learning mode, and is early in his career when it comes to his philanthropic efforts.
He's begun to think about whether slash how he might want to shape advocacy efforts to support his philanthropic priorities and is particularly interested in meeting people who could help him understand how to move the needle on the specific public policy issues he cares most about.
He wants to meet folks who can inform his understanding about effective political operations to advance public policy goals on social-oriented objectives like immigration, education, or basic scientific research.
So does that mean that she's suggesting that Mark Zuckerberg collude with John Podesta?
Because, you know, some of the stuff that's happened in Facebook, you know, the conservative news not trending, the overall suppression of conservative views, the curators of these trending stories being crazy, crazy lefties and so on.
I don't know.
Was he meeting with any Republicans?
Well, I guess he did once this trending bias was caught.
Now, of course, a lot of people get upset with this kind of collusion, just as they do with Mark Zuckerberg working hand-in-glove to some degree with the head of Germany, right?
With Angela Merkel to manipulate information about immigration and so on.
But...
What you have to remember is that big companies in America are always operating under the threat of antitrust regulations, of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
It's one of the reasons why Microsoft never swallowed up Apple.
They needed somebody else in the market so they could have a legitimate defense.
If they were attacked for becoming too big, for becoming too successful.
This is a murky law.
There's no particular definition.
It's not like, well, if you achieve X percentage of the marketplace, you're now considered to be a monopolist.
It's all a shakedown.
In other words, the people in power can...
Launched proceedings against big companies for supposed monopolistic practices and one of the things that destroyed IBM as a creative force in the software and hardware computer industry was a 13-year grinding endless Investigation from the Department of Justice for supposed monopolistic practices.
And this is something that you're always under, always facing.
It may have been one of the reasons why Bill Gates decided to move more into philanthropy and away from being the head of Microsoft.
So you have to make nice with your political masters.
And if you don't, you can face a variety of repercussions that are It can destroy the soul of your company.
It can destroy the creativity.
I mean, how much do you want to grow and come out with cool new products when the government is going after you for being too successful?
It can literally destroy an entire company.
And this is just something that they have to face.
I'm not defending all of it.
I'm just saying that if you are in his position and you are facing these kinds of murky potential problems, Attacks from the Department of Justice and other places.
It's just something you have to take into account.
You know, can you make nice with some conservative repression in order to avoid all of that?
Can you start promoting untrammeled immigration in order to maintain your stock price, your stock value, in order to maintain the value of the company you care a lot about?
And when you run a company, and I know this, I've been very at the sort of executive level of companies I've co-founded, of companies I've worked at.
You really care about your employees.
You don't want to do things that can get lots of people Laid off or fired because you have to devote a huge amount of money to legal wrangles with the government.
So it doesn't excuse everything, of course, but it is a context that needs to be taken into account.
Again, you really want to focus on the gun in the room.
You want to focus on who has the power to hurt others.
And in this case, it's not Facebook.
It's the government.
And they may just be responding to that kind of Kafkaesque regulatory environment.
So here's just some miscellaneous stuff.
John Podesta to Ambassador Eleni T. Kunalakis on June 11, 2015.
Some speculation that Biden will run because of Beau's loss.
I think that would be a little crazy and sad, but you never know.
I like him and grieve for him and hope he doesn't do it for his sake.
Now, this is Biden's son died of brain cancer, I think, at the age of 46.
And it sounds sympathetic, but we talked about this in the previous context, that there's some pretty shady stuff around Biden's non-run for president.
And I hope he doesn't do it for his sake.
Could be sympathetic.
It could also be a little sinister.
I'm not sure I'm going to provide the benefit of the doubt in my own mind.
Near a tendon to Howard...
Wolfson regarding Michael Bloomberg's tease of running for president on June 03, 2015.
Is there something Mike Bloomberg would want to do in his life in an admin?
Like, is like ambassador to China way too small?
Huh.
So handing out an ambassadorship to China in order for Mike Bloomberg to not run for president.
I don't know.
Didn't...
Did Rob Blagojevich get in some trouble in Illinois regarding this kind of stuff?
Maybe I'm stretching, but it just seems like...
Shouldn't the ambassador to China be somebody really good at being an ambassador to China rather than here?
You can have this if you don't run for office, which seems to be the implication of this email.
Howard Wolfson to Nira Tanden.
Secretary of State, which ain't going to happen.
I think that maybe they asked him, or maybe they're just guessing, that he would not run for president if he was offered Secretary of State.
Again, this is the kind of dealing with your future, your life, your children's lives.
Clinton A. Duma Abedin and Clinton Global Initiative employee Amitabh Desai and Ed Hughes on September 14th, 2009.
2009!
2009!
So this is quite a long time ago, people!
Seven years ago!
Just want to make sure someone has coordinated with you on HRC, Hillary Rodham Clinton's speech setup.
She won't be able to give it in the round like Bill Clinton does, walking around with a microphone.
Are we able to set it up so she's speaking at a podium?
Sick.
I guess there's two meanings for that.
S-I-C, S-I-C-K. So she won't be able to give it in the round.
She needs a podium to lean on.
2009 doesn't have a lot of strength, it would seem, for that kind of stuff.
Have you talked with her at all about taxes and health?
I know both are hypersensitive, but I wonder if both are better dealt with very early so we can control them, rather than responding to calls for transparency.
What do you think?
Taxes and health.
Well, you know, there's some indications that Hillary donated to her own foundation to minimize taxes and so on.
But apparently Donald Trump minimizing taxes perfectly legally is a very bad thing.
And apparently the rich need to pay their fair share.
Taxes and health.
So what do they know about her taxes?
And what do they know about her health?
Both are hypersensitive.
Hillary Clinton's taxes and health are hypersensitive.
What is known?
What is concealed?
What do the American public have a right to know?
Are they voting for Hillary Clinton, or are they voting for eight minutes of Hillary Clinton, followed by four years of Tim Kaine?
That seems kind of important.
Matt Ortega to John Podesta, December 3rd, 2015.
Christopher Hayes, the NBC News is now reporting a U.S. citizen named Saeed Farouk, believed to be one of the people involved in the shooting.
John Podesta responded, better if a guy named Saeed Farouk was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter.
So, I'm not going to get into a big thing here, but it's a big thing.
So, is there sympathy for the victims?
Is there horror at the terrible attack?
No!
It would just be better optics, it would be better for us if the reporter was named Saeed Farouk and a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter.
Now, why is this?
Well, the question is, of course...
Why has America imported more Muslims after 9-11 than beforehand?
A few problems.
Well, because the Muslims vote Democrat.
And so their concern, I would assume, is that if Muslims commit terrorist actions in the United States, then people might have some concerns about Muslim immigration, and that would mean fewer voters for the Democrats.
Regardless if you're positioned on any of this, that's just something to ponder, to mull over, to think about in a dark room, slowly shaking your head.
So an email, fwj77.comcast.net to John Podesta, February 25th, 2016.
The black vote is obvious supercritical.
I'm hearing the same complaint in political circles that I continue to hear while fundraising.
The campaign doesn't value black folks and takes us for granted.
Right.
Well, this is a point that Trump brought up in one of the debates, that, yeah, the Democrats will bungee in to express their dewey-hearted concern for the black community every time there's an election, grab the votes, and bungee back out again, and then continue to pursue policies detrimental to the black community.
Robbie Mook to Uma Abedin and John Podesta regarding Bill Clinton's upcoming Wall Street speech on March 12, 2015.
I know this is not the answer she wants, but I feel very strongly that doing the speech is a mistake.
The data are very clear on the potential consequences.
It will be three days after she's announced and on her first day in Iowa where caucus goers have a sharply more negative view of Wall Street than the rest of the electorate.
Wall Street ranks first for Iowans regarding a list of institutions that take advantage of everyday Americans.
So again, it's not that doing the speech is wrong.
It's not that taking money for Bill Clinton from Wall Street is wrong.
It's all about the optics.
It's not right or wrong.
It's not what's true.
It's what people will accept as true.
It's not what's right.
It's what people will perceive as right.
Again, this is social metaphysicians as an old Ayn Rand argument.
And again, I know this is not the answer she wants.
But how can we spin it?
How is it going to look?
How is it going to seem?
Not what is it, but how is it going to appear?
Neera Tanden to John Podesta on January 16, 2016.
Well done, tweet!
We don't know what tweet she's referring to.
John Podesta responds, I am past about one thing.
I suggested doing that at 4.30 and got held.
Neera Tanden wrote back, You mean pissed?
Got held by who?
Hillary.
God, her instincts are suboptimal.
Pretty typical, though.
I would not be surprised if William Jefferson Clinton told him to do it, just as I'm pretty sure Mark Penn didn't do his cocaine rang against Obama without some higher-up approval.
Okay, dear.
It's kind of going out there.
Hillary, her instincts are suboptimal.
Might be a good time to cancel your gym membership and not spend a lot of time around carpeting because things happen.
Christina Costa to Joel Benenson titled Energy Infrastructure Fact Sheet and KXL Op-Ed on September 7th, 2015.
In answer to research, changed 20 to 40.
And Trevor can provide calculations based on EIA data, if reporters need it, on the Mexico-Canada trade point.
It isn't written up neatly in one place online, unfortunately.
Joel, we pumped up the climate impacts.
But in discussing with Jake, decided we still do need to address why she's making her position known, when she has previously said she will wait for the president to make a decision.
I added the emphasis.
Joel, we pumped up the climate impacts.
But anybody who's skeptical about catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is crazy.
It's just mad.
Skepticism is wrong.
U.S. News and World Report writer David Kattenes to Mary Lee on January 19, 2015.
I was recently contacted by a source who claims to have worked on the 2008 Hillary campaign and is alleging that Marlon Marshall made unwelcome sexual advances and propositions towards women on the campaign repeatedly.
The allegation is that he would corner women, make them uncomfortable, and make suggestions about having sex.
The source also claims that Robbie Mook was made aware of the issue but declined to act on it or intervene because he is personal friends with Marshall.
Do you know if there is any truth to this?
Oh ho!
David, David, David.
You're emailing the Dems and asking for truth?
Hmm.
Why don't you email me and ask for Mohawk tips?
Clinton Foundation staffer Karuna Sashasai to Democratic Operative Ian Mandel.
Regarding Equal Pay Foundation on February 24th, 2015.
Right?
Because remember, Republicans are sexist, misogynistic, there's a war on women, and it's really, really important to have equal pay for work of equal value.
This is a gender pay gap.
It's terrible!
Don't you know?
So, Karuna wrote, Attached is the equal pay hit pulled from the foundation book.
Essentially, here are the key takeaways.
Three out of the 11 highest paid employees of the foundation are women.
Average salary of the highest paid men is $294,150.50, while the average salary of the highest paid women is $181,576.66.
$112,000 difference!
Median salary of the highest paid men is $346,106, while the median salary of the highest paid women is $185,386.
That's a $190,000 difference.
So you see at the Clinton Foundation, women are paid a lot less than men.
Less than half of the median salary of the highest paid men and highest paid women.
I wonder why.
I wonder why the media...
Hasn't picked up on this.
I mean, imagine if Donald Trump had these kinds of gaps in his pay between men and women.
Oh, you wouldn't hear anything else.
But it doesn't exist because it's negative towards Democrats and exposes the hypocrisy of their positions.
Teresa Amart to John Podesta, March 21st, 2014.
Trump University Judge Gonzalo Curiel's wife, Carolyn Curiel, was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site.
She and I exchanged raves about the two of you.
Now, Judge Gonzalo Curiel is presiding over one of the Trump University lawsuits.
Trump has said, well, he can't really be impartial because he's involved in organizations promoting the legalization of illegal immigration, and I'm against that.
So he's saying the judge can't really be impartial.
The judge has a political bias in here.
She's the head of Purdue University.
Trump University judge, Gonzalo Curiel's wife, Carolyn Curiel, was just here with a group of Purdue students to visit the debate site.
She and I exchange raves about the two of you.
Huh.
Very interesting.
So his wife is mad keen on John Podesta.
But the judge can be completely impartial about Donald Trump running against John Podesta's boss, Hillary Clinton.
Podesta replied, Wow!
Small world!
Yes, it is.
Yes, it is a small world, if you live in that kind of circle.
Pretty small world, lots of people rotating around.
There's the Saturn of state power and all the little rocks floating around it, creating a ring of doom.
A ring that should be thrown into Mount Doom.
All right, let's bring it home, shall we?
So imagine the following scenario.
In a particular area, half the population is black.
But 96% of the reporters are white.
Would you say, well, there seems to be some racism involved here because these numbers don't particularly match up.
When it comes to reporters, 96% of them of course are donating to the Democrats.
Well, when it comes time to presidential elections, close to half the population is voting for Republicans.
So we've got half the population, Republican or Republican leaning, and almost no Republicans in the mainstream media.
So where is the diversity?
Why aren't they sitting down and saying, you know, we really don't have enough of the Republican voices in here.
We've got to mix it up.
We've got to set quotas.
We've got to go out and actively start hiring Republicans to bring that balance.
They are not interested in diversity.
They are not interested in multiculturalism.
This is all a lie.
The Democrats want to import everyone who votes Democrat.
It's got nothing to do with actual diversity.
It is only importing people who are going to vote for Democrats.
Now, Democrats as a whole, the mainstream media and the politicos and all of the lobbyists and all of the people surrounding the central hub of power of the state, They've all adapted to that environment.
Their investment in education, their investment in their contacts, their investment in their skills, their investment in their networking.
Everything is an adaptation to state power.
And when you've adapted as an organism to a particular environment, you don't want that environment to change.
They fight against privatizing.
They fight against shrinking the power of the state because they've adapted to exploit the power of the state.
And they will burn you down to stay in power.
They will burn down the Republic.
They will burn down freedoms.
They will burn down opportunity.
They will burn down everything.
They will burn down history.
They will burn down your future in order to stay in power.
This applies to significant portions of the Republicans as well, particularly those who are fighting Donald Trump, who genuinely wants to shrink government.
And again, you can look at the Project Veritas James O'Keefe videos.
The Democrats, high-level Democrats, hire mentally ill people to start riots and fights at Trump rallies.
High-level Democrats openly admit to committing rampant voter fraud and abuse for the past half century.
To stay in power High-level Democrats are willing to threaten war with Russia.
You see, all addicts will burn down their own lives, the lives of those around them, their entire environment, their families, their jobs.
They will burn down everything to get their drug of choice.
And the Democrats are addicted to political power.
It's a dopamine hit.
It's very clear.
Studies have shown addiction to being at the top of a hierarchy...
Is more addictive than cocaine.
They are addicted to political power.
They will say anything.
They will do anything.
What addicts do, right?
They lie.
They misrepresent.
They manipulate.
It's all about the pursuit of power.
Now, you can't talk an addict out of his drug of choice.
You can't just say, well, you know, I don't think that alcohol is really good for you.
I don't think that sexual addiction is really good for you and so on.
You can't talk the addict out of his addiction.
You've got to cut off the sauce.
To free people from the demonic grip of the addiction to political power, you must pursue shrinking the size and power of the state.
When you pursue shrinking the size and power of the state, they will go through withdrawal, they will survive, and they will have better lives because their drug of choice is going to be minimized.
They'll fight like hell against it, of course, of course, because it will feel to them like the end of the world instead of the beginning of a new and productive and fruitful life.
So this is really, really important.
As the state grows, as the size and power of the state grows, more and more people get caught up in this addiction, become addicted to the dopamine hit and the money and the power and the kiss-the-ring authority of state power.
It absorbs more and more people into its ugly belly.
And there are fewer and fewer people to supply the money that the government uses to control the rest of the population.
The government swallows more and more people, there are fewer and fewer people to feed the government, and it eats society as a whole.
It's smaller government, or it is the end of the world.
When people are starting to threaten nuclear-armed Russia before an election, it is smaller government, or it is the end of the world.
So you need to take a stand.
You need to take a stand now.
You need to take a stand online.
You need to take a stand in person.
You need to get out and talk to people about the reality of the danger your civilization faces.
That the state is going to eat all of the fruits, all of the freedoms, all of the glorious gifts our ancestors bled and died to hand to us out of their graves.
It is going to be eaten and destroyed and controlled by the ever-expanding, increasingly totalitarian state Which, for the first time in history, has the incredible technology produced by the free market to control and manipulate the population in ways absolutely unforeseen in the past?
There was a two-way telescreen in 1984.
Now half of Americans are already in a facial recognition database.
