- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
You must be posting these things because you feel what he is doing here is idiotic.
That or this is not appropriate for this thread.
[PAX] My Idiot President
- Thread starter Stu
- Start date
You must be posting these things because you feel what he is doing here is idiotic.
That or this is not appropriate for this thread.
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- .
@Wyote for the record I have no objections to any perceived derailment of this particular thread. I really do not wish to have Trump supports feel oppressed in expressing their opinions or any attempts to disprove the notion that Trump is an idiot.
That said, I do not feel obliged to defend the position that he is both perceived as an idiot and is in fact an idiot.
But...you are the man so do as you see fit.
That said, I do not feel obliged to defend the position that he is both perceived as an idiot and is in fact an idiot.
But...you are the man so do as you see fit.
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
I probably would not have poked in were it not for the [PAX] tag which people probably don't even know or pay attention to anyway.
Just seems like making off topic/unrelated posts is a way to create division in a thread that is not intended as such.
But I'm cool with whatever, if you are. You're the OP, you're the man now dog.
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
See...jesus man!!
A normal post!
On topic and everything!
You CAN do it, now you have no other excuse (I’m teasing you in fun now don’t be offended, you can back at me all you want).
You seem to take his side of things for someone who says he doesn’t like him...it seems like you agree with his politics?
If you are interesting in public perception take a look at what Trump tweets daily and then fact check it.
The majority of what he says has been proven to be false a majority of the time if not a downright lie.
Yet he still has 30% or so who believe him.
Sad numbers.
Who are you referring to marching on Washington?
The tea-publicans?
That’s only who he panders to.
Yes...most likely the midterm elections will see a loss of the house or the senate based on the current direction of things and the push back against Trump and the lack of constituent representation in an ever bi-partisan Congress - meaning there is no compromise and whole groups of society feel unrepresented and angry and rightly so.
See...now we are having an on topic, normal conversation.
Thanks!
i have another article somewhere that digs into some problems with the new mexico deal. I was trying to find it through a search but only found that article. I'll have another look. It gave some interesting insights
i guess to answer to these points you are making the best way in which i can convey my feelings on it is to share this documentary that I watched today which is a great flashback to the obama years. I remember speaking about all these issues in the documentary during that time but now i have moved onto new issues. So when you ask me if i agree with his politics i'm kinda reminded of what was going on before he came to power to remember why people wanted america to change direction
The documentary was never finshed because the guy who was making it was found dead in his home with his wife and 5 year old child. The authorities said it was a 'murder suicide' but i have my doubts!
anyway if we try to understand trump and the rise of what some here might call an idiot to president we have to look at those obama years
Anyway the documentary is below and someone pieced it together from the info left on the guys computer. Its a real trip down memory lane
Grey State: The Rise
Here's that article. This guy does not like trump!
Abominable New US/Mexico Trade Deal
Stephen Lendman
All US trade deals are secretly negotiated behind closed doors, corporate predators having final say over what’s agreed on, assuring they’re granted new powers and privileges.
They make it easier for them to offshore jobs, ignore ecosanity, trash worker rights, and abandon policies vital for human health and well-being.
NAFTA’s investor protections incentivize offshoring production and jobs. Since taking effect on January 1, 1994, around a million US jobs were lost from this deal alone.
Wages were lowered, benefits lost, and inequality increased at the expense of fast eroding social justice.
So-called Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) facilitates offshoring of jobs to low-wage countries.
The so-called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system grants corporate predators the right to sue governments for virtually unlimited compensation before a rigged panel of three corporate lawyers - their ruling final, not subject to appeal.
Rulings in their favor can be gotten by claiming laws protecting public health or ecosanity violate their trade agreement rights.
If a nation refuses to pay, its assets can be seized for compensation. ISDS incentivizes offshoring of jobs by providing special privileges and rights for firms relocating operations abroad - facilitating a global race to the bottom.
Most NAFTA provisions have nothing to do with trade - everything to do with compromising ecosanity and worker rights, along with human health and welfare.
The new US-Mexico trade agreement (NAFTA by another name) empowers corporate predators to continue offshoring jobs.
It lets them ignore ecosanity, human health and welfare in both countries. It trashes worker rights, sub-poverty wages in Mexico as low or lower than in China, America heading in the same direction.
A petition to Congress by partnered organizations states the following:
“We, the undersigned, demand that any NAFTA replacement must…
Eliminate the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system and the special investor protections it enforces that make it less risky and cheaper to outsource jobs, and that also empower corporations to attack environmental and health laws before tribunals of three corporate lawyers and get unlimited payouts of our tax dollars.
And add strong labor and environmental standards with swift and certain enforcement to raise wages and strengthen lax environmental rules in Mexico to prevent companies from moving jobs to pay workers a pittance and dump toxins.”
Large-scale migration from Mexico to America since the 1990s was largely because US-subsidized agricultural exports under NAFTA displaced millions of Mexican farmers and related workers.
The deal also let large US manufacturers and retailers operate freely in Mexico, bankrupting its small companies.
Corporate predators in both countries benefitted at the expense of everyone else.
Once full details of the new US-Mexico trade deal are known, it may show what was agreed on is worse than NAFTA.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Abominable New US/Mexico Trade Deal
Stephen Lendman
All US trade deals are secretly negotiated behind closed doors, corporate predators having final say over what’s agreed on, assuring they’re granted new powers and privileges.
They make it easier for them to offshore jobs, ignore ecosanity, trash worker rights, and abandon policies vital for human health and well-being.
NAFTA’s investor protections incentivize offshoring production and jobs. Since taking effect on January 1, 1994, around a million US jobs were lost from this deal alone.
Wages were lowered, benefits lost, and inequality increased at the expense of fast eroding social justice.
So-called Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) facilitates offshoring of jobs to low-wage countries.
The so-called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system grants corporate predators the right to sue governments for virtually unlimited compensation before a rigged panel of three corporate lawyers - their ruling final, not subject to appeal.
Rulings in their favor can be gotten by claiming laws protecting public health or ecosanity violate their trade agreement rights.
If a nation refuses to pay, its assets can be seized for compensation. ISDS incentivizes offshoring of jobs by providing special privileges and rights for firms relocating operations abroad - facilitating a global race to the bottom.
Most NAFTA provisions have nothing to do with trade - everything to do with compromising ecosanity and worker rights, along with human health and welfare.
The new US-Mexico trade agreement (NAFTA by another name) empowers corporate predators to continue offshoring jobs.
It lets them ignore ecosanity, human health and welfare in both countries. It trashes worker rights, sub-poverty wages in Mexico as low or lower than in China, America heading in the same direction.
A petition to Congress by partnered organizations states the following:
“We, the undersigned, demand that any NAFTA replacement must…
Eliminate the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system and the special investor protections it enforces that make it less risky and cheaper to outsource jobs, and that also empower corporations to attack environmental and health laws before tribunals of three corporate lawyers and get unlimited payouts of our tax dollars.
And add strong labor and environmental standards with swift and certain enforcement to raise wages and strengthen lax environmental rules in Mexico to prevent companies from moving jobs to pay workers a pittance and dump toxins.”
Large-scale migration from Mexico to America since the 1990s was largely because US-subsidized agricultural exports under NAFTA displaced millions of Mexican farmers and related workers.
The deal also let large US manufacturers and retailers operate freely in Mexico, bankrupting its small companies.
Corporate predators in both countries benefitted at the expense of everyone else.
Once full details of the new US-Mexico trade deal are known, it may show what was agreed on is worse than NAFTA.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
Yeah, well the guy who supposedly wrote the “Necronomicon” supposedly died in mid-sentence...but I think it’s just added in to sell more books.
See...we’ve wandered off subject and back onto Obama again.
We can go all the way back as far as you want in history and show that whatever whomever did was responsible for where we are today, but it’s still irrelevant now that Trump is the POTUS...which is what we are talking about...the moronic and dictatorial “job” (as in heist) he is doing.
You’ve gone over this and that with Obama already man.
As for the documentary...he was found dead...I hate to break it to you, but it happens all the time (I used to pick them up in the Ambulance)...you think it was some Obama hit squad masquerading as FEMA?
Are you a “deep state” conspiracy theorist?
Let’s get back on topic shall we?
Yeah, well the guy who supposedly wrote the “Necronomicon” supposedly died in mid-sentence...but I think it’s just added in to sell more books.
See...we’ve wandered off subject and back onto Obama again.
We can go all the way back as far as you want in history and show that whatever whomever did was responsible for where we are today, but it’s still irrelevant now that Trump is the POTUS...which is what we are talking about...the moronic and dictatorial “job” (as in heist) he is doing.
You’ve gone over this and that with Obama already man.
As for the documentary...he was found dead...I hate to break it to you, but it happens all the time (I used to pick them up in the Ambulance)...you think it was some Obama hit squad masquerading as FEMA?
Are you a “deep state” conspiracy theorist?
Let’s get back on topic shall we?
the video was simply the best way i could answer to your questions
why did people vote for something different?
well we only have to review all that stuff that documentary covered to understand why people wanted something different
is trump what they were hoping for? THATS the question!
Do i personally believe a deep state hit squad off'd that filmmaker? Yes. I think they went to take him out and bungled it by doing it when his wife and child were in the house so they ended up killing them too. This way they had to change the plan from being a 'suicide' to being a murder suicide
Do i think a guy who was about to release a kickass documentary he'd been pouring his heart and soul into suddenly shot his family and himself just before releasing the documentary? No
Anyway back to trump! This article today from zero hedge:
The Mueller Investigation Is Sending People to Jail - But Not For Collusion
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 09/14/2018 - 22:35
0
SHARES
Submitted by the Strategic Culture Foundation
The anonymous government official who revealed a “resistance” inside the White House has heightened the sense of doom hanging over Donald Trump’s presidency. A stream of disparaging claims from other White House insiders, the multiple criminal cases enveloping Trump’s inner circle, and the ongoing special-counsel investigation into possible collusion with the Russian government have all also added to anticipation of Trump’s imminent downfall. But the widespread perception that “the walls are closing in”; on a “ “teetering” Trump presidency is getting ahead of reality. While figures eyed as central to the suspected Trump-Russia conspiracy—campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos, longtime fixer Michael Cohen, and campaign manager Paul Manafort—have been convicted of criminal activity, their cases have not bolstered the case for collusion as many liberals had hoped.
Last week, Papadopoulos was sentenced to 14 days in prison for lying to the FBI about the timing of his contacts with a Maltese professor, Joseph Mifsud. According to Papadopoulos, Mifsud claimed to have connections to Russia and information that the Kremlin had obtained Hillary Clinton’s stolen e-mails. In May 2016, Papadopoulos relayed vague details about his conversation with Mifsud to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer. According to press accounts, a tip from Downer about his encounter with Papadopoulos sparked the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation into alleged Trump-Russia ties.
Because Papadopoulos may have purportedly heard about stolen e-mails before their public release, he has been widely scouted as “Exhibit A” for a Trump-Kremlin conspiracy, part of a “secret channel through which the Russian government was able to communicate with the Trump campaign as it stole Democratic emails and weaponized them to help Trump win the presidency,” according to James Risen of The Intercept. In the end, Papadopoulos did not fill that role. According to special counsel Robert Mueller’s sentencing memo, Papadopoulos “did not provide ‘substantial assistance’” during his interviews in August and September of 2017. But in remarks made after his sentencing, Papadopoulos says that “I did my best…and offered what I knew.” It is not a surprise that he did not have much to offer. Not only did the Trump campaign rebuff Papadopoulos’s proposals to set up meetings with Russian officials, Papadopoulos now says that “I never met with a single Russian official in my life.”
Mueller’s sentencing memo also confirms that after FBI agents interviewed Papadopoulos in January 2017, they interviewed Mifsud just weeks later in Washington, DC. Despite his being the figure whose comments ostensibly led to the opening of the Trump-Russia investigation—making him a suspected Kremlin cutout—Mifsud was not detained then, nor has he been charged since.
Mueller appears to blame Papadopoulos for this. Papadopoulos, Mueller claims, “substantially hindered investigators’ ability to effectively question” Mifsud when they spoke to him just a few weeks later. Papadopoulos’s lies, they allege, “undermined investigators’ ability to challenge the Professor or potentially detain or arrest him while he was still in the United States.… The defendant’s lies also hindered the government’s ability to discover who else may have known or been told about the Russians possessing ‘dirt’ on Clinton.”
The claim is puzzling. In his sentencing memo, Mueller acknowledges that Papadopoulos “identified” Mifsud to FBI agents voluntarily, though “only after only after being prompted by a series of specific questions.” That is why Papadopoulos has not pleaded guilty to lying about Mifsud, but only about the timing of his contacts with them: He falsely told agents that he was not yet a member of the Trump campaign when he and Mifsud spoke. In that same interview, Papadopoulos told agents that Mifsud informed him that the Russians “have dirt on [Clinton]” in the form of “thousands of emails.” Given that Papadopoulos not only informed FBI agents of Mifsud’s identity but also of the “dirt” he floated, how could Papadopoulos have “hindered” their ability to find out what Mifsud knows?
As Papadopoulos appears to exit the collusion bracket, longtime Trump fixer Michael Cohen has recently emerged front and center. On July 26, CNN reported that Cohen is prepared to tell Mueller that Trump had advance knowledge of the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower with Russian nationals. The incident has been the subject of intense focus because Donald Trump Jr. was promised compromising information about Hillary Clinton as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”
Veteran Clinton operative turned Cohen spokesperson Lanny Davis fanned the flames. Hours after Cohen’s indictment on August 21, Davis told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that Cohen “is more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows,” including about “the obvious possibility of a conspiracy to collude.… in the 2016 election” and even “whether or not Mr. Trump knew ahead of time” about Russian e-mail hacking “and even cheered it on.”
Davis’ qualified language (“obvious possibility,” “whether or not”) was easily overlooked, but the specter of perjury could not be. The co-chairs of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Richard Burr and Mark Warner, noted that Cohen had testified to them last fall that that he has no knowledge of any Trump-Russia collusion and that he didn’t even find out about the Trump Tower meeting until it was publicly reported in June 2017—one year after it took place. Burr and Warner also revealed that in response to CNN’s story, Cohen’s attorneys informed them that he is not changing his testimony.
Davis quickly dropped the innuendo. Asked by CNN’s Anderson Cooper on August 22 if Cohen has information that Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting in advance, Davis replied, “ No, he does not.” Davis also abandoned his suggestion, made just 24 hours earlier to Maddow, that Cohen can tie Trump to advance knowledge of Russian e-mail hacking. Davis told Cooper that he was “more tentative on that” and that he only meant that he believes Cohen “may or not be useful” to Mueller, even though “it’s not a certainty the way [Cohen] recalls it.” Davis was, he clarified in the same CNN interview, just relying on his own “intuition.”
Yet this clarification proved to be more consequential than perhaps Davis intended. The Washington Post and the New York Post revealed that they had used Davis as an anonymous source for their own stories “confirming” the initial July 26 CNN report. “I should have been more clear—including with you—that I could not independently confirm what happened,” Davis told The Washington Post, adding his regrets. Davis also continued to back off of his hacking claims, explaining that he was merely “giving an instinct that [Cohen] might have something to say of interest,” though, yet again, “I am just not sure.”
But Davis was not done; he then revealed that he had also been used as anonymous source for CNN’s initial story. This did not just raise a sourcing issue for CNN but a potential scandal: In its initial report, CNN had falsely claimed that Davis had declined to comment. This meant that CNN had not just relied on a source who no longer stood by his story, but mislead readers into believing that he was not a source. To date, CNN has yet to offer an explanation for the gaffe—which, along with the failure to explain it—is not a first.
In his dizzying retraction tour, Davis also raised doubts about another story that had been circulating for months. In April, McClatchy reported that Mueller’s team has information about Cohen that could corroborate a key claim in the Steele dossier, the DNC-funded report alleging a high-level conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. The dossier claims that Cohen visited Prague in August or September 2016 to meet with Russian officials as part of his key role “in a cover up and damage limitation operation” over the hacking of Democratic Party emails. Citing two sources, McClatchy claimed that Mueller “has evidence” that Cohen secretly visited Prague during the period in question. Davis now says that that claim is false. Cohen, Davis told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, was “never, ever in Prague.”
The only story Cohen has affirmed is the one he shared in court: that Trump, in order to influence the election outcome, directed him to make a hush-money payment to cover up for an extramarital affair. That allegation may or may not prove to be sufficient grounds for impeachment, but they decidedly do not fall under Robert Mueller’s purview.
Cohen’s indictment coincided with Paul Manafort’s conviction on tax-evasion and bank-fraud charges related to his political consulting work in Ukraine. It is often speculated that Manafort’s Ukraine stint is relevant to a Trump-Russia conspiracy plot because, the theory goes, he served Kremlin interests during his time there. The opposite is the case, as Manafort’s former partner-turned-prosecution-witness, Rick Gates, reaffirmed during trial. Gates testified that Manafort pushed his client, then–Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, to align with the European Union and away from Russia. According to Gates, Manafort was paid lucratively to craft a policy known as “Engage Ukraine,” which “became the strategy for helping Ukraine enter the European Union.” Given that the tug-of-war between Russia and the EU (with US backing) over Ukraine sparked a full-blown international crisis and a new Cold War, Manafort’s strategy would be an odd one for a supposed Kremlin stooge.
Putting aside Manafort’s record in Ukraine, there have been attempts to tie him to a potential Russia conspiracy via his financial debts to Russian tycoon Oleg Deripaska. During the campaign, Manafort wrote to an associate about leveraging his position in the Trump camp in order to “get whole” with Deripaska, even suggesting that he offer “private briefings.” Could this have been, pundits suggest, where a collusion plot was hatched?
Deripaska denies ever having been offered private briefings by Manafort. Another impediment to tying Deripaska to a Trump-Russia collusion plot is that Deripaska has connections to the figure arguably most responsible for the allegations of collusion. Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent whose DNC-funded “dossier” alleged a longstanding Trump-Kremlin conspiracy, has served as an intermediary for contacts between Deripaska and US officials. Deripaska even has a link to Mueller and the federal agency he once headed. In 2009, when Mueller was in charge of the FBI, Deripaska ponied up millions of dollars for a secret effort to rescue a captured CIA operative, Robert Levinson, in Iran. In return, the FBI—with the encouragement of Steele—helped secure a visa for Deripaska, who had been banned from the United States for alleged ties to Russian organized crime. In short, Deripaska’s various contacts make plain that Manafort’s financial ties to him, illicit or not, do not necessarily lead to a Kremlin conspiracy.
Most critically, Mueller has yet to allege one. Prosecutors openly acknowledged before Manafort’s first trial that the case had nothing to do with “evidence or argument concerning collusion with the Russian government,” while the judge in Manafort’s upcoming second trial notes that the collusion investigation is “wholly irrelevant to the charges in this case.”
The same could be said for all of the other charges in the Mueller investigation to date. Mueller has uncovered criminal activity, but not as of yet a conspiracy with a foreign power. Should that trend continue, it need not be a defeat for the resistance. The Russiagate fixation has diverted attention from many of Trump’s damaging policies and turned vast segments of the public into spectators of an endless drama. A political opposition mobilized around a range of issues that materially impact Americans—and no longer counting on Mueller’s investigation—may be the strongest threat that Trump could face.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-14/mueller-investigation-sending-people-jail-not-collusion
JennyDaniella
Stargazer
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 925
Saw this, had to post it!
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Saw this, had to post it!
I feel like I need a drumpf hair snapchat filter in my life
JennyDaniella
Stargazer
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 925
Hahaha right?!
Skarekrow
~~DEVIL~~
- MBTI
- Ni-INFJ-A
- Enneagram
- Warlock
the video was simply the best way i could answer to your questions
why did people vote for something different?
well we only have to review all that stuff that documentary covered to understand why people wanted something different
is trump what they were hoping for? THATS the question!
Do i personally believe a deep state hit squad off'd that filmmaker? Yes. I think they went to take him out and bungled it by doing it when his wife and child were in the house so they ended up killing them too. This way they had to change the plan from being a 'suicide' to being a murder suicide
Do i think a guy who was about to release a kickass documentary he'd been pouring his heart and soul into suddenly shot his family and himself just before releasing the documentary? No
Anyway back to trump! This article today from zero hedge:
The Mueller Investigation Is Sending People to Jail - But Not For Collusion
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 09/14/2018 - 22:35
0
SHARES
Submitted by the Strategic Culture Foundation
Why would someone who had severe paranoia about the government commit a murder suicide?:thinking:
You are making assumptions based on what you wish is true to fit your agenda and messaging.
Why would someone do something like that?
Why do they ever?
Are you kidding me man...that is no kind of logical reasoning.
As for “Zero Hedge”...I read through it from time to time...but I also take it with a grain of salt...because you know...it’s written by a dude calling himself “Tyler Durden”, and a quick FYI - the “Strategic Culture Foundation” from whom this article was submitted, is part of the Russian Voltaire Network and is state controlled media.
So...yeah...there is that...but I’m sure you’re cool with Russians fucking with our elections....since it’s all a big smokescreen right?
And really man...you seem to know so much about us and how Americans think even though you admittedly don’t live here...not that that is everything, but growing up in a culture (if that is what you want to call it, lol) makes a huge difference in having a thorough understanding of peoples’ mentality...even then it’s difficult, so there is even more of a disconnect.
A hit squad to stop a documentarian?
That is something they do in Russia.
It’s a beautiful country and the people are very warm once you are not in public (shopkeepers never ever smile).
I highly recommend anyone going there...though not sure how our relations on the ground are now...it’s been about 8 years since I was there last I think?
Seriously though...the documentary is available right?
So they didn’t stop anything with the supposed “hit squad”.
Think about it...if he was killed by a hit squad, wouldn't they take his documentary and alter it to fit their agenda and you are falling into their trap?
And there are much easier ways to stop someone without committing murder...very easy if you have a bit of power.
You could bankrupt someone...sue them for fake reasons...charge someone with a false crime...I mean...they could have disappeared them to Gitmo and no one would have thought anything other than they vanished, or that he left his family.
But instead they made it look like a murder-suicide and didn’t take all the video evidence they were killing a family to keep private?
Illogical again.
Just saying.
Last edited:
you're assuming that the guy was wrong in the things he was saying which of course would mean that all of those people he interviews in the documentary were wrong too
are you saying they are wrong about the things they are saying in that documentary?
i think establishing the source of something is important to take into consideration any bias but then the content of the article can then be assessed for its own merit
the article makes points are there any you disagree with?
i don't think the russians got trump elected
i think israel messes with your elections more than the russians but you seem to be selective in your outrage which is kinda odd
that's why its good to ask people questions which is what i'm doing
sure i mean someone shot seth rich didn't they?
someone shot gary webb
someone shot barry seal
someone shot a whole load of people in the US including some of your presidents!
you never heard of CIA deathsquads or operation COINTELPRO?
they DID stop the documentary
someone had to piece this one together from all the notes
- MBTI
- .
- Enneagram
- .
I find it humorous that the hard core anti Democratic forces resort to accusations of mass murder against the former President and the former Presidential candidate as their last defense against the indictment and conviction of an apparent felonious and quite possibly treasonous present President of these United States of America.
BTW how's that Brexit thing working out for you?
BTW how's that Brexit thing working out for you?
i'm not against democrats. I quite like the work of some democrats for example robert kennedy is doing great work at the moment in a number if fields
what i have a problem with is the hidden agenda that is co-opting the democrats
concerning your disbelief that the clintons might be mixed up in some very nasty stuff you should maybe look into their connection to mena airport and the drug smuggling that went through that airport with the help of the CIA
The CIA don't like to go cap in hand to the congress you see because they think they are above the law which is why president kennedy said he was going to smash them into a million pieces......what happened to kennedy by the way?
So what the CIA do is they engage in off the books activities to raise funds such a drug smuggling and arms dealing (flash back to the 'fast and furious' arms smuggling scandal under obama)
In fact hollywood made a film about it recently with tom cruise playing barry seal who was the pilot smuggling drugs through mena airport for the CIA under the gaze of the clintons. In fact in the movie a call is made to the clintons at one point to get seal out of a legal issue he was in so even hollywood admits as much