Famous Bernie Sanders supporter Susan Sarandon: Clinton is scarier than Trump!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Meister, Apr 30, 2016.

  1. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #1
  2. rdowns, Apr 30, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2016

    rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #2
    I always take political advice from Hollywood elites.
     
  3. Meister thread starter Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #3
    Always!

    That's why we'll vote a former reality show host pres. ;)
     
  4. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #4
    Agreed. I'm sure everyone here would never take advice from Hollywood liberals like Dwayne Johnson, Bruce Willis, Vince Vaughn, Sylvester Stallone, Angelina Jolie, Jessica Simpson, Cindy Crawford, Rush Limbaugh (member of unions AFFTRA and SAG, like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and other reality TV celebrities), Jimmie Walker... Quite a lot more of these "liberal elites" in tinsel town that love being called "liberal" since that's what the republicans seem to call everyone in Hollywood, oddly...
     
  5. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #5
    When did J.J. join the Hollywood elite?
     
  6. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #6
    Let’s see. Donald Trump wants less war. Donald Trump wants noninterventionist foreign policy. Donald Trump has not voted for any wars or been the cause for any wars. Donald Trump has not killed anyone. Hillary Clinton on the other hand is completely opposite and wants more wars, wants interventionist foreign policy, has voted for wars and been the cause for wars, has killed people and has the blood of hundreds of thousands of men, women, children, Muslims, black people, brown people, poor people, women and girls, on her hands. Obvious choice-if you’re a real liberal-on who to support: Bernie or Trump.
     
  7. Technarchy macrumors 603

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #7
    Nailed it. Trump is the better option by far in the absence of the Bern.
     
  8. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #8
    Didn't he state quite a few time that he would bomb ISIS out of existence ?

    Donald just wants you to forget what he said he wanted 1 hour ago.
     
  9. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #9
    Bombing ISIS out of existence doesn’t negate what is said in my earlier reply.
     
  10. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #10
    Yeah, cos escalting a war is so much different than starting one !!
     
  11. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #11
    If it wasn’t for Bush, Obama, Hillary, CIA, and supposed gulf state “allies,” ISIS wouldn’t exist.
     
  12. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #12
    How well has arming the enemy worked out so far? Libya? Syria? Trump is far better than Hillary
     
  13. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #13
    Still doesn't explain how more bombs are gonna fix that problem in the long run.

    "Best" result would be installing some pro-US dictator only to be bitten in the back some 20-50 years later (see Iran).
     
  14. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #14
    My thumbs up relating to your first sentence, because it is true: bombing ISIS is not long-term solution.
     
  15. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #16
    Sure. If you think "wages are too high", like to have your president talk about women's faces and where they bleed from and enjoy hearing the disabled mocked. Also great if you want to put someone in charge of nuclear missiles who has a short temper, likes to hold grudges, and thinks he can do no wrong. Spectacular plan. :rolleyes:
    --- Post Merged, Apr 30, 2016 ---
    Based on........absolutely nothing. Someone has only not killed someone, only not dropped a bomb, only not started a war, only not armed someone.....until they have. A Trump presidency will not be immune to the real world problems every other president has faced and had to deal with. Expect to become disillusioned. Quickly.
     
  16. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #17
    Please. Obama armed rebels and bombed sovereign nations with hillarys support. N one is saying things will be all roses either
     
  17. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #18
    Worse than just arming so-called “rebels,” Obama’s armed certified terrorists in conspiracy with 9/11 co-conspirators he protects for 9/11 related crimes. At the same time that Obama cries fake, staged tears for U.S. victims of gun violence, he helps to arm terrorists with AK-47’s, heavy machine guns and ammunition. Guns and ammunition used to MURDER victims, including women and children. Obama is one of the worst humans alive on the planet today, he deserves to be, at minimum, thrown away into ADX Florence for the rest of his life. And Hillary supports and has PUSHED for these crimes herself. Obama and Hillary are worse than 100,000 Trumps. Hopefully a President Trump targets Obama for his litany of treasonous crimes, war crimes, terrorism, terrorist aiding and protecting, mass murdering and serial killing.


    U.S. Relies Heavily on Saudi Money to Support Syrian Rebels

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/w...-on-saudi-money-to-support-syrian-rebels.html

    Bandar Obama.jpg
     
  18. Ironduke Suspended

    Ironduke

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #19
    I love this @&£) every 4 years u Americans scream how you are doomed if whoever gets into power and when they leave power 4 or 8 years later not much has changed.

    The president doesn't have the ability to wreck America that is in the hands of congress and the banks.

    Big D is actually liked by the Russians, and I have a feeling If America elect trump, that after his tenure it will be a case of he did little good or bad but damn it was more fun then usual.

    This will also break the chains on Americans thinking a socialist could wreck the country, he could only if congress, the banks, the corporations, the senate and the Supreme Court all let them, which would not happen.

    For a nation with 3,000 nukes and 12 super aircraft carriers you are so scared of stuff

    Now elect Big D and let's have some fun
     
  19. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #20
    You have a strange idea of fun. I don't think it is fun to mock women's looks or the disabled or a POW or Hispanics looking for a better life and associating them with rapists. I don't think it is fun to cheapen and degrade the office of the Presidency. I don't think it's fun to have a commander in chief trolling Twitter late into the night, instead of spending time on more important matters. I don't want a reality show in the White House that everyone, both home and abroad looks at with distain and ridicule.

    As for the doomed part, Presidents can leave lasting impressions for decades. They can get us into wars, destabilize a country, wreck our own finances, and pick Supreme Court nominees whose decisions we have to live with for a generation. So yeah, it's a very big deal, even if you think it's not. And definitely not something to have "fun" with. This is serious stuff.
     
  20. ericgtr12 macrumors 6502a

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    #21
    In his foreign policy speech he said "ISIS will be gone very very quickly once I'm president". That was the extent and detail of his plan. Even Republicans were laughing at him. Once this thing turns into real policy and he has to answer questions, he's a sitting duck, Hillary will eat him alive.
     
  21. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #22
    Of course he could have announced his plans, including the date all troops will be out if the country, to make sure the ENEMY knows exactly what he's going to do.

    Obama did that. Worked well. Should be tried for treason.
     
  22. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #23
    The date of the withdrawal was set under the Bush administration. Obama just more than happily followed through with it.
     
  23. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #24
    Hillary with Obama and CIA was helping to get weapons from Libya into Syria to arm terrorists to attempt illegal overthrow of the Syrian government that had not attacked America, and it’s a high likelihood that some of those Libyan weapons made their way directly into ISIS’ hands in Syria.


    The Red Line and the Rat Line
    Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdoğan and the Syrian rebels


    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

    In January, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on the assault by a local militia in September 2012 on the American consulate and a nearby undercover CIA facility in Benghazi, which resulted in the death of the US ambassador, Christopher Stevens, and three others. The report’s criticism of the State Department for not providing adequate security at the consulate, and of the intelligence community for not alerting the US military to the presence of a CIA outpost in the area, received front-page coverage and revived animosities in Washington, with Republicans accusing Obama and Hillary Clinton of a cover-up. A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria. A number of front companies were set up in Libya, some under the cover of Australian entities. Retired American soldiers, who didn’t always know who was really employing them, were hired to manage procurement and shipping. The operation was run by David Petraeus, the CIA director who would soon resign when it became known he was having an affair with his biographer. (A spokesperson for Petraeus denied the operation ever took place.)


    Military to Military
    Seymour M. Hersh on US intelligence sharing in the Syrian war

    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military

    The military’s resistance dates back to the summer of 2013, when a highly classified assessment, put together by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then led by General Martin Dempsey, forecast that the fall of the Assad regime would lead to chaos and, potentially, to Syria’s takeover by jihadi extremists, much as was then happening in Libya. A former senior adviser to the Joint Chiefs told me that the document was an ‘all-source’ appraisal, drawing on information from signals, satellite and human intelligence, and took a dim view of the Obama administration’s insistence on continuing to finance and arm the so-called moderate rebel groups. By then, the CIA had been conspiring for more than a year with allies in the UK, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to ship guns and goods – to be used for the overthrow of Assad – from Libya, via Turkey, into Syria. The new intelligence estimate singled out Turkey as a major impediment to Obama’s Syria policy. The document showed, the adviser said, ‘that what was started as a covert US programme to arm and support the moderate rebels fighting Assad had been co-opted by Turkey, and had morphed into an across-the-board technical, arms and logistical programme for all of the opposition, including Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State. The so-called moderates had evaporated and the Free Syrian Army was a rump group stationed at an airbase in Turkey.’ The assessment was bleak: there was no viable ‘moderate’ opposition to Assad, and the US was arming extremists.

    In July 2013, the Joint Chiefs found a more direct way of demonstrating to Assad how serious they were about helping him. By then the CIA-sponsored secret flow of arms from Libya to the Syrian opposition, via Turkey, had been underway for more than a year (it started sometime after Gaddafi’s death on 20 October 2011). The operation was largely run out of a covert CIA annex in Benghazi, with State Department acquiescence. On 11 September 2012 the US ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, was killed during an anti-American demonstration that led to the burning down of the US consulate in Benghazi; reporters for the Washington Postfound copies of the ambassador’s schedule in the building’s ruins. It showed that on 10 September Stevens had met with the chief of the CIA’s annex operation. The next day, shortly before he died, he met a representative from Al-Marfa Shipping and Maritime Services, a Tripoli-based company which, the JCS adviser said, was known by the Joint Staff to be handling the weapons shipments.

    By the late summer of 2013, the DIA’s assessment had been circulated widely, but although many in the American intelligence community were aware that the Syrian opposition was dominated by extremists the CIA-sponsored weapons kept coming, presenting a continuing problem for Assad’s army. Gaddafi’s stockpile had created an international arms bazaar, though prices were high. ‘There was no way to stop the arms shipments that had been authorised by the president,’ the JCS adviser said. ‘The solution involved an appeal to the pocketbook. The CIA was approached by a representative from the Joint Chiefs with a suggestion: there were far less costly weapons available in Turkish arsenals that could reach the Syrian rebels within days, and without a boat ride.’ But it wasn’t only the CIA that benefited. ‘We worked with Turks we trusted who were not loyal to Erdoğan,’ the adviser said, ‘and got them to ship the jihadists in Syria all the obsolete weapons in the arsenal, including M1 carbines that hadn’t been seen since the Korean War and lots of Soviet arms. It was a message Assad could understand: “We have the power to diminish a presidential policy in its tracks.”’


    Exclusive Interview: Seymour Hersh Dishes on Saudi Oil Money Bribes and the Killing of Osama Bin Laden

    http://www.alternet.org/world/exclu...-oil-money-bribes-and-killing-osama-bin-laden

    Seymour Hersh: The only thing we know is that she [Hillary] was very close to Petraeus who was the CIA director at the time (and running the Libyan weapons into Syria op) ... she’s not out of the loop, she knows when there’s covert ops. ... That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission he was meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel.


    Obama and Hillary both deserve to be thrown away into ADX Florence for the rest of their lives.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 30, 2016 ---
    Obama most surely should be tried for multiple instances of treason, but Iraq withdrawl isn’t among them.
     
  24. Ironduke Suspended

    Ironduke

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #25
    Then why are you letting trump do so well
     

Share This Page