WikiLeak Reveal – Hillary Clinton Reads Prepared Script from Prearranged Question For MSNBC “Phone Interview”…

Wow. How fake is Hillary Clinton?  How much does the media collude toward that fakery? Well, consider this example.  The latest WikiLeaks release shows an email chain of approvals for Hillary Clinton talking about her tax proposal.  Specifically the emails show a script constructed by, and approved by, no less than ten campaign staff.

[…] HRC is going to call into Chris Hayes’ show this afternoon to do her tax hit. How does this look to you guys? (link to email chain)

Later MSNBC’s Chris Hayes claims he’s pre-taped an interview with Secretary Clinton via phone.  However, his question was part of the script the specific answer was written for.  The Clinton team knew the question in advance because they wrote it.  JUST WATCH:

“I got a chance to speak earlier with Secretary Clinton who joined me by phone from Iowa. We discussed everything from the electability question to what Bernie Sanders said about her campaign. But I started by asking about her proposed tax hikes for the highest earners.”

Yeah, sure you did Chris.

Hillary Clinton press we can 2

This entry was posted in Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Dem Hypocrisy, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2016, media bias, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

117 Responses to WikiLeak Reveal – Hillary Clinton Reads Prepared Script from Prearranged Question For MSNBC “Phone Interview”…

  1. nimrodman says:

    Sundance, you’ve been busy today

    Liked by 13 people

  2. 1hear2learn says:

    At this point I would suspect no less from these so called “real journalists”!

    Liked by 3 people

  3. anarchist335 says:

    Everybody knows the ship is sinking, everybody knows the captain lied…

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Howie says:

    Produced by…..Hillary Clinton
    Directed by…….John Posesta
    Starring …………Cris Hayes

    Liked by 12 people

  5. Muddlerman says:

    President Trump’s AG and DOJ will need two terms to prosecute all these traitors to “We the People”.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. Aparition42 says:

    A salient point. Any democrat elected to congress gives the opposition opportunity to claim their constituents voted to oppose a Trump presidency. The RATS will have a much harder time selling that lie. Also, no matter how hard they oppose Trump during the primaries, they’ll have a much harder time opposing legislation that conservative voters have been clamoring for for a generation. Right now their argument is simply that Trump is too crude, or a liar. They depend on a strong Democrat presence to justify their inaction on core policies their own constituents want (i.e.. “We don’t have a veto proof majority”, “we must reach across the aisle”). With the presidency, the Supreme Court, and both houses of Congress, they won’t be able to pull that. They’ll have to own their actions.

    The time to oust The RATS is during the primaries. This time we had to maintain laser-like focus on the Presidency, but we’ve got two years to capitalize on Trump’s electoral mandate and make sure we have the right replacements lined up. History looks unfavorably on revolutions that tear down the current regime without having a replacement already lined up. It would be unwise to assume that any random democrat would be better than an anti-Trump Rino. Even after losing, the Clinton machine will still have a lot of power and influence, and an upstart Dem congress critter will likely succumb to their pressure. For now, better to trust in Trumps deal-making abilities and his use of the veto power.

    Of course, that’s just a generalization. If your district has a trustworthy, anti-globalist option, then by all means, vote your conscience :). Otherwise, the Trump party midterm campaign season starts November 9th.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Aparition42 says:

      Odd, this was supposed to be on the other thread discussing whether to try and punish RATS down-ballot. I’m not sure how I managed to get this in the wrong place, sorry.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. markstoval says:

    The media has favored and protected Clinton like a crazed helicopter mom defending her jerk of a son. This is just one more data point in the case against them.

    Hillary Clinton could not defend herself against any given “Bubba” from the local watering hole. As a so-called “smart, experienced lawyer and politician” she sure does need to cheat a lot,

    She is a horror of a human being.

    Liked by 6 people

  8. Lroy says:

    This video won’t play for me. Found it directly on YouTube and same result. Always a possibility that I am technologically challenged but I doubt it. Are they squelching it?


  9. Gov Jay says:

    One thing for certain… this further proves that the WikiLeaks emails are indeed authentic… contrary to the narrative spewed by the Marxist media (aka Hillary Clinton campaign)…

    Liked by 4 people

  10. dji9424 says:

    Chris Hayes is the consummate girly man, a perfect match for that alleged woman newsreader Rachel Maddow. Chris has always brought to mind the 98 lb. weakling who gets sand kicked in his face. Unfortunately for him, he knows nothing of Charles Atlas’ answer for that problem; instead, he doubled down on sniveling snarkiness and stayed as far away from manly pursuits as possible. He is chronologically old enough to be a man but he has never reached the mark of being one.

    Liked by 2 people

    • JustTea says:

      I can’t stand to watch either of them. The only one decent to watch is Morning Joe at least they seem sane.


      • dji9424 says:

        I agree, I can watch Joe for longer than I can Hayes or Maddow. This is the way I would characterize MSNBC’s offerings:

        Morning Joe – Appeals to the professional political class crowd, latest scuttlebutt heard in the DC area. Plants the latest leftist ideas for the day for the rest of the media to run with.
        News filler the remainer of the morning and afternoon until Chuck Todd.
        Chuck Todd – Follow-up on Morning Joe material, nothing of any real news or interest, just normal democratic apologists with Chuck trying to look like he knows something about the subjects being discussed.
        Chris Matthews – Harder version of Todd’s program. Still nothing more than leftist apologists, in general. Matthews loves to “machine gun” his opposition guests, i.e. just keeps hammering them until they blurt out something he can run with. Not an interview, it’s a hit job.
        Chris Hayes – Appeal is to the millennial crowd, no one over age 30 bothers to watch his drivel, it is overly scripted and childish with Chris showing way too much glee when he thinks he has scored a point.
        Maddow – Militant feminist crowd, attempts to mock traditional values in every way possible. Very snarky, self-righteous, but amazingly demure towards Brian Williams when they are on the set together, like he is someone of great gravitas. Sickening and unwatchable.
        Lawrence O’Donnell – I have little idea, hardly ever watch it. O’Donnell is just a less popular version of Bill O’Reilly on Fox, i.e. mostly about themselves, not their guests.

        Overall, MSNBC is not news and it’s not even good propaganda. For the most part it is unwatchable so I don’t bother. About the only time I watch it is when I want to see just how they are spinning the news of the day.


  11. sarrask says:

    Are they still ridiculing the idea of Hillary being given beforehand the questions for the first debate?

    Liked by 2 people

  12. screwauger says:

    It’s a tad frustrating to me that folks who should be “in the know” seem to act shocked that the GOPe “would commit suicide like this” when in fact, they would gladly give up seats and turn the senate and congress over to the leftists in the spirit of circling the Uniparty wagons for an all out war against Trump.


  13. Nunya Bidness says:

    Hillary Clinton looks like a Potemkin candidate. There is nothing behind the facade.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. 20-GAUGE says:


    Liked by 4 people

    • RedBallExpress says:

      A new one every 5 minutes – Seriously? They need to release one every minute to keep up with her lying machine gun mouth.


  15. rmnewt says:

    Would bet that half the time the questions or at least the subject matter are provided by Hillary’s people to the press before hand.


  16. IRock says:

    Hmmm did Crooked Hillary receive the questions before the debates or did she give the moderators the questions? Answers too? The media would never stoop that low. /sarc/


  17. Lyn says:

    How is this any different from the state controlled news media in North Korea constantly reporting how great their dear leader is?

    Liked by 1 person

  18. OmegaManBlue says:

    If Rachel Maddow’s doppelganger did this, one would expect Rachel did too.


  19. Niagara Frontier says:

    There was a time that collusion like this involving a journalist would have resulted in a firing, or at least an immediate suspension. I’m sure this incident will only serve to solidify his standing within the MSNBC community. Shameful to say the least.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. bulwarker says:

    Sundance, could we get a pinned thread for people to go through the new release of email?
    Here is one I happened against:

    Goldman, b/c of their relationship with us, is delaying the drafting of a lease for this interested party until they get a better sense from us but they cannot hold them off too much longer. I briefed John this am and then he and I met with Bob regarding CGI needs. It would be great if we could arrange a call to discuss the Secretary’s needs for this week and I can have John and/or Bob join as needed. Michelle is copied here for follow up on setting a time for a meeting or call at your convenience. In meantime, Genzler via Goldman Sachs is awaiting our details to do test fit options.

    Thanks, Laura Laura Graham
    Chief Operating Officer & Chief of Staff to President Clinton
    The Clinton Foundation

    Liked by 1 person

  21. MVW says:

    Anyone think that Hillary Inc. has only scammed a couple of $ hundred million for years of pay to play? There has to be $ billions stashed in the world’s special banks.

    Anyone think that Obama didn’t learn from Hillary? Anyone really wonder why he supports her?

    Liked by 5 people

  22. angryduc says:

    Next steps for Mena …. I wonder what this was? Was Mena Arkansas still shipping out arms?


  23. sulli159 says:

    Just my two cents; but I think she also knew the questions asked at the debate. Just too well thought out and quick to answer. I wonder why Trump kept pacing behind her.when she got on his turf. Maybe to see if she was wired up again?? Just some ammo for Trump:

    deleted emails isn’t this illegal (so what is new)?

    Litigation: Sanctions for spoliation of evidence

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Here are a couple I found noteworthy. Illegal SuperPac coodination as well as coordinating with the media from the very beginning. podesta emails and attachments

    Liked by 2 people

    • Niagara Frontier says:

      There is neither disincentive nor reluctance to break federal election laws and cheat. The FEC puts charges like this on its long “To Do” list, and around mid 2017 or 2018 the charges will be found to be accurate and a fine will be assessed. That’s the way it works in Washington DC.


  25. angryduc says:

    Huma to be Secretary of State (a salafist muslim)

    Liked by 2 people

  26. angryduc says:

    Podesta’s plan for a Catholic Spring is nothing short of an attempt at a Corporate Church directly subverting the Power of the Pope


    • annieoakley says:

      I know Soros started ‘Catholics for Choice’. I wonder if this is related?


    • Sorry, but the pope has been all in for decades. He’s an Argentinian marxist. He’s in Soros’ pocket too. Lots of Soros money has gone to Rome.

      Liked by 1 person

      • angryduc says:

        Well I’m not sure why but apparently she is pissed because he won’t endorse her.


      • angryduc says:

        That story doesn’t give the date of the plot to overthrow the Catholic Church so you may be right and it could explain Pope Benedict XVI’s departure.


        • Deb says:

          The leftist plotters within the church have been conspiring for over 100 years. They are part of the overall worldwide progressive movement, and yes many of them are Marxists. They have manipulated many well meaning “pewsitters” into abandoning Catholic teachings in the name of “freedom.” The abortion issue just one of the most scandalous.


      • annieoakley says:

        I have always wondered if Soros Forced Pope Benedict to leave so that he could install Francis?


        • Deb says:

          It wasn’t Soros directly, he has many fellow travelers within the Catholic hierchy, and Benedict’s resignation was close to the time the scandal of the “homosexual lobby” within the Vatican came to light. Sadly, I think Pope Benedict was simply not strong enough to withstand the battle that is waging, and resigned thinking someone younger and stronger could take over. That obviously didn’t happen, instead the leftists elected on of their own.

          Our Lady of Victory, pray for us.


  27. NJF says:

    Oh my BUSTED.|

    Then off to Dover. Another great showing by the organizing team, as well as by Carly Fiorina’s husband, who greeted the Secretary enthusiastically. You’d never know his wife calls for HRC’s imprisonment on a daily basis.


  28. Trumped says:

    Next podesta batch:
    The kids at reddit are on to it! This will be updated with every damning email for easy digestion:

    Liked by 2 people

    • annieoakley says:

      Dr. Carson is right. “The amount of corruption is staggering,” Might be an approximate quote but the corruption is overwhelming IMO. Trump is the ONLY person who can possibly survive this onslaught.

      Liked by 2 people

  29. Can you imagine Hillary at a presidential press conference? The strings holding her up, the prompter off to the side, the plant in the press corps…


    • NJF says:

      Someone n FBN remarked yesterday that the Clinton/Gore “rally” had to be delayed bc the TelePrompTers weren’t working correctly.

      Trump would say, “ah the hell with it let’s get this started.”

      Liked by 1 person

  30. Trumped says:


    Pre hillary launch campaign AT the HOUSE OF Joel_Benenson !!!!
    That’s the guy who was in charge of that recent NBC poll !!!

    Liked by 3 people

  31. NJF says:

    Of corse by investigate they mean “prove the Russians did it”

    The content not so much.

    Liked by 3 people

  32. NJF says:

    What a pig.

    Liked by 3 people

  33. Alison says:

    What amazes (dismays) me is how few realize Hillay’s minders run everything. She’d be the most ‘puppet’ Pres we’ve ever had, not least because of her health.

    Obama has his taxpayer-funded multi-million PR Operation. Hillary’s nefarious squad will go fullbore into a Cabinet Department of Disinformation.


    • Sherlock says:

      That’s true. She makes virtually no decisions on her own. Even her “tweets” are a group effort, sometimes taking two days to get out.


  34. NJF says:


  35. Ace says:

    The Clinton campaign fretting over Bill Clinton honoring Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis when he was Governor of Arkansas!


  36. TrustyHaste says:

    Fun idea: After Trump wins, a new Internet/TV station is created. Led by Bannon. Featuring Stefan M., Paul Watson, James OKeefe, Ann Coulter, Crowder, Alex Jones, who else? This is fun!


  37. Sherlock says:

    Obama displaying erection on plane to giggling from traveling press corps.


  38. Jamie says:

    I am sorry for the length of this post. I am trying to wrap my head around all of this. My question is at the end though, and I would appreciate all insight.

    About these leaks. There’s soooo much within it’s mind-blowing. I could read for days and days, like a fictional thriller. It’s not fiction though, sadly, and the amount of corruption and collusion is staggering. Wiki, Guccifer 2.0, James O’keefe. How will the citizenry that is not inclined to seek out evidence that this woman is as evil as they come, get this in a way that it sinks in?

    To me, there is enough. If divided into major parts:
    1) Media complicity (the script, the orders to ‘sell’ stories to the media);
    2) Criminal Activity (obvious email destruction, supplying arms to the enemy/Benghazi; abuse of power/using political position to profit/pay to play, utilizing US servicemen to illegally further agenda; voter fraud);
    3) Disdain for Americans and groups of Americans (comments on immigration and ne’er do wells, comments re: Bernie’s basement dwellers, stance against Catholics);
    4) Self profit and self-serving interests (Clinton Foundation, Haiti);
    5) General creepiness with company she keeps (Bill, Weiner’s wife);
    6) Hypocrisy (Pro-women but standing by her adulterer hubby; defending child rapist; threatening WJC’s victims);
    7) Ineptitude & poor policy demonstration (TPP, NAFTA support, though I am not sure if this is information ‘leaked’ as opposed to already obvious, same as #8);
    8) War-mongering

    What I am not clear on though, is how this is supposed to cross-over so that it reaches the willfully blind left? Circulating on TCTH and Breitbart is awesome, but it is like preaching to the choir, no? Word of mouth. Except again, those I come into contact with about this are either so closed minded they won’t listen or are already in the know and don’t need me reiterating.

    Best to divide up by subject matter 1-8 and hit groups over the head with it (hit the Indy voters, I think the party line loyalists are hopeless), according to interest?

    E.g.: Disdain for groups of Americans and ne’er do well comments to minority voters; basement dweller comments & self profit information to on the fence socialist leaning/Bernie voters; NAFTA/TPP to left leaners due to blue collar antiquated Democrat ‘working man’ ideology to citizens of Penn, Ohio, etc., gutted by these policies; Benghazi & pay to play info to those on the left yet possibly supporters of the constitution and our armed forces.

    How does this sink in and resonate with those it needs to reach, best to do it in a dumbed down way, like a tabloid header? A chapter book based on what you’re sure to be outraged by? I can’t see the sheeple seeking this information out. They seem more inclined to react and make a decision based on breaking news of hot-mic conversation, or incidents that might paint DJT as a racist — versus the real issues that will bring us to our knees – voter fraud, conspiring with the enemy, poor trade deals, immigration and the media under orders. My money is on the MSM NOT picking any of it up. Is Reddit accomplishing this? I’m not familiar with the purpose they serve and how.

    In short, how to disseminate and how to get it to resonate? Thanks in advance.


    • NJF says:

      It’s prescense on twitter & facebook is blowing up. CNN et al doesn’t have the influence it once did. It’s one of the reasons they are mashing out. Not saying they don’t “inform”‘people but they, like conservative media, are mostly preaching to their own choir.

      Newt had a great observation last night on Hannity. Trump should pick a half dozen or so of these emails and just focus on those and how those attitudes & positions contrast with his policies.

      He can always say, if you want to learn more, go and read them yourself.

      We all know that the breadth of the corruption is so vast it almost rendees it unbelievable.

      I think it’s a very good strategy.


      • Flossie says:

        And yet . . . nothing will come of it.


      • Jamie says:

        Thank you. I guess haven’t had the stomach (or wherewithal possibly) for social media platforms like Twitter or FB. I do see their usefulness (I use FB to remain in contact with relatives not near), but just can’t stand the echo chamber, group think mentality and the way subscribers can take something and run with it (‘hands up, don’t shoot’). Not because what’s valid shouldn’t be run with, but the lack of critical thinking trend saddens me.

        Because of my reservations, I lack the ability to measure whether there is an uptick in the masses being awakened. I also am gravitating toward what doesn’t sicken me (Twitter & FB postings of those wanting to derail this monster versus the simpleton, globalists wanting to elevate her). And I have, by my own admission, been obsessing over those tweeting (is that the correct verb?) about upcoming leaks, like True Pundit, James O’Keefe, and of course WikiLeaks. Every morning, with each new bit released, my thought is ‘that HAS to be ENOUGH’ so remain perpetually confused by why it is not.

        I am, if nothing else, grateful for the members of this site and their unwavering confidence, encouraged by the enthusiasm factor Trump has going for him (which I hope does indeed translate to votes) and entertained by the idea of HRC living in fear of the other shoe dropping on a regular basis. On the flipside, I can’t bring myself to visualize her surviving all of the shoe droppings and succeeding. Being able to say “I told you so” after 4 or even 8 years, when we’re totally destroyed, brings little comfort either. I’ve been saying that to BHO supporters and get a worthless jobs report shoved in my face or a BLM mantra chanted at me.

        I do see the CNN/LSM trend and the sentiment by more and more of not trusting the media, but know that the ultimate demise of MSM outlets won’t come soon enough, certainly not by Nov 8th (and much of the information needs to stick earlier, with mail in voting). That is why I’m hopeful there will be other mechanisms for this to become widespread.


        • NJF says:

          Recently the media reported on some study that people under 50 basically do not watch ANY tv.

          I’m over 50 but I realized awhile ago I basically watch a couple of news shows I like, ie Dobbs, Hannity, Varney, or reruns on USA and ION.

          I have Twitter, but mostly just follow along. WikiLeaks is blowing up….”that I can tell you!”


  39. 20-GAUGE says:

    Podesta #727 : Iran Deal Will Lead to Nuclear War in Persian Gulf


  40. This may be Clintons most DAMAGING LEAK YET! Here’s an interesting commentary from a young Libertarian who supports Trump.
    “Clinton Campaign Mocks Catholics and Evangelicals… Oops”
    Published October 12, 2016 (Length 8:39 min)

    In other words two thirds of the country: (see CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY article below shows the emails).

    Liked by 1 person

    • coldsnap says:

      This is most interesting because this guy is winning over other Libertarians, and fence sitters of various ideologies, to Trump. Wow, reading the comment sections (excluding some of the Jewish comments) you can see his reasoning rings true with them. I watched this one and another one of his. Of course I don’t agree with everything he says, but he makes a lot of sense and see what many of us see. We need to get rid of the corrupt uniparty. They have as much disdain as we do for the GOPe, but feel giving Trump a chance, making sure Hillary, et al, doesn’t do more damage, is most important. Getting votes for Trump — GREAT!

      Liked by 1 person

  41. freepetta says:

    Dirty slime! She can only win by cheating!

    Sent from my iPhone



    • skyborn78 says:

      “Win by cheating”…This is true, but if it was in the bag for her, they wouldn’t be fighting so hard, unless it really is just a big show, but I don’t think even they could pull off that big of a show. They are clearly terrified.

      Liked by 1 person

  42. NJF says:

    Discussing how Hillary believes turning over her emails is akin to “bending to their will.”

    Uh no, they were always supposed to be part of the public record.


  43. Jamie says:

    Please allow #727 (above), as well as the immigration stance containing the “ne’er do wells {paraphrased} to catch fire. IMO, these are the most damning. One for the sheer danger this woman puts us in here and abroad, the other because it seems to take a direct insult/tabloid type of fodder for it to have any interest to the masses and also counters the DJT is racist mentality.

    It seems, tabloid sensationalism and fodder is the way for it to seep into the minds of those that choose to stay ignorant/blind. Appealing to and dumbed down enough for the lowest common denominator – a) the idealistic left and the b) something for free/special interest left not wanting the gravy train to stop. Going on about the obvious (to us) end goal of globalism by the elite, ruling class/Uniparty is not effective, too long-term and abstract a concept for them to grasp. I am realizing many are like those in the analogy of the frogs being boiled alive, not realizing they’re slowly witnessing their own demise. The message has to hit them over the heads like a ton of bricks.


  44. NJF says:

    And it begins…


    • keebler AC says:

      Some of the contestants probably purposely expose themselves to Trump knowing he’s the owner. What about Hollyweird women like Kardashian who lets herself get photographed being ravaged by her husband or buys Chippendale calenders, talking smut openly about wanting to do it with Hollywood hunks?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Jamie says:

      The problem is, THIS is what the simpletons gravitate to and then pick up and run with. Minutia in the grand scheme of things. A nuclear armed Iran being a bad idea, doesn’t register or rank.

      Can’t change the intelligence level of these folks or their lack of ability to discern when they are being pandered to, especially in less than a month’s time. So somehow dumbing down and sensationalizing the message at the same time while still demonstrating the hypocrisy (obvious racism within emails, degrading the church, women, minority groups, Bernie supporters), ineptitude and criminality is how to achieve getting the information out there.

      Liked by 1 person

  45. silverlakela says:

    It is great reading and sharing our thoughts with everyone, but reading these comments is like telling the choir to sing. We need to RE-POST articles on other sites to get the word out.
    RE-POST to Twitter, facebook, news sites Etc.
    We have to overcome media bias!!!
    Don’t just “like”, RE-POST!!!


    • Jamie says:

      Maybe that’s why I’m at a loss as to how this is to reach those not of the same mindset. The topic of the election was brought up at work, and while I don’t seek out the discussion, I don’t fib when asked. Was asked who I supported and I asserted that I will without question be voting for DJT. I have at least 15 objective reasons why, but no one wants to have an objective discussion. The temperature has been chilly at the workplace since. Same thing at church, at school (kids) etc. Granted, I live smack down in the middle of a liberal dystopia, so this is no way indicates the norm across the country, but it brings me to this:

      Many, unfortunately cannot post, share, like, etc., certain things on social media – due to consequences – work, school, retaliation from a, b, c. It sounds far fetched and paranoid, but it’s true. I suppose an alternate account without identifying information would serve this purpose as well though?


      • andi lee says:

        Good for you, Jaime, sorry to hear there is a chill in the air. You could ask them naysayers why they are voting for Hillary. What ability does she posess to lead? What has she championed? She has zero accomplishments on her own.


        • Jamie says:

          Oh, I certainly do question the reasoning they may have, but it seems none are willing to have an objective discussion. I request (politely) that they list positive accomplishments of hers, and….crickets. I bring up Haiti, Pay to Play, Benghazi, Uranium, etc.., and it’s all – ‘speculative’ or still better than the alternative, in their eyes. Sad. I don’t mind the chill, it’s just balancing between being honest and forthcoming when asked, and demonstrating support openly, knowing in this area and with those I deal with having such a mindset, there could very well be ramifications. That and witnessing so many fall under this ‘spell’, drives me nuts.

          If I were wealthy, or had a ‘Jamie foundation’ on par with HRC’s, I wouldn’t worry, but, it is where my bread is buttered and how I contribute to the household. That, and if it were just me, I wouldn’t mind so much, but I know without a doubt that the opinions my kids hold (though I do encourage them to form their own, regardless of what their parents’ views are), would not be well received if it was known they leaned conservatively. I’m not saying there would be safety issues, but I imagine there could very well be consequences due to their leanings. They get it, see the inconsistency and so far have been able to discern and see through the BS being fed to everyone constantly. I guess, if nothing else, it’s created young, critical thinkers.


  46. Ace says:

    Good example of how the Clintonoids manipulate the corrupt media:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s