Video shows Hillary Clinton 'lying for 13 minutes'

YouTube video entitled "Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight" has been viewed more than seven million times on the internet.
The video shows Mrs Clinton changing her positions on a variety of issues including Wall Street, healthcare, trade deals, and same sex marriage
Mrs Clinton, the probable Democratic presidential nominee, has suffered from low poll numbers when voters are asked about honesty and trustworthiness.





The video and its wide reach is likely to exacerbate that problem.
It was posted by a YouTube user called Michael Armstrong in January.
He later explained that it was "not a pro-Trump video" and he planned a similar attack on the presumptive Republican nominee in due course.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/20/video-shows-hillary-clinton-lying-for-13-minutes/

Everyone is so very busy hating Trump that they don't seem to realise that Hilary is no better.

At least he's an obvious snake and not one that hides in the grass.

Betting that the Trump video doesn't get 7 million views, or much news coverage ...

NAME ONE politician, corporate leader or Royal who wasn't a born liar, by nature ???

eddie wrote:
Everyone is so very busy hating Trump that they don't seem to realise that Hilary is no better.

At least he's an obvious snake and not one that hides in the grass.

WHAT A LOAD of partisan rubbish...

NO matter how bad Clinton gets, she's not even half as bad as Trump !!!

What do you mean by Royal?

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:
Everyone is so very busy hating Trump that they don't seem to realise that Hilary is no better.

At least he's an obvious snake and not one that hides in the grass.

WHAT A LOAD of partisan rubbish...

NO matter how bad Clinton gets, she's not even half as bad as Trump !!!

Really? I'd say that she's just as bad.

It's the same old fabricated lies that you hear from the RW all the time.  Who among the general population didn't evolve on gay marriage during the past 10-years of this century?

On November 4, 2008, voters approved the Proposition 8 and made same-sex marriage illegal in California, arguably the most liberal state in the nation.  Proposition 8 was a statewide ballot proposition in California.  

On June 28, 2014, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco lifted its stay on an injunction, which ordered state officials to stop enforcing Prop, 8, Within hours both couples who were plaintiffs in the case had wed.  

That's 2008 to 2014, 6-years, a mere blink of the eye.  The opinion of the whole nation was evolving on the issue of gay marriages.  The wonder is that it happened so fast.  

The clip in the OP, in order to find Clinton allegedly "lying" on the topic, goes from 2002 to 2013, an even greater span of time.  The wonder is that Michael Armstrong had to go back so far to fabricate his 'gotcha' moment.  

The timing shows Hillary was ahead of the rest of the nation by some 5-years on gay marriage.  In other words, she was leading the charge and was probably foremost among the reasons why the nation changed.  Yet Mr. Armstrong skews the facts by contrasting the two positions as if they didn't happen ten years apart.

The rest of the fabrications come down to a single frustration we have had with all of the Republican chatter: there's no there, there.  Emails?  Not one violation has been raised; it's all a hoax.  Wall street?  How are you going to change laws without Congress?  Benghazi?  Give me a break; even Republicans say they can't find anything there.  Healthcare?  Hillary was way out in front, when Congress held back.  NAFTA?  That was her husband's administration.  In sum, it's just a heap of steaming garbage, composted and complied by the RW.  Do you get it?  None of it has any policy merit; it's all garbage designed to distract you.

NOW, HERE COMES ANOTHER LECTURE ON HOW/WHY THE RW LIES:  The RW represents special interests, while the LW represents the general interest.  The RW lies because if it became known that they didn't represent most of the population, they couldn't garner the votes to win elections.

Thus, the RW has to distract the voter with sleight-of-hand tricks like these.  The RW is elitist, and thus believes that you, the people, are not smart enough to figure out this bit of trickery.  After all, as John Stuart Mill pointed out, the largest proportion of Conservative membership is "stupid" and cannot figure such things out: ergo we have fools like Trump.

The 'take-home' lesson here is that you have just witnessed, in a microcosm, how stupid the RW thinks you are, and how stupid they are for so underestimating you.  It is another exercise in how the RW uses duplicity and fraud to win elections.  See, Why Elephants Lie.

I watched the first segment about gay marriage and presume the rest of the video will follow along the same lines.

In 2002 she didn't support gay marriage.
In 2013 she did......I imagine millions of people changed their minds about this issue in this time frame.
I know I did.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:



WHAT A LOAD of partisan rubbish...

NO matter how bad Clinton gets, she's not even half as bad as Trump !!!

Really? I'd say that she's just as bad.

Utter bullshit...

Well I think your post is utter bullshit

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:



WHAT A LOAD of partisan rubbish...

NO matter how bad Clinton gets, she's not even half as bad as Trump !!!

Really? I'd say that she's just as bad.

It's not about 'bad'.  Hillary does not have the detachment from reality that Trump has.  

Donald Trump really is a loose canon.  Ask yourself one question: how is he going to build the wall?  Best estimates put it at $25-billion, not the $10-million that Trump puts it.  Then there's the buying of all property along the border.  Eminent domain?  You couldn't even get re-elected if you alienated that many people.  Plus the additional expense of buying all that property.

Ok, he wants to deport 11-million Mexicans.  Where is the money coming from for that fiasco?  Congress.  Um...is this the same Congress headed by Paul Ryan, who won't even vote for Trump?  As I recall, this is the Congress that refused to even pass a budget.  If they are going to pay for such a mass migration, why can't they pay for falling bridges or more inspectors at airports.

Prohibit the immigration of Muslims?  What does he do about the First Amendment?  Maybe Paul Ryan will head a drive to amend the Constitution and eliminate freedom of religion...um, the same freedom that Christians are using to discriminate in employment, housing and public accommodations.

Rearm Europe with nuclear weapons?  Really??  Does he think the UK, France, Germany, the Dutch, Italy and sundry others won't object to that proposal.  Mindless!!

Plus, all those cunts (using Donald's language, here) who love him, and those Mexican rapists who will vote for him...and those women who are having their periods...oh yes, and the traditional conservative Republicans. he thinks he's going to tap into these populations to have an overwhelming victory.  The man is in La-La land.  

Calm down Quill! I didn't say I liked him

The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

eddie wrote:Calm down Quill!  I didn't say I liked him

I'm responding to the contrast.  The only reason I quote you is to merge into your chat with Wolf.  It's not that I see them as different brands...I don't even see them as the same product.

She's cunning, yes. But he's unable to generate any mental energy. He's a classic reflexive knuckledragger.

Paul Ettinger wrote:The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

Complex ideas require more words to communicate than the simplistic, reflexive grunts employed by the right.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Calm down Quill!  I didn't say I liked him

I'm responding to the contrast.  The only reason I quote you is to merge into your chat with Wolf.  It's not that I see them as different brands...I don't even see them as the same product.

She's cunning, yes.  But he's unable to generate any mental energy.  He's a classic reflexive knuckledragger.

I think you're wrong. There are a lot of people claiming he's waking people up - the wrong kind of people maybe, but he is creating a buzz, Quill.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

Complex ideas require more words to communicate than the simplistic, reflexive grunts employed by the right.

Bullshit requires waffle...


Check my signature about truth being found in simplicity...

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'm responding to the contrast.  The only reason I quote you is to merge into your chat with Wolf.  It's not that I see them as different brands...I don't even see them as the same product.

She's cunning, yes.  But he's unable to generate any mental energy.  He's a classic reflexive knuckledragger.

I think you're wrong. There are a lot of people claiming he's waking people up - the wrong kind of people maybe, but he is creating a buzz, Quill.

We can all make shit up: Melania was a high-priced prostitute before she married Donald; Trump's endorsement by the NRA means he favors arming ISIS; Trump's failure to release his tax returns is because he took advantage of a loophole that offered forgiveness for those who had formerly lied on their returns, making him a felon.

See? It's easy. Trump does it everyday. So, what's to wake up to? Pee Wee Herman could do that.

P.S.:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

Complex ideas require more words to communicate than the simplistic, reflexive grunts employed by the right.

Bullshit requires waffle...


Check my signature about truth being found in simplicity...

Hate to break it to you but Newtons laws Got infinity more complex to be correct when we started launching satellites and understanding space etc...
SO sort of proves that simplicity is for simple moments, but over any length of time and space variation is encountered and then requires complexity to adapt to the reality of multiple situations.

Newton was also a bit crazy and believed that the world would have ended in a biblical style Apocalypse long before now

Paul Ettinger wrote:The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

I don't know that she will be as good or bad as trump and i think that is the thing with trump it is a vote for change but what exactly is unknown.

So if you are wall street type or have vested interests in maintaining the status quo than Hillary will be better but if are a well prepared prepper that has spent the last decade preparation for an Apocalypse this might FINALLY be you chance.


So personally 50/50 on who is 'better'
but they are going to be quite different i think

And Trumps 'Apocalyptic' vote is gaining far more momentum than the old blood on either side wants to admit

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:The facts are this.

I do not mind people changing their opinion, but she has bullshitted claiming she has not

She will make as good a President as Trump, in other words, does not give two fucks about the US people.

She will only use them to gain office

As usual we have the long winded excuses from the left

Complex ideas require more words to communicate than the simplistic, reflexive grunts employed by the right.

Which shows your line of thinking is prejudiced along the same lines like racism, based politically, which is nonsense of course.
Which just proves you are no better than a racist, because as seen you hold a prejudice and inferior view of people.
One is racially, yours is evern more ignorant based on varying political beliefs, because you think you are morally and ethically right.
Based on your regressive views and continued defense of bad beliefs, it makes you the worst hypocrite

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Complex ideas require more words to communicate than the simplistic, reflexive grunts employed by the right.

Which shows your line of thinking is prejudiced along the same lines like racism, based politically, which is nonsense of course.
Which just proves you are no better than a racist, because as seen you hold a prejudice and inferior view of people.
One is racially, yours is evern more ignorant based on varying political beliefs, because you think you are morally and ethically right.
Based on your regressive views and continued defense of bad beliefs, it makes you the worst hypocrite

You've really gone downhill, didge.

Original Quill wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:



Which shows your line of thinking is prejudiced along the same lines like racism, based politically, which is nonsense of course.
Which just proves you are no better than a racist, because as seen you hold a prejudice and inferior view of people.
One is racially, yours is evern more ignorant based on varying political beliefs, because you think you are morally and ethically right.
Based on your regressive views and continued defense of bad beliefs, it makes you the worst hypocrite

You've really gone downhill, didge.

Again another idiot thinking he holds some ethical and moral high ground.
You continue to do what you do best Quill

I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

eddie wrote:I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

Really, I don't even think of didge as a RW. He used to have great potential for intelligent discussion. I didn't care which side he landed on.

But now all of his posts are: 'you fuck-face", "idiot" (big one), "fool", "ignorant", "stupid", "tool"...he's so bent on attacking the poster that he leaves no room for the message. I can understand if one uses a colorful noun now and then to get a message across, but when you leave out the message it becomes pointless.

When I say didge has gone downhill, I'm really not addressing him in the here-and-now. It's more of a lament for the didge that used-to-be.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

Really, I don't even think of didge as a RW.  He used to have great potential for intelligent discussion.  I didn't care which side he landed on.

But now all of his posts are: 'you fuck-face", "idiot" (big one), "fool", "ignorant", "stupid", "tool"...he's so bent on attacking the poster that he leaves no room for the message.  I can understand if one uses a colorful noun now and then to get a message across, but when you leave out the message it becomes pointless.

When I say didge has gone downhill, I'm really not addressing him in the here-and-now.  It's more of a lament for the didge that used-to-be.

See yet more lies as I have not even sworn at you and this is all the left can do in debate, when they meet people, like me, who constantly put them in their place on things they thought they knew more on and as seen do not. You just try to deligitimize people and its simple childish and pathetic.
So I really am not concerned on your views of me, as you are certainly not the standard to be looked up to let alone be seen as anyone of any good standing

Paul Ettinger wrote:But then you are without a doubt one of the worst regressives on here who advocates doing nothing to combat the world problems, which as seen only increases them.

Anything else monkey boy?

So much of his effort goes into name-calling and jingoism.  He used to have so much more intelligence to his posts.

Original Quill wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:But then you are without a doubt one of the worst regressives on here who advocates doing nothing to combat the world problems, which as seen only increases them.

Anything else monkey boy?

So much of his effort goes into name-calling and jingoism.  He used to have so much more intelligence to his posts.

Again you are not the standard to judge on intelligence, that is your first failing and the fact you simply look down think you are more intelligent than others.

I thought the Gif suited you down to a tea

eddie wrote:I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

First off, Didge had just lumped the left all in together. Also, I didn't mean to hurt his wittle feelings, I thought of my response as banter

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

First off, Didge had just lumped the left all in together. Also, I didn't mean to hurt his wittle feelings, I thought of my response as banter

Incorrect, I call out those left and regressive on here, that is simple a fact.

You though now claim humour

Not buying, as you are one of the most prejudiced on here

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I think Didge has a point tbh, and it's something I've pointed out before:

Why is it ok for everyone on here to brand people (RW'ers) "stupid" and "ignorant" and saying they "grunt"?

You're all fond of lumping people together. It's stupid.

First off, Didge had just lumped the left all in together. Also, I didn't mean to hurt his wittle feelings, I thought of my response as banter

Incorrect, I call out those left and regressive on here, that is simple a fact.

You though now claim humour

Not buying, as you are one of the most prejudiced on here

Correction -- you call everyone who disagrees with you on here "left and regressive." It's like how I know what's going to happen if I tap my knee with a mallet.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Incorrect, I call out those left and regressive on here, that is simple a fact.

You though now claim humour

Not buying, as you are one of the most prejudiced on here

Correction -- you call everyone who disagrees with you on here "left and regressive." It's like how I know what's going to happen if I tap my knee with a mallet.

Incorrect, as i disagree with Tommy, Victor at times and others, shoiwing again this is all the left can do is continue to lie.
Maybe you can show me where I have ever called Stormee or tommy left?

I shall await your apology

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Correction -- you call everyone who disagrees with you on here "left and regressive." It's like how I know what's going to happen if I tap my knee with a mallet.

Incorrect, as i disagree with Tommy, Victor at times and others, shoiwing again this is all the left can do is continue to lie.
Maybe you can show me where I have ever called Stormee or tommy left?

I shall await your apology

Like Trump, tweets endlessly, says nothing.

Original Quill wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:
Incorrect, as i disagree with Tommy, Victor at times and others, shoiwing again this is all the left can do is continue to lie.
Maybe you can show me where I have ever called Stormee or tommy left?

I shall await your apology

Like Trump, tweets endlessly, says nothing.  

Quill trying to think of anything without constantly blaming Republicans