America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in the White House

thompson

Unrepentant WrongThinker
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/1/us-really-did-have-manchurian-candidate-white-hous/

America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in the White House

By L. Todd Wood - - Sunday, July 1, 2018

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

After returning from a tour of some of the war zones in the Middle East — which ended with the Free Iran Gathering 2018 in Paris — I am struck by the realization that America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in The White House for eight years. If you look at the evidence, there really is no other conclusion. The calamitous consequences of the Obama presidency will be felt for the foreseeable future.

In the short year and a half that President Trump has been in office, he has put in place policy that has mitigated the damage that President Obama inflicted on our national security and on our allies. The speed with which Trump has been able to turn things around points to the diabolical depths the Obama administration went to in order to undermine our national strength and way of life. All Trump had to do was stop doing things that hurt America; America could then take care of itself. The results are plain as day. However, it will take decades for the Obama damage to be completely undone. The deviousness of the Obama sedition runs deep.

Think about it or a moment. If you wanted peace in the Middle East, why would you throw away the trillions of dollars spent, as well as the lives of thousands of American souls, by irresponsibly pulling out ALL American troops from Iraq? No matter your thoughts on starting the war, pulling out was an irresponsible thing to do. We still have troops in Germany, Korea and Japan, for God’s sake. Why? For stability, that’s why. As Colin Powell said, we broke it, now we own it. It was a given that instability would follow the force withdrawal. When you combine this act with the reality that Obama never really did try to defeat the Islamic State, what conclusion can you come up with? Trump defeated them in a few months. The conclusion is obvious: Obama really didn’t want to destroy them.

Why did Obama and Hillary take down Moammar Gadhafi, who had already given up his nuclear weapons? Was it to destabilize Libya, where ISIS could gain another foothold? Why did Obama help install the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? What was the agenda behind the so-called Arab Spring?

However, the coup-de-grace of anti-American activity was the JCPOA, or, to say it another way, the agreement to give Iran everything it wanted, including nuclear weapons and money — lots of money — which it immediately used to further destabilize the region, and existentially threaten the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel. To take it a step further, why didn’t Obama support the opposition against the Mullahs in 2009 when there was an obvious chance for regime change in Iran? Why didn’t Obama confront Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons use? One of the main unanswered questions is what ties did Valerie Jarrett really have to the Iranian regime?

I won’t go into why Obama ran up more debt for the United States than all previous presidents combined. I won’t ask why he weakened our armed forces. I won’t ask why he used tyrannical policies, like using the agencies of the federal government to go after his political opposition. I won’t ask why he politicized our security apparatus in an attempt to frame President Trump.

What I will say is that there was a big fox in the hen house for eight long years. Eight long years for people like Brennan, Hillary, Kerry, Clapper, Comey and Jarrett to really hurt us regarding our safety and security.

Trump has a lot of house cleaning to do. Thank goodness he’s being quick about it.
 

JF&P

Veteran Member
I think MKUltra was the programming device used on Obama....its really a powerful tool.
 

Ragnarok

On and On, South of Heaven
Blah blah blah Obama this, Hillary that, Comey something else.


Time to move on, folks
Someone else feels the way I do...

Fu^k Obama, Hillary, Comey, Lynch, Rice, etc...

The only reason they are still relevant is because we keep posting stories about their stupid asses!
 

mzkitty

I give up.
Oh, it still matters what those thieves did, because you know why?

They haven't given up at all, and they are plotting and scheming to get their claws back in as soon as possible.

You know it. I know it. Everybody with a brain knows it.

:dvl2:
 

JF&P

Veteran Member
Oh, it still matters what those thieves did, because you know why?

They haven't given up at all, and they are plotting and scheming to get their claws back in as soon as possible.

You know it. I know it. Everybody with a brain knows it.

:dvl2:
Absolutely Correct mzkitty!!!
 

NC Susan

Deceased
Someone else feels the way I do...

Fu^k Obama, Hillary, Comey, Lynch, Rice, etc...

The only reason they are still relevant is because we keep posting stories about their stupid asses!

They are relevant
They are the figure heads that are still leading the resistance army and the Obstructionist politicians

Bush CIA#1 created them ( secular godless Progressive elites Globalists ) and they have been empowered 40 years
 

Seer

Veteran Member
Oh, it still matters what those thieves did, because you know why?

They haven't given up at all, and they are plotting and scheming to get their claws back in as soon as possible.

You know it. I know it. Everybody with a brain knows it.

:dvl2:
I agree. The reason they are constantly bitching about Trump is because there are people within government who are sick of the corruption and they are the ones who encouraged Trump to run for president and prevent Hillary from completing what Obama laid the groundwork for. Trump is face of the anti Obama/Hillary true patriots in government. The deep state is fighting for their lives in a battle they will lose.

I believe Hillary and Bill will go to prison along with many others and Obama will be tried and convicted of treason.
 

sunny225

Membership Revoked
So, we need to round them all up and hang them on light posts along the road in DC.
After we do that, if there are still followers who want to riot/protest in the streets, we will start doing them the same way.
But.... here we sit, bitching about it on the internet, agreeing with one another that "something needs to be done" about them all.
They will never face punishment for any of this crap. Not in this world anyway.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Look, us constantly posting stories like this is exactly the same as the marxists still screaming at the sky because Trump won. They need to get over it and move on. Us too. Stories about what they’ve done are relevant, but stories about what terrible people they are (like this one) are not. We KNOW they’re terrible people. So? Move on already.
 

Seer

Veteran Member
Move on to where? To ignore their crimes is to accept their criminal past. To say they never will be held accountable for their actions is an admission that there is no hope for the future of our nation and that the enemies of freedom have won.

I will never give them that advantage and let them suppress my belief in the superiority of our constitutional government. As long as we have a breath in our bodies we should always resist tyranny.
 

Seer

Veteran Member
Please explain for those of us who believe that the domestic enemies of America will be held accountable for their criminal past activity.
 

Terriannie

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Look, us constantly posting stories like this is exactly the same as the marxists still screaming at the sky because Trump won. They need to get over it and move on. Us too. Stories about what they’ve done are relevant, but stories about what terrible people they are (like this one) are not. We KNOW they’re terrible people. So? Move on already.
For me, it's not the story that's intriguing, it's the Title:

"America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in the White House!"

Plus, even though it's an opinion piece, it's not from "Alex Jones" but from the "Washington Times!"

Don't you find that unusual?

Yes, I know. In clicking and reading, we find the article is NOT a discovery of Skunkworks/Mkultra/Mind Control performed on Obama. Just political crimes. But the "seed" if you will has been planted.

Going out on a conspiracy limb here, I think we just saw the first, testing of the waters so to speak, in preparing real-time, Deep State, dialog for the public.

Obama would NEVER be associated with the Deep State. He has always been cast as a "god."
 

flying screwdriver

Veteran Member
Move on to where? To ignore their crimes is to accept their criminal past. To say they never will be held accountable for their actions is an admission that there is no hope for the future of our nation and that the enemies of freedom have won.

I will never give them that advantage and let them suppress my belief in the superiority of our constitutional government. As long as we have a breath in our bodies we should always resist tyranny.
But WHY???

'cause Justice.
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
How long does CRIME matter, once it has been committed? What's the statute of limitations on trying to overthrow a country? On stealing billions in a global charity fraud? On selling national resources for personal gains?

Does that not matter? Are we supposed to just forget about it now and leave those crimes uninvestigated and unprosecuted?
 

mzkitty

I give up.
How long does CRIME matter, once it has been committed? What's the statute of limitations on trying to overthrow a country? On stealing billions in a global charity fraud? On selling national resources for personal gains?

Does that not matter? Are we supposed to just forget about it now and leave those crimes uninvestigated and unprosecuted?
Why yes, yes we are. After all, the crimes are so monstrously huge that we just can't really see them, peons that we all are. Therefore to "them" they don't really exist. You can't pin crimes on them if they don't really exist, now can you? Big numbers confuse us. We don't own any big numbers ourselves, so how can we simpletons possibly understand them?

:lol:
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
https://www.hoover.org/research/hillarys-hamartia

Hillary’s Hamartia
by Victor Davis Hanson
Thursday, June 21, 2018

Hillary Clinton could have spared the country hours of wasted investigations, debates, and near civil war had she just made three easy ethical and logical choices.

One: Had she, as Secretary of State, used a standard Department of State email server for her official correspondence, there would have been no Inspector General’s 500-page plus report. Indeed, there would have been no three-year-long email scandal that has all but destroyed the reputation of the Washington hierarchy of the FBI.

In other words, there would have been no need for all the distortions by Clinton, the FBI, and the Department of Justice. Just think of it: no bit-bleaching of Clinton hard drives, no smashing of mobile devices, and no secret meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac.

Nor would there have been embarrassing press conferences by former FBI Director James Comey during the 2016 campaign. Loyalists like Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin would have had no need to lie about their knowledge of their boss’s illegal server.

There would been no need for silly euphemisms inserted into the FBI reports to exonerate Clinton. No investigation of Anthony Weiner’s laptop would have followed. No deceptions would have arisen about “yoga” and a “wedding” as the topics of some 30,000 deleted Clinton emails.

There would have been no conflict of interest of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who investigated the Clinton email scandal, shortly after his wife had received Clinton-related campaign donations. McCabe would not have had any private server emails in the first place over which to exhibit his lack of judgment.

Two: Had Hillary Clinton campaigned more in the key purple swing states—especially Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—during the key last month of the election, she might well have won the Electoral College. Instead, quite delusionally, she sought a “mandate,” headquartered in Brooklyn and camping out in unwinnable red states like Georgia and Arizona, squandering resources as a frenetic Trump pilfered her supposedly secure Midwestern base.

Much of the illegal behavior at the Department of Justice and FBI was predicated on the administrative state assuming that Clinton would win the election. Had she done what all the experts and polls predicted—campaigned logically and won her predicted landslide—we would currently have no scandals in quite another sense.

A President Hillary Clinton would have squashed the 2016 email investigation of herself. No FBI or DOJ careerist would have been so naive as to risk a career pursuing it. There would be no inquiries into 2016 FISA court abuse. The lovebird texting of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok would either never have emerged, or would have been dismissed as innocent overzealous supportive banter by President Clinton.

No one would care that a President Clinton had silenced inquiries into how her campaign had hired Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on her rival Donald Trump.

Under a President Clinton, we also would have had no idea that the Obama FBI had inserted a spy into the Trump campaign in the person of Stefan Halper.

No one would have known or probably cared that the Obama national security team had unmasked the names of U.S. citizens swept up with FISA court surveillance and leaked them to the press. Indeed, a President Clinton would likely have envisioned overzealous careerists who may have broken the law on her behalf as loyalists to be rewarded, rather than as lawbreakers to be referred to federal prosecutors.

Three: Had the defeated Hillary Clinton only accepted the results of the Electoral College, like all other defeated candidates, there would have been no post-election collusion hysteria. Had Clinton acted magnanimously like other sorely disappointed losers—Jimmy Carter in 1980, Walter Mondale in 1984, Michael Dukakis in 1988, George H.W. Bush in 1992, Bob Dole in 1996, John McCain in 2008, and Mitt Romney in 2012—there would have been no accusations of scandal.

We would not have heard that the voting machines in particular states were supposedly rigged (they were not). Third-party candidate Jill Stein would not have sued over the results. There would have been no pathetic effort to warp the postelection voting of the Electoral College. The entire Russian collusion myth and the misadventures of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigations arose largely because an embittered Clinton wished to blame almost anything but her own ill-starred campaign for her loss.

Instead, an embittered postelection Clinton went on an endless global book tour. She tweeted as if she were Trump. She joined the “Resistance.” She hit the talk shows.

In these venues, she has blamed almost everything and everyone for her humiliating defeat: the Russians, James Comey, the cash-poor Democratic National Committee, red-state racists and sexists, bullying husbands who silence their wives, the Electoral College, the deplorables and irredeemables, the WikiLeaks email revelations, right-wing media, the mainstream media in general, Republican efforts at voter suppression, right-wing donors, Steve Bannon and Breitbart News, Facebook, Bernie Sanders and his socialist agenda, Barack Obama, Netflix, fake news accounts, the Republican National Committee, her own campaign staff, Jill Stein, Anthony Weiner, and on and on it goes.

The irony is that as the 2016 campaign wound down and most experts and pollsters forecast a 90% likelihood of a Trump defeat, both President Obama and Clinton had warned Trump not to be a sore loser. Obama had condescendingly advised likely losing candidate Trump to stop whining. Obama sermonized that it was absolutely impossible for any foreign nation to tamper with a U.S. election (and by extension equally impossible for Trump to win).

Clinton seconded Obama’s assertions. She chided the sputtering Trump campaign for questioning whether the 2016 election would in retrospect be fair.

Of course, to imagine what a more savvy, humble, and gracious Hillary Clinton might have done during and after the election is an exercise in futility.

Hillary Clinton is by nature sometimes clueless, often haughty, and characteristically vindictive. To understand her response to her defeat, it would be wise to turn to the Athenian tragedian Sophocles and other Greek authors.

Sophocles, Euripides, and the Greek epic poets, historians, and tragedians explore the idea of hamartia. Such an innate character flaw, such as Oedipus’s self-regard or Jason’s obtuseness, can be repressed, but it will inevitably resurface at the most inopportune moment. From Clinton’s cattle-future imbroglio and the “missing” Rose Law Firm files to the Uranium One and Clinton Foundation scandals, Clinton for over 40 years has never much worried about the wages of chronic deception and ends-justifying-the-means morality.

The next step in the slow cycle of classical self-destruction is koros—a greed or overreaching ambition that is the result of hamartia. It thus deludes the apparently successful into believing there will be few consequences to their excess. Koros makes self-reflection impossible. As first lady, Senator, Secretary of State, and a presidential candidate, Clinton saw no ostensible connection between her character flaws and a lack of success. Indeed, her fabrications, excesses, and deceptions previously led to ever-greater career advancement, and were seen as integral to her good fortune.

Koros—the mindset that there are no consequences to surrendering to innately destructive impulses—leads to hubris, or a pattern of blindness brought on by overweening arrogance. Hubris is why no one questioned why Hillary Clinton was using a private email server. No campaign aide or staffer risked suggesting to a hubristic Clinton that she was wasting her time campaigning in Georgia or in bitter defeat joining the Resistance.

The Greeks saw atê as the concrete result of hubris. Atê was synonymous with individual acts of abject folly. In the-emperor-has-no-clothes-fashion, Clinton doubled down on her delusions. So, her hubris-driven recklessness continued, if not accelerated, as she ranted about the “deplorables” and “irredeemables.”

The final act in a multistoried Greek tragedy is the advent of Nemesis or divine retribution. At some point, the gods decide they’ve had enough of mortal excess, arrogance, and folly, and intervene to destroy the perpetrator—and often everyone in his or her vicinity.

Usually that happens at the pinnacle of the tragic hero’s perceived success, as in the case of a clueless but innately haughty King Oedipus of Thebes. In Clinton’s case, Nemesis approached in late 2016, when experts had all but coronated her as president-elect months before Election Day.

When Nemesis finally hit Clinton on November 8, 2016, she was stunned, unable to even extend a simple public gesture of concession on election night. From there, Nemesis took her on a downward spiral. Clinton descended from once polling as the most popular woman in the U.S. to a rather sad figure, scapegoating, weaving conspiracy theories, blame-gaming, and endlessly replaying the disaster of 2016—a sort of poor, blinded and dethroned Oedipus wandering in exile in the fashion of peripatetic former FBI Director James Comey, whose character and fate in some ways are similar to Clinton’s.

In sum, Clinton made a series of nearly inexplicable, but clearly disastrous decisions—assuming that she could set up an unlawful private server as Secretary of State, that her 2016 victory was foreordained, and that she would deny and seek to overturn rather than accept her defeat. At any time, easy and obvious choices would have spared her a great deal of humiliation and her associates and supporters disaster.

But then again, according to the classical belief in fate and necessity, Clinton may have had little choice after all—given that her innate flaws were a sort of bomb that was always ticking until blowing up at the most appropriately tragic time.
 

Freeholder

This too shall pass.
IMO, these articles are extremely important, because the Far Left is NOT GONE. And if we aren't very careful and very determined, they WILL COME BACK. And IF they come back, they will make d****d sure that they never lose power again, and they will do their very best to DESTROY those who oppose them. Sorry for the shouting, but we've got to realize that just because Trump is in the White House for a few years, it does not mean that the war is won. We've won a battle, we have not yet won the war. And if some major changes are not made to our education system immediately, we CAN NOT win this war, because the public education system is still churning out young Progressives by the millions. Don't take for granted that what has been won is ours to keep, people. It is not.

And if Trump was serious about taking back this country, he would be focused on fixing the public education system. I haven't seen any sign of that yet.

Kathleen
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Oh, it still matters what those thieves did, because you know why?

They haven't given up at all, and they are plotting and scheming to get their claws back in as soon as possible.

You know it. I know it. Everybody with a brain knows it.

:dvl2:
And the Perps are still free.

Trump does not realize how "centralizing" getting even a few of these red suited Deep Staters in orange would be. It would call forth a big "unification" of the Deplorables and re-election Trump (or a successor) would be assured in 2020.

Of course it would divide the country - but isn't the country already divided politically? It always has been. Its just now everyone has forgotten the advantages of being "civil" - a whole generation has grown up without the carnage of Pullman Strikes, Civil War, Anti-War activism, Kent State if you will. I suspect that violence MUST be an undertone simply to convince the majority that Rule of Law:TM: is preferable to outright violence.

Sad this is true. Enlightenment must be learned. Humanity is not born with it.

Dobbin
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Evidently there is complete lack of reading comprehension of my post 17. Re-read it, as many times as necessary to understand what i was trying to say.
 

night driver

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
I'm not sure I care ref L. Todd Wood and what he "thinks". He is NOT the thinker that either V D Hanson or Col Kurt are.
 

ainitfunny

TB Fanatic
Evidently there is complete lack of reading comprehension of my post 17. Re-read it, as many times as necessary to understand what i was trying to say.
I do not dismiss the tentacles of liberal political influence, intimidation and control that those embedded liberals who still run every government agency still have to intimidate and threaten conservatives, those democrats who still can influence and steer political discourse will still try to do so. I may have misunderstood, but my gut says you are trying to keep this board as free as possible,"but you still needs to find work" and right now liberals can still shut down access to that and I do not doubt that there are also certain parameters within which even "free" discussion of powerful liberal politicians can be "discouraged" with sufficiently intimidating "incentives" from powerful people to "squash or redirect" such forum discussions that veer into "jail Hillary or Obama" territory.

I could be wrong, I often am, but my gut has a pretty good read on things. I do not expect you to be as free as we are to say what you really think and under what constraints you are able to provide this forum for us.
 
Last edited:

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
You are indeed wrong.

Just like we finally started moving the 911 “Truther” threads because it was all editorial, it’s time to start moving the “so-and-so is a terrible person” editorials. They aren’t news, it’s already been discussed to death, and we all know how terrible they are. We don’t need to keep reading about it every damn day.

It’s the exact same thing as TDS, but in reverse.
 
Top