'RIGGED' is defined as "something that is fixed in a dishonest way
to guarantee a desired outcome."
Some examples of how to rig an election (as provided by our good friends at the Democratic National Convention headquarters via Julian Assange):
So the major party in America that represents fairness and tolerance and a level playing field (according to them) has instead opted to use deceit and fear, and by collaborating with the most influential force in the world, the electronic media (see George Soros voting machine scandal), chosen to actively try to rig a national presidential election.
It is effectively a coordinated act of war on conservatism.
I heard Joy Behar, during a discussion on the progressive morning talk show "The View" when asked why liberals have no problem supporting proven slime balls that have abused women, politicians like Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson Jr, and Bill Clinton, but act repulsed by the male-chauvinistic jocktalk of Donald Trump. She said it was because as bad as their actions are, those liberals 'voted right!' They support the important social issues like abortion and minority rights, free college tuition and healthcare! They are soldiers marching in lockstep with Progressive Dogma.
For Progressives, it doesn't really matter about the candidate's character (unless they happen to be conservative), all that matters is how they vote. The ends justifies the means and the end is for liberal and progressive policies to control society. The integrity of the system is not as important as the results of the voting.
Just as the extremists who justify murder and terror as a holy act, extreme liberals justify character assassination, political corruption and the abandonment of morals as an act of Progressive Jihad.
One of the basic issues I address in my book, is the criminal fraud that has been perpetrated on American parents of college students. Politicians brag about increased participation and graduation rates, but they conveniently forget to mention that the kids are graduating college with an eighth grade education. Then those same kids are conscripted to become career government employees, given massive decision making powers affecting millions of people and billions of tax payer dollars, and guess what we get?
A bloated, arrogant and malevolent bureaucracy that expands and perpetuates itself by empowering unions and Democratic administrations. We get totally inept department heads who overspend wildly and still get horrible results. Then turn around and complain that if they had had bigger budgets, everything would be working just fine!
Skeptical? Think I am just a cranky Republican? Check this newly released study....
The Obamas invited some high profile rappers for an evening at the White House. Presumably they talked about wholesome ways to promote good values in their communities through their art.
The dignitaries included Rick Ross, Jay Z and Beyonce, and Nicki Minaj.
It must have been a thrilling night for the Obama girls, chatting with musicians whose rap reflects the trials and tribulations of young lovers and inner city blacks in today's challenging world.
Later, commenting on the crude language employed by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, First Lady Michelle Obama said, "I can't stop thinking about this (Trumps chatter with Billy Bush about how easy it is to grope fawning women). It has shaken me to my core…What message are our little girls hearing about who they should look like, how they should act?"
That would be a really good question if it weren't so disingenuous.
She had no problem embracing the rappers whose lyrics glorify misogyny and
date rape...does anyone see the hypocrisy here? Besides the persistent overuse of the F and N word in their 'music', which is common language in the vernacular of rap, these folks are enamored with sexual subservience.
Nicki Minaj -"Yes I do the cooking/ Yes I do the cleaning/ Yes I keep the nana real sweet for your eating/ Yes you be the (boss) yes I be respecting."
Jay Z - "Slid the panties right to the side/ Ain`t got the time to take drawers off!"
Beyonce - "He popped all my buttons and he ripped my blouse/
He monica-lewinski'd all on my gown..."
Rick Ross - "Put molly all in her champagne/ She ain't even know it /
I took her home and I enjoyed that/ She ain't even know it."
Mrs.Obama, one thing is for sure; our White House virtue will never be the same.
The Open and Shut Case Against Another Clinton White House
By the late Christopher Hitchens for Vanity Fair
"What would it take to ...make us wake up and inquire what on earth we are doing when we make the Clinton family drama--yet again—a central part of our own politics?
What do you have to forget or overlook in order to desire that this dysfunctional clan once more occupies the White House and is again in a position to rent the Lincoln Bedroom to campaign donors and to employ the Oval Office as a massage parlor?
You have to be able to forget, first, what happened to those who complained, or who told the truth, last time. It's often said, by people trying to show how grown-up and unshocked they are, that all Clinton did to get himself impeached was lie about sex. That's not really true. What he actually lied about, in the perjury that also got him disbarred, was the women.
And what this involved was a steady campaign of defamation, backed up by private dicks (you should excuse the expression) and salaried government employees, against women who I believe were telling the truth. In my opinion, Gennifer Flowers was telling the truth; so was Monica Lewinsky, and so was Kathleen Willey, and so, lest we forget, was Juanita Broaddrick, the woman who says she was raped by Bill Clinton. Yet one constantly reads that both Clintons, including the female who helped intensify the slanders against her mistreated sisters (Hillary), are excellent on women's "issues."
One also hears a great deal about how this awful joint tenure of the executive mansion was a good thing in that it conferred "experience" on the despised and much-deceived wife. Well, the main "experience" involved the comprehensive fouling-up of the nation's health-care arrangements, so as to make them considerably worse than they had been before and to create an opening for the worst-of-all-worlds option of the so-called HMO, combining as it did the maximum of capitalist gouging with the maximum of socialistic bureaucracy. This abysmal outcome, forgiven for no reason that I can perceive, was the individual responsibility of the woman who now seems to think it entitles her to the presidency.
But there was another "experience," this time a collaborative one, that is even more significant. During the Senate debate on the intervention in Iraq, Sen. Clinton made considerable use of her background and "experience" to argue that, yes, Saddam Hussein was indeed a threat. She did not argue so much from the position adopted by the Bush administration as she emphasized the stand taken, by both her husband and Al Gore, when they were in office, to the effect that another and final confrontation with the Baathist regime was more or less inevitable.
Now, it does not especially matter whether you agree or agreed with her about this (as I, for once, do and did). What does matter is that she has since altered her position and attempted, with her husband's help, to make people forget that she ever held it. And this, on a grave matter of national honor and security, merely to influence her short-term standing in the Iowa caucuses.
Surely that on its own should be sufficient to disqualify her from consideration?
Indifferent to truth, willing to use police-state tactics and vulgar libels against inconvenient witnesses, hopeless on health care, and flippant and fast and loose with national security: The case against Hillary Clinton for president is open-and-shut."
The above was written before the untimely and unfortunate death of Mr. Hitchens in 2011 and the contest for the election of 2012. Before the recent events of Benghazi, the DNC emails and the revelations that Clinton has collaborated with her PACs on disruptions of her opponents rallies, her lies about her experiences in Iraq, and her obvious conflicts of interest accepting speech fees from donors and international governments that have business with the State Department and the White House, and that have horrendous human rights records, especially against homosexuals and women.
Hitchen's naked assessment is haunting.
Would Columbia let Maria Teresa Osorio de Serna run for President? The notorious drug lord, heir apparent to El Chapo, has plenty of money and influence. She is a woman. She knows how to run a large complex drug smuggling operation and has international ties. She certainly has a mind of her own.
So why not?
Like Hillary, maybe it is because she is untrustworthy. Or maybe it's because a lot of people who have done business with her have suddenly turned up dead. Or maybe because she has no idea of how to legitimately run a business or a country. It could be that she is a habitual criminal running a worldwide criminal enterprise, such as those that Don Hillary runs, otherwise known as the DNC and the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.
So when Donald Trump suggests that in the upcoming Presidential election, there are issues about it's legitimacy, he is right. Again.
The fact that a person with a criminal record like Don Hillary could even be on the ballot makes this whole election suspect. Just as many of the drug lords of the world have not actually been convicted yet doesn't make it OK for them to seek public office. Law enforcement knows who did what. In our legal system, our investigators know that Hillary has been implicated in dozens of suspicious cases of intimidation, of misrepresentation, of destruction of evidence, of lying to investigators, of misappropriating funds, of obstruction of justice, etc, etc,.
There was Whitewater, the missing notes from her real estate deals that later showed up in her possession, the White House Post Office contract, Vince Foster, the missing furniture from the White House, the intimidation of women who accused her husband of sexual improprieties, the deletion of supenied emails, the destruction of her cell phones, the conversations she cannot remember, and her outright lies about the cause of the Benghazi attacks and how she dismissed the death of an ambassador as something that resulted from some guys out looking for something to blow up.
The recent release of the videos of DNC collusion in disrupting peaceful and legitimate rally for Trump amounts to massive violations of election laws and interfering with the political process, of undermining freedom of expression and the right to gather in public or private areas to voice political views. The WikiLeaks emails show multimillion dollar pay-for-play donations and gifts to the foundation and for 30 minute speeches are obviously bribes under cover of charity contributions.
How else does the Clinton Crime Family amass hundreds of millions of personal fortune while on government salaries?
As the titular head of the Democratic election arm of the party she is accountable for the actions of those hired guns, or Hombres, as Trump called them. As First Lady she got away with stuff as a courtesy to the Office of President, but now it looks more like she has managed to 'persuade' the Democratically appointed leaders of the justice department. If it weren't for a compromised DOJ and FBI, Don Hillary would be waiting for a trial right now, not parading around slapping herself on the back and hacking in the face of justice and the American electorate.
It has to be clear to any interested observer that the 4th estate is no longer a news media. There are a few organizations that actually report the news, but overall, what used to be a revered and important part of a free society has been totally corrupted.
It is painful to see such a vital and transformative institution shredded by politically driven ideologues. There is absolutely no shame in their obvious propaganda to assure the reelection of another politician that is owned and coopted by multinational corporations pushing for a one-world, borderless and globalist government.
Remember the Clarence Thomas fiasco where he was accused of 'sexual harassment'? He called it a "high-tech lynching." Substitute the name Trump, and you have history repeating itself.
Since the civil war, Democrats have used any means necessary to DESTROY their philosophical opponents, and the history is undeniable. All of the charges are racial, sexual, or involve he-said she-said accusations that are virtually unprovable but leave deep scars of innuendo. And all attacks are aimed at conservatives. In the meantime, liberals give accolades to their political affiliates who are charged with similar violations of impropriety: Clinton, Weiner, Frank, Jackson Jr., Hart, Kennedy, Mel Reynolds and others were given kid glove treatment, where the press rationalized their indiscretions as 'personal matters'.
This is so antithetical to every tenant of the constitution of the United States, yet using the power of academia to inculcate our youth in Marxist ideology, who then move up into the halls of justice, of journalism and of government, and by memorializing their leftist agenda via media manipulation of the news and the language of reporting, we are witnessing the actualization of what George Orwell predicted in his precedent book '1984'.
Watch any network present a report on our nations election, and what you get is 'newspeak'. The dismemberment of the language of truth telling smells rancid because we are witnessing the Death of Journalism.