Hillary Clinton gave order for Waco massacre

originally posted by: ChesterJohn

the Kennedy's were assassinated, Nixon had to resign, Chuck Colson did the time for Watergate.

Bill Clinton still "dicking bimbo's in the next room, never got in trouble, Obama has lied so many times and no one cares not even the peopel or the media, and Hillary well we are still waiting.

the point being you said none of them got in trouble. I pointed out it wasn't true except int he case of the Clinton's.

I'm talking about Legal Trouble so Kennedy's don't make the list.

But Nixon is a good example because like I said, they might lose their position but that's it. He didn't have to pay for his crimes like anyone else would have to. Obama and Clinton will also get away with whatever they want. BTW, lying isn't always a crime depending upon the situation.

I know you want to make it seem like only Clinton or Obama or maybe even those on the Left get away with stuff while the Right have to pay, but that's not how it works. They both get away with crimes every single day. You don't have to be a Clinton to be a criminal and get away with it. But if you're a Clinton, you probably are a criminal and will get away with it.

a reply to: randomthoughts12

What scandals citing otherwise are you talking about and what physical evidence of tampering are you talking about???

Can you back up anything you just said or should we just assume you're correct and honest because you say so???

a reply to: ColaTesla

Why does this not surprise me....? I guess they were just some of those deplorable people, in her book, and not as important as her agenda.

a reply to: schuyler

And you have presented nothing but denial. The lack of evidence is not proof of anything. No, I do not have the definitive proof you seek. If I did there would be people behind bars for this. As I said, many people have sought out proof about the clintons. Even when it seems that an indictment or trial is imminent somehow evidence is lacking. Tapes vanish, servers get wiped, cell phones get destroyed, any number of seemingly incredible things happen. This is nothing new with the clintons. But lets ignore that repeating history and just say she has no connection, even though it would serve her purpose. When hard evidence continually gets lost or destroyed or withheld, and the only witnesses keep having mysterious accidents or committing unusual suicides, proof will be hard to attain. I am not the first to have failed to produce proof of their guilt. That in itself proves NOTHING.

ATF is part of the treasury department, just like the secret service. At one time or another any one of them could be on a security detail for the president. While not likely as such in an ongoing basis, they could and were assigned to his security team. My statement regarding the first field duty assignment after transfer applied to only one of them. My apology.

All you have done is demand proof and deny. You have proven nothing at all except that you want very badly to deny the possibility that hillary had anything to do with this.

a reply to: schuyler

Then you go tell everyone that if they contradict you they "damn well better" have evidence.

Cut and paste works here. There is no reason to misquote me unless you have an agenda...

I said if you are going to call me a liar you better damn well prove it. And you haven't proven anything. Not a damn thing. You bark but don't bite.

You are so convinced that my opinion is wrong lets see some evidence from you that proves it. You are free to disagree all you want but to do so you should have something more than the desire to not believe what you are reading. When your argument consists of nothing but nay saying, you have no argument at all. Show some reason, some fact, something tangible to support your rabid denial. Then you have something to shout about.

I think its pretty ridiculous that you can sit here and yap at me for not having proof. The AG allegedly couldnt find proof. The FBI couldnt find proof. The congressional committees couldnt find proof. Thousands of investigative journalists all over the world couldnt find proof. But lets all rip on vroom because he is in the same boat as so many others. He knows what happened but has no proof.

How nice it must be to sit back in relative obscurity and take pot shots at people trying to shed some light on a horrendous violation of life and liberty. You should be proud. Not many people would do that...

originally posted by: mOjOm

How dense and dishonest can you possibly be??? There is ZERO evidence to show that Hillary had anything to do with Waco.

Well of *Course* the evidence was covered up as with everything they do.

She only got caught on the email scandals because somebody got careless.

All liars get exposed eventually.

a reply to: mOjOm

How dense and dishonest can you possibly be??? There is ZERO evidence to show that Hillary had anything to do with Waco. Janet Reno herself testified to congress admitting that she was responsible for what happened there.

And the AG testified to congress that her meeting with bill in the secured hangar was "unplanned". As if anything the clintons do is unplanned. And you ask about being dense and dishonest?

If you are using the "she said it so it must be true" defense...with the clintons and their allies...all I can say is wow... Good luck with that one.

Wasnt that Madeleine Albright Secretary of State under Bill Clinton that gave those orders? At least that is what all the documentation states of the time.

Listen up!!!

This is not the MUD PIT.
Community Announcement re: Decorum
This thread is about HIllary and Waco....please stick to the topic.
Quit the bickering...and derailing with off topic arguments.

You are responsible for your own posts.




and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: Sillyolme

LOL.

Set from inside.....thats as sketchy as saying HC had everything actioned so she could have 3 Secret Service Agents who knew of Billys Blunders who had been "transferred or assigned" to Waco EXECUTED VIA SNIPERS FROM CHOPPERS and from SHOOTERS INSIDE.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You want us to believe that the whole thing and all the players involved was all just so that the Clinton's could cover the deaths of 4 guys????

That's insane. There are far easier ways to off someone and get away with it.

Nor does it change the fact that Reno made the call!!!!

Even if we are to allow your far fetched theory here, at best you are saying that Hillary used the situation to hide the murder of 4 other people during the chaos of that event. But that still isn't the same as ordering or commanding what was happening there.

Using Waco as a distraction to kill 4 guys is like buying a car lot to try and hide a single vehicle you shouldn't have purchased in the first place. It makes no sense.

You really should take a drive to Arkansas and talk to folks around Little Rock who were there when the Clintons ruled. This sort of thing was common in his rise to power. Quite a few members of the Trailer Park Trash clan were horribly murdered and nobody was ever brought to justice for those murders. Lots of others committed suicide, some who were so talented that they managed to shoot themselves in the back of the head twice. Left handed people shot themselves with their right hand.

I'm sorry to report it but there are people in the world who have absolutely no respect for human life other than their own. Their actions don't make sense to those of us who could never take a life simply to further political aims. The Clintons are part of that cult. So are their good friends the Bush clan. They belong in a cell beside Manson.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Dude give me a break. You say you know so much about what happened but you don't seem to know a damn thing.

Janet Reno openly admitted that she made the call. She was interviewed multiple times admitting to it. She testified saying the same thing. She regretted it however because she was also being lied to about the situation. But she made the call.

She was even questioned why she was taking the blame rather than the president. She testified it was because it was in fact her decision and that she told the president that according to her intel it was the correct thing to do and that she'd take full responsibility for it. Well, as we know it didn't go too well and she took responsibility for it. Sort of I guess. She at least admitted it was her call and that things went wrong for whatever that's worth.

Anyone can just claim anything I guess now. The Conspiracy Theorists dream come true. A world where simply making up any claim at all and not having any evidence to support it means you're more correct than anyone having testimony, confessions, evidence, video, etc. to prove their side.

It's like a Reality where "God of the Gaps" is the top answer for everything. Here's a theory that I have no evidence for so my claim is that since we don't know what happened it must be . Don't bother providing evidence to oppose it either because my Non-Evidence is more powerful than everything you have. Because I base my argument on ignorance. That is your argument right there. You have no evidence, ignore all evidence to the contrary, claim that nobody knows what happened then insert your theory as the answer. Well it doesn't work that way. Your ignorance about the facts don't make you correct. Sorry.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Vroomfondel

I don't doubt your story and I'm sorry to hear about your friends tragic death.

But nothing you said has anything to do with Hillary being the cause of it.

The sole benefit from the entire event was the clintons eliminating four secret service agents who knew too much. Absolutely no other person or group benefited from this entire exercise. Yet it still took place. Dozens of lives lost, women and children murdered. And what came of it? Nothing other than four voices who could have spoken out against the clintons were silenced.

And that is the motive, right there, for anyone wondering why she would push for such an action! So sorry about your friend. Horrible case, all around. Wonder what those four knew?

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

And that is the motive, right there, for anyone wondering why she would push for such an action! So sorry about your friend. Horrible case, all around. Wonder what those four knew?

Right because that's the best way to knock off 4 guys and get away with it. To send them into harms way on the chance that they'd all get killed in the process, thereby making their deaths more public and widely known and publicized and studied than ever which then launches another massive scandal resulting in one of the worst and most tragic blunders ever in our nations history.

That's your theory for why the whole thing happened huh. As a covert way to kill 4 guys that in fact made their deaths the focal point which set off a whole scandal and government blunder which is still talked about today??? Because the First Lady has the authority and power to do that but apparently can't delete some emails or get sick without hiding it??? Sure, makes perfect sense.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: mOjOm

How dense and dishonest can you possibly be??? There is ZERO evidence to show that Hillary had anything to do with Waco.

Well of *Course* the evidence was covered up as with everything they do.

She only got caught on the email scandals because somebody got careless.

All liars get exposed eventually.

Wonder if any of the hackers have been able to obtain the phone calls NSA has been recording for so long? Phone logs are good but the actual calls would be interesting. Oh, forget it----that would violate national security interests, can't have that!
We all know that those nasty cultists in Waco were very dangerous to national security. TPTB told us so.

So, let me see if I understand correctly here. The Hillary Kool Aide crowd is saying as First Lady, she wasn't involved in any pollicital affairs, and didn't make the call for Waco, but in the same breath, use her time as First Lady as presidential experience? Which is it? Either she had her hand in calling shots, or she was just smiling for the camera while propping Bill up as president.
Does her time as First Lady qualify her experience, or doesn't it. Simple question.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

And that is the motive, right there, for anyone wondering why she would push for such an action! So sorry about your friend. Horrible case, all around. Wonder what those four knew?

Right because that's the best way to knock off 4 guys and get away with it. To send them into harms way on the chance that they'd all get killed in the process, thereby making their deaths more public and widely known and publicized and studied than ever which then launches another massive scandal resulting in one of the worst and most tragic blunders ever in our nations history.

That's your theory for why the whole thing happened huh. As a covert way to kill 4 guys that in fact made their deaths the focal point which set off a whole scandal and government blunder which is still talked about today??? Because the First Lady has the authority and power to do that but apparently can't delete some emails or get sick without hiding it??? Sure, makes perfect sense.

And your theory is what, again? You buy the official story, hook, line, and sinker. You assume that Reno most be responsible, because she took the fall. You assume that the Clintons, with a long list of dead bodies to their credit, were utterly innocent. Using a case like that would be, clearly, an excellent way to kill four people, and have most believe it was in the line of duty. You believe that's what happened. The scandal was about why the action happened, who was to blame, who shot first, etc., not about for specific people on duty at the time. Plenty of smoke there to distract from them, especially if most people didn't have any idea they had dirt on the Clintons. THREE people, in August, I believe, who knew stuff on her, died mysteriously, murdered. But, hey, nothing to see here, right? Come on! This is quite feasible.

She was around, and known to be very active politically, even though she was not elected. People joked about her being in charge, often, instead of Bill. She's known to be angry, and nasty to those around her, and they have a list of deaths, of all sorts of people who crossed them, or were in their way, or who knew something, and you want to just assume this isn't possible? it's very possible. She's made it clear what she thinks about people who don't agree with her. We are all "deplorable", remember? Does that sound like someone who would care about people dying?

As for the emails and her illness, they are still covering that up. The only reason we know is that some people talked, and some of those are dead. Remember? A hacker in Russia has exposed some of it. Safer for him than for those closer. Her illness is known only because it's so bad, she's collapsed on camera, and had seizures, etc. Even with all that, there are people who deny it, including her and her staff.

People can see a lot of things, and somehow still remain in the dark.

Plus, she wasn't sick back then. She can't remember things now, and it's all unraveling.