Is You-Know-Who a Psychopath? - Here's the Actual Criteria

I just happened to run across this post on FB by Garry Kasparov, the World Chess Champion 1985 and now political commentator:

Why is everyone talking about plagiarism by Trump's wife when the candidate himself has been plagiarizing Mein Kampf for a year?!

After my little plagiarism joke yesterday, I see an opportunity in the comments to refute one of the most tiresome discussions I have encountered in my years of calling attention to dictatorships. "Putin isn't Hitler!" "Trump isn't Hitler!" Wow, congratulations! You have failed the most basic lesson of learning from history in order not to repeat it!

I wrote about this fallacy extensively in Winter is Coming and elsewhere, but am happy to recap it here. Of course Putin isn't Hitler, and Donald Trump isn't even Putin—no matter how much he would like to be. The point is that no one is making comparisons to the monster Adolf Hitler became in the 1940s. But in the 20s, even for most of the 30s, Hitler wasn't Hitler either! There could be no more important lesson to understand than how a race-baiting demagogue came to power in an educated and liberal country like Germany and how he transformed that nation into a fascist death machine capable of World War and unimaginable acts.

More at the link:
www.facebook.com...

~

a reply to: Olivine

I don't have multiple personal direct sources.

I have some personal and some researched that are essentially in agreement.

Not going to give any links or verification.

I find that those who are well read, discerning, alert, perceptive . . . have her number.

Others, not.

a reply to: Olivine

My personal connection involved absolutely off the wall irrational, hostile, hideously foul language, abusive language etc. for 0.000% reason. It was an extremely telling thing about the screechy one's character.

The tales of Secret Service personnel over the years have essentially said the absolute same thing.

The latest book by the Secret Service agent--though rather muffled, imho, says essentially the same thing.

But actually one doesn't need a long list of personal anecdotes and reports from guards etc. One merely has to look at a number of photos that show her when the evil is lurking or flooding out from her eyes.

So, part of my conclusions are from the reports of those I trust and read.

And part is what I feel in my bones when I look at her on videos or a still photo.

That sort of discernment has served me well though all my counseling and teaching years. I have a lot of confidence in it.


I have NOT vetted the below. They just looked interesting from the dogpile.com pages:

= = =

How evil is Hillary Clinton? THIS evil! #WhatDifferenceDoesItMake


1389blog.com...

= = =

Dr. Herbert London: Hillary Clinton Is ‘Embodiment of Evil’

During his Tuesday appearance on Breitbart News Daily, SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon asked geopolitical analyst Dr. Herbert London for his take on the 2016 presidential contest.

www.breitbart.com...

= = =

Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says

www.thedailybeast.com...

= = =

HILLARY CLINTON BEATS UP CRIPPLED CHILDREN, TAKES THEIR CANDY AND PARKING SPACE

wonkette.com...

= = =
HILLARY #CLINTON PURE EVIL!

www.youtube.com...
= = =

Hillary Clinton Defended Evil Rapist and Smeared 12 Year Old Rape Victim

eaglerising.com...

= = =

HILLARY CLINTON IS CORRUPT AND 100% PURE EVIL:

shoebat.com...
= = = =

Hillary Clinton is the Devil

www.youtube.com...

= = = =

HILLARY CLINTON IS AN EVIL LESBIAN, SAYS ROGER STONE

www.browardpalmbeach.com...

a reply to: SentientCentenarian


Your looking for parallels.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and
arrested Senators during sitting sessions. Our first President was a rebel and a traitor.

Law and order? How dare he?? A Fascist!!

Yawn....

a reply to: bbarkow

As opposed to the 2 Fraudulent CROOKS that are currently leading worthless polls? ABSOLUTELY..

Heck, I'd take former Mets Manager, Davey Johnson over the 2 other idjits...

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: Olivine
I don't have multiple personal direct sources.

Thanks for the clarification. From your earlier statements of:

you have not talked to folks who have worked around her extensively...

And

you've never had to deal with folks...

I interpreted your remarks to mean that you had.

a reply to: Olivine

I and/or closer friends have . . . sufficiently for me to trust such assertions above average.

a reply to: boncho

Not only did all that happen, but after that, Bush would go on to lie entirely, to get into a war. Which is just historical record now. But where were his congressional hearings? Ah right. Just like 9/11 it wasn't important. Just like it wasn't important Trump had business dealings with the Israeli-Russian mob/fraudster/spook.

So do we ignore the long list of high ranking democrats, including hillary, pelosi, and obama, who all insisted that the WMD's were real, that saddam hussein was a legitimate threat, and that war in Iraq was necessary? Why is it only Bush who is held accountable? And if he is to be held accountable because it happened on his watch, regardless of who demanded it, then why can't democrats say the same thing about hillary or obama for their many many failures?

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: SentientCentenarian

NONSENSE.

The gritchy pants suit--yeah, she'd probably qualify.

. . . except for her ragaholism . . .

certainly she is a compulsive pathological liar.
certainly she is a homicidal maniac.
certainly she has not a shred of morality or compunctions about doing any number of a long list of evil deeds--then laughing, cackling about them.

certainly she is an EXTREME NARCISSIST.
certainly she is pathologically vengeful, spiteful, ruthless, greedy, power-mongering.

She's probably the most psychopathic politico on the world stage currently--by a good margin.

And that's just in view of the well publicized stuff in her own words and often in her own videos.

You would have a point if those things were true. But they are not. I think even in a venue such as this it is irresponsible to write such garbage in regard to someone's mental status. People are listening to you because of your age old Ph.d and you are doing them a disservice. And you know it. If you don't, you should.

Exactly how is it that you know these things are all false? And why is it irresponsible to voice an opinion, here or anywhere else? And you should consider the fact that other people share the same opinions and have come to the same conclusions entirely on their own, without direction or coercion. Not everyone thinks killary is a victim of right wing conspiracies. If you have ever looked at the long list of mysterious deaths around the clintons with honest eyes, you have to wonder...

Four bodyguards who escorted bill to a clandestine rendezvous are suddenly transferred, sent to Waco, and all die of friendly fire injuries, all with identical gun shot woulds to the left temple - execution style. And they are the only people to die from friendly fire in the entire incident. How can you look at that and say it has nothing to do with the clintons? Especially when this is just four men on a list of roughly 80 friends, associates, and secret service/bodyguards to die under extremely suspicious circumstances.

killary is a chronic habitual if not pathological liar, an extreme narcissist, and bears close resemblance to, or meets, psychopathic pathology. Trump may not be the best candidate, or able to deliver on his promises. But I believe he wants what is best for America. killary wants nothing that is not for the greater good of killary.

Honestly. I like Trump, and hope he becomes the American President, but I wouldn't rule it out.

Many people at the top (business and politics) are psychopaths. They have to be, or they wouldn't be able to make the difficult, sometimes life-destroying decisions they have to make on a fairly regular basis.

There was a documentary on it some time ago. A psychopath does not exhibit physically insane behaviour on the whole, and the vast, vast, VAST majority of them are not murderers or other criminals (well I guess a lot of the ones in business and politics are, but hey )

edit: documentary in question: www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Vroomfondel

So do we ignore the long list of high ranking democrats, including hillary, pelosi, and obama, who all insisted that the WMD's were real, that saddam hussein was a legitimate threat, and that war in Iraq was necessary?

Facepalm.

Considering there was false intelligence from the CIA, which was directed by Cheney and others in the administration, yes, I guess?

You are just arguing partisan BS right now. Really, are you going to condemn Trump because he hung out and agreed with Clinton in the past? The logic you are presenting doesn't make sense.

In plain English:

The person in power, especially the person who is lying, to manipulate and push certain agendas through, is the sole responsible party, yes.

Just as we've been hearing for ages now how HRC is solely responsible for Bengazi (when it appears much more is at play) and we also heard that the Bush administration was at no fault over 9/11, and the subsequent investigation was a dog & pony show.

You are missing the larger picture though. HRC says here, the reason she sided with Bush is because he insisted it was a leverage tactic. and you know what? That's consistent with the Clinton's-both of them, they are very political..to their core. They see everything as leverage, pressure, developed or undeveloped partnerships. And it's why you will find them on both sides of the fence, all the time.

Im not saying they are good, or altruistic, or benevolent, or anything like that. In fact, I think they are intelligent and have built up dirt on most of Washington, wouldn't be surprised if they suckered many in, to the point they had leverage over them. BUT, you can see the way they operate.

The difference between Bush, or Trump or any other designated AIPAC partner or Zionist puppet, is you can't quite peg down why the hell people even allow them to operate, but they seem to scathe by. It's the difference between a corrupt power player and a corrupt power center behind a single person.

It goes so far beyond partisan politics you probably can't even fathom it.

a reply to: boncho

You are missing the larger picture though. HRC says here, the reason she sided with Bush is because he insisted it was a leverage tactic. and you know what? That's consistent with the Clinton's-both of them, they are very political..to their core. They see everything as leverage, pressure, developed or undeveloped partnerships. And it's why you will find them on both sides of the fence, all the time.

killary says a lot of things, whenever it is convenient, so putting any stock in anything she says is foolish.

However, lying (as you believe) to start a war that lost thousands of lives and cost billions of dollars is bad. But lying to start a war that lost thousands of lives and cost billions of dollars so you can exert leverage over a sitting President is ok?

Facepalm.

Soldiers returning from Iraq stated with no uncertain terms that there were WMD's. We know hussein had WMD's because he used them on his own people to quell a rebellion. This is historical fact. It is not historical fact that he completely depleted his supply of WMD's and never replenished. To believe that takes a special kind of person. And we had no absolute verification short of actually being there and seeing for ourselves.

If the person in charge, the person lying, is the one to be held accountable, how do you explain the fact that killary is not behind bars and is instead running for the highest office in the land?

I am not condemning Trump for anything other than being inexperienced in politics. As lacking as he is, he isn't far behind the experience obama had when he got elected. obama was a community organizer promoted to senator for two years. That isn't much experience to go on for POTUS. But he promised change - that never materialized. Now Trump represents the change we never got from obama. The only reason people are trying to portray him as a psychopath is because he has a chance to win. Its like calling him a racist, which no one did until he started to run against the democrats. People call him racist because some white supremacist groups support him. And the new black panthers support killary. Does that make her a racist terrorist?

I don't spew party rhetoric, because I don't belong to either party. I have no interest in the party rhetoric at all. I tell the truth. It just so happens that the truth doesn't sit well with liberals and democrats. That doesn't make me racist, evil, hateful, afraid, or anything else. But it means I will vote with my conscience. And there is no way I could live with myself if I voted for killary.

By its very nature truth can be polarizing. But only when some people refuse to accept it, for whatever reason. Many would call it cognitive dissonance. I would be one of them. When reality is so frightening that it threatens your view of the world, your construct, to the point that you can no longer function, self-preservation kicks in and prevents you from acknowledging the threat. That is cognitive dissonance. There are millions of special little snowflakes out there right now whose world is crashing down around them. When msnbc has to display trigger warnings for our little snowflakes because they are about to show anti-killary buttons on the news - there is your proof.