Hal 9000

The bias from MSM comes from opinion pieces with fake outrage over minor issues, this documentary gives actual evidence that can be fact checked. Some of it makes a minor stretch, but it's pretty solid from a evidentiary perspective.

So, what's your take on Juanita Broadrick's accusations?

Sure, she tells millennial that they don't know what the F they're talking about, I just hope people realize that (by these words) she has absolutely no intention of handing out free education or healthcare.

It's a politically correct way of saying "rape" or "attempted rape", but maybe we should ask Juanita Broadrick?

I can point out the role of GW Bush, but it's sheer naivety to think that he started anything. Bush threw some chips in the pot, but you can go back to Carter and Clinton and get a better sense of why the world is where it is now. And, nobody has served to destabilize the middle east as much as the Obama/Clinton duo.

Increasing the size of the Military is smart, and also will help get people working He did not support Iraq...and the video is out there as proof 30,000 soliders in Iraq is not waging war, it's already a war He is not willing to use nukes on europe - that's just stupid. He refuses to do what Obama has done and that is tell the enemy what the US won't do. If you've listened to Trump at all, you'd know that he is fully against getting involved in the middle east (ISIS notwithstanding). The fact is; Hillary, Obama and Bill have been know to attack and disrupt more countries than any republican president in history. In fact, other than Iraq and Afghanistan, every war the US has taken part in has been under a Democratic president - It was a democrat who bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Are you actually being serious right now?

Whom exactly does Trump want to wage war against?

What has he done as proof or even evidence that he dislikes women? What has he done that is racist? Is what Trump said even remotely close to as bad as this interaction? Not even close. Reuters: "On the day of a crucial vote in her nomination battle against fellow Democrat Barack Obama, the New York senator said she wanted to make clear to Tehran what she was prepared to do as president in hopes that this warning would deter any Iranian nuclear attack against the Jewish state. "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel)," Clinton said in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America." "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said. "That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic," Clinton said. Her comments appeared harder than a week ago, when during a presidential debate she promised "massive retaliation" against any Iranian attack on Israel. Obama rejected Clinton's rhetoric as saber rattling on a day when Pennsylvania Democrats voted in a party primary contest that could help decide which Democrat will face Republican John McCain for the White House in the November general election. "One of the things that we've seen over the last several years is a bunch of talk using words like 'obliterate,'" Obama, an Illinois senator, said in a separate ABC interview. "It doesn't actually produce good results. And so I'm not interested in saber rattling." The Obama campaign also issued a statement saying Clinton was contradicting her remarks at an August debate, where Obama spoke in favor of taking unilateral military action in Pakistan if the United States had actionable intelligence on the whereabouts of senior al Qaeda members. Clinton had said she did not believe "people running for president should engage in hypotheticals" and called it a mistake "to telegraph" what U.S. strategy might be at a time of unrest inside Pakistan. At a Tuesday news conference in the Philadelphia suburb of Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, Clinton said the question of Iran merited hypothetical discussion because a nuclear Tehran would require straightforward Cold War-style deterrence. "It's a question not of what might be on or off the table," she said. RELATED COVERAGEIran says U.S. pressure could backfire Meanwhile, Obama said he would respond "forcefully and swiftly" to an Iranian attack against Israel or any other U.S. ally, whether conventional or nuclear."

It what way is Trump worse than Clinton? What has Trump ever done that's worse or different than what all of us have done on any given day? Hillary has tried to overthrow a number of nations to disastrous results causing the deaths of thousands - and for what? But, Trump called Rosie O'Donnell a pig so... Let's just call it what it is: Hillary is a woman and that's about all some people need in order to cast a vote for her.

No, they understand fully that the issue is about Hillary threatening and intimidating anyone who threatened her and her husbands rise to power. These people are not dumb or confused , they simply don't care about the victims of Bill and re-victimization from Hillary. You see all the pundits and surrogates reply the same way. When confronted with Bill's sexual harrassment and rape and Hillary's intimidation, they all instantly reply with "Bill's affairs dont have any bearing on Hillary", Or "Hillary is the real victim".

Women chess players should go to Iran and do as Iranian men tell them - plain and simple.

Millennials are the worst.

Trump isn't showing any signs of health issues.

I'm not asking what the democrats would do, I'm asking what you people would do. Would you act surprised? Would you be angry with her or her entire party for lying to you? Would you deny that she was previously sick and insist that she just got diagnosed - whenever the truth does come out?

I asked a serious question, and nothing but deflection. She's clearly of ill health and all you people want to do is say "yeah, well Trump....". Typical!

What are you people gonna do when the truth does come out about her health?

True, but we all know where you head is at when you make the "educated" comments. I might say that stable, married women prefer Trump, while welfare queens prefer Hillary...working people prefer Trump, while the indoctrinated college elites and career welfare cases prefer Hillary.

I can't believe that Hillary supports are claiming to be be smarter, that dumb people are being conned by Trump. Hillary has lied and conned every day of her 40 year presidential run. I haven't seen this many lies and ignored evidence since the OJ trial. "Voting for Hillary is like watching a McDonald's employee spit in your Berger and eating it anyway". P.s I don't know where I heard that line, but it's the best summary of a Clinton supporter I've heard yet.

What will also be interesting is if she tries to change the format of the debate to a sit down, smaller venue or a shorter event. I wouldn't be surprised if she found a way out of all together

So, no mention of the obvious seizures or what the handlers are carrying around with them? Weird! The timing of this report seems rather coincidental...almost as if they were trying to get out ahead of a scandal.

Why do feminists say stuff like this? I've bought them for my wife and daughter. This whole embarrassment or shame thing is so overplayed, i've never shied away from buying those products and i'm not sure i know any men who have shied away from it.

So, we're still buying into the pneumonia narrative?