Wikileaks: HRC's Flip Flop on TPP

[deacon blues]

She publicly stated she was in favor of this Trans Pacific Partnership 45 times until it became politically expedient to flip flop on it:

Inside the latest batch of Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails by WikiLeaks is a stunning story of how the Democratic presidential nominee’s campaign staff forced her through the uncomfortable process of flip-flopping against the Trans Pacific Partnership.
In the emails is a bald admission from several campaign staffers that the Democratic presidential nominee flip-flopped on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).

That admission is coupled with the revelation of how exactly—over a months-long period—her campaign staff helped her maneuver through her position change on the explosive issue. And all of that is mixed together with the admission in writing in these emails by her campaign manager Robby Mook that Hillary Clinton would not be “comfortable” coming out against TPP during the campaign, even though she had to do it for votes. These emails indicate just how seriously her team of political operatives took the issue—and how they viewed it, as Mook said in one email, as an “annoying” issue in terms of timing—in terms of not infuriating labor unions, which by and large oppose such trade deals. Clinton has had a rocky relationship with Big Labor, as other emails have shown her campaign staff’s frustration with union bosses like the AFL-CIO’s Richard Trumka.
.

[n david]

Funny how the NY Times is bashed for "leaking" old Trump tax info, but Trump supporters love Wikileaks....which illegally hacks private accounts and illegally releases private information.

Right, it's okay because Wikileaks isn't exposing Trump.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by n david

Funny how the NY Times is bashed for "leaking" old Trump tax info, but Trump supporters love Wikileaks....which illegally hacks private accounts and illegally releases private information.

Right, it's okay because Wikileaks isn't exposing Trump.

Since the entire MSM gives a disproportionate amount of time focused on what Trump said eleven years ago and accusations from the past and glosses over Hillary's glaring web of corruption and serial lying, Wikleaks is providing some welcomed levity to a very unbalanced reporting of the facts.

The 1995 tax return isn't even worthy of news. What's the bombshell here? Trump claimed a huge loss, therefore MAY have not paid income tax for years? Whatever. All hypocrisy. NO ONE pays more taxes than they legally are obliged to, so it's nothing. I'm paying an additional $1,700 this week after already paying $20,000. I'm not rich. Not by any stretch. It doesn't bother me in the slightest Trump didn't pay any income tax in 1995, nor does it phase me if he hasn't paid any for decades. Kudos to him if he found ways to keep his own money.

[n david]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Since the entire MSM gives a disproportionate amount of time focused on what Trump said eleven years ago and accusations from the past and glosses over Hillary's glaring web of corruption and serial lying, Wikleaks is providing some welcomed levity to a very unbalanced reporting of the facts.

The 1995 tax return isn't even worthy of news. What's the bombshell here? Trump claimed a huge loss, therefore MAY have not paid income tax for years? Whatever. All hypocrisy. NO ONE pays more taxes than they legally are obliged to, so it's nothing. I'm paying an additional $1,700 this week after already paying $20,000. I'm not rich. Not by any stretch. It doesn't bother me in the slightest Trump didn't pay any income tax in 1995, nor does it phase me if he hasn't paid any for decades. Kudos to him if he found ways to keep his own money.

Exactly, there was no bombshell. It was old news and yet Trump supporters were angry, claiming the NY Times broke the law and illegally leaked info. The claim was even made here. But Trump supporters are lapping up whatever Wikileaks posts.

I guarantee you, you and every other Trump supporter would be screaming if these leaks were about Trump.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by n david

Exactly, there was no bombshell. It was old news and yet Trump supporters were angry, claiming the NY Times broke the law and illegally leaked info. The claim was even made here. But Trump supporters are lapping up whatever Wikileaks posts.

I guarantee you, you and every other Trump supporter would be screaming if these leaks were about Trump.

The difference is Wikileaks is doing the job that our "impartial" press should be doing. This system is so rigged against the GOP and conservatism I'm okay with Wikileaks and what they're exposing.

[n david]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

The difference is Wikileaks is doing the job that our "impartial" press should be doing. This system is so rigged against the GOP and conservatism I'm okay with Wikileaks and what they're exposing.

Riiiiight.

You're okay with illegal leaks. Let's revisit this should anything be leaked illegally against Trump. Again, I would bet the bank your tune will quickly change should Wikileaks or any news org leak private info on Trump.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

It should never be illegal to expose the truth.