Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (924394)	3/4/2016 12:39:44 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	1 Recommendation Recommended By zax Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574888

If the Democrats had put up a reasonable choice of a candidate, and given Trump becomes the nominee, I would be voting Democrat this year and I think a lot of other people would as well. Since, in your opinion Hillary is not a reasonable choice, you will not be voting for a Democrat. This shows, of course, that you were doing nothing but bloviating all along. Otherwise you would vote for Bernie Sanders???? The evidence is damned serious. Even having to QUESTION whether Barack Obama will allow her to be indicted is ridiculous. What is that "damned serious" evidence? What did she do that Colin Powell and Condie Rice did not do? Did she transfer secrets to an enemy?

To: i-node who wrote (924394)	3/4/2016 2:37:22 PM
From: Taro	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB i-node Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574888

Read this, sorry for the "machine only" (Google) translation, it's from the same link and published in Swedish "Aftonbladet" by their leftmost contributing columnist. The full link to the original article at the bottom: "If you want to get an idea about how four years, Hillary Clinton might look like, you should look at the contributors to The Clinton Foundation. Among the largest sponsors are Goldman Sachs, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait. Even Lukas Lundin brings big money. Previously ran Hillary requirement that companies like Lundin Oil, operating in genocidal states such as Sudan and Congo, will be penalized and blacklisted. She does not anymore. The New York Times revealed on 22 and 23 April last year, there are a contributor that Hillary Clinton does not usually mention: Uranium One, which is now owned by the Russian state. 2005 Bill Clinton helped a Canadian mining giant, urAsia, to buy into the Kazakh uranium mining. To thank the Clinton Foundation received $ 31.3 million. UrAsia merged with a South African company, and formed Uranium One. Uranium One immediately started a cooperation with government Rosatom, which is currently with Russian Atomic Energy. Rosatom acquired 17 percent of Uranium One and donated many new millions to Clinton foundation. In June 2010, Bill Clinton's half a million dollars for speaking in Moscow, paid by a bank closely tied to the Kremlin. In January 2013 Rosatom took full control of Uranium One. This means, writes the New York Times, that Mr and Mrs Clinton has helped Putin to take control of a great portion of the world production of uranium. US State Department, whose manager was named Hillary Clinton, was with and approved the decision. Few politicians are as corrupt as Hillary Clinton. It's really ugly money enables her campaign contributors at an arch instrumental want to be paid for it. Trump's money smells certainly not better, but he pretends in any case to be just and FAIR. We must stop parata the US as a democracy when policy conditions looks like this. The link works, but you may have to paste it into your browser: aftonbladet.se