Hillary Clinton wanted to discuss ditching Taiwan: WikiLeaks - Polidicks

[quote]TAIPEI (Taiwan News) – According to an alleged e-mail by Hillary Clinton published by WikiLeaks, the former United States Secretary of State was willing to discuss a New York Times editorial calling on Washington to ditch Taiwan in return for China writing off debt. Her adviser Jake Sullivan passed on the editorial to Clinton, and she replied, “I saw it and thought it was so clever. Let’s discuss,” according to WikiLeaks.[/quote] [url]http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3069884[/url] The email: [url]https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/23730[/url] I can't find another news site but I've got the actual email there.

Honest question: is anything Clinton says or thinks relevant anymore?

[QUOTE=Anti Christ;51686675]Honest question: is anything Clinton says or thinks relevant anymore?[/QUOTE]I'm all for insuring she never touches the political sphere again at least.

[QUOTE=Anti Christ;51686675]Honest question: is anything Clinton says or thinks relevant anymore?[/QUOTE] other than wondering what would happen in an alternative timeline, not really relevant

[QUOTE=Anti Christ;51686675]Honest question: is anything Clinton says or thinks relevant anymore?[/QUOTE] Why do you assume her career in politics are over so soon?

Remember CIA/FBI Confirmed that Everything about Clinton wikileaks released was "unfortunatly" legit. [editline]17th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sally;51686689]Why do you assume her career in politics are over so soon?[/QUOTE] There were possible leaks she would become New York Mayor.

[QUOTE=Anti Christ;51686675]Honest question: is anything Clinton says or thinks relevant anymore?[/QUOTE] Shame her and her family, keep her spawn Chelsea out of politics, plus it's just interesting to hear about.

The only silver lining to Trump wining was that the first female president wasn't Clinton.

The idea of disposing of the democratic beliefs of millions to pay off a portion of your financial debt. Considering china's beliefs that's dangerously close to ignoring genocide just to get the bills paid.

I bet China is getting ready to tear Trump a new one the second he chimes in on this and calls it Taiwan instead of China.

did anyone read her leaked cabinet plans? it was almost as bad as trump's, worse in some parts

[QUOTE=Judas;51686717]did anyone read her leaked cabinet plans? it was almost as bad as trump's, worse in some parts[/QUOTE] nope, what was in it?

[QUOTE=jordguitar;51686716]I bet China is getting ready to tear Trump a new one the second he chimes in on this and calls it Taiwan instead of China.[/QUOTE] this already happened when China enraged itself over his tweet about receiving a phone call from the Taiwanese president

[QUOTE=Perrine;51686737]this already happened when China enraged itself over his tweet about receiving a phone call from the Taiwanese president[/QUOTE] Well I guess more specifically when he actually becomes president. Then they can get REALLY pissy.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51686721]nope, what was in it?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/10/hillary_cabinet_plans_leaked_sheryl_sandberg_at_treasury_starbucks_ceo_at.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51686686]I'm all for insuring she never touches the political sphere again at least.[/QUOTE] That's one of the few silver linings. Going away from the fiscally conservative left leaning centrists brought in the Clinton era will be very wise to go away if one wants to take an advantage in 2020.

difference here, this is an intillectual conversation not actual policy.

[QUOTE=Judas;51686771][URL]http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/10/hillary_cabinet_plans_leaked_sheryl_sandberg_at_treasury_starbucks_ceo_at.html[/URL][/QUOTE] A couple of these are questionable (Podesta as Secretary of State lmao) but most aren't, as opposed to Trump's cabinet wherein the only one people really like is Mattis. [editline]17th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sableye;51686873]difference here, this is an intillectual conversation not actual policy.[/QUOTE] Barely even a conversation, she says it's an interesting article. I think this part from Sullivan is more curious [QUOTE]For your reading pleasure while you endure open governance and try to steal glances at your blackberry:[/QUOTE] "enduring open governance" indeed. Holy shit I'm so glad these people lost.

[QUOTE]According to an [B]alleged e-mail[/B] by Hillary Clinton[/QUOTE] hmmmm [editline]17th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51686692]There were possible leaks she would become New York Mayor.[/QUOTE] I thought those were just rumors.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51686919]A couple of these are questionable (Podesta as Secretary of State lmao) but most aren't, as opposed to Trump's cabinet wherein the only one people really like is Mattis.[/QUOTE] The worst part is how she just says that she'll pick a nameless black person for some positions.

[QUOTE=Judas;51686771][url]http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/10/hillary_cabinet_plans_leaked_sheryl_sandberg_at_treasury_starbucks_ceo_at.html[/url][/QUOTE] Reading about how Starbuck tried using that worker-scheduling software which only made their employees lives worse and its founder was to be her Sec of Labor, makes me realize American workers were fucked no matter how they voted.

I don't understand - wouldn't Trump supporters love this? The editorial shared is saying "let's get rid of our debt by ending our military interventionism abroad." Isn't that what Trump's been saying with NATO and everything else? Why is Taiwan good interventionism, but fuck Crimea? I think trading that for a debt write-off [I]is[/I] a clever tactic, totally, but I disagree that it should be done because I'm pretty pro-Taiwanese independence.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;51687490]I don't understand - wouldn't Trump supporters love this? The editorial shared is saying "let's get rid of our debt by ending our military interventionism abroad." Isn't that what Trump's been saying with NATO and everything else? Why is Taiwan good interventionism, but fuck Crimea? I think trading that for a debt write-off [I]is[/I] a clever tactic, totally, but I disagree that it should be done because I'm pretty pro-Taiwanese independence.[/QUOTE] Yeah but this isn't their chosen candidate so that makes it bad. I'm actually not sure I see the issue here myself anyways. There seems to be nothing to suggest that anything other than her entertaining the idea to consider what benefits it might bring. There's nothing wrong with that and it's by no means a guarantee she was going to go through with it anyways. I don't know what general US populace opinions on Taiwan are but I'd think that a lot of people would oppose her if she'd tried to do something like this.

Irrelevant ex-politician talks politics in emails.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;51687490]I don't understand - wouldn't Trump supporters love this? The editorial shared is saying "let's get rid of our debt by ending our military interventionism abroad." Isn't that what Trump's been saying with NATO and everything else? Why is Taiwan good interventionism, but fuck Crimea? I think trading that for a debt write-off [I]is[/I] a clever tactic, totally, but I disagree that it should be done because I'm pretty pro-Taiwanese independence.[/QUOTE] the thing clinton did wrong in the eyes of trump supporters was say something, [I]while also being[/I] hillary clinton not that i agree with this plan but if trump laid it out you'd be able to hear the MAGA's from the moon

[QUOTE=Mining Bill;51688129]the thing clinton did wrong in the eyes of trump supporters was say something, [I]while also being[/I] hillary clinton not that i agree with this plan but if trump laid it out you'd be able to hear the MAGA's from the moon[/QUOTE] I thought most Trump Supporters didn't like being labeled "Racist", "Sexist", "Misogynist" and so on, by a Presidential Candidate, by their supporters and by people in general.

[QUOTE=Xonax;51688229]I thought most Trump Supporters didn't like being labeled "Racist", "Sexist", "Misogynist" and so on, by a Presidential Candidate, by their supporters and by people in general.[/QUOTE] I like how people conveniently forget the demonization Trump did of Clinton before she said deplorable or whatever. Whatever fits the narrative I suppose. It's some revisionist tier shit.

[QUOTE=mchapra;51688241]I like how people conveniently forget the demonization Trump did of Clinton before she said deplorable or whatever. Whatever fits the narrative I suppose. It's some revisionist tier shit.[/QUOTE] What? There's a marked difference between talking bad about your opponent in the presidential election and then calling half of American voters deplorable.

[QUOTE=srobins;51688334]What? There's a marked difference between talking bad about your opponent in the presidential election and then calling half of American voters deplorable.[/QUOTE] Less than a quarter of American voters - it was always [I]half[/I] of Trump's supporters. Which translates to less than 10% of all Americans. It was a shit quote, but pretending she literally meant [I]exactly half[/I] of Trump's supporters are deplorable is dumb. There's a [I]lot[/I] of cunts in Trump's supporter group, let's not pretend otherwise.

[QUOTE=mchapra;51688241]I like how people conveniently forget the demonization Trump did of Clinton before she said deplorable or whatever. Whatever fits the narrative I suppose. It's some revisionist tier shit.[/QUOTE] I ain't American, I didn't pay too much about both sides, just the candidates, even then it wasn't much. So yeah, I didn't "conveniently" forget, I actually either forgot or didn't know. Also there is a difference between Demonizing the Candidates and Demonizing the voters. Most politics involve demonizing the opposition, I've seen it happen here. Hillary called all potential voters Deplorable, which is a great way to lose votes from people who were on edge. [editline]18th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;51688350]Less than a quarter of American voters - it was always [I]half[/I] of Trump's supporters. Which translates to less than 10% of all Americans. It was a shit quote, but pretending she literally meant [I]exactly half[/I] of Trump's supporters are deplorable is dumb. There's a [I]lot[/I] of cunts in Trump's supporter group, let's not pretend otherwise.[/QUOTE] It may be true, but it's not a smart move as a candidate to alienate the voters, you're supposed to win them over, which is why the voting process happens much later. Also it was giving ammo for people to use to treat people like crap. Not saying Hilary knew it would and did it on purpose, just saying you gotta be careful.