![\"Donald](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/Donald-Trump.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I did not watch this debate either, and I\u2019m only reporting and commenting on the things I\u2019ve read and heard this morning. First, it seems that Chris Wallace actually did his job, and fired a few hard questions at the Cankled One. The early reports regarding him appear to be generally positive.<\/p>\n
There were a couple of \u201cgaffes\u201d that occurred. One by Felonia has been skated over by the media, the other by Trump is being blown up totally out of proportion. I\u2019ll begin with Clinton once again blasting classified information all over the place.<\/p>\n
During the debate, Clinton announced the time lag between the issuance of a nuclear fire order being issued by the President, and when the missiles are fired. Here is what Clinton said:<\/b><\/p>\n
\u201cBut here\u2019s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There\u2019s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n
\u2013Hillary Clinton<\/b><\/p>\n
And if you think this is just something that was made up, here is the video of Felonia von Pantsuit violating security yet again.<\/p>\n [youtuber vimeo=’https:\/\/vimeo.com\/188098722′]<\/p>\n The military is quietly going apeshit over the latest breach of national security by Hillary Rodham Clinton. According to Liberty News:<\/p>\n Following Wednesday\u2019s presidential debate Pentagon officials found themselves completely dumbfounded as to why former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would feel it appropriate to announce U.S. Special Access Program intel on national television. <\/b><\/p>\n According to sources within the Department of Defense speaking under anonymity, Clinton likely violated at least two Dept. of Defense SAP protocols during the debate by announcing on <\/b>live television<\/b><\/em> the United States Government\u2019s response time for a nuclear launch. <\/b><\/p>\n You may be wondering why this is a big deal. The answer is simple. Enemy governments can make educated guesses on how long it takes for the United States to initiate a counter-strike if they launch missiles at America. However, it is ONLY a guess. To break it down, The United States detects what appears to be missile launches coming from, oh, lets say Russia. It takes about 30 minutes for a warhead to reach its target.<\/p>\n Several minutes will be lost confirming that an actual attack is underway. By the time it is confirmed, and the president is notified, (Provided that can get Felonia von Pansuit to wake up from her Martini induced nap), easily 15 minutes will have passed. It will also take several minutes for that drunken fool to understand that she is about to be reduced to radioactive ash. At this point, the President will only have a few minutes to go through the Permissive Action Link system to authorize a retaliatory strike.<\/p>\n By providing potential enemies with the details of how long it will take for the actual order to be carried out, they can make adjustments in how they will target their warheads to prevent or seriously reduce our counter-strike. The result?<\/p>\n This should be the \u201cBig story\u201d of the debate. It isn\u2019t. What is the big story? The apparent gaffe by Donald Trump on whether or not he would accept the final results of the election. According to Always Backing Clinton, (ABC), News<\/a>:<\/p>\n When Donald Trump was asked at the third and final presidential debate if he will accept the outcome of the election, and if he loses, concede to the winner, the real estate mogul refused to say. <\/b><\/p>\n “I will tell you at the time,” said Trump, who has frequently discussed voter fraud and a “rigged” system. <\/b><\/p>\n “I’ll keep you in suspense, okay?” Trump told moderator Chris Wallace. <\/b><\/p>\n And Clinton, who had spewed more Top Secret information to our enemies replied:<\/p>\n Hillary Clinton responded, “That’s horrifying.”<\/strong><\/p>\n No actually it isn\u2019t. For the last couple of weeks, we have been seeing multiple stories of states investigating some major reports of voter fraud. The last numbers I heard were some 12 states had major investigations underway, with Indiana actually raiding a voter registration agency<\/a> in Indianapolis. Texas has started offering a $5000 reward for credible tips leading to voter fraud.<\/p>\n And let\u2019s not forget the zombie vote. Every election, the dead rise and always seem to vote for the Democrat candidate. Already, tens of thousands of the \u201cDearly Departed\u201d some of them dead for 10 years or more, have been found to have voted as recently as the 2014 midterms.<\/p>\n Then we have Albert Gore of the order of the Hanging Chad<\/a>. For those of you who have forgotten. The 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore was very close. It came down to who won the Florida vote. Initially, it was George Bush, but Gore decided to go full on Lawfare to get the courts to declare him the winner. He kept demanding one recount after another, and tried to have thousands of absentee military votes declared invalid.<\/p>\n The whole mess ended up in the laps of the Supreme Court, who really didn\u2019t want to have to deal with it. They decided to apply the election laws and rules in place at the time in Florida, and put an end to Gore\u2019s repeated attempts to \u201cfind\u201d more votes.<\/p>\n Going further back in time, there is significant anecdotal evidence that the election between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon was outright stolen by the Democrats. The only reason Nixon didn\u2019t fight the results was his desire to not tear the country apart. Who knows how the world might be today if he had won?<\/p>\n There might not have been a Watergate Scandal, since the Watergate was still under construction. There might not have been a Berlin Wall or a Cuban Missile Crises or even a Vietnam war. Nixon may have served two terms and honorably retired instead of resigning to avoid impeachment.<\/p>\n More recently, we have the 2004 election between George W. Bush and John \u201cKetchup Boy\u201d Kerry. Kerry has claimed the election was stolen from him since his defeat. Here are a few details on that from a 2015 story in the Daily Caller<\/a>:<\/p>\n A profile of Secretary of State John Kerry published Sunday in The New Yorker reveals that, 11 years after his election loss to George W. Bush in 2004, Kerry still believes he was robbed via systematic fraud. <\/b>The article itself<\/a>, written by David Remnick, focuses mostly on Kerry\u2019s efforts to achieve peace and democracy in the Middle East, but it also dwells extensively on his presidential defeat more than a decade ago.<\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIn 2004, when Kerry lost the Presidential race to George W. Bush, who is widely considered the worst President of the modern era, he refused to challenge the results, despite his suspicion that in certain states, particularly Ohio, where the Electoral College count hinged, proxies for Bush had rigged many voting machines,\u201d Remnick writes. <\/b><\/p>\n Kerry lost because he was found to be a complete fraud. Was there vote rigging? Sure, but it was in Kerry\u2019s favor. The Democrats have been trying to rig elections for the better part of a century. Just this week, James O\u2019Keefe\u2019s Project Veritas released several videos of Democrats admitting to voter fraud and outright violence. This has led to two major players in Democrat Politics being thrown under the bus.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s what I think was going through Trump\u2019s mind when he was asked that question. He\u2019s also been following the news reports regarding the possibility of up to 4 million fraudulently registered voters. He may also have seen the Project Veritas<\/a> videos. Trump has certainly seen the criminal actions of the \u201cDemocrat protesters\u201d at his events. I\u2019m not surprised that he was hesitant to say he would accept the results unconditionally. Under these circumstances, so would I, if it turns out to be a close race. Even his running mate, Governor Mike Pence agrees that Trump would be within his rights to wait.<\/p>\n The Clinton Broadcasting Systems, (CBS), Major Garret grabbed Governor Pence and tried to get him to throw Trump under the bus. Here is Pence\u2019s reply:<\/p>\n He\u2019s a candidate for President of the United States of America. He has every right, he has the prerogative, to wait and see how the results of the election come out. Sometimes extraordinary circumstances develop. We saw that in the year 2000. When Al Gore conceded the election, and then withdrew his concession, and the matter ultimately was resolved in the Supreme Court. I think what you heard Donald Trump say tonight was out of concern for, frankly, the fairly obvious bias in the national media, and out of concern for pockets and instances of voter fraud around the country. He said he would look at it at the time. He reserved the right and as a candidate for president of the United States of America. I have every confidence that if this election is conducted in a way that is fair and proper, we\u2019ll move forward as a country together<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Game, Set, Match. If Mike Pence has been holding a microphone, he would have dropped it<\/a>. Basically, he\u2019s saying that Trump will wait for the election results to come in and see what\u2019s what. Compare this to Felonia von Pantsuit once again handing powers hostile to the United States of America top secret\/Secure Access Program information on national television. Come on Fox News, where\u2019s your outrage on that?<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n [yasr_visitor_votes size=”large”]<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n