Hillary Clinton is a Gigantic Liar Wrapping Herself in the American Flag and Distorted Exceptionalism

Hillary Clinton does not know what "American exceptionalism" means at all. What it means, and always has, is that certain Americans have believed that there's something in the American DNA (race-based) that makes them exceptional, that even with education, the other people just don't respond correctly. They can't handle "American-style" democracy, etc.

Read her full speech made to the American Legion: "Read Hillary Clinton’s Speech Touting ‘American Exceptionalism’."


Tom Usher

Let's also remember Honduras and Hillary Clinton's direct support for a fascist coup against the duly elected President of Honduras.

She also wasn't for the Iran deal. She was for harder sanctions that shouldn't have been put into place in the first place. They didn't have a nuclear-weapons program. She still claims they did. She has seen the "intelligence" saying they did not, yet she still spreads the flat-out lie!

She wants a no-fly zone in Syria (against whom, Russia?)

She calls Russia a threat. Russia hasn't started a thing against the US or anyone else. Russia under Putin and Medvedev has been reacting to direct, huge provocations, not starting wars. They aren't stupid. They know there are Americans in high places who want regime change in Russia by evil means for evil ends: to put a compliant neoliberal-puppet in place as Russia's leader. Hillary Clinton is one of those Americans.

She claims Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee when everyone knows that is nothing but an allegation. That's a reckless accusation against Russia. Hillary Clinton knows that the allegation has not been definitely substantiated, not even close. Yet, here she is flat-out lying about Russia. It's a lie to say they did it when she doesn't know they did at all (and she doesn't).

This is a woman who wants you to vote for her to lead the United States of America. Well, if you vote for her, you'll be getting exactly what you deserve for doing so: a blatant liar and a blatant spreader of purely false propaganda to saber rattle.

As far as I'm concerned, she's a maniac; and no amount of Trump-hating will alter that, not that he's not been pretty reckless himself.

She leaves a trail of death behind her, death of plenty of innocents.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 – present, website developer and writer. 2015 – present, insurance broker.

    Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration.

    Volunteerism: 2007 – present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.

    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.