Not a huge amount. Watch this video from ITV News.
Many of us will have found the sight of Farage speaking at a Donald Trump campaign rally pretty distasteful. Let’s hope that the American people keep turning away from Trump as they seem to be doing at the moment.
My worry is that as the campaign intensifies after next weekend’s Labor Day, Trump’s campaign will simply go after Hillary in every way that they can. They can’t win a clean campaign so they will fight as dirty as possible.
Earlier this week, in a speech in Reno Nevada, Hillary Clinton coolly detailed the racism, islamophobia and misogyny of Donald Trump. Here’s the whole rally. She starts speaking at just after 8 minutes in.
The Clinton team seems to be learning from the mistakes of the Brexit and Better Together campaigns. They have a strong positive message, the melody to get people onside, as well as very strong attack lines against Trump.
The difference in style between UK and US political meetings is very interesting. I don’t think a “can I have an amen to that” as we heard from the local congressional candidate, would go down too well over here.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Find Halloween and seasonal gifts in my Etsy shop today.
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Sue Gray: Beware of beat-sweeteners and source-greasers
Is Kemi Badenoch still in the lead? - The Week in Polls
Belljar
England urged to bring in minimum unit price on alcohol as deaths rise 10% a year
David Warren
David Allen
Steve Trevethan
John Waller
Vince Thompson
33 Comments
Although I believe that climate change is by far the most important issue of our time – and Trump is a denier – for the sake of balance – it does seem important to also post this video of Rudy Giuliani making an extremely robust case that the Clintons have been heavily engaged in criminal activity.
This is also coupled to the fact that Julian Assange is presently releasing copies of her emails, through Wikileaks, that he has suggested might see her end up in jail.
John,
I watched the video of Rudy Giuliani and it seems extremely high on assertions and accusations, but only evidence seems to be “we can’t find any evidence, the FBI can’t find any evidence, and the State Department can’t find any evidence, but we Republicans know that is only because the Clintons destroyed the evidence…”
Clinton is the only mature choice for President. Sanders was basically Corbyn with guns.
Sadly though Clinton seems to have fallen for populist rhetoric over free trade deals. My hope is she will sign the TPP and TTIP regardless, and it is just electioneering.
Well done “the voice ” , yes , of reason and sanity , in the UK or for the US !
Trump is an outrage , Farage a disgrace . I do not think John , above does anyone any service posting videos against Hillary , the former mayor of NY is just one of thousands . Just go to You Tube , some so called films ,claim they have the evidence, such as , she is part of a witches coven, then they produce a picture of the former First Lady in hat at a fancy dress , seriously !
I thank Andrew , for his comment . Any none too keen on some aspects of the Democratic nominee should contemplate a Trump presidency and send good vibes for Hillary , in my view a very presidential candidate .
Andrew McCaig 26th Aug ’16 – 12:38pm
I am not sure that is the case Andrew. I understood that Wikileaks have copies of the original emails – the remainder of which Assange is releasing once they have been thoroughly checked.
Giuliani says in the video that the only reason that this evidence is not being acted upon by the FBI – is that she is the Democrats nomination for president.
I suppose we will gradually learn what else Wikileaks has as the weeks leading up to the election goes by.
Here is a Daily Mail report on what Assange is doing with the material he has:
Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange claims he is about to release ‘significant’ and ‘unexpected’ material from Clinton’s election campaign
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3757650/Wikileaks-founder-Julian-Assange-release-significant-material-Hillary-Clinton-s-election-campaign.html#ixzz4IRJ8sKxY
I won’t make any comment on this video – I will just post it so that members are aware of what has been claimed and can make their own judgements – this US presidential election almost defies belief:
Stimpson 26th Aug ’16 – 12:53pm
Clinton is the only mature choice for President. Sanders was basically Corbyn with guns.
Sadly though Clinton seems to have fallen for populist rhetoric over free trade deals. My hope is she will sign the TPP and TTIP regardless, and it is just electioneering.
My understanding is that the US administration is no longer interested in these agreements now that the UK is leaving the EU.
“I won’t make any comment on this video”
How about paranoid conspiracy theorist makes up story surrounding a snippet of uncorroborated news.
Hillary Clinton: “Farage has called for a ban on the children of legal immigrants from public schools and health services…”
I don’t like Nigel Farage but I don’t think those words are true.
Let’s be honest – Assange has and is causing the US government a great deal of embarrassment. How far would they go to shut him up – who knows.
I think he is drip feeding information deliberately – rather than issuing it all at once – because he sees Hilary as the person who has caused his own internment in the Ecuadorian Embassy. So his motives are revenge intertwined with the public good.
The best thing about this particular issue [the material he has] – is that we will know its extent and seriousness within the next few months.
I have preferred to see the video of the whole of Hillarys speech instead of Assanges , and for good reason .
If we go down the route John Roffey points to, we end up nowhere bar helping Trump and destroying Clinton.
I prefer to go with the view of Stevan Rose , and dismiss or doubt Assange and route for Clinton to beat Trump !
To me it is as simple as this. Apart from a few no-hopers the presidential election is between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. To me unquestionably by far the worse outcome for the USA and the world would be for Trump to be elected. Anyone who assists the promulgation of the sort of stuff about Clinton which will continue to be put out until November needs to realise they are helping to achieve the election of Trump.
@Stevan Rose
” ‘I won’t make any comment on this video’
How about paranoid conspiracy theorist makes up story surrounding a snippet of uncorroborated news.”
Quite, although I think you missed out the adjective “narcissistic”.
I thought this a balanced commentary from the BBC:
Hillary Clinton’s flaws – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37188339
Basically this is a bare knuckle fight for the Presidency between two extremely unsuitable candidates. Trumps flaws are obvious – but I very much doubt if Hilary would have had a hope of being a candidate had she not been the wife of former President Bill [Cherie for PM!].
From the more recent comments – am I to assume that Liberal Democrats do not want blabbed debate?
‘balanced’
Bill Clinton was President for eight years. Since he became Democratic frontrunner first time round, the Republicans were out to get him. They didn’t turn up anything criminal, unless you count lying over Monica Lewinsky. Moreover, the Clintons don’t seem especially rich by American top people standards.
“I very much doubt if Hilary would have had a hope of being a candidate had she not been the wife of former President Bill”
Sounds a pretty sexist comment that, or the sort of thing Trump would come out with, same thing really. I thought we had long since given up giving the credit for a woman’s achievements to her husband. Was he also responsible for her becoming a Senator and Secretary of State? She’s a formidable intellect, top lawyer and politician in her own right. Bill just got the big job first.
As for the suggestion that Hillary would never have been a presidential candidate if she had not been married to former President Bill Clinton – it should be pointed out that the truth may be closer to being the other way round. Perhaps Bill Clinton would never have achieved what he did had he not been married to Hillary. I remember, at the time that Bill Clinton was standing for his second term as president, hearing that many American women were saying that they were not all that impressed by Bill, but they were prepared to vote for Hillary’s husband.
Stevan Rose 27th Aug ’16 – 11:11pm
Catherine Jane Crosland 28th Aug ’16 – 7:54am
This woman has become a candidate – against all of the odds and without family connections.
It is worth listening to what she has to say – because I believe that everything she says has been confirmed elsewhere – and we in the UK should hope that she can beat the odds and win. [Was there really any justification for the aggressive nature of the questioning?].
John Roffey, yes, the Green candidate does seem impressive. In a way I’d like her to get a good percentage of the vote. But unfortunately, as she does not have any realistic chance of winning, I’m afraid that if quite large numbers of people with progressive views vote for her, this may have the effect of splitting the vote and letting Trump in.
Catherine Jane Crosland
I am not sure that those who would vote for Jill Stein would be entirely from the Democrats – or even mainly from them. She offered to stand down in favour of Bernie Sanders before he endorsed Hilary – if he would become the Green Party candidate. – and the polls showed that he would have a fairly good chance of winning.
I suppose that the best outcome would be that Assange does have enough seriously damaging material on Hilary that she does have to stand down [I don’t think that there is any doubt that she is a warmonger] – which, I presume, would promote Sanders to the Democrats candidate. Polls showed that he would beat Trump hands down.
The more I read about Hillary Clinton, the more frightening she seems. She seems to have taken part in inspiring coups against democratic governments, undermining non-democratic but stable regimes and has embraced extrajudicial killings that also include the killings of non-combatants. She is probably better than Donald Trump in terms of having considerable government experience, self-control and intellect but I do not see her as a political progressive when it comes to foreign policy. This is the first US presidential election that I can remember when neither of the two main candidates can be seen as a “safe pair of hands” or “statesmanlike”. Let’s hope the next US presidential election features two candidates who are more tolerable.
Fox News have added a lighter note – but still cover all of the issues:
John, Catherine , Ed
The Green party candidate Jill Stein is more impressive than she is consistent or transparent, her stance on some issues is variable , and her party is well to the left of Sanders !
We need to be very careful with the criticism of Hillary Clinton. I would have prefered a less jaded nominee, but for decades the anti Clinton lobby have tried to pin everything on the two Clintons , to no avail , really.
Much of the personal criticism is based on hatred , remember Ken Star ?! As to the political criticism , all we can say is we may differ with her stance on certain issues , rightly , but war monger and the like is hardly a scathing attack in an era of tremendous conflict in certain situations .
Sometimes a position has to be taken , whether we like it or not , that is as much a reason to say yes to her as no , with regard to respect and agreeing to disagree. She did not do half the things or more , they say she did , and some , that she gets little credit for , which she did do.
I believe if we look at so many world leaders they are deeply flawed . We choose from who are there. Trump is a walking disaster . Clinton , we know , can work with , and could do some good , with a programme , much of which the Sanders people endorse.
Lorenzo Cherin 28th Aug ’16 – 2:19pm
With the greatest respect Lorenzo – do you actually know what accusations made against Hilary and Bill are correct and which are false? Even the Democrats representative on the Fox News video above are not denying much of what has been levelled against them.
Is there any point in the L/Ds – with 8 seats in the HofC and one MEP – taking sides when the truth is likely to be much clearer [via Wikileaks] by the time of the election.
Whereas before NC took the Party into the coalition – with such a devastating outcome – there might have been some interest in who the Party supported. However, the main issue for the Party now is simply how to survive – this is not likely to helped if it stoutly supports Hillary now – and some even darker actions by the Clintons are revealed by Assange who, generally, has not over-egged the material he has in the past..
John, thank you for the respect , believe me , reciprocated, to you.
I do not take an interest because our party has influence , nor do any of us . But we do have some links , and , some of us have a particular relationship,my wife is once upon a time , NYC, American origin!
The video you show actually changes my mind not one bit . I know Fox news well, and do not think it the ghastly right wing site some do . Right wing rather than left wing yes , maddeningly so ,but there are one or two anchors that are fair and balanced , as they like to tell us , one or two commentators I respect.
One is in the video and he is Juan Williams , a distinguished broadcaster of public radio reputation, and a regular moderate voice Fox bring in . Even he says he thinks Hillary is going to trounce Trump , in his words , describing the reason as Trump being “loco “! Williams gives the main reason I am very keen for Hillary to win big !
Of course you are correct , I do not know whether she has worse in her close . If it is awful , let justice prevail .
But , think of this . One of the best people in American politics , former Labour secretary and man of the more liberal centre left , Robert Reich , now a professor , he backed Sanders , but , serving under Bill Clinton , and aside Hillary , he does consider her to be one of the most qualified candidates possible.
And one , more thing , John. If we can just get her elected first , even if it goes belly up soon , we get President Tim Kaine , a corruption free zone . Better , oh so much , than , Trump !
“This woman has become a candidate – against all of the odds and without family connections. ”
What has that got to do with H Clinton becoming Democrat candidate on her own merits and not because she has a famous husband?
As to Assange having damaging and credible and verifiable evidence against Clinton, if it existed would she be standing knowing what would come out? I would be shocked if she hadn’t got involved in some illicit overseas excursions when SoS but Americans don’t have a track record of caring when their Government intervenes elsewhere in American interests. It’s a bit like claiming a French Presidential candidate has an extra-marital interest and expecting the French voters to care.
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president we will attack Iran—-we would be able to totally obliterate them.” [H. Clinton: 2008 AIPAC Conference]
“What I said and what I mean is that there will have to be consequences for any violation by Iran [re. terms of nuclear agreement] and that the nuclear option should not be taken off the table.” [H. Clinton: Brookings Institution’s Saban Forum 2015]
Lorenzo Cherin 28th Aug ’16 – 8:49pm
Lorenzo – it is of great relief to know that you and your wife are knowledgeable about what goes on in US politics. As you will know, under Cameron/Osborne/NC, the policies adopted were virtually the same as those adopted by the US administration – which were aimed at the empowerment of the largest US Corporations and the Wall St bankers [the reason that Blair and Brown receive ridiculously large fees for corporate speeches, as does Hilary, and Cameron and Osborne will soon be].
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3743172/All-aboard-gravy-train-George-Osborne-earn-50-000-time-lectures-signing-speaking-firm.html
I came across this video about 5 years ago [this is just highlights of the full interview which is also available YouTube] and found it quite remarkable because AR died in 2007 and what has happened since.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuinaIm-kd4
It would have been reasonably easy to disregard this – but the final video he made, shortly before his death, does make the original more compelling:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pcDr8taoTc
This seems to be the same battle Trump is fighting – can you tell me more about it?
Donald Trump has the support of the National Rifle Association, which is a powerful campaigning organisation, but his latest remarks venture into territory which would be illegal in the UK. Does not the USA have laws? and the ability to enforce them?
Hilary Clinton’s response was only that Trump’s comments were inappropriate for a Presidential candidate. Him or Her? and why not Everybody?
President Lincoln was murdered.
President John F. Kennedy was murdered.
Presidential candidate Robert Kennedy was murdered.
President Reagan was attacked but lived.
Donald Trump is a disgrace.
Nigel Farage’s speech to the UKIP conference was carried live on BBC2 Daily Politics.
There was no mention at all that an MP had been killed during the campaign.
Whatever the causes of this murder her death was a fact and led to vigils and suspensions of campaigning.
The official Leave campaign did mention her death during a previous interview on the Daily Politics.
Liberal Democrats are not standing a candidate in the consequent by-election.
I do not know whether the new leader of UKIP has commented.
The FBI has today exonerated Hillary Rodham Clinton, but meanwhile many people have casts their early votes.