Hillary Gets Away With It. Again. - Caleb Jones

Hillary Clinton, the Lizard Queen, the most criminal and corrupt politician in mainstream politics in my lifetime, the likely next President of the United States, a person who about 50% of you are going to vote for because you’ve gone insane, has avoided prison yet again, even though the authorities have admitted she broke the law.

The director of the FBI has announced that even though the Lizard Queen clearly violated the law, and that he would prosecute anyone else if their name wasn’t Hillary Clinton, there will be no action taken against her.

Big shock. As I’ve discussed before, I expected this to happen, and always knew that her actually getting in trouble for purposely violating confidentiality and security laws was extremely low. Like Obama before her and George W. Bush before him, the Lizard Queen was anointed by the elites to win the presidency quite a while ago.

If you vote for this woman, you’re simply pushing down on the accelerator to America’s eventual collapse. You shouldn’t vote for Trump either. The only three rational options for voting in November are these:

1. Vote for a third party. No, they won’t win because the system is rigged and they can’t, but at least you can look people in the eye and tell them that you’re not part of the problem. You can’t say this if you vote for big government, warmongering corporatists like the Lizard Queen or the Orange Menace.

2. Refrain from voting and re-organize your life to be as detached from the system as possible, as I describe in my books and blogs. You can’t stop Western society from getting worse; that ship sailed long ago. But you can structure your life so that this crap won’t harm you nearly as much as the typical person.

3. Refrain from voting and make plans to move out of the country some time in the next 5-15 years.

Back in the 90s I chose option 1. In the last few years I’ve chosen option 2 and it’s worked out great. Now I’m working on option 3.

Voting for HillTrump because you think the other person would be worse is just flat out stupid at this point. The West is on its way out. Instead of worrying about that, take charge of your life and steer your own ship.

14 Comments on “Hillary Gets Away With It. Again.

  1. It’s the same everywhere in the western world. In my country (Spain), 33% percent of the voters, voted for the corruption-laden current party in power. The lambs are voting the wolves to run the farm. Democracy is marketing and nothing else.

    I’m still in the “enjoy the decline” stage, which is not that bad.

    Regards,

  2. “The director of the FBI has announced that even though the Lizard Queen clearly violated the law, and that he would prosecute anyone else if their name wasn’t Hillary Clinton, there will be no action taken against her.”

    That’s not true. He said they would face some sort of sanctions, but since she’s no longer employed they can’t punish her. However it doesn’t matter who it was, it wasn’t something you can prosecute.

  3. As an “alien” living in the US, I feel sorry for the Americans. What a choice, Clinton or Trump!

    I’ll take option three please and have started reading your material on leaving the US.

  4. I feel sorry for the Americans

    I used to feel sorry for my fellow Americans, but no longer. Americans did this to themselves. It’s true what they say: you get the government you deserve.

  5. “”However it doesn’t matter who it was, it wasn’t something you can prosecute.””

    I disagree. General Patraeus got prosecuted for almost exactly the same thing. Hillary has been teflon her whole life. From Whitewater to the cattle futures trading fiasco. You have to admit that she has a talent for finding powerful friends that will go to bat for her. It really is amazing to watch her commit crime after crime and walk free with no repercussions at all.

  6. Tony says
    > since she’s no longer employed they can’t punish her

    That isn’t true. The DNI can and absolutely should deny her and her cronies security clearance. That is the sort of administrative and security punishments Comey was talking about. How one becomes President without security clearance is not apparent. It should absolutely disqualify her from even running for president since she doesn’t have the legal ability to execute the office.

    Of course that won’t happen, though plainly it should since anyone else would at the very least loose access to security clearance for the rest of their lives.

    In regards to Caleb’s advice on voting I’d say this: if you are driving along the street and you find you brakes fail then you might jack the engine down to a lower gear or pull on the parking brake or steer the car against a wall to slow it down. You are still going to crash, but at least you can slow things down a little bit….

    Hillary’s message of poor verses rich leads to snipers shooting cops. Hillary’s deep hatred of individual rights leads to supreme court decisions that will last through your children’s lifetime. Hillary’s message of soak the “rich” robs regular folks struggling to make their business work prone to failure, and robs them of the ability to provide for themselves.

    Which is to say the better of the two dreadful, viable candidates will slow down the collapse of the country, and that is a good thing. It’ll give Caleb more time to pack his bags.

  7. Oh, and FWIW, I’ll probably vote for Gary Johnson. I live in Illinois so a democrat is going the win this state short of an asteroid strike. So I get to feel good about voting for Gary even though it makes no difference either way.

  8. @Fraser Orr

    Same here bro-I’m in Chicago which is obviously a democrat stronghold. I didn’t think there would a Libertarian on the ticket at all so I was not going to vote this election. I would throw in for Gary Johnson as well. They have no chance BUT if they have a good showing, it will send a message to the elites and maybe get more people curious about the Libertarian party.

  9. I have a question about Democracy. I know that the average voter isn’t very logical or smart which is why the western wold is such mess in the 1st place. However instead of abandoning democracy and replacing it with a parliamentary system does anyone think that anyone should be able to vote as long as they take a test to ensure that they are actually qualified to vote?
    I hope my question makes sense if not I will clarify it.

  10. instead of abandoning democracy and replacing it with a parliamentary system does anyone think that anyone should be able to vote as long as they take a test to ensure that they are actually qualified to vote?

    That would be one big step in the right direction and a major improvement over what we have, but it still wouldn’t be ideal.

    In my ideal system, you’d have a federalist, parliamentary republic with an enforceable
    constitution that kept the federal government relatively small. There would be no states or provinces, only cities. Individual cities could have any type of democracy they wanted (if they wanted it at all) including direct democracy, but the only people allowed to vote in federal elections would be net contributors to the economy, i.e. those with jobs, a business, or investment income who didn’t receive any government assistance or any inherited income.

    This would not be a perfect system and there would be problems, but it would be far less bad than the utterly horrible mess the Western world has now.

    To me, “qualified to vote” doesn’t just mean you’re not an idiot (although that’s a good start). You need to be directly contributing to the economy. and want that economy and freedom to flourish. Allowing people on food stamps, welfare, unemployment, subsidized housing, and/or people without jobs (either because they’re lazy or because they’re being supported by someone else) to vote in national elections is simply asking for eventual socialism (and thus a collapse a few decades after that).

  11. CJ,
    Had I not come across your websites, I would have been one of those head-in-the-sand liberals (or libtard…fair enough) who would have held my nose and voted for Clinton.

    But after Comey’s revelations this week, I just can’t bring myself to do so — even if it meant keeping Trump out of the White House. Your articles as well as what I’ve been reading over at RedState are helping me decide not only how to vote in November but to question my long-held political views. Cheers to that, mate.

  12. CJ, this is off topic but I’d like to know your opinion on climate change within a libertarian framework. Here’s my question: assuming the folllowing premises (and I’d be curious of how you consider those premises, from “most certainly false” to “definitely correct”):
    1° That there has been a rise in temperatures in at least some important regions of the globe in the past century.
    2° That at least some of it is man-made and not just another natural fluctuation or some opposite of the “Little Ice Age”.
    3° That it may be very harmful.
    4° That human actions may mitigate it without harming the world economy beyond reason.
    Then is there a solution to this that is not too incompatible with minarchism/libertarianism ?

    Also, do you think that regardless of whether the thing is legit or a hoax, some libertarians reject it due to a bias linked to the (alleged) difficulty of tackling this problem without big government ?

  13. 1° That there has been a rise in temperatures in at least some important regions of the globe in the past century.

    Generally correct.

    That at least some of it is man-made and not just another natural fluctuation or some opposite of the “Little Ice Age”.

    Slightly correct.

    That it may be very harmful.

    Incorrect. Before it truly becomes harmful, humans will fix the problem via technology like they always do.

    That human actions may mitigate it without harming the world economy beyond reason.

    Correct, but via technology, not laws or politics.

    Then is there a solution to this that is not too incompatible with minarchism/libertarianism ?

    The solution is for someone like Elon Musk to invent something. Perfectly compatible with libertarianism.

    Also, do you think that regardless of whether the thing is legit or a hoax, some libertarians reject it due to a bias linked to the (alleged) difficulty of tackling this problem without big government ?

    Yes, I’m sure some think that. But I made my libertarian position on the environment clear right here:

    http://calebjonesblog.com/the-environment/

    The summary is that it’s literally impossible to solve the world-wide environmental problem via politics or government. Someone is going to have to invent something. And I’m confident they will. It will just be a while, since the problem must become worse for humans to get off their asses and do something about it technologically.

Leave a Reply

To leave a comment, enter your comment below. PLEASE make sure to read the commenting rules before commenting, since failure to follow these rules means your comment may be deleted. Also please do not use the username “Anonymous” or “Anon” or any variation thereof (makes things too confusing).

Off-topic comments are allowed, but Caleb will ignore those.

Caleb responds to comments in person, but he only does so on the two most current blog articles.

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search.