Important questions:

Hillary Clinton appears to be so proud of campaigning on her platform when she speaks about obtaining health insurance for children in the USA.  I got to ask ask one simple question. Why would a child living in the richest country not have health insurance when America has been sending billions abroad to assist children in other countries and all there families needs? (many children were on their parents plan then)

She calls on the minority voters who dwell in our inner cities. Yet these inner cities in America have been ran by Democrats for decades.  Why do these cities continuously regress with no proof of any hope? (tax payers pay for them to collect off our Government)

She speaks out for women, yet she insulted the women her husband fucked and sexually attacked.  I ask a classic case of hypocrisy? I won't get into what the Clinton foundation raked from other countries while their women were being raped. (HRC knew this was happening)

Hillary Clinton calls out  to women.  Great!  But one problem with this platform call. I ask how many woman who prevail can say our Government in the USA played a role? Any woman who wants to succeed comes from within. (show me where politicians helped)

Why and how is it the mainstream media in the USA is ignoring the Wikileaks CONCERNING Hillary Clinton?

In closing,  if you work for and or  run a small or corporate business in the USA you are fucked if HRC wins. Taxes will be raised forcing you to get in line for unemployment. A no vote or vote for the the 3rd party clowns is a defacto for more then likely HRC.

This is politics in the raw. Tune into FOX news for facts in the raw!

Ok. Great.. Now lets hear you tell us how bad Trump is. Because if you think he's a better option, then I think you need help.

Who is the independant third party? Has the independant ever won?!

Both candidates are equally appalling options. We have about 2 weeks now before our country goes down the shitter.

All credibility was lost soon as you mentioned WikiLeaks all i see is another Tin Foil Hat wearing moron now if you would believe a traitor and a rock spider to deliver your news your an idiot.

I don't think it's fair to dismiss someone entirely on what you believe to be an illegitimate new source. The Democratic party certainly thought it was legitimate when they had their chairwoman step down before their National Convention over the contents of some of the leaks. Not to mention some of those leaks reveal Clinton was sharing, at least what i would consider, to be sensitive material.

Is it really so wrong to want the main stream media outlets to at least investigate or report on some of the things revealed in the emails?

As for the founder of Wikileaks being a traitor, who exactly did he betray? They guy was an Australian hacker who never worked for any government or military before founding Wikileaks 10 years ago.

I know where the SCUM BAG is from he betrayed our govmt your govmt britain and anyone else from the free west you dont have to work in an agency to betray a country.

Soon as that piece of shit caused the deaths of people in Afghanistan he deserves everything that is coming his way and his master from Moscow and Beijing wont be able to save him.

So if the information he has leaked in the past was true and caused real world consequences, why should the current leaks be considered "tin foil hat" material, when based on previous form they have always been legitimate and should warrant some form of journalistic investigation?

World consequences It caused the deaths of Aussie soldiers i dont know about world cosequences but those deaths are enough. And investigation why so all you tin foil hat wearing idiots can say he was framed?

I mean the idiot Republicans had most of the USA in a panic trying to say Hillary had sent a hit team to storm the embassy he is holed up in.

So that is the shit he and his masters want and America laps it up and praises the CRIMINAL TRAITOR ROCK SPIDER Julian Assange as some sort of internet hero PATHETIC

Why and how is it the mainstream media in the USA is ignoring the Wikileaks CONCERNING Hillary Clinton? - OP

All credibility was lost soon as you mentioned WikiLeaks - You

World consequences It caused the deaths of Aussie soldiers i dont know about world cosequences but those deaths are enough. - You

​​​In order for passed leaks to of caused deaths they would have had to have been credible and accurate. I'm not talking about Assanges crimes nor was OP i believe, we are speaking to the contents of the current leaks. Surely based on the accuracy of past leaks and the fact that even you believe them true enough to label the man a traitor, the contents of the current leaks should get more attention from the media that they do, no? I simply don't think it fair to dismiss everything OP has said based off of one thing and by fair i mean bordeline ignorant.

WHY?? it is obvious you clowns believe every thing soon as someone mentions wikileaks you clowns jump up and down and think its true while your country is imploding.

 How one of the more educated country's in the world buys into this conspiracy tin foil hat bullshit boggles my mind but good luck with it.

Funny how you dont care about his crimes but with no proof you want certain politicians dragged over the coals because a criminal traitor puts a wikileaks stamp on something.

Yeah lets all dance to the tune of a traitor let him dictate how we run our country you are naive but like i said put on your tin foil hat and be happy if it works for you.

So when Aussies die the leaks have substance and are proof, but when no one has died yet it must be a Russia/China conspiracy... If we are wearing a tin foil hat the so are you.

I dont get how someone dieing is proof of anything? But then, I dont know why the Aussies died. But if this person has simply blown their cover, all it proves is that they had the names/locations of these particular people, not that everything they post is accurate and/or credible.

That said my own personal view of the Wikileaks stuff is that the information is indeed sensitive and accurate information which shouldn't be shared with anyone, and I would consider anyone doing so to be a traitor.

Intresting point Slash. The image i posted was of a file that was a part of the initial Clinton email dump.  That document was sent from Hillary Clinton to a Saudi Prince. The brief bit i posted i feel is 'sensitive', it is page 2 of 7. The remainder of that document and the rest of that file goes into far more depth and is something i would consider far more than sensitive. It's interesting  you would consider anyone sharing this information a traitor, yet the only reason this information is being leaked is because a secretary of state was sharing it with a foreign intrest, yet people won't consider that person a traitor. 

It depends as to what end the information was shared. Was the foreign interest collaborating to assist the US of A in its efforts? Or did the sharing of said information put the interests of USA in peril? Its not simply about what is shared, its also about why and to what end. Sharing it with the world for the sake of sharing it and causing damage is where I feel the line needs drawn. A person that is given that information in an official capacity and is charged with the distribution of it to those of foreign interests isn't being a traitor when they are still acting in the interest of that which they were charged with doing. Someone essentially stealing said info and sharing it with persons its not intended for however is wrong and that person should be punished.

Heathen Hillary has not denied the leaks. They profess the emails were "stolen" and cannot verify, per Kaine.  How is it when Trumps tax returns were made available via theft, HRC and minions had an organism and ran around America  with the stolen documents.  The best part is Bill Clinton's tax reform allowed Trump to not pay the taxes that those got their asses up in the air about.  Wikileaks is as real as it comes.

Today we learn Obama has lied about her private server. This did not come as a surprise to millions in America. He has been lying for 9 years.  The Dems in WA. are duly noted and proven to be predatory lenders. Meaning they target minorities and tell them what they want to hear and use them for their vote. Once in office, regardless what party you are YOU pay out your pocket. 

When Bill came into office we were the richest Country. We had a surplus.  The day he singed the trade act kit was predicted America would decline.The Trade act is not the sole reason we are not NOW the richest country in the nation. But it sure in hell set the stage.

Or we can eliminate pay to play or not favor those who can pay more

As an out of USA observer (live in Greece),  i don't see any difference between your political parties.