Posted on 10/26/2016 2:52:07 PM PDT by Revel
Danney Williams was banned on YouTube today.
(Image at link)
He will no longer be able to tell his story. It’s too damaging to the Clintons.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
It has been around 20 years. Not just a few. Organic stuff has a breakdown rate. I just dont know what kind of environmental exposure it has had for 20 years, or even if it exists at all anymore.
Danney Williams is still up on InfoWars.com, including their YouTube videos of him.
http://www.infowars.com/search-page/?danney%20williams
He may have lost his YouTube Channel, but there is still plenty about him there: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=danney+williams+clinton
Trump should take up Danney's cause and insist Bill give him a paternity test and find out once and for all if he is the boys father. Just give him some closure. Its cruel and mean to keep him in suspence. It might help Trump with the black vote also.
#Black Lives Matter !
This has been around since 1992. Just look at the kid, and then ask yourself...Who looks more like Billy Jeff? Chelsea or Danney?
Then ask yourself, who does Chelsea look like...?
5.56mm
The “corner” is the expectation of objectivity . . . from someone (YouTube in this case) who claims objectivity:The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing.The other way to the same result is to refer toThe man whom we believe is necessarily, in the things concerning which we believe him, our leader and director, and we look up to him with a certain degree of esteem and respect. But as from admiring other people we come to wish to be admired ourselves; so from being led and directed by other people we learn to wish to become ourselves leaders and directors . . .
The desire of being believed, the desire of persuading, of leading and directing other people, seems to be one of the strongest of all our natural desires. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
O'Sullivan's First Law: All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing. I cite as supporting evidence the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, and the Episcopal Church. The reason is, of course, that people who staff such bodies tend to be the sort who don't like private profit, business, making money, the current organization of society, and, by extension, the Western world. At which point Michels's Iron Law of Oligarchy takes over — and the rest follows.Again, you can simply reflect that claiming a virtue - any virtue, including objectivity - is arrogant. You cannot know when you are being objective. You can know whether or not you are trying to be objective - but that is a different claim. The ancient Greek Sophists claimed to be wise - and if you argued with that premise, you were ridiculed. The response was the advent of Philosophers - lovers of wisdom, not wise (in their own conceit) men. The philosopher refuses to claim a virtue, but claims to be open to facts and logic. If the philosopher cannot claim objectivity, he must not consider himself “above labels,” as the “No Labels” bunch had it. Thus, you could in principle openly be a socialist and be a philosopher, or you can be a conservative and be a philosopher - but you cannot claim to be objective and still be a philosopher.‘Course if you are a socialist and you actually are open to facts and logic, you are unlikely to remain a socialist. IMHO. And the limitation one faces in claiming to be objective is that such a claim denies that you are trying to be objective - the first principle of trying to be objective is, of course, looking critically at the incentives you face, and reasons why you might not be objective.
That’s right. His channel is gone.
So it makes you angry, but in the bigger scheme, he’s still on YouTube.
Unless he’s a total nitwit, he gets back on with a pseudonym or a totally different identification.
One of his paramours talked about an abortion procedure, can’t remember which one though.
Has this guy filed a paternity suit?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When he was young, his mother tried something.
Something REALLY BAD happened to her. Guess that would be called a Clinton response.
[FYI in one of Roger Stone’s books on the Clintons, he has a lot on this case.]
very tragic indeed
we have lost the Republic that Benjamin Franklin and our Founders bestowed on us
we were born in a land of liberty and now will die in a dictatorship
the children will have to fight for their freedom ALL OVER AGAIN
We lost the Republic in 1865.
Bill started this rumor and perpetuated it for two obvious reasons:
1. To deny love children (it aint mine, im shootin blanks!)
2. Wont have to wear condom when dicking bimbos (you wont get pregnant baby, im shootin blanks!)
I remember one of the first members of the clinton death circle was pregnant with his baby when she shot herself in the back of the head twice or something. Look it up.
Maury can make the announcement
The internet went corporate.
I guess it was bound to happen.
Too many people are willing to trade away
the freedom of Usenet for the strait
jacket of managed discourse.
He better hurry up with the DNA test before the old gezzer kicks the bucket. Then demand a place on the board of the CF.
“DNA test. NOW. A certain blue dress should do.”
“Trump should take up Danney’s cause and insist Bill give him a paternity test ....”
No need for the blue dress or getting Bill’s DNA directly.
Bill Clinton had a half-brother, Leon Ritzenthaler, from his father’s first wife (well after they had divorced and unknown to Bill’s mother when Blythe married her). Ritzenthaler died in 2009, and is survived by a son, Charles, who lived in Paradise, California, at that time (see http://www.paradisepost.com/article/ZZ/20090114/NEWS/901149999 )
Clinton would fight and delay providing any sample, but Charles should carry at least the Y chromosome common to Clinton. If Danny and Charles have the same Y chromosome - it would make a very strong case.
If Clinton’s Blythe line and genealogy from his mother’s side was checked, Danny could find others willing to provide DNA samples to test for any relationships. With all the services now available (23 and me, ...), he could either find compelling evidence for the likelihood of Clinton being his father, or on the flip side at least find no apparent relationship and put the issue to rest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.