Team Billary shared their creative economic strategy

Hillary's Clinton Foundation accounting is an innovative way of completing your taxes. It's not honest, but it's creative. And it's great for those semi-crazy types that like to play Russian Roulette with their freedom by randomly rearranging your taxes to create an alternate reality of the previous year's earnings. But be careful, the IRS can tough arm deceptive taxpayers much better than Donald Trump can strong arm Mexico into paying for a wall. The Clinton's convoluted tax returns very much mirror another Clinton technique of theirs -- their gameplan for answering questions (by not answering the questions). It's very similar to telling people you're going to release  your taxes and show your honesty -- followed by your own massive censorship of it.

You know, all of this deceptive smokescreen number accounting application makes up one poor argument plan in order to confuse people. This results in alll voters either nodding off or becoming distracted enough to believe the lies and BS. After all, with tax documents including misleading Hieroglyphics and pictures of kittens so nobody understands them,  the Clinton Creative Tax Application  reminds me of another Clinton strategy, The Clinton Smokescreen Answer/Non-Answer Technique. (i.e. how to not discuss the answer to a question you hate by using things that don’t associate at all with the question, talking up a lot of points you do want to talk about that have no place in any smart person’s response to a straight question. Then you wind up  tying up the bow by making these two totally unrelated ideas that mean absolutely nothing to each other actually falsely sound like they go together. It's kind of like Donald Trump and his hairpiece -- you're really trying to make the two things fit. And since the association makes no sense and is totally illogical, both Clintons when doing it either do a  great job (Bill) and a bad job (Hillary) of dodging your question, twisting the subject, and talking about what they  wanted to talk about. Yet it doesn’t matter who does it well and who doesn’t, it’s still totally nonsensical, Bill’s just far more entertaining when he does it

The non-answers to questions provided by Hillary Clinton

The end result? You lose everybody, completely fail to answer the question, and somehow manage to end your answer on the subject of traffic lights needing one more color added plus some disco balls at night for extra safety (followed by an association to make this all try to sound like it goes well together somehow in Clinton Associative Ville La-La Land). This type of non-answer is a usual Clinton response to press questions. And all of these words wind around the originally posted question about how much of a percentage the Clinton Foundation really gives to charity.

It's interesting that I’ve noticed many times the Clintons wind up using this tactic with simple “yes no” answer questions. No matter what your definition of “is” might be, this wordy nonsensical filler waste of people’s lives that encompass most of both Clintons' words is not an effective strategy for when the rest of us realize what was required in the answer. I guess those mutated genes really don’t make Hillary a smarter species because she’s certainly not your standard American—human or beast, or human Hilda Beast.

I like my human voter species

And thankfully, that point about Hillary not being anything like the majority of Americans is really true, so there’s something still great left in this country. I’m very glad, after all, she’s just one person and not really even considered by women to be a female activist or anything to look up to or emulate. At least there’s still sanity amongst the voters and people in this country, even if it evaporated long ago in both presidential candidates. #Election 2016 #Democratic Party #Hillary Clinton