It is currently Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:41 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 197 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:08 am
Posts: 1256
955876 wrote:
Stinger8 wrote:
955876 wrote:
I’m sure CNN is allowed to broadcast in Canada though right?

The same CNN that’s had to retract stories they ran that were highly false. The same CNN that’s been outed as straight making up stuff to fit its agenda.

I hear the Fox accusation often. Funny thing is though, when challenged to cite what “fake news” is being spouted people can’t.

My Fast & Furious News wasn’t fake. I provided the background. You can look up he rest if you choose.

In the future though, I’d appreciate you not lumping me in with “old stupid viewers” and “conspiracy theories” when you didn’t even bother to take the time to see if I was full of shit or not.

In this instance, I was the one providing facts and you lazily resorted to liberal talking points.

You can do better than that.


There are many many examples of Fox lies (see Seth Rich conspiracy for one of many) however recently I am not sure if you have heard but they have said countless times that there is zero evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia. Zero evidence. But there kinda is lots of evidence and more and more coming daily about people on the campaign kinda, sorta trying to connect with Russian peeps to cut quid pro quo's. Just a little bit here and there. See Manafort see Donny Jr, see Page etc.

Please save your canned response, I know you will check your talking points and like a good parrot spew them out. Just trying to help you fella's see the light.

Regards form a socialist utopia


Russia again? The bogus witch hunt by Mueller? Other than saying the word collusion what actual collusion has there been evidence of? Actual collusion now. Not just cuz CNN said. Money paid for a benefit received. Real collusion. Tied to Trump. Not something Manafort did prior to campaign.

And I suppose you’ve been ignoring the real story about what the DNC was doing on he campaign. More conspiracy right? It’s all just a “vast right wing conspiracy” huh? Just like the cum on Monica’s dress.

Funny how just the mention of collusion stirs up the left yet hard evidence of real crimes committed by your cherished & failed candidate are always dismissed.


95 there are indictments and more coming and someone (papadopolous)plead guilty already to lying to the FBI about Russian entanglements. Whatever, believe what you (or Hannity) want to believe I actually feel kinda feel sorry for you. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Swiss is right about the medical. I've crossed into your lands almost 100 times

Worked with your fine people, I've heard the stories about sick children and other emergencies. Single payer leads to serfdom


Single payer leads to being tied to a specific piece of land that you have to farm for a feudal lord until death? That's weird.


Funny you should mention 'land', that is being stolen from us land owners too, among everything else to make everyone have a 'fair' distribution.

You should look up the full meaning of that word. Mr. Literalglitterarty


Oh? Are you one of those crackpot ranchers out west who supposes that the federal government has no claim over land used in the United States?

By the way, any moron, can see that distributive justice requires that equals should get equal shares and that unequals should get unequal shares. The difficulty is not in pinning down a definition common to all forms of distributive justice. The difficulty is in deciding on which merit or matter is most relevant in deciding distribution. Probably those who are the fastest runners suppose the spoils should be divided up based on how fast you can run so that the fastest should get the best pieces of the pie.

We are all biased and would like to see distribution based on whatever merit or matter would have us benefit most.

What most people fail to see in politics is that there are competing, legitimate claims to political power.

Without wealth a nation cannot prosper and so those generative of the most wealth have a legitimate claim to more power than others less generative of wealth.
Without those willing to die to defend the nation, a nation cannot last and so those more willing to die (those with more courage) have a legitimate claim to more power than others with less courage.
Without the virtuous and prudent, a nation cannot do what is best for itself and so those with more virtue and intellectual ability to see what must be done have a legitimate claim to more power than those with less insight.
Without a nation of free born citizens who are able to rule themselves, a nation must devolve at best into a nanny state and at worst into a tyranny, and so those free born with reason have a legitimate claim that that they are owed as much power as everyone else.

This is not an exhaustive list, but only some obvious merits to power.

Now, you can go down the list of party talking points on both sides of the aisle and see different claims to power being championed over others. But the true high-level statesman or woman will have the insight to see how to make all these competing claims commensurate with one another.

One of the most brilliant aspects of our particular republican constitution is that it tries to make the different claims commensurate via the house, (before the 17th amendment), the senate, and the unelected judiciary.

Those on the far right (the Breitbart set) and on the far left (the HuffPo set) are morons incapable of recognizing a diverse competing set of legitimate claims to power. They think only the claims they champion are the appropriate merits or matters on which to distribute the various categories of goods. They are myopic and stupid, thus.

So I appreciate you telling me to look up the meaning of the word fair, Beth, but, perhaps, you will do me the credit of recognizing that I already have.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6314
Poltargyst wrote:
I confess I had heard mention of Operation Fast and Furious, but knew next to nothing about it. So I read this:

http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/20/fast-and-furious-ig-report-destroys-right-wing-conspiracy-theories/

Quote:
What none on the right are admitting is that Horowitz’s report systematically reveals how irresponsible and speculative the accusations from their side have been. The report criticizes Holder’s Criminal Division chief Lanny Breuer for failing to inform Holder or his deputy that “gun walking” had taken place in the Bush administration in another case in Arizona called “Wide Receiver”. But the report shows that Breuer knew nothing about gun walking in Fast and Furious, and that therefore the scandal existed three levels below Holder (let alone the White House).


Huh. Gun walking started under the Bush administration. Did Fox News mention that?

Quote:
Horowitz destroys the conspiracy theories on both sides of the aisle over 471-pages, but it’s the right wing screamers who come out looking worst. Horowitz shows definitively that the Arizona ATF agents and prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s office there were responsible for the operation, not the White House or the Justice Department in Washington and that the primary source of the inaccurate testimony given to Congress was the U.S. Attorney for Arizona, Dennis Burke.


Fascinating.
There are differences between "wide receiver" and "fast and furious." RFD chips in the guns, and the Mexican gov knew about Wide Receiver. However, both originated in AZ, and were directives of local offices. Holder didn't provide requested documents because it was an on going investigation, and was held in contempt by a republican congress. But look into the details. It's not completely what the conservative right wants you to think.

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6314
But back to the original topic :

Quote:
ESPN’s profits are declining, but it is still profitable and its revenue and number of employees are still both growing. Even in 2016, as the presidential election pulled attention from everything else in television, ESPN ranked as the highest-rated cable network among men and adults between ages 18 and 54, and second among total viewers in primetime. As Bill Simmons told Kafka, “it’s weird that people think they’re in trouble. They’re not in trouble. They’re just not going to be making money hand over fist, like they did six years ago.”

Still, one of the most common biases in media is that reporters miss the forest for the forest fires, focusing on crises over more-important, yet less exciting, trendlines. In 2015, ESPN laid off about 300 people, and it was a big story. Last week, it laid off 100 people, including several prominent on-air talents, and it was an even bigger story. But in the 18-month interim, its global workforce actually grew by 500 to 8,000—and it wasn’t a story at all.


From here : https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... re/524922/

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
95 there are indictments and more coming and someone (papadopolous)plead guilty already to lying to the FBI about Russian entanglements. Whatever, believe what you (or Hannity) want to believe I actually feel kinda feel sorry for you. :(


You know, if Papadoplus or Manafort did something illegal they should be punished. But here’s the thing with all this Russia stuff. It’s on record the FBI knew Russians were trying to meddle in our political system going back to I think 2015. Likely longer as that is what countries do to one another. We play those games as well around the world. Further, simply speaking to a Russian doesn’t constitute collusion. Look, both sides are lobbing shit at one another. So take a moment and see which shit passes the smell test.

These Russian allegations came out almost immediately after Trump’s victory. Like clockwork almost. She lost, he won, and in very short order there was immediate scandal and crying the Russians Russians Russians. So then ask yourself how is it possible that none of this gets mentioned oh I dunno, during the campaigns where it could have sealed victory for her? Why after?

It isn’t plausible on any level to believe they knew nothing of Russians before Nov. 8, 2016 but all of a sudden immediately after they have all this evidence of Russian collusion? Smells fishy to me.

Also, has anyone been able to show any actual collusion? I don’t mean someone talked to a Russian. What I am referring to is something along the lines of do this for us and we will do this for you after we win the election. And even then, did that have any play at the ballot box? Were Russian operatives forcing people to vote a certain way? Did they hack our system and change votes?

And back to those “indictments”. How can you not see (well I know) or smell the stench there? What leads you to believe that THIS investigation is really on the up & up?

Look no further than the previous high level “investigation” our “Justice Department” conducted. There you had a presidential candidate accused of being “grossly negligent” in her handling of classified information. A term changed (prior to actually interviewing her) to “extremely careless” by who should be referred to as “disgraced” former FBI directed James Comey. A director that wrote his exoneration months before actually interviewing the target of said “investigation”. Oh wait, it wasn’t an investigation at all. We know this because Comey himself has said that his boss (Loretta Lynch) told him to not publicly refer to it as an investigation and instead use the term “matter”.

So said candidate was (and there is mountains of eveidnce so let’s not debate this point) guilty of grossly mishandling classified information. Something that as the law is written constitutes treason. The law is VERY clear that intent matters not and the simple act of not safeguarding the info in and of itself is treasonous.

But it doesn’t stop there. Said candidate was also required, not by rule but by law, to maintain copies of ALL of her official correspondence while serving as Secretary if State. Not only did she fail to do so, she took the additional steps of deleting thousands and thousands of emails AND THEN had her IT guys wipe the server clean. And no, not with a “cloth” tee hee. Those acts constitute obstruction of justice.

Then to top it off there is the perjury. You know, the same crime her husband committed that led to articles of impeachment being drafted. Statements she made (under oath) in regards to the Benghazi investigation were later found to be false. This isn’t “conspiracy” as her own emails (the ones she didn’t get to delete & wipe clean) proved.

So we have a “Justice Department” that has mountains of strong evidence against a presidential candidate for treason, obstruction of justice, and perjury yet the freakin director of the FBI exonerates her before even one interview all the while the Attorney General directs her underlings to not even consider it an “investigation”. Are you kidding me???

All of that and yet you want me to believe that this Mueller probe is being conducted ethically and by the book?

If I see & smell dogshit I don’t need to first step in it to know what I’m looking at and smelling is dogshit.

And that is the difference between you and me. I don’t align myself so tightly to Dem or Repub that I’m not able to call a spade a spade. You cannot do that nor can very many other liberals. You are the guy that would smirk while laying down a royal flush in spades. Problem is, your ace of spades is really a club. Everyone else at the table sees it’s a club except you yet you sit there and cry how you should have won till you are blue in face.

In your world everything corrupt or against the law one of your precious liberals do is immediately dismissed as “right wing conspiracy” or “fake Fox News”. You take whatever you are given from CNN or wherever and treat it as gospel no matter how bogus. Herded in the direction they want you to go like mindless cattle.

And that makes you no better than common cattle. So you feel sorry for me? Oh no. That hardly hurts coming from someone who is either incredibly lazy, very naive, or frankly hovering but a few IQ points above a heffer.

You can flame away. I’ll let you have this one as this debate has become much what standing in a pasture debating with said heffer would feel like. I’d rather just have it for dinner and be on my way.

On a brighter note, today is November 8th. Anniversary of the day the Clinton Crime machine came to an end.

I’m no fan of some of the things Trump has done or said. However, he did accomplish one great thing. And that’s keeping one of the most corrupt politicians in history from having even more power.

I wonder how much Bill gets paid for speeches these days or how many foreign entitities are lining up to make massive “donations” to the Clinton Foundation now that they have nothing to offer in return.


Last edited by 955876 on Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:13 pm
Posts: 1678
Quote:
ESPN’s profits are declining, but it is still profitable and its revenue and number of employees are still both growing. Even in 2016, as the presidential election pulled attention from everything else in television, ESPN ranked as the highest-rated cable network among men and adults between ages 18 and 54, and second among total viewers in primetime. As Bill Simmons told Kafka, “it’s weird that people think they’re in trouble. They’re not in trouble. They’re just not going to be making money hand over fist, like they did six years ago.”

This is a nice example of short term rather than long term outlook.

Profits declining is the entire point, and that's because their expenses are increasing faster than revenues. For 2016, ESPN was paying $4.7b for broadcasting rights. That number is going to jump to $5.8b in the near future. Meanwhile, they're facing increased competition from newcomers like Amazon and every league now has its own network. If ESPN loses broadcasting rights to the NBA, NFL, and/or MLB, they're completely screwed.

All the while, they're losing about 2 million subscribers/year. ESPN has been able to offset that with an increase in subscriber fees, which have jumped from $4 in 2010 to $7 in 2016 (5x higher than the 2nd most expensive channel). That can't continue indefinitely, and cable companies are starting to push back - look at the Altice cable fight in NY. I really don't see how ESPN can keep bumping up subscription costs at a time when people are cord cutting faster than ever. Some cable companies are even starting to offer lean packages that exclude ESPN.

Quote:
Still, one of the most common biases in media is that reporters miss the forest for the forest fires, focusing on crises over more-important, yet less exciting, trendlines. In 2015, ESPN laid off about 300 people, and it was a big story. Last week, it laid off 100 people, including several prominent on-air talents, and it was an even bigger story. But in the 18-month interim, its global workforce actually grew by 500 to 8,000—and it wasn’t a story at all.

So what does their overall payroll expense look like? If they cut 400 people averaging $100k/year and hired 500 people making $50k/year, then they've still dramatically cut their payroll. This is meaningless without numbers.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3128
955876 wrote:

It isn’t plausible on any level to believe they knew nothing of Russians before Nov. 8, 2016 but all of a sudden immediately after they have all this evidence of Russian collusion? Smells fishy to me.



Huh??

July 25 2016 – The FBI confirms it has opened an investigation into the hacking of the DNC computer network. “The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” it says in a release.

(James Comey, the FBI director at the time, would later testify that the FBI in late July 2016 began investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump campaign associates were involved in those efforts. The New York Times would later report that Page’s speech in Moscow “was a catalyst for the F.B.I. investigation into connections between Russia and President Trump’s campaign.”)

So under oath, the FBI director testified that they began looking into whether the Trump associates were involved in Russia's interference with the election. So the Government and Intelligence agencies knew about it before the election day. It was not announced that it was occurring because officials ( i.e. Obama) did not want to seem to influence the election.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6314
jebrick wrote:
It was not announced that it was occurring because officials ( i.e. Obama) did not want to seem to influence the election.
Meanwhile, Obama asked for a bi-partisan effort to expose the interferance and asked Mitch McConnell, republican majority leader, to make a joint public statement. He said "No."

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
jebrick wrote:
955876 wrote:

It isn’t plausible on any level to believe they knew nothing of Russians before Nov. 8, 2016 but all of a sudden immediately after they have all this evidence of Russian collusion? Smells fishy to me.



Huh??

July 25 2016 – The FBI confirms it has opened an investigation into the hacking of the DNC computer network. “The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” it says in a release.

(James Comey, the FBI director at the time, would later testify that the FBI in late July 2016 began investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump campaign associates were involved in those efforts. The New York Times would later report that Page’s speech in Moscow “was a catalyst for the F.B.I. investigation into connections between Russia and President Trump’s campaign.”)

So under oath, the FBI director testified that they began looking into whether the Trump associates were involved in Russia's interference with the election. So the Government and Intelligence agencies knew about it before the election day. It was not announced that it was occurring because officials ( i.e. Obama) did not want to seem to influence the election.


Leaving out all the news about the DNC, Fushion GPS, and the Clinton ties to the “Russians”?

My point, which apparently is lost here is that if they had knoweledge prior to 11/8 that Trump was in cahoots with the Russians they would have used it during campaign. It would have been a huge thing.

As it turned out, the Russian stuff wasn’t made a huge issue until after the surprise victory. Then it was oh my god we’ve been invaded, hacked, and taken over by the Russians.

And I’m with Swiss in terms of politicians. They all stink. Difference here is that many of you here hold investigations into those on the right as the holy grail while dismissing everything on the left.

Do you really believe they are clean? At etc all the crap that’s comes out about Clinton, the DNC, the farce of an investigation the “Justice dept” conducted or actually failed to conduct?

How about this, explain away the farce that was Comey’s investigation. Humor me here. I need a laugh.

Explain away how all that evidence don’t and doesn’t warrant a massive investigation into Clinton, Comey, Lynch etc.??

Hillary should have been removed early on from the ticket and replaced.

How is “gross negligence” not so just because a Clinton that did it?

How is obstruction of justice not obstruction just because a Clinton did it?

How is perjury not a crime just because a Clinton did it.

You are looking for crimes elsewhere but willfully excuse all of those done that already has all the proof needed. Problem is the corrupt power the be in DC, the protected inner circle won’t do a thing about it. Instead they lead you to look elsewhere.

Hey, if Trump or anyone else in their team did commit crimes lock them up I say. Provided the same hand of “Justice” is applied to Clinton, Comey, Lynch etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
And about the hacking of the DNC. So what? What came from that hack was how the DNC was colluding against Sanders.

Is that something as a voter you would like to know? Or is the hack itself the issue?

You said yourself and I posted Obama had been informed the Russians were trying to meddle. What did they do?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
And maybe we can at the least all agree that nothing Comey says should hold any weight.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Stinger8 wrote:
955876 wrote:
Stinger8 wrote:

There are many many examples of Fox lies (see Seth Rich conspiracy for one of many) however recently I am not sure if you have heard but they have said countless times that there is zero evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia. Zero evidence. But there kinda is lots of evidence and more and more coming daily about people on the campaign kinda, sorta trying to connect with Russian peeps to cut quid pro quo's. Just a little bit here and there. See Manafort see Donny Jr, see Page etc.

Please save your canned response, I know you will check your talking points and like a good parrot spew them out. Just trying to help you fella's see the light.

Regards form a socialist utopia


Russia again? The bogus witch hunt by Mueller? Other than saying the word collusion what actual collusion has there been evidence of? Actual collusion now. Not just cuz CNN said. Money paid for a benefit received. Real collusion. Tied to Trump. Not something Manafort did prior to campaign.

And I suppose you’ve been ignoring the real story about what the DNC was doing on he campaign. More conspiracy right? It’s all just a “vast right wing conspiracy” huh? Just like the cum on Monica’s dress.

Funny how just the mention of collusion stirs up the left yet hard evidence of real crimes committed by your cherished & failed candidate are always dismissed.


95 there are indictments and more coming and someone (papadopolous)plead guilty already to lying to the FBI about Russian entanglements. Whatever, believe what you (or Hannity) want to believe I actually feel kinda feel sorry for you. :(


you all need to see that whole situation as disinformation warfare. Sun Tzu, all war is deception. Those sealed indictments are going to raise eyebrows.

you never replied to me on your attack a few pages back. How is that hate speech law coming up there? Talk about a mess

If you happened to see what the Saudi reformation effort the past 3 years until the other days (corruption arrests) is going to roll up all the FARA violations of all our senate and house members. Look at the one billionare who was funneling the money to many here. The rug is rolling up worldwide.

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
you all need to see that whole situation as disinformation warfare.


Oh I’m fully aware that does and has been taking place.

It’s the other stooges here that immediately dismiss anything negative about their precious flowers or immediately take the position that if Fox News said it then it is fake.

Shit, even a blind squirrel can find nuts.

Here are three questions for the loyal followers of CNN otherwise known as the Clinton News Network:

1) In your opinion, was Hillary grossly negligent in her (mis)handling of classified information? There is so much evidence she was I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

2) In your opinion, did Hillary commit obstruction of justice when she deleted thousands upon thousands of emails AND had her IT people wipe the server clean? Please note these were not her emails to do as she pleases with. Those emails were yours and mine and she was required BY LAW to maintain records of. We could also toss in destruction of government property while we are at it. There is so much evidence she did these things I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

3) In your opinion, did Hillary commit perjury when she lied under oath before Congress? There is ample evidence that shows statements made under oath proved to be false when recovered emails (you know, the ones she couldn’t delete) proved her statements were false. There is so much evidence she did I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

Given that items 1, 2, & 3 are nearly impossible to refute, how is it then that our “justice department” was able to arrive at the conclusion that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges?

Really? Hmmm, do reasonable investigators write their exoneration of a target before they’ve even interviewed them? Do reasonable (and non-corrupt) attorney generals inform their investigators to not even refer to the “matter” as an investigation? Is it not a conflict of interest when the target of the investigations husband meets with the top attorney privately (her former boss) before the no-charges debacle?

How can a reasonable person dismiss all of this and yet have such outrage over the stuff the very people covering up this scandal are slinging at the other side? How is any of that credible when such lengths have been taken to sweep all this under the rug?

I’m all for brining them all down. But that’s not the case here. You here on the left only want to believe the stuff that fits nicely into your own narrative.

On one side there is accusations that you believe simply because the accusations have been made yet on the other side there is HARD EVIDENCE of actual crimes and yet it’s all “fake news”.

So have at it Stinger, Cor-ten, Poltargyst. Tell me how what I posted above didn’t happen. Tell me how it was made up. Tell me how it’s a vast right wing conspiracy.

Treason, obstruction, destruction of gov. property, collusion, corruption, and perjury. Hard evidence supports that your precious Hillary has committed them all in spades.

But but but CNN said something about Manafort....

Ok, fry him up I say. But only after you cook the big fish that’s been swimming in the scum pond.

Somehow though the sheeple here will defend it and anyone else with a (D) next to their name.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
That sealed doj indictment list grew from 8 to 14 and now 7 more today ....total of 31

https://mobile.twitter.com/LizCrokin/st ... 76/photo/1

Plot thickens

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 7:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6314
Pabst wrote:
I'm all for background checks as well - but the issue, first and foremost, is that the Texas shooter (and the Charleston shooter) both passed a background check because the government fucked up their records. Basically, i don't trust the federal government to handle records properly.
It wasn't the government. It was the Air Force, from what I understand. The military division of "government." I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative that the government is inherently bad.

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7291
I've not weighed in on this for awhile, and my responses will be more base, not nearly as reasoned as those of you asshats that are well-read on these topics. Few thoughts:

1. Stinger's last message to me: Yes and that 15% helps fund better health care, better education, better infrastructure, safer society, guaranteed pension (CPP and old age) and overall happier lifestyle for EVERYONE. The metrics dont lie (pesky things to contradict those metrics). You can look em up on the intraweb.

I can honestly say I have never heard a Canadian say "damn it makes me angry when an American gets $.20 cents more on the dollar here in Canada (or european, or Brit etc)????. What I can say is I hear Canadians say damn the fact our dollar is worth $.80 against the US dollar is GREAT for my business.


I think you misunderstood me, Stinger. Neither have I heard any Canadian begrudging Americans their currency conversion. I AM saying though, that I know plenty of people in PEI that are struggling to pay the prices they pay for commodities plus 15% tax. I'm good buying stuff in Canada due to the great mitigator, the US Dollar being worth $1.25 when up against the looney. True....many businesses, merchants, etc. do much worse when the looney is equal to the dollars. Few other things:

2. Donald Trump is a fuckin' douchebag. He's an absolute embarrassment to have that guy, whom his own Secretary of State reportedly referred to, quite legitimately, as a moron, as President of our country. It's a sad commentary on the electorate.

3. Hillary Clinton needs to Shut the FUCK Up and go the fuck away. She's a drag on the Democratic Party.

4. Much as it pains me to say it, the King of Mumbo-Jumbo, Ivory Tower Ike, Academia Artie, Still Lit is goddamn on the mark about guns. Hell....require every household to have a handgun so we can off any suspected intruder, lawn invader, or smirker. Throw in a rifle so we can shoot the squirrels in our yard, boil 'em up. But...we CAN to that, and still not sell military grade weapons, built to inflict maximum damage, to the very population of Americans most off their fuckin' rocker. Sure, sell these killing machines to crazy mother-fuckers, then say there's nothing we can do...they might have killed just as may by choking them to death.

5. FUCK Colin Kaepernick and all these so-called demonstrators. What a fuckin' stupid way to sway public opinion. Identify a cause...then alienate half the fuckin' country in pursuit of this cause. And all the outrage at police killings of so-called Unarmed Black Men? Seriously?? Sure....let's make heroes out of fuckin' idiots like Michael Brown. Let's canonize the mother-fucker who all he had to do was listen to the cop telling him to get the fuck out of the middle of the street, not strong-arm a cigar store owner. Now, I'm not a fan of Barney Frank, but he had one of the best lines of all times by a politico. When criticized for not opposing the death penalty strongly enough, the senator from Massachusetts, referring to those executed, said, "I won't miss 'em."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3128
COR-TEN wrote:
Pabst wrote:
I'm all for background checks as well - but the issue, first and foremost, is that the Texas shooter (and the Charleston shooter) both passed a background check because the government fucked up their records. Basically, i don't trust the federal government to handle records properly.
It wasn't the government. It was the Air Force, from what I understand. The military division of "government." I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative that the government is inherently bad.


Apparently, the Armed Services do not have to enter crimes of domestic abuse in the criminal DB like everyone else. They are trying to pass a law now to do just that.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3128
955876 wrote:
jebrick wrote:
955876 wrote:

It isn’t plausible on any level to believe they knew nothing of Russians before Nov. 8, 2016 but all of a sudden immediately after they have all this evidence of Russian collusion? Smells fishy to me.



Huh??

July 25 2016 – The FBI confirms it has opened an investigation into the hacking of the DNC computer network. “The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” it says in a release.

(James Comey, the FBI director at the time, would later testify that the FBI in late July 2016 began investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump campaign associates were involved in those efforts. The New York Times would later report that Page’s speech in Moscow “was a catalyst for the F.B.I. investigation into connections between Russia and President Trump’s campaign.”)

So under oath, the FBI director testified that they began looking into whether the Trump associates were involved in Russia's interference with the election. So the Government and Intelligence agencies knew about it before the election day. It was not announced that it was occurring because officials ( i.e. Obama) did not want to seem to influence the election.


Leaving out all the news about the DNC, Fushion GPS, and the Clinton ties to the “Russians”?

My point, which apparently is lost here is that if they had knoweledge prior to 11/8 that Trump was in cahoots with the Russians they would have used it during campaign. It would have been a huge thing.

As it turned out, the Russian stuff wasn’t made a huge issue until after the surprise victory. Then it was oh my god we’ve been invaded, hacked, and taken over by the Russians.


I believe I stated that the administration did not want to appear to influence the election by announcing that people in the Trump campaign were under investigation for possibly working with the Russians to interfere with the election. It became a big deal because after the election, when it could not longer be construed as attempting to influence the election, the administration announced it what had happened. Even then the Obama administration did not say that Trump or his campaign was being investigated. That news was broken in a tweet by Trump. Not long afterwards, the National Security Advisor was fired because he was found to be lying about his contacts with the Russians.

As to your other points. If the Justice department, under Trump, is not doing anything against Clinton it just might be because there is nothing to be done. You do realize that they can ignore Comey's recommendation and prosecute her. They are well within any statue of limitations. So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7595
955876 wrote:
Quote:
you all need to see that whole situation as disinformation warfare.


Oh I’m fully aware that does and has been taking place.

It’s the other stooges here that immediately dismiss anything negative about their precious flowers or immediately take the position that if Fox News said it then it is fake.

Shit, even a blind squirrel can find nuts.

Here are three questions for the loyal followers of CNN otherwise known as the Clinton News Network:

1) In your opinion, was Hillary grossly negligent in her (mis)handling of classified information? There is so much evidence she was I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

2) In your opinion, did Hillary commit obstruction of justice when she deleted thousands upon thousands of emails AND had her IT people wipe the server clean? Please note these were not her emails to do as she pleases with. Those emails were yours and mine and she was required BY LAW to maintain records of. We could also toss in destruction of government property while we are at it. There is so much evidence she did these things I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

3) In your opinion, did Hillary commit perjury when she lied under oath before Congress? There is ample evidence that shows statements made under oath proved to be false when recovered emails (you know, the ones she couldn’t delete) proved her statements were false. There is so much evidence she did I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

Given that items 1, 2, & 3 are nearly impossible to refute, how is it then that our “justice department” was able to arrive at the conclusion that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges?

Really? Hmmm, do reasonable investigators write their exoneration of a target before they’ve even interviewed them? Do reasonable (and non-corrupt) attorney generals inform their investigators to not even refer to the “matter” as an investigation? Is it not a conflict of interest when the target of the investigations husband meets with the top attorney privately (her former boss) before the no-charges debacle?

How can a reasonable person dismiss all of this and yet have such outrage over the stuff the very people covering up this scandal are slinging at the other side? How is any of that credible when such lengths have been taken to sweep all this under the rug?

I’m all for brining them all down. But that’s not the case here. You here on the left only want to believe the stuff that fits nicely into your own narrative.

On one side there is accusations that you believe simply because the accusations have been made yet on the other side there is HARD EVIDENCE of actual crimes and yet it’s all “fake news”.

So have at it Stinger, Cor-ten, Poltargyst. Tell me how what I posted above didn’t happen. Tell me how it was made up. Tell me how it’s a vast right wing conspiracy.

Treason, obstruction, destruction of gov. property, collusion, corruption, and perjury. Hard evidence supports that your precious Hillary has committed them all in spades.

But but but CNN said something about Manafort....

Ok, fry him up I say. But only after you cook the big fish that’s been swimming in the scum pond.

Somehow though the sheeple here will defend it and anyone else with a (D) next to their name.


Ok, I'll do some reading and see what I come up with. In the meantime, riddle me this:

During the campaign, Trump promised to do many things on DAY ONE. One of those things was to prosecute Hillary. Trump stood on a debate stage with Hillary and promised to see her in prison if he won. It was one of the promises of his campaign.

Okay. Trump won. Republicans have all the power right now. The full power of the United States justice system can be brought to bear on Hillary now, and Trump promised to do it. So why is nothing happening? If she's so obviously so guilty, where's the prosecution?

Or, to turn around your earlier statement, now that Hillary/the Clintons are no longer a threat, there's no further need to throw crap charges at her in campaign speeches?

Mueller was appointed by a Republican Attorney General in a Republican administration, but I'm supposed to dismiss his investigation as some kind of farce? Let's see what he comes up with, shall we?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
I believe I stated that the administration did not want to appear to influence the election by announcing that people in the Trump campaign were under investigation for possibly working with the Russians to interfere with the election.


Wait, let me get this straight. You are saying the Obama Administration had knowledge (before elections) of people in the Trump campaign working with the Russians but sat on it because he “didn’t want to influence the elections”?

That is comedy gold.

They absolutely would have used it to oh I dunno, win the election....

Again leaving out the OTHER sides ties to the Russians that has been coming out.

Fake news though so it doesn’t count.

Yep, Obama new of this and sat on it.

How’s this for something more probable. He knew the Russians were trying to meddle, he didn’t have any real dirt on Trump & Russians together, he didn’t want it brought up as to not taint Hillary’s victory and give those on the right any fingers to point later. So lips are sealed.

Trump pulls the upset and all of a sudden it’s OMG the Russians interfered with our elections.

Here’s a fact, they would have used any and all info they had if it could have hurt Trump leading up to 11/8. To believe they sat on something of that caliber TO TRUMP’S BENEFIT is beyond crazy.

You essentially said Obama did Trump a solid.

Ummm ok...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
During the campaign, Trump promised to do many things on DAY ONE. One of those things was to prosecute Hillary. Trump stood on a debate stage with Hillary and promised to see her in prison if he won. It was one of the promises of his campaign.

Okay. Trump won. Republicans have all the power right now. The full power of the United States justice system can be brought to bear on Hillary now, and Trump promised to do it. So why is nothing happening? If she's so obviously so guilty, where's the prosecution?


For starters, other than getting rid of Comey the justice department is still chalked full of the same corrupt people that pretended to investigate her the first time and did nothing. There is obviously tons of evidence. If you disagree and show me how she didn’t commit those crimes. She did.

And the justice department looked the other way.

Personally, I think after he won it was better (at the time) for the county as a whole to let her bullshit go. She was essentially neautered of all power by losing and it would have been portrayed as being vindictive to make that a first priority of business. So on to other things that matter like policy, regulation roll backs etc.

Problem is, the Dems don’t want any part of working together for the county. Instead they all went full on “obstructionist” and created a “resistance”. Shit, you had idiots calling for impeachment before the guy did a damn thing.

And the republicans don’t have “all the power” in terms of the justice department. It was deputy director Rosenstein that appointed the Mueller. You don’t think he was close to Comey at all??

And let me ask you this, they were so quick to appoint special counsel to dig into Trump/Russia etc why not at same time appoint one for Hillary’s garbage?

The whole thing reaks.

And the challenge is still sitting there. Explain how she didn’t commit those crimes. Whenever it gets brought up in main stream media it’s laughed off like no big deal. Oh those emails.

Ummm ya, our emails that were wiped clean when it became apparent they might be seen.

Ever wonder to yourself what she had to hide that was worth wiping a server clean knowing full well she was breaking the law in doing so?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
As to your other points. If the Justice department, under Trump, is not doing anything against Clinton it just might be because there is nothing to be done. You do realize that they can ignore Comey's recommendation and prosecute her. They are well within any statue of limitations. So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.


You are aware, well actually you aren’t, that it wasn’t even Comey’s job to do what he did?

The FBI investigates and then presents to the attorney general the case they have. It is then up to attorney general to determine if an indictment is to be issued.

Why were procedures altered in this instance?

In Comey’s statement he literally spelled out the case against her and then said oh but we aren’t going to do anything.

Then he babbled about “intent” which is funny because the law she broke had zero stipulation in regards to “intent”. Doesn’t matter.

Remember the sailer that took a selfie while serving on the nuclear submarine? The one sent to prison for “mishandling classified information”? He had no intent to distribute the pics. It was a selfie by some 20 something kid. Didn’t matter. There were classified sonar stations in he background of the pic he took so the law was broken.

And Hillary? She exposed hundreds of high level classified docs via her unsecure private server.

Same crime. One was an ant and one was Mount Everest. The ant went to prison while the other almost became POTUS.

And you think the justice department isn’t corrupt?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Quote:
So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.


He has been asking why.

Great question for Sessions who seems to have excused himself from all of it.

And Trump is backed into a corner. If he fires people because they aren’t doing their job it will simply get spun by the media and the Dems that he fired them because they had dirt in him.

And round & round we go.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:13 pm
Posts: 1678
COR-TEN wrote:
Pabst wrote:
I'm all for background checks as well - but the issue, first and foremost, is that the Texas shooter (and the Charleston shooter) both passed a background check because the government fucked up their records. Basically, i don't trust the federal government to handle records properly.
It wasn't the government. It was the Air Force, from what I understand. The military division of "government." I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative that the government is inherently bad.

Wait, what? Since when is the armed forces not a government agency? It falls under the DoD. The Air Force is a part of the government.

Also, my narrative is that the government is inherently incompetent & inefficient. Not inherently bad.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
Pabst wrote:
COR-TEN wrote:
Pabst wrote:
I'm all for background checks as well - but the issue, first and foremost, is that the Texas shooter (and the Charleston shooter) both passed a background check because the government fucked up their records. Basically, i don't trust the federal government to handle records properly.
It wasn't the government. It was the Air Force, from what I understand. The military division of "government." I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative that the government is inherently bad.

Wait, what? Since when is the armed forces not a government agency? It falls under the DoD. The Air Force is a part of the government.

Also, my narrative is that the government is inherently incompetent & inefficient. Not inherently bad.


But are incompetence and inefficiency qualities that are good or bad?

You are at least claiming that government inherently possesses bad qualities.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:13 pm
Posts: 1678
Still Lit wrote:
But are incompetence and inefficiency qualities that are good or bad?

You are at least claiming that government inherently possesses bad qualities.

To me, 'bad' insinuates that they act with malicious intent. But sure, if you want to lump it all together, it doesn't really change my overall point.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
955876 wrote:
Quote:
During the campaign, Trump promised to do many things on DAY ONE. One of those things was to prosecute Hillary. Trump stood on a debate stage with Hillary and promised to see her in prison if he won. It was one of the promises of his campaign.

Okay. Trump won. Republicans have all the power right now. The full power of the United States justice system can be brought to bear on Hillary now, and Trump promised to do it. So why is nothing happening? If she's so obviously so guilty, where's the prosecution?


For starters, other than getting rid of Comey the justice department is still chalked full of the same corrupt people that pretended to investigate her the first time and did nothing. There is obviously tons of evidence. If you disagree and show me how she didn’t commit those crimes. She did.

And the justice department looked the other way.

Personally, I think after he won it was better (at the time) for the county as a whole to let her bullshit go. She was essentially neautered of all power by losing and it would have been portrayed as being vindictive to make that a first priority of business. So on to other things that matter like policy, regulation roll backs etc.

Problem is, the Dems don’t want any part of working together for the county. Instead they all went full on “obstructionist” and created a “resistance”. Shit, you had idiots calling for impeachment before the guy did a damn thing.

And the republicans don’t have “all the power” in terms of the justice department. It was deputy director Rosenstein that appointed the Mueller. You don’t think he was close to Comey at all??

And let me ask you this, they were so quick to appoint special counsel to dig into Trump/Russia etc why not at same time appoint one for Hillary’s garbage?

The whole thing reaks.

And the challenge is still sitting there. Explain how she didn’t commit those crimes. Whenever it gets brought up in main stream media it’s laughed off like no big deal. Oh those emails.

Ummm ya, our emails that were wiped clean when it became apparent they might be seen.

Ever wonder to yourself what she had to hide that was worth wiping a server clean knowing full well she was breaking the law in doing so?


all answers are here: https://suntzusaid.com/

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:13 pm
Posts: 1678
Pabst wrote:
Quote:
Still, one of the most common biases in media is that reporters miss the forest for the forest fires, focusing on crises over more-important, yet less exciting, trendlines. In 2015, ESPN laid off about 300 people, and it was a big story. Last week, it laid off 100 people, including several prominent on-air talents, and it was an even bigger story. But in the 18-month interim, its global workforce actually grew by 500 to 8,000—and it wasn’t a story at all.

So what does their overall payroll expense look like? If they cut 400 people averaging $100k/year and hired 500 people making $50k/year, then they've still dramatically cut their payroll. This is meaningless without numbers.


Whelp. Looks like more layoffs are coming: https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/11/09/espn-layoffs-staffers-sportscenter-talent-cuts

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
955876 wrote:
Quote:
So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.


He has been asking why.

Great question for Sessions who seems to have excused himself from all of it.

And Trump is backed into a corner. If he fires people because they aren’t doing their job it will simply get spun by the media and the Dems that he fired them because they had dirt in him.

And round & round we go.


up to 50 sealed indictments in past week. from d.c. pacer

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Au0aup ... QG4k0/view

keep in mind

Quote:
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.


here is a blogger's take on the whole art of war with mueller investigation. it's theory based on what's occured to date

https://tttthreads.com/thread/926770966226595840

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7595
955876 wrote:
Quote:
During the campaign, Trump promised to do many things on DAY ONE. One of those things was to prosecute Hillary. Trump stood on a debate stage with Hillary and promised to see her in prison if he won. It was one of the promises of his campaign.

Okay. Trump won. Republicans have all the power right now. The full power of the United States justice system can be brought to bear on Hillary now, and Trump promised to do it. So why is nothing happening? If she's so obviously so guilty, where's the prosecution?


For starters, other than getting rid of Comey the justice department is still chalked full of the same corrupt people that pretended to investigate her the first time and did nothing. There is obviously tons of evidence. If you disagree and show me how she didn’t commit those crimes. She did.

And the justice department looked the other way.

Personally, I think after he won it was better (at the time) for the county as a whole to let her bullshit go. She was essentially neautered of all power by losing and it would have been portrayed as being vindictive to make that a first priority of business. So on to other things that matter like policy, regulation roll backs etc.

Problem is, the Dems don’t want any part of working together for the county. Instead they all went full on “obstructionist” and created a “resistance”. Shit, you had idiots calling for impeachment before the guy did a damn thing.

And the republicans don’t have “all the power” in terms of the justice department. It was deputy director Rosenstein that appointed the Mueller. You don’t think he was close to Comey at all??

And let me ask you this, they were so quick to appoint special counsel to dig into Trump/Russia etc why not at same time appoint one for Hillary’s garbage?

The whole thing reaks.

And the challenge is still sitting there. Explain how she didn’t commit those crimes. Whenever it gets brought up in main stream media it’s laughed off like no big deal. Oh those emails.

Ummm ya, our emails that were wiped clean when it became apparent they might be seen.

Ever wonder to yourself what she had to hide that was worth wiping a server clean knowing full well she was breaking the law in doing so?

What power do Democrats have to obstruct anything? What Democrat resistance is keeping Trump from doing anything he wants? Are you saying Trump is at the mercy of the Justice Department? He can't call for a special counsel to investigate Hillary? What about Senate or House committee investigations? The Republicans own the federal government but are powerless to stop Hillary Clinton?

Oh, and give me a break with the "the Dems don't want to work together for the country" crap. The Republicans never came together to work with Obama. When the Republicans had the minority in the Senate they perfected the art of literally filibustering everything effectively requiring 60 votes to pass anything. Holding up Obama judicial appointments forever, never bothering to hold hearings for Garland. Oh those poor poor Republicans, all they've ever tried to do is work with the Democrats, and the Democrats have been so mean! Cry me a river.

I haven't forgotten the Hillary challenge.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7595
BethlehemSteel wrote:
955876 wrote:
Quote:
So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.


He has been asking why.

Great question for Sessions who seems to have excused himself from all of it.

And Trump is backed into a corner. If he fires people because they aren’t doing their job it will simply get spun by the media and the Dems that he fired them because they had dirt in him.

And round & round we go.


up to 50 sealed indictments in past week. from d.c. pacer

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Au0aup ... QG4k0/view

keep in mind

Quote:
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.


here is a blogger's take on the whole art of war with mueller investigation. it's theory based on what's occured to date

https://tttthreads.com/thread/926770966226595840

*cough*bullshit*cough*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Poltargyst wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
955876 wrote:

He has been asking why.

Great question for Sessions who seems to have excused himself from all of it.

And Trump is backed into a corner. If he fires people because they aren’t doing their job it will simply get spun by the media and the Dems that he fired them because they had dirt in him.

And round & round we go.


up to 50 sealed indictments in past week. from d.c. pacer

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Au0aup ... QG4k0/view

keep in mind

Quote:
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.


here is a blogger's take on the whole art of war with mueller investigation. it's theory based on what's occured to date

https://tttthreads.com/thread/926770966226595840

*cough*bullshit*cough*


enjoy sitting in it in a little while, you can join STD in the fields :P

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
Amazing how many get cucked by conspircy theories and even refer to getting cucked as red pilling.

You have to be an utter moron to swallow a bunch of LSD (= read something on an obscure blog or propaganda site) and claim you now see reality.

Might as well take a sleeping pill and suppose you're about to wake up.

Submental.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Still Lit wrote:
Amazing how many get cucked by conspircy theories and even refer to getting cucked as red pilling.

You have to be an utter moron to swallow a bunch of LSD (= read something on an obscure blog or propaganda site) and claim you now see reality.

Might as well take a sleeping pill and suppose you're about to wake up.

Submental.


Maybe you are the one on LSD

I never made a claim of reality, you did. Project much?

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3128
My understanding is the Mueller investigation is operating as a typical white-collared crime investigation. Digging into the money. I think he will try to turn Manifort to see what he can get. IMHO, Mike Flynn is the next person to get papers.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Amazing how many get cucked by conspircy theories and even refer to getting cucked as red pilling.

You have to be an utter moron to swallow a bunch of LSD (= read something on an obscure blog or propaganda site) and claim you now see reality.

Might as well take a sleeping pill and suppose you're about to wake up.

Submental.


Maybe you are the one on LSD

I never made a claim of reality, you did. Project much?


If you think you are making claims that amount to the truth based on what you are posting then you are making claims about reality. Cuz, you know, the truth is what adequately captures, ummm, reality.

I project that I think you're a wacko.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
jebrick wrote:
My understanding is the Mueller investigation is operating as a typical white-collared crime investigation. Digging into the money. I think he will try to turn Manifort to see what he can get. IMHO, Mike Flynn is the next person to get papers.


And over here we have, in contrast, something sensible.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
If there are a crapload of sealed indictments that are about to come out I think it’s much more likely they are for anyone and everyone related to Trump that’s either done a lot or as little as had a sip of Stolichnaya vodka recently. And while I think what Beth posted is close to what’s been taking place, I don’t believe for one second these yay hoos have their shit together enough to pull that off. Believe it if/when I see it which should be right after Charlotte McKinney rides nude into my office this morning on a unicorn.

And what powers to the Dems have to obstruct you ask Poltargyst? For starters, the President doesn’t run the justice department and can’t just demand indictments as I understand it. Maybe I’m wrong there.

Sessions is either a grand master with a big plan (unlikely) or nothing more than a neautered dog as he’s done nothing to his point (more likely).

And here is what is lost on some. It’s not just the Dems against Trump. It’s the entire SYSTEM. Both sides. Both sides are afraid and worried about the gravy train coming to an end. Both sides have their levels of corruption. The powers that be kniw who butters their bread and it isn’t Trump for either of them. Don’t forget how strongly the republicans fought against Trump getting the nomination. They didn’t want him either. And not because his ideas are horrible but rather he said he was going to drain the swamp. And that didn’t just mean Dems it meant both.

DC has become nothing more than a playground for which politicians enrich themselves with our money. Both sides. Trump being an outsider scared them both and both sides have done their part to help him fail or not succeed.

There was a study done on CNN’s coverage of his first 100 days. Something like 96% of all their coverage was negative. It was negative immediately before the guy could do anything. Wasn’t a case of him being on he job, fucking up big time and then being critical. It was critical from he outset all the while people like Hillary announces she’s joined the “resistance” and guys like Schumer flat out saying they will obstruct anything he tries to do. That’s not working together.

It also isn’t really quite fair to expect polished politician from a guy who’s first experience with politics is as POTUS. But here’s the thing with that, these slickster leeches that infest DC are EXPERTS at portraying an image to the public while doing something quite different in private. Meanwhile, those who take things at face value get all warm & fuzzy over catching lil things like “Stronger Together” slogans. Shit, Hillary was caught saying she has a public persona and a private one. This was in relation to things she said to Wall Street bankers during one of her high paid speeches to them all the while saying something different and very contradictory to the public.

Back to you Poltargyst, I’m not sure what you are going to “read up” on in terms of the Hillary bullshit. The stuff I posted has too much evidence to disprove. She did mishandle classified info. This can’t be denied. Shit, disgraced Anthony Weiner had classified docs on his laptop. I guess Huma was bringing work home. There are recovered emails (ones that weren’t deleted) from Hilary’s IT guys saying they had to take down the server because they noticed attempts to hack into it. There was stuff that came out confirmining info got out. There is simply no way someone can say she isn’t guilty of mishandling classified info. That is treason by law and governmental employees have gone to jail for much much much less. Not to mention how the hell should she be allowed to keep her security clearance? She was granted a free pass to operate outside the law. Matter of fact, there was a recovered email discussing setting up a .gov email for her to use temporarily when server was down and the response from her was along the lines of don’t do it as she was concerned with Freedom of Information Act disclosure’s. That right there proves she was purposely hiding her work as SOS from the American people which was also against the law as she was required to maintain copies of all official correspondence.

Which leads to obstruction. She deleted and then had the server wiped clean so that nobody would ever see what she was really doing. Nobody wonders what she was hiding that she took such elaborate steps to delete (illegally) all of yours and my emails? Nope. Nothing to see here folks. Those emails were nothing more than yoga appointments, recipes, and death condolences. Ummmm ok, how fucking stupid would someone have to be to believe that? First off, that bitch hasn’t ever been on a yoga mat nor does she step foot in the kitchen. Death condolences and wedding plans I can believe. But here’s the catch, if that’s what they were, WHY WOULD SHE DELETE THEM??? Those would her get out of jail free card. Those would be her chance to rub a lot of people's noses in shit. But that’s not what they were. That’s why she had IT people use a program that wiped it all clean.

Then the perjury. And then breaking campaign finance laws etc.

There are sooooo many charges the justice department could bring against this woman as well as her inner circle it’s ridiculous. And you say what powers do the Dems have to obstruct?

Well, there are obviously very powerful people in DC that pulls he strings. Someone is protecting her and everyone around her. The evidence is too strong to deny these things happened.

And that isn’t even touching on why so many foreign entities would feel the need to pay millions upon millions of dollars into a U.S. based “charitable” foundation at the very time she was serving as SOS as well as expected to soon be POTUS. If pay to play wasn’t involved then the level of contributions should continue at the same level should they not?

Funny how the spin off organization Clinton Global Initiative had to lay off employees and be shut down after losing election and it’s already been noticed that big foreign contributions into the foundation immediately dried up post Nov. 8, 2016. I suppose foreign entities that were paying money hand over fist into this “charity” all of a sudden decided to be philanthropist elsewhere. No coincidence at all. Nothing to see there. CNN said so. So did MSNBC. Mmmm kay sheeple.

I’m not going to claim I’m never wrong in things. But I have been a long-time hater of corrupt Hillary and challenge anyone to defend, deny, or disprove any of this. It can’t be done because the criminal evidence is more than ample to bring indictments based on proven actions and events.

The fact that it hasn’t happened is just proof of how deeply corrupt DC is. So to me, any indictments that come down that don’t also include that c*nt Hillary Rotten Clinton isn’t worth the paper their written on.

This was long but I’ll give you a gift of not following up. Or at least trying to. I’m actually tired of (surprising huh) this garbage and very busy at office. Been going from 7am to 7 pm daily and sometimes earlier + longer in addition to coming in some Saturdays. Stinger would be pleased though as I know how important it is to him that us working folk do our part to pay for others.

Plus at this point, I’ve actually said all I really have to say on the matter. Again, surprising I know.


Last edited by 955876 on Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:33 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Still Lit wrote:
jebrick wrote:
My understanding is the Mueller investigation is operating as a typical white-collared crime investigation. Digging into the money. I think he will try to turn Manifort to see what he can get. IMHO, Mike Flynn is the next person to get papers.


And over here we have, in contrast, something sensible.


Yep, just good ole honest Bob Mueller. But no digging into the financial matters of the Clintons and DNC....

Read my post above to address that.

Criminal & corrupt activity by Clinton>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Flynn, Manafort, and anyone else you care to name.

If she isn’t indicted the whole thing is a one sided sham and shows you who really holds the keys to the kingdom.

Carry on.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Still Lit wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Amazing how many get cucked by conspircy theories and even refer to getting cucked as red pilling.

You have to be an utter moron to swallow a bunch of LSD (= read something on an obscure blog or propaganda site) and claim you now see reality.

Might as well take a sleeping pill and suppose you're about to wake up.

Submental.


Maybe you are the one on LSD

I never made a claim of reality, you did. Project much?


If you think you are making claims that amount to the truth based on what you are posting then you are making claims about reality. Cuz, you know, the truth is what adequately captures, ummm, reality.

I project that I think you're a wacko.


I think you are a piece of trash with a super ego the size of texas. There how's that dickshit. I just put out some theories.

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Still Lit wrote:
jebrick wrote:
My understanding is the Mueller investigation is operating as a typical white-collared crime investigation. Digging into the money. I think he will try to turn Manifort to see what he can get. IMHO, Mike Flynn is the next person to get papers.


And over here we have, in contrast, something sensible.


They won't find that Flynn took any money, as he returned his so called lobby money. He was spookin, and he still is

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7595
955876 wrote:
This was long but I’ll give you a gift of not following up. Or at least trying to.


But I did all that reading!

955876 wrote:

1) In your opinion, was Hillary grossly negligent in her (mis)handling of classified information? There is so much evidence she was I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


Oh, let me just see if I can come up with something.

https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/why-i ... nton-case/

Quote:
McCarthy and others are mistaken. The issue of mens rea, or intent, is not as simple as it seems on the surface, and intent is the correct standard. Comey was right not to recommend filing charges and to base his decision on the absence of evidence that Clinton had the necessary intent.


Quote:
Section 793(f) makes it a felony for any person “entrusted with… information relating to the national defense” to allow that information to be “removed from its proper place of custody” through “gross negligence.” On its face, the law does not appear to require intent, but it turns out the key phrase in 793(f) is not “gross negligence.” The key phrase is “related to the national defense.”


Quote:
This helps provide context as to why James Comey insisted that intent was required to satisfy the requirement of 793(f). Even though the plain language of the statute reads “gross negligence,” the Supreme Court has essentially rewritten the statute to require intent to sustain a conviction.


Quote:
Justice Stanley Reed wrote the majority opinion and disagreed that the law was unconstitutionally vague, but only on the very narrow grounds that the law required “intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States.” Only because the court read the law to require scienter, or bad faith, before a conviction could be sustained was the law constitutional. Otherwise, it would be too difficult for a defendant to know when exactly material related to the national defense. The court made clear that if the law criminalized the simple mishandling of classified information, it would not survive constitutional scrutiny, writing:

The sections are not simple prohibitions against obtaining or delivering to foreign powers information… relating to national defense. If this were the language, it would need to be tested by the inquiry as to whether it had double meaning or forced anyone, at his peril, to speculate as to whether certain actions violated the statute.

In other words, the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit a foreign power for his actions to violate 793(f).


Quote:
Without the requirement of intent, the phrase “relating to the national defense” would be unconstitutionally vague. This reading of the statute has guided federal prosecutors ever since, which is why Comey based his decision not to file charges on Clinton’s lack of intent. This is also why no one has ever been convicted of violating 793(f) on a gross negligence theory.


Quote:
Despite what may appear to be the plain meaning of 793(f), the negligent mishandling of classified material is not a civilian criminal offense. A civilian can face many consequences for negligently mishandling classified material, including the loss of their clearance and probably with it their employment, but they would not face criminal charges. For anyone who thinks negligence should be a crime their argument is not with Director Comey but with Justice Reed, the author of the Gorin opinion. Because of that decision, the correct standard is intent, not gross negligence, and the director was right not to recommend a criminal case.


But what about that sub guy?

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/201 ... olumn.html

Quote:
Neither the FBI nor the Navy has discussed what Saucier intended to do with those photos. But after FBI agents and Navy investigators confronted him in March 2012, Saucier returned to his home and destroyed a laptop, a camera, and the camera's memory card.

He was charged with two felony counts, and in May he pleaded guilty to one of them, violating the Espionage Act. Sentencing is set for August, and under federal guidelines he's expected to serve five or six years.

Let's compare that to Clinton's behavior.

FBI Director James Comey said his agents found no evidence that Clinton knowingly broke the law. Only a "very small number" of the classified e-mails she sent or received were marked as classified, he noted.

Saucier, by contrast, must have known that taking photographs of the sub's propulsion system was illegal. It's obvious, and it's part of the training all sailors aboard a sub receive.

Clinton also did nothing to obstruct the FBI inquiry, according to Comey. Saucier rushed home as soon as he learned of the investigation to destroy evidence. Pieces of his laptop were later discovered in the woods on a property in Connecticut owned by a family member.

So is that where Comey cut a special deal for Clinton? Did her carelessness rise to the level of criminal negligence?

On that question, Comey relied on precedent. He asked whether prosecutors typically file criminal charges in similar situations, and he found the answer was no:

"All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a away as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

Apply that same test to the Saucier case, and criminal charges are perfectly appropriate. He did intentionally break the law, and he did try to obstruct justice.

So where is the special treatment for Clinton? When you use precisely the same standards, as spelled out by Comey, Saucier is the one who belongs in prison.


955876 wrote:

3) In your opinion, did Hillary commit perjury when she lied under oath before Congress? There is ample evidence that shows statements made under oath proved to be false when recovered emails (you know, the ones she couldn’t delete) proved her statements were false. There is so much evidence she did I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


I won't answer no. I'll let John Dean say no:

https://verdict.justia.com/2016/08/19/o ... ry-clinton

Quote:
To prove perjury, it should be noted however, requires showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was made with “willful intent” and the speaker knew the statement was false. It is not perjury or a punishable false statement when the testimony results from “confusion, mistake or faulty memory.” Inconsequential inconsistencies or conflicts in testimony do not constitute perjury or false statements. An intentionally misleading but literally true answer cannot form the basis for prosecution. In short, perjury cannot be proven simply by showing the testimony of a witness is inconsistent with the statements of another witness, as the Republicans seek to do with the Goodlatte/Chaffetz letter, and with their video clips of Clinton vs. Comey testimony. Finally, to convict of perjury it must be proven by more than one witness, or one witness plus corroborative evidence.

The hard evidence, however, shows that Hillary Clinton did not lie, rather those charging her have distorted her testimony, or claimed she had information she simply did not have at the time she testified. It is pretty ugly stuff, made even uglier because it is being promoted by two high ranking Republican chairmen who are, the facts show, trying to frame her.


Quote:
Bottom line: The charges that Secretary Clinton lied to Congress are baseless. While there may be a few technical errors in her testimony, and there may be information that was discovered by the FBI after she testified, there is absolutely no evidence at all that she willfully and knowingly provided false information to Congress.
Ironically, there are more false statements in the letter from chairmen Goodlatte and Chaffetz to the Department of Justice, which are clearly intentional, than the hours upon hours of testimony given by Secretary Clinton. If these men were ordinary citizens, they could be arrested for making false statements to law enforcement. They lied and played it for a one-day headline, and in doing so performed at the level of banana-republic legislators, if not lower. Sadly their actions are consistent with the thinking of the new Republican Party leader, Donald Trump, who would be proud of their effort to “Lock her up, Lock her up.”


955876 wrote:
2) In your opinion, did Hillary commit obstruction of justice when she deleted thousands upon thousands of emails AND had her IT people wipe the server clean? Please note these were not her emails to do as she pleases with. Those emails were yours and mine and she was required BY LAW to maintain records of. We could also toss in destruction of government property while we are at it. There is so much evidence she did these things I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


No quote for this one. My understanding is that Hillary had the authority to decide which emails were work-related and which were personal, and she then had the authority to delete them so that her mere deletion of the emails itself is not illegal or against State Department policy. WHEN the emails were deleted is the question, and the answer is...we don't know. Those that are inclined to believe Hillary will believe that she requested the emails to be deleted before they were subpoenaed and therefore did nothing wrong. Those not inclined to believe Hillary will believe she ordered the deletion of the emails after the subpoena and committed obstruction of justice. The point is, there is no evidence to prove it.

My final position: Comey did not have the evidence to proceed with charges, knew he could not get a conviction, and correctly did not proceed.

You came on like gangbusters as if the case against Hillary was so iron-clad that only those "sheeple" blinded by party loyalty or loyal to Hillary could possibly be so blind as to defend her. Doesn't look so iron-clad to me. It is certainly possible for reasonable, intelligent people to decide that Comey ought not or could not proceed against Hillary.

Now here's my challenge for Republicans: put up or shut up. Republicans have all the power right now. Spare me the excuses of how they can't find a way to prosecute Hillary. Either put Hillary in prison, or STFU. Republicans do NOT get to run around calling Hillary a criminal on the one hand while not convicting her on the other. Hillary not being in prison = the charges are bogus and Republicans full of crap (as usual). If Trump is going to continue to refer to her as crooked or a criminal, then I insist, I DEMAND that she be tried, convicted, and imprisoned. Failure to imprison Hillary means Republicans are full of crap. Imprison Hillary or STFU. Put up or shut up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:08 am
Posts: 1256
955876 wrote:
If there are a crapload of sealed indictments that are about to come out I think it’s much more likely they are for anyone and everyone related to Trump that’s either done a lot or as little as had a sip of Stolichnaya vodka recently. And while I think what Beth posted is close to what’s been taking place, I don’t believe for one second these yay hoos have their shit together enough to pull that off. Believe it if/when I see it which should be right after Charlotte McKinney rides nude into my office this morning on a unicorn.

And what powers to the Dems have to obstruct you ask Poltargyst? For starters, the President doesn’t run the justice department and can’t just demand indictments as I understand it. Maybe I’m wrong there.

Sessions is either a grand master with a big plan (unlikely) or nothing more than a neautered dog as he’s done nothing to his point (more likely).

And here is what is lost on some. It’s not just the Dems against Trump. It’s the entire SYSTEM. Both sides. Both sides are afraid and worried about the gravy train coming to an end. Both sides have their levels of corruption. The powers that be kniw who butters their bread and it isn’t Trump for either of them. Don’t forget how strongly the republicans fought against Trump getting the nomination. They didn’t want him either. And not because his ideas are horrible but rather he said he was going to drain the swamp. And that didn’t just mean Dems it meant both.

DC has become nothing more than a playground for which politicians enrich themselves with our money. Both sides. Trump being an outsider scared them both and both sides have done their part to help him fail or not succeed.

There was a study done on CNN’s coverage of his first 100 days. Something like 96% of all their coverage was negative. It was negative immediately before the guy could do anything. Wasn’t a case of him being on he job, fucking up big time and then being critical. It was critical from he outset all the while people like Hillary announces she’s joined the “resistance” and guys like Schumer flat out saying they will obstruct anything he tries to do. That’s not working together.

It also isn’t really quite fair to expect polished politician from a guy who’s first experience with politics is as POTUS. But here’s the thing with that, these slickster leeches that infest DC are EXPERTS at portraying an image to the public while doing something quite different in private. Meanwhile, those who take things at face value get all warm & fuzzy over catching lil things like “Stronger Together” slogans. Shit, Hillary was caught saying she has a public persona and a private one. This was in relation to things she said to Wall Street bankers during one of her high paid speeches to them all the while saying something different and very contradictory to the public.

Back to you Poltargyst, I’m not sure what you are going to “read up” on in terms of the Hillary bullshit. The stuff I posted has too much evidence to disprove. She did mishandle classified info. This can’t be denied. Shit, disgraced Anthony Weiner had classified docs on his laptop. I guess Huma was bringing work home. There are recovered emails (ones that weren’t deleted) from Hilary’s IT guys saying they had to take down the server because they noticed attempts to hack into it. There was stuff that came out confirmining info got out. There is simply no way someone can say she isn’t guilty of mishandling classified info. That is treason by law and governmental employees have gone to jail for much much much less. Not to mention how the hell should she be allowed to keep her security clearance? She was granted a free pass to operate outside the law. Matter of fact, there was a recovered email discussing setting up a .gov email for her to use temporarily when server was down and the response from her was along the lines of don’t do it as she was concerned with Freedom of Information Act disclosure’s. That right there proves she was purposely hiding her work as SOS from the American people which was also against the law as she was required to maintain copies of all official correspondence.

Which leads to obstruction. She deleted and then had the server wiped clean so that nobody would ever see what she was really doing. Nobody wonders what she was hiding that she took such elaborate steps to delete (illegally) all of yours and my emails? Nope. Nothing to see here folks. Those emails were nothing more than yoga appointments, recipes, and death condolences. Ummmm ok, how fucking stupid would someone have to be to believe that? First off, that bitch hasn’t ever been on a yoga mat nor does she step foot in the kitchen. Death condolences and wedding plans I can believe. But here’s the catch, if that’s what they were, WHY WOULD SHE DELETE THEM??? Those would her get out of jail free card. Those would be her chance to rub a lot of people's noses in shit. But that’s not what they were. That’s why she had IT people use a program that wiped it all clean.

Then the perjury. And then breaking campaign finance laws etc.

There are sooooo many charges the justice department could bring against this woman as well as her inner circle it’s ridiculous. And you say what powers do the Dems have to obstruct?

Well, there are obviously very powerful people in DC that pulls he strings. Someone is protecting her and everyone around her. The evidence is too strong to deny these things happened.

And that isn’t even touching on why so many foreign entities would feel the need to pay millions upon millions of dollars into a U.S. based “charitable” foundation at the very time she was serving as SOS as well as expected to soon be POTUS. If pay to play wasn’t involved then the level of contributions should continue at the same level should they not?

Funny how the spin off organization Clinton Global Initiative had to lay off employees and be shut down after losing election and it’s already been noticed that big foreign contributions into the foundation immediately dried up post Nov. 8, 2016. I suppose foreign entities that were paying money hand over fist into this “charity” all of a sudden decided to be philanthropist elsewhere. No coincidence at all. Nothing to see there. CNN said so. So did MSNBC. Mmmm kay sheeple.

I’m not going to claim I’m never wrong in things. But I have been a long-time hater of corrupt Hillary and challenge anyone to defend, deny, or disprove any of this. It can’t be done because the criminal evidence is more than ample to bring indictments based on proven actions and events.

The fact that it hasn’t happened is just proof of how deeply corrupt DC is. So to me, any indictments that come down that don’t also include that c*nt Hillary Rotten Clinton isn’t worth the paper their written on.

This was long but I’ll give you a gift of not following up. Or at least trying to. I’m actually tired of (surprising huh) this garbage and very busy at office. Been going from 7am to 7 pm daily and sometimes earlier + longer in addition to coming in some Saturdays. Stinger would be pleased though as I know how important it is to him that us working folk do our part to pay for others.

Plus at this point, I’ve actually said all I really have to say on the matter. Again, surprising I know.


95 I am very pleased if you in fact pay your fair share. Thank you for doing the right thing and pulling your weight. Now I have no doubt, none at all that you are convinced that you are the only person working hard and paying your fair share of taxes.

Society, you know the thing that you live in needs people to help pay for things like hospitals where the sick can get treated, and schools so children can get educated and grow up to be good hard and productive working citizens who pay their fair share and will maybe look after you when you are old and infirm. So when you drive to work tomorrow on that spiffy highway or heaven forbid call the fire department or police department cause you need their services know your tax dollars and those of others have helped make the society you live in a pretty good one (but not as good as the socialist Canada :D )


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:08 am
Posts: 1256
Poltargyst wrote:
955876 wrote:
This was long but I’ll give you a gift of not following up. Or at least trying to.


But I did all that reading!

955876 wrote:

1) In your opinion, was Hillary grossly negligent in her (mis)handling of classified information? There is so much evidence she was I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


Oh, let me just see if I can come up with something.

https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/why-i ... nton-case/

Quote:
McCarthy and others are mistaken. The issue of mens rea, or intent, is not as simple as it seems on the surface, and intent is the correct standard. Comey was right not to recommend filing charges and to base his decision on the absence of evidence that Clinton had the necessary intent.


Quote:
Section 793(f) makes it a felony for any person “entrusted with… information relating to the national defense” to allow that information to be “removed from its proper place of custody” through “gross negligence.” On its face, the law does not appear to require intent, but it turns out the key phrase in 793(f) is not “gross negligence.” The key phrase is “related to the national defense.”


Quote:
This helps provide context as to why James Comey insisted that intent was required to satisfy the requirement of 793(f). Even though the plain language of the statute reads “gross negligence,” the Supreme Court has essentially rewritten the statute to require intent to sustain a conviction.


Quote:
Justice Stanley Reed wrote the majority opinion and disagreed that the law was unconstitutionally vague, but only on the very narrow grounds that the law required “intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States.” Only because the court read the law to require scienter, or bad faith, before a conviction could be sustained was the law constitutional. Otherwise, it would be too difficult for a defendant to know when exactly material related to the national defense. The court made clear that if the law criminalized the simple mishandling of classified information, it would not survive constitutional scrutiny, writing:

The sections are not simple prohibitions against obtaining or delivering to foreign powers information… relating to national defense. If this were the language, it would need to be tested by the inquiry as to whether it had double meaning or forced anyone, at his peril, to speculate as to whether certain actions violated the statute.

In other words, the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit a foreign power for his actions to violate 793(f).


Quote:
Without the requirement of intent, the phrase “relating to the national defense” would be unconstitutionally vague. This reading of the statute has guided federal prosecutors ever since, which is why Comey based his decision not to file charges on Clinton’s lack of intent. This is also why no one has ever been convicted of violating 793(f) on a gross negligence theory.


Quote:
Despite what may appear to be the plain meaning of 793(f), the negligent mishandling of classified material is not a civilian criminal offense. A civilian can face many consequences for negligently mishandling classified material, including the loss of their clearance and probably with it their employment, but they would not face criminal charges. For anyone who thinks negligence should be a crime their argument is not with Director Comey but with Justice Reed, the author of the Gorin opinion. Because of that decision, the correct standard is intent, not gross negligence, and the director was right not to recommend a criminal case.


But what about that sub guy?

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/201 ... olumn.html

Quote:
Neither the FBI nor the Navy has discussed what Saucier intended to do with those photos. But after FBI agents and Navy investigators confronted him in March 2012, Saucier returned to his home and destroyed a laptop, a camera, and the camera's memory card.

He was charged with two felony counts, and in May he pleaded guilty to one of them, violating the Espionage Act. Sentencing is set for August, and under federal guidelines he's expected to serve five or six years.

Let's compare that to Clinton's behavior.

FBI Director James Comey said his agents found no evidence that Clinton knowingly broke the law. Only a "very small number" of the classified e-mails she sent or received were marked as classified, he noted.

Saucier, by contrast, must have known that taking photographs of the sub's propulsion system was illegal. It's obvious, and it's part of the training all sailors aboard a sub receive.

Clinton also did nothing to obstruct the FBI inquiry, according to Comey. Saucier rushed home as soon as he learned of the investigation to destroy evidence. Pieces of his laptop were later discovered in the woods on a property in Connecticut owned by a family member.

So is that where Comey cut a special deal for Clinton? Did her carelessness rise to the level of criminal negligence?

On that question, Comey relied on precedent. He asked whether prosecutors typically file criminal charges in similar situations, and he found the answer was no:

"All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a away as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

Apply that same test to the Saucier case, and criminal charges are perfectly appropriate. He did intentionally break the law, and he did try to obstruct justice.

So where is the special treatment for Clinton? When you use precisely the same standards, as spelled out by Comey, Saucier is the one who belongs in prison.


955876 wrote:

3) In your opinion, did Hillary commit perjury when she lied under oath before Congress? There is ample evidence that shows statements made under oath proved to be false when recovered emails (you know, the ones she couldn’t delete) proved her statements were false. There is so much evidence she did I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


I won't answer no. I'll let John Dean say no:

https://verdict.justia.com/2016/08/19/o ... ry-clinton

Quote:
To prove perjury, it should be noted however, requires showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was made with “willful intent” and the speaker knew the statement was false. It is not perjury or a punishable false statement when the testimony results from “confusion, mistake or faulty memory.” Inconsequential inconsistencies or conflicts in testimony do not constitute perjury or false statements. An intentionally misleading but literally true answer cannot form the basis for prosecution. In short, perjury cannot be proven simply by showing the testimony of a witness is inconsistent with the statements of another witness, as the Republicans seek to do with the Goodlatte/Chaffetz letter, and with their video clips of Clinton vs. Comey testimony. Finally, to convict of perjury it must be proven by more than one witness, or one witness plus corroborative evidence.

The hard evidence, however, shows that Hillary Clinton did not lie, rather those charging her have distorted her testimony, or claimed she had information she simply did not have at the time she testified. It is pretty ugly stuff, made even uglier because it is being promoted by two high ranking Republican chairmen who are, the facts show, trying to frame her.


Quote:
Bottom line: The charges that Secretary Clinton lied to Congress are baseless. While there may be a few technical errors in her testimony, and there may be information that was discovered by the FBI after she testified, there is absolutely no evidence at all that she willfully and knowingly provided false information to Congress.
Ironically, there are more false statements in the letter from chairmen Goodlatte and Chaffetz to the Department of Justice, which are clearly intentional, than the hours upon hours of testimony given by Secretary Clinton. If these men were ordinary citizens, they could be arrested for making false statements to law enforcement. They lied and played it for a one-day headline, and in doing so performed at the level of banana-republic legislators, if not lower. Sadly their actions are consistent with the thinking of the new Republican Party leader, Donald Trump, who would be proud of their effort to “Lock her up, Lock her up.”


955876 wrote:
2) In your opinion, did Hillary commit obstruction of justice when she deleted thousands upon thousands of emails AND had her IT people wipe the server clean? Please note these were not her emails to do as she pleases with. Those emails were yours and mine and she was required BY LAW to maintain records of. We could also toss in destruction of government property while we are at it. There is so much evidence she did these things I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.


No quote for this one. My understanding is that Hillary had the authority to decide which emails were work-related and which were personal, and she then had the authority to delete them so that her mere deletion of the emails itself is not illegal or against State Department policy. WHEN the emails were deleted is the question, and the answer is...we don't know. Those that are inclined to believe Hillary will believe that she requested the emails to be deleted before they were subpoenaed and therefore did nothing wrong. Those not inclined to believe Hillary will believe she ordered the deletion of the emails after the subpoena and committed obstruction of justice. The point is, there is no evidence to prove it.

My final position: Comey did not have the evidence to proceed with charges, knew he could not get a conviction, and correctly did not proceed.

You came on like gangbusters as if the case against Hillary was so iron-clad that only those "sheeple" blinded by party loyalty or loyal to Hillary could possibly be so blind as to defend her. Doesn't look so iron-clad to me. It is certainly possible for reasonable, intelligent people to decide that Comey ought not or could not proceed against Hillary.

Now here's my challenge for Republicans: put up or shut up. Republicans have all the power right now. Spare me the excuses of how they can't find a way to prosecute Hillary. Either put Hillary in prison, or STFU. Republicans do NOT get to run around calling Hillary a criminal on the one hand while not convicting her on the other. Hillary not being in prison = the charges are bogus and Republicans full of crap (as usual). If Trump is going to continue to refer to her as crooked or a criminal, then I insist, I DEMAND that she be tried, convicted, and imprisoned. Failure to imprison Hillary means Republicans are full of crap. Imprison Hillary or STFU. Put up or shut up.


Oh SNAP, 95 getting owned. Quick run to Fox to get your talking point/rebuttal. Remember deflect, false equivalize, straw man


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:26 am 
Still Lit wrote:

I project that I think you're a wacko.


True. VERY weird guy.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9664
SteelerChef wrote:
Still Lit wrote:

I project that I think you're a wacko.


True. VERY weird guy.


He's half right about the Texas comment, though. I was born and raised in the Lone Star State. Not many people remember this (and have no reason to have paid attention) but I was a huge Oilers fan growing up. Went to all the home games with my Dad in the Warren Moon run and shoot era. Man I fucking hated the Steelers (not as much as I hated the Bills). If Cowher had had Moon as his QB, how many more championships would the Steelers have?

But when that bastard Adams held the city hostage for a new stadium and the citizens rightly told Adams to go eff himself and he moved the team, I quit the NFL. Didn't watch a game until 2004. My now wife grew up in far, far eastern OH and was a big Steelers fan. We ended up moving to Pittsburgh and a family friend scored us lower level 50 yard line tickets to the Ravens game on Halloween night in 2004. Holy Shit, what an atmosphere. The fan base was rabid. Out for blood. That's all it took. I hopped on the Steelers Bandwagon and have been buckled in ever since.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 12:04 pm 
The saddest part of this thread is just how far some of you total morons will go to avoid seeing the truth. Get over yourselves and quit acting like this country and its bounty only belong to you


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7291
Still Lit wrote:
SteelerChef wrote:
Still Lit wrote:

I project that I think you're a wacko.


True. VERY weird guy.


He's half right about the Texas comment, though. I was born and raised in the Lone Star State. Not many people remember this (and have no reason to have paid attention) but I was a huge Oilers fan growing up. Went to all the home games with my Dad in the Warren Moon run and shoot era. Man I fucking hated the Steelers (not as much as I hated the Bills). If Cowher had had Moon as his QB, how many more championships would the Steelers have?

But when that bastard Adams held the city hostage for a new stadium and the citizens rightly told Adams to go eff himself and he moved the team, I quit the NFL. Didn't watch a game until 2004. My now wife grew up in far, far eastern OH and was a big Steelers fan. We ended up moving to Pittsburgh and a family friend scored us lower level 50 yard line tickets to the Ravens game on Halloween night in 2004. Holy Shit, what an atmosphere. The fan base was rabid. Out for blood. That's all it took. I hopped on the Steelers Bandwagon and have been buckled in ever since.


It was either Patriots Halloween night game in '04, or Ravens in '05. You prob mean Ravens. I was at both, with my then 11-year-old or 12-year old son on both occasions. At the Ravens game, there was this chick sitting about four rows behind us. About every 10 minutes, every Ravens possession, she's screaming, "Break his FUCKIN' leg!!" A girl after my heart!! My boy's laughing his ass off. Was telling my Mom, rest her soul, about it, the next day. She says..."Isn't that terrible! What did the people around you say?" I say..."You kidding me, Mom! She was the hero of the section!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 4166
Props for the leg work Poltargyst. But much of that is simply flat out wrong. The laws about the handling or in this case “mishandling” of classified info are pretty clear. Intent is not needed to show negligence. People are in jail for for less. People lost security clearances for far less.

About the obstruction, in no was does she get to decide which official correspondence she needs to maintain record of and which she does not. She must maintain copies of ALL official state department business. This is required due to Freedom of Information Act. In no way did she have the right to delete those emails. That was criminal.

The perjury did occur. There were statements made under oath directly in conflict with emails (ones she wasn’t fortunate enough to delete in time) she sent to Egyptian Price minister the night of or day following the Benghazi attack.

And I didn’t need to get this from “Fox” Stinger. I actually watched her entire testimony to Congress. All several hours worth.

And no, pulling up a counter argument from someone in support of her isn’t “owning” me Stinger. You might as well have just said Mooooo because that’s all it sounds like. It also takes the assumption (a big one) that everything Poltargyst posted was from 100% reliable sources while everything I’ve read to gain my knowledge is from 100% fraudulent sources. And that simply isn’t true.

And this is why I am tired of the debate. Because you guys believe and will continue to believe anything that fits your agenda or what you choose to accept.

Comey didn’t have enough evidence? Smashing devices with hammers, using a program to wipe the server clean, having classified docs end up on your assistants husbands computer??

There is more but those points right there are enough to support mishandling of classified info as well as obstruction.

You are acting as if these things didn’t occur and myself or “Fox” is making them up. They happened. And falling back in whatever it is youvread that tells you it didn’t shows how gullible the two of you are.

You don’t need to do research. Look at what happened. There is no dispute these things occurred. We aren’t debating that. We are debating the legality of it all.

You both are grasping at straws. She is part of the protected elite on the highest of levels. Those people get away with things the average person cannot.

Ask the naval seaman put in prison for taking a selfie while on board a nuclear submarine. His charge, mishandling of classified info. A sonar screen was captured in the background.

The info she failed to safeguard put real lives in danger. Oh but it was “only a few emails marked classified” so it’s ok then.

Believe what you want. I gain nothing in changing your mind and no longer wish to. Because here is the funny part and why I refer to you as “sheeple”. You had to go “find your opinion” by having to go search out all the places that are pro-Hillary that will tell you what she did was ok. You aren’t simply looking at the actions and telling me what YOU think Poltargyst. You are telling me what someone else has told you your opinion should be.

Oh but Comey said... That is so funny that Comey is somehow to be trusted completely.

Classified info ended up exposed-mishandling
Server was wiped clean-obstruction. And no, she didn’t have authority to do so and yes she was required to maintain record. I suppose you like our high level governmental people able to work in complete autonomy. Nothing to see here folks, I just delete record of everything I do. Mmmm Kay.

And about that perjury. That was in reference to testimony given that gave us the famous “at this point what difference does it make” comments. The one where she was still trying to back up the ridiculous claims that Benghazi was cut a peaceful demonstration over a video they were upset about that got out of hand. Mmm Kay.

Perjury was shown when an email was recovered she sent to the Egyptian Ambasaador the night if or following day after the attacks. The one where she clearly discussed the “terrorist” attack that occurred. The “video” garbage was a fabricated story told to the American people because we were but two moinths shy of a presedetial election.

All those “points you raised” were nothing more than the stuff they want you to think and you took the bait hook line and sinker.

And again, that’s why this is no longer worth discussing. Because I’m not debating you, I’m debating the the talking points it takes you two days to scour the internet for. And thus the sheeple comments.

You want to change directions here and have an interesting debate let’s discuss how the secret arms program they were running in Benghazi could very well have armed the very people that ended up murdering the ambassador...


Last edited by 955876 on Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mothership is Afire
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:57 pm 
Lol

Unbelievable....literally....lol


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 197 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group