|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 29 2016 01:32 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 01:26 stilt wrote:On September 27 2016 21:44 farvacola wrote:On September 27 2016 21:41 zeo wrote:On September 27 2016 21:22 Mohdoo wrote:
Taking credit for Obama's birth certificate and doubling down on stop and frisk is what surprised me the most. It makes no sense. He did really, really poorly last night. I am now convinced that he's actually this person. If he was actually well calculated, he would have appeared as normal as possible. I think from here, support crystallizes and Clinton sweeps.
Clinton taking full responsibility for emails and saying she wouldn't do it again just makes any more questions besting a dead horse. What a relief. She should be in jail then. You're welcome to send a letter to the Department of Justice so that they can be made aware of their mistake. Justice is only available for the weak. But thanks to remind us the total impudence of the elite. Justice is only a option for the weak????? So the strong don't get justice???? Being responsible for a mistake doesn't make it criminal.
Ahah, don't be more stupid that you really are. This little liberal and hypocrite rhetoric that you use cannot hide the fact that the laws is no the same for all and that the political elite, corporation, etablishment that Clinton is part of basically allow her to do anything she wants.
The strong doesn't care about justice unless it alienates the weak.
User was warned for this post
|
Mods should remove the first debate winner poll as it's clearly being spammed now.
|
On September 29 2016 02:27 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:On September 29 2016 02:00 oBlade wrote:On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:On September 28 2016 15:41 oBlade wrote:On September 28 2016 14:22 Rebs wrote:On September 28 2016 10:51 LegalLord wrote:On September 28 2016 10:46 biology]major wrote:On September 28 2016 10:33 KwarK wrote:On September 28 2016 10:30 biology]major wrote:
[quote]
Thanks for the explanation, you say our sanctions initially didn't do shit because we were alone in applying them, so how did we get a coalition to agree on placing sanctions if Iran continued trying to get a nuke if they didn't care before?
No, we applied them with a bunch of other people back when the US had credibility. It lost that credibility and the will to maintain sanctions was breaking down. The sanctions were effective for fucking shit up in Iran but ineffective for stopping a nuke and wouldn't keep working once China and Russia backed out, and they were backing out once it became clear that a) the sanctions wouldn't stop Iran getting a nuke, b) Iran was willing to negotiate to end the nuclear program if the US was willing to talk about it. Iran came to the table and asked for a deal and even though the US didn't want to make a deal if enough people thought that Iran's deal was good the US wouldn't be able to refuse on behalf of everyone, if that makes sense. If Iran offered terms that Russia, China etc thought were totally reasonable and the US refused to negotiate then Russia and China could unilaterally call off their sanctions at which point it wouldn't matter what the US thought. And inversely, if Iran violates it now then it's Russia and China who look retarded for allowing them to resume their nuclear program, hence why their interests are now aligned with the US again. Hypothetically if Iran and North Korea both had fully functional nuclear capability, I don't see their governments really doing anything reckless. They aren't completely insane and would simply use it as a deterrent or probably a bargaining chip. The main worry would be if radical extremist groups get their hands on it some how and then we are completely screwed. It's only a matter of time before N korea gets one, and Iran will also be able to aquire one but probably a decade behind schedule. You don't see a country which has a large population of religious zealots, nor a country with an unstable statist chaotic mess of a government using nukes irresponsibly? There's a reason why Pakistan is considered to be the most dangerous country in the world. uhh sorry.. by who exactly ? Our nukes are quite well protected and the safeguards in place do not involve people sleeping at the door with a system that launches of a floppy disk. The nukes are controlled by the military and for all its faults and the misery and regression it has caused, the military is at the least a stable institution that our neighbor 10 times are size still hesitates to fuck with. The most dangerous country in the world is the one you are living in. Never try to convince yourself otherwise. The world has made peace with that fact but a little introspection never hurt anyone. Oh and number 2 we have Saudi Arabia, if it werent for them you wouldnt have "radical islam" so really it all comes back full circle. I dont like this game but I dont appreciate someone with zero clue pointing fingers either. The proliferation of nuclear weapons on the subcontinent is what led to trading knowledge and technology with North Korea, and together you're the two most likely countries to cause a nuclear war. On the subject of introspection, ask yourself what role Pakistan had in helping the US hunt down Bin Laden. STRAWMAN>>>><<<>>> Has nothing to do with nukes or Pakistan posing a danger ot anyone. You don't know what a straw argument is. On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:It takes 2 countries to cause nuclear war. + Show Spoiler + Pakistans proliferation was purely retaliatory. And yes the generals sold secrets and knowledge..... to Iran. Most of the credit for North Korea goes to China, they have a completely different tech to what we have. The base itself for the bombs are completely different. China did not help North Korea or want nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula, just nonsense. On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:
What does that have to do with our own nukes being unsafe?
And as much as you might like to pat yourself on the back for taking out Bin Laden, what did that achieve exactly ? Some catharsis but thats about it. Bin Laden was a dying nobody at that point and that has proven to be the case since as is pretty evident. So again, ask yourself why the noble country of Pakistan couldn't help with such a basic task as the manhunt for the most wanted man in the world, a pathetic has-been terrorist kingpin, taking refuge in their own territory. They didnt care ... And yes China has been pretty involved with North Korea, its just as viable a possibility as the one we were accused of with limited proof. It's documented that Pakistan and North Korea were exchanging ballistic missile and nuclear tech. This sort of clandestine activity is common among countries like Cuba, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran as you pointed out. The last thing China wanted was a starving state with nuclear weapons right next to them which is evident by their changing foreign policy stance towards the DPRK now. Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
As for OBL. They just didnt give a shit. There is nothing noble about any of this, lay of the platitutdes. They didn't give a shit about Osama Bin Laden. Great answer. Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
They have their interests and their goals. You keep attacking the moral question here but what im trying to explain to you here that you dont have any moral high ground to attack any country from let alone Pakistan so please drop it k ? You can shit on the US ad nauseam but it's irrelevant. The US could annex Mexico tomorrow and sink South America the day after that. That would not erase the threat of regional nuclear war and Pakistani weapons falling into the wrong hands. Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
The original issue was the claim that "Pakistan is the most danger country in the world.. because nukes" Which is a load of bullshit and you know it. The only evidence you will ever find for this is populist right wing indian newspapers but then again a Drumpf supporter should be all about populist bullshit propoganda. This has nothing to do with the US election, I've said for a while allowing proliferation of nuclear weapons to Pakistan was the biggest mistake in modern times.
yeah they really did not give a shit about OBL. He is Americas problem, our problems are splinter groups some (our intelligence was in cahoots with till they lost control) and counter Afghan based Indian intelligence funded terror networks in Balochistan.
I agree it has nothing to do with the US election, so why bring up Pakistan ? And China is no saint, they are more than happy to have North Korea be a thorn because they have always been a leverage tool for then.
Im pretty anti nukes myself but there is no question that had we not proliferated the nukes, you would have seen the populist Indian govts doing whatever they wanted.
You keep saying you are worried about our nukes falling into the wrong hands and I am explaining to you that they are safer than US nukes. I would bet my house on it. For starters its not even like there are missiles hanging around ready to be fired. They are de assembled and spread out over various locations, then you have the codes and so and so forth. These are modern nukes not your 1960's built floppy disk open door WMD's like we have in the Dakotas.
All this nonsense about nukes falling into the wrong hands is typical Trumpism and fear mongering.
|
On September 29 2016 02:32 farvacola wrote:
Mods should remove the first debate winner poll as it's clearly being spammed now.
agreed; it just went up by a huge margin, clearly indicative of spamming.
|
United States42008 Posts
On September 29 2016 02:32 farvacola wrote:
Mods should remove the first debate winner poll as it's clearly being spammed now.
It served its purpose. I'm hoping it'll serve a new purpose now. As far as I'm concerned the Clinton 83/15/2 win stands. Also anyone who actually watched the debate, Trump supporter or not, knows that he had an implosion.
|
On September 29 2016 02:31 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 01:32 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 01:26 stilt wrote:On September 27 2016 21:44 farvacola wrote:On September 27 2016 21:41 zeo wrote:On September 27 2016 21:22 Mohdoo wrote:
Taking credit for Obama's birth certificate and doubling down on stop and frisk is what surprised me the most. It makes no sense. He did really, really poorly last night. I am now convinced that he's actually this person. If he was actually well calculated, he would have appeared as normal as possible. I think from here, support crystallizes and Clinton sweeps.
Clinton taking full responsibility for emails and saying she wouldn't do it again just makes any more questions besting a dead horse. What a relief. She should be in jail then. You're welcome to send a letter to the Department of Justice so that they can be made aware of their mistake. Justice is only available for the weak. But thanks to remind us the total impudence of the elite. Justice is only a option for the weak????? So the strong don't get justice???? Being responsible for a mistake doesn't make it criminal. Ahah, don't be more stupid that you really are. This little liberal and hypocrite rhetoric that you use cannot hide the fact that the laws is no the same for all and that the political elite, corporation, etablishment that Clinton is part of basically allow us to do anything she wants. The strong doesn't care about justice unless it alienates the weak.
No crime was committed. The FBI confirmed this. The director specifically stated that if an FBI employee did the same thing, they would not be criminally charged, but would be in a lot of trouble. It wasn't criminal. Your desired to assume everyone is in the pocket of this vague group known as the "establishment" shows you don't have the ability to make decisions on your own. You need labels and categories to slot people into and then you can make your pre-determined choices based on what group they are in.
|
On September 29 2016 02:35 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:32 farvacola wrote:
Mods should remove the first debate winner poll as it's clearly being spammed now. It served its purpose. I'm hoping it'll serve a new purpose now. As far as I'm concerned the Clinton 83/15/2 win stands. Also anyone who actually watched the debate, Trump supporter or not, knows that he had an implosion.
I guess it could be instructive to see how poorly Trump fans deal with losing. Once Trump loses in November and his less abashed supporters decide to riot, we can look back at this poll with quaint nostalgia 
|
On September 29 2016 01:51 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 01:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
Curious why the Trump's been edging up in the stickied poll. Hmm. Every poll ever on Clinton vs. Trump has started with a huge Clinton lead, then edged somewhat more towards Trump. I dunno, maybe all Trump supporters are night owls?
Did they sleep for two and a half days?
|
On September 29 2016 02:37 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 01:51 LegalLord wrote:On September 29 2016 01:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
Curious why the Trump's been edging up in the stickied poll. Hmm. Every poll ever on Clinton vs. Trump has started with a huge Clinton lead, then edged somewhat more towards Trump. I dunno, maybe all Trump supporters are night owls? Did they sleep for two and a half days?
4chan's a helluva drug.
But on the other hand, we already know that TeamLiquid is statistically much more liberal than conservative, and one might wonder how much implicit confirmation bias appeared in the TL poll. I'm liberal and I think Hillary won and I don't think I'm being biased, but that doesn't mean I'm not biased
|
On September 29 2016 02:37 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 01:51 LegalLord wrote:On September 29 2016 01:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
Curious why the Trump's been edging up in the stickied poll. Hmm. Every poll ever on Clinton vs. Trump has started with a huge Clinton lead, then edged somewhat more towards Trump. I dunno, maybe all Trump supporters are night owls? Did they sleep for two and a half days?
There are many Trump supporters who think like Trump. That if the internet says he did well, it must be true. It’s like the people who cite the number of dislikes on a youtube movie trailer showing that the movie is bad. Or the people who believe that the 5000 users on average Dota 2 subreddit is the “dota community” when like 13 million people play the game.
|
Trump lost the first debate hands down, but as we have seen this election, that doesn't translate negatively into polls for trump. He might even be going up.
When he went after the khan family, that was the only time I've seen him actually take hit in the polls
|
|
|
On September 29 2016 02:45 biology]major wrote:
Trump lost the first debate hands down, but as we have seen this election, that doesn't translate negatively into polls for trump. He might even be going up.
When he went after the khan family, that was the only time I've seen him actually take hit in the polls
I guess it depends on what you mean by "lost"
I'd say he did poorly, and maybe a bit worse than average; and hillary did well, and a bit better than her average.
But I feel that "winning" in the context of the debate, really means whether you improved or worsened your odds of winning the election; and hence is mostly going to be assessed by the poll numbers. I don't have a good sense of how typical people will respond, as I, and everyone I know, are atypical people.
|
On September 29 2016 02:34 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:27 oBlade wrote:On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:On September 29 2016 02:00 oBlade wrote:On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:On September 28 2016 15:41 oBlade wrote:On September 28 2016 14:22 Rebs wrote:On September 28 2016 10:51 LegalLord wrote:On September 28 2016 10:46 biology]major wrote:On September 28 2016 10:33 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
No, we applied them with a bunch of other people back when the US had credibility. It lost that credibility and the will to maintain sanctions was breaking down. The sanctions were effective for fucking shit up in Iran but ineffective for stopping a nuke and wouldn't keep working once China and Russia backed out, and they were backing out once it became clear that a) the sanctions wouldn't stop Iran getting a nuke, b) Iran was willing to negotiate to end the nuclear program if the US was willing to talk about it.
Iran came to the table and asked for a deal and even though the US didn't want to make a deal if enough people thought that Iran's deal was good the US wouldn't be able to refuse on behalf of everyone, if that makes sense. If Iran offered terms that Russia, China etc thought were totally reasonable and the US refused to negotiate then Russia and China could unilaterally call off their sanctions at which point it wouldn't matter what the US thought. And inversely, if Iran violates it now then it's Russia and China who look retarded for allowing them to resume their nuclear program, hence why their interests are now aligned with the US again. Hypothetically if Iran and North Korea both had fully functional nuclear capability, I don't see their governments really doing anything reckless. They aren't completely insane and would simply use it as a deterrent or probably a bargaining chip. The main worry would be if radical extremist groups get their hands on it some how and then we are completely screwed. It's only a matter of time before N korea gets one, and Iran will also be able to aquire one but probably a decade behind schedule. You don't see a country which has a large population of religious zealots, nor a country with an unstable statist chaotic mess of a government using nukes irresponsibly? There's a reason why Pakistan is considered to be the most dangerous country in the world. uhh sorry.. by who exactly ? Our nukes are quite well protected and the safeguards in place do not involve people sleeping at the door with a system that launches of a floppy disk. The nukes are controlled by the military and for all its faults and the misery and regression it has caused, the military is at the least a stable institution that our neighbor 10 times are size still hesitates to fuck with. The most dangerous country in the world is the one you are living in. Never try to convince yourself otherwise. The world has made peace with that fact but a little introspection never hurt anyone. Oh and number 2 we have Saudi Arabia, if it werent for them you wouldnt have "radical islam" so really it all comes back full circle. I dont like this game but I dont appreciate someone with zero clue pointing fingers either. The proliferation of nuclear weapons on the subcontinent is what led to trading knowledge and technology with North Korea, and together you're the two most likely countries to cause a nuclear war. On the subject of introspection, ask yourself what role Pakistan had in helping the US hunt down Bin Laden. STRAWMAN>>>><<<>>> Has nothing to do with nukes or Pakistan posing a danger ot anyone. You don't know what a straw argument is. On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:It takes 2 countries to cause nuclear war. + Show Spoiler + Pakistans proliferation was purely retaliatory. And yes the generals sold secrets and knowledge..... to Iran. Most of the credit for North Korea goes to China, they have a completely different tech to what we have. The base itself for the bombs are completely different. China did not help North Korea or want nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula, just nonsense. On September 28 2016 23:16 Rebs wrote:
What does that have to do with our own nukes being unsafe?
And as much as you might like to pat yourself on the back for taking out Bin Laden, what did that achieve exactly ? Some catharsis but thats about it. Bin Laden was a dying nobody at that point and that has proven to be the case since as is pretty evident. So again, ask yourself why the noble country of Pakistan couldn't help with such a basic task as the manhunt for the most wanted man in the world, a pathetic has-been terrorist kingpin, taking refuge in their own territory. They didnt care ... And yes China has been pretty involved with North Korea, its just as viable a possibility as the one we were accused of with limited proof. It's documented that Pakistan and North Korea were exchanging ballistic missile and nuclear tech. This sort of clandestine activity is common among countries like Cuba, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran as you pointed out. The last thing China wanted was a starving state with nuclear weapons right next to them which is evident by their changing foreign policy stance towards the DPRK now. On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
As for OBL. They just didnt give a shit. There is nothing noble about any of this, lay of the platitutdes. They didn't give a shit about Osama Bin Laden. Great answer. On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
They have their interests and their goals. You keep attacking the moral question here but what im trying to explain to you here that you dont have any moral high ground to attack any country from let alone Pakistan so please drop it k ? You can shit on the US ad nauseam but it's irrelevant. The US could annex Mexico tomorrow and sink South America the day after that. That would not erase the threat of regional nuclear war and Pakistani weapons falling into the wrong hands. On September 29 2016 02:06 Rebs wrote:
The original issue was the claim that "Pakistan is the most danger country in the world.. because nukes" Which is a load of bullshit and you know it. The only evidence you will ever find for this is populist right wing indian newspapers but then again a Drumpf supporter should be all about populist bullshit propoganda. This has nothing to do with the US election, I've said for a while allowing proliferation of nuclear weapons to Pakistan was the biggest mistake in modern times. yeah they really did not give a shit about OBL. He is Americas problem, our problems are splinter groups some (our intelligence was in cahoots with till they lost control) and counter Afghan based Indian intelligence funded terror networks in Balochistan. I agree it has nothing to do with the US election, so why bring up Pakistan ? And China is no saint, they are more than happy to have North Korea be a thorn because they have always been a leverage tool for then. Im pretty anti nukes myself but there is no question that had we not proliferated the nukes, you would have seen the populist Indian govts doing whatever they wanted.
Not when it comes to North Korea being a rogue nuclear state. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/03/31/is-chinas-policy-toward-north-korea-changing/chinas-north-korea-policy-is-definitely-changing
On September 29 2016 02:34 Rebs wrote:
You keep saying you are worried about our nukes falling into the wrong hands and I am explaining to you that they are safer than US nukes. I would bet my house on it. For starters its not even like there are missiles hanging around ready to be fired. They are de assembled and spread out over various locations, then you have the codes and so and so forth. These are modern nukes not your 1960's built floppy disk open door WMD's like we have in the Dakotas.
I don't know what you think you're referring to. If you disassemble a nuke enough it eventually stops being a nuke, I presume. You probably mean that the bomb cores have to be inserted, which is true of many kinds of weapons, it's not something inherent to Pakistan.
The bit about the US military being a worse steward of nuclear weapons than the Pakistani one is just a value judgment, nothing to argue.
On September 29 2016 02:34 Rebs wrote:
All this nonsense about nukes falling into the wrong hands is typical Trumpism and fear mongering.
When I say this has nothing to do with the US election, I am responding to the way you keep trying to connect this to the Trump boogeyman like a child.
|
On September 29 2016 02:36 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:31 stilt wrote:On September 29 2016 01:32 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 01:26 stilt wrote:On September 27 2016 21:44 farvacola wrote:On September 27 2016 21:41 zeo wrote:On September 27 2016 21:22 Mohdoo wrote:
Taking credit for Obama's birth certificate and doubling down on stop and frisk is what surprised me the most. It makes no sense. He did really, really poorly last night. I am now convinced that he's actually this person. If he was actually well calculated, he would have appeared as normal as possible. I think from here, support crystallizes and Clinton sweeps.
Clinton taking full responsibility for emails and saying she wouldn't do it again just makes any more questions besting a dead horse. What a relief. She should be in jail then. You're welcome to send a letter to the Department of Justice so that they can be made aware of their mistake. Justice is only available for the weak. But thanks to remind us the total impudence of the elite. Justice is only a option for the weak????? So the strong don't get justice???? Being responsible for a mistake doesn't make it criminal. Ahah, don't be more stupid that you really are. This little liberal and hypocrite rhetoric that you use cannot hide the fact that the laws is no the same for all and that the political elite, corporation, etablishment that Clinton is part of basically allow us to do anything she wants. The strong doesn't care about justice unless it alienates the weak. No crime was committed. The FBI confirmed this. The director specifically stated that if an FBI employee did the same thing, they would not be criminally charged, but would be in a lot of trouble. It wasn't criminal. Your desired to assume everyone is in the pocket of this vague group known as the "establishment" shows you don't have the ability to make decisions on your own. You need labels and categories to slot people into and then you can make your pre-determined choices based on what group they are in.
Oh nice, a liberal declares me not licensed to make a decision on my own. :D I guess I did good today, very good,
How cute you are my dear but sorry, I will continue to disturb the elite you represent as much as I can.
|
Looks like Bill's accusers may be showing up in the media soon. Cosby time?
|
On September 29 2016 02:51 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:36 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 02:31 stilt wrote:On September 29 2016 01:32 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 01:26 stilt wrote:On September 27 2016 21:44 farvacola wrote:On September 27 2016 21:41 zeo wrote:On September 27 2016 21:22 Mohdoo wrote:
Taking credit for Obama's birth certificate and doubling down on stop and frisk is what surprised me the most. It makes no sense. He did really, really poorly last night. I am now convinced that he's actually this person. If he was actually well calculated, he would have appeared as normal as possible. I think from here, support crystallizes and Clinton sweeps.
Clinton taking full responsibility for emails and saying she wouldn't do it again just makes any more questions besting a dead horse. What a relief. She should be in jail then. You're welcome to send a letter to the Department of Justice so that they can be made aware of their mistake. Justice is only available for the weak. But thanks to remind us the total impudence of the elite. Justice is only a option for the weak????? So the strong don't get justice???? Being responsible for a mistake doesn't make it criminal. Ahah, don't be more stupid that you really are. This little liberal and hypocrite rhetoric that you use cannot hide the fact that the laws is no the same for all and that the political elite, corporation, etablishment that Clinton is part of basically allow us to do anything she wants. The strong doesn't care about justice unless it alienates the weak. No crime was committed. The FBI confirmed this. The director specifically stated that if an FBI employee did the same thing, they would not be criminally charged, but would be in a lot of trouble. It wasn't criminal. Your desired to assume everyone is in the pocket of this vague group known as the "establishment" shows you don't have the ability to make decisions on your own. You need labels and categories to slot people into and then you can make your pre-determined choices based on what group they are in. Oh nice, a liberal declares me not licensed to make a decision on my own. :D How cute you are my dear but sorry, I will continue to disturb the elite you represent as much as I can.
The irony in this post is astounding.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
|
what the heck is going on with the TL pol lol
|
On September 29 2016 02:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2016 02:51 stilt wrote:On September 29 2016 02:36 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 02:31 stilt wrote:On September 29 2016 01:32 Plansix wrote:On September 29 2016 01:26 stilt wrote:On September 27 2016 21:44 farvacola wrote:On September 27 2016 21:41 zeo wrote:On September 27 2016 21:22 Mohdoo wrote:
Taking credit for Obama's birth certificate and doubling down on stop and frisk is what surprised me the most. It makes no sense. He did really, really poorly last night. I am now convinced that he's actually this person. If he was actually well calculated, he would have appeared as normal as possible. I think from here, support crystallizes and Clinton sweeps.
Clinton taking full responsibility for emails and saying she wouldn't do it again just makes any more questions besting a dead horse. What a relief. She should be in jail then. You're welcome to send a letter to the Department of Justice so that they can be made aware of their mistake. Justice is only available for the weak. But thanks to remind us the total impudence of the elite. Justice is only a option for the weak????? So the strong don't get justice???? Being responsible for a mistake doesn't make it criminal. Ahah, don't be more stupid that you really are. This little liberal and hypocrite rhetoric that you use cannot hide the fact that the laws is no the same for all and that the political elite, corporation, etablishment that Clinton is part of basically allow us to do anything she wants. The strong doesn't care about justice unless it alienates the weak. No crime was committed. The FBI confirmed this. The director specifically stated that if an FBI employee did the same thing, they would not be criminally charged, but would be in a lot of trouble. It wasn't criminal. Your desired to assume everyone is in the pocket of this vague group known as the "establishment" shows you don't have the ability to make decisions on your own. You need labels and categories to slot people into and then you can make your pre-determined choices based on what group they are in. Oh nice, a liberal declares me not licensed to make a decision on my own. :D How cute you are my dear but sorry, I will continue to disturb the elite you represent as much as I can. The irony in this post is astounding.
Your hypocrisie as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
