- This topic has 145 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 6 months ago by
FlyerInHi.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 30, 2016 at 2:55 PM #802841October 30, 2016 at 3:21 PM #802842
njtosd
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=njtosd][quote=bearishgurl][quote=njtosd]
Once again, BG, you have misquoted me by adding emphasis where there was none. It really riles me – I have explained on a couple of occasions now in painfully clear terms that I resent your misrepresentations. So have other people. Stop it.[/quote]nj, you’re certainly free to tell the Piggs what you meant by this phrase you posted:[quote=njtosd]…Emotionally, though, this brings front and center a very distasteful potential crime by a close Clinton connection. And it also reinforces the notion that both Hillary and her closest aid have (a) willful blindness, (b) poor judgment or (c) something else when it comes to what would normally be considered one of the most important relationships in their lives. …[/quote]
Instead of berating me for giving MY opinion, why don’t you give yours? What exactly did to mean by the [bolded] phrase?[/quote]
All right – I understand you’re not so bright, but this shouldn’t be difficult. It is my choice to express what I think and to emphasize one point over another if I choose to. Do not change what I write. I don’t need to explain myself to you upon demand. Speak for yourself – you’ve done a lot of that already.[/quote]Good L@rd, I never thought I would actually agree with SK on this issue but those are YOUR words (above). No one has changed anything you have written. How did you expect your words to be interpreted, especially since you are apparently unwilling to clarify them?
Absolutely amazing …. :-0[/quote]
My point is (if you are really dim enough to miss this) is that I never italicize or bold anything. I believe that if you use the right words, italics and bold are almost never required. You have in this thread and others changed the font, which I have nicely asked you to stop – but yet you go on. And yes – you are absolutely amazing in a sad way.
October 30, 2016 at 3:42 PM #802845Anonymous
Guest[quote=SK in CV]Most of their talk has been about what a huge screw up it was for Comey to do what he did, because the actual facts are …nothing has happened. It may sink his career. A Hatch Act complaint has already been filed against him. He could go to jail.[/quote]
It is hilariously ironic that Comey’s letter carries more weight toward his own possible conviction than the person he is sorta maybe investigating.
He should certainly be prosecuted. The Haney act is extremely important to democracy and Comey should be made an example. Government employees should never use their position to influence elections.
October 30, 2016 at 4:03 PM #802846spdrun
ParticipantComey and Assange are useful, if not quite heroes.
Not that I like Trump, but I enjoy seeing politicians of all stripes squirm under the magnifying glass. 90% of American politicians call and vote for decreased privacy for the common person, for increased policing powers, for more government intrusion into private lives. They do little or nothing to rein in corporate invasions of privacy and data collection. (In places like Europe, privacy is seen as a civil right and taken seriously by politicians.)
It gladdens my heart immensely to see Clinton on the receiving end of an invasion of privacy and feeling the power of the state. Sunlight disinfects as well as stinging.
I don’t think that Trump is any better than Clinton on the police state, privacy, etc (if anything he’s worse). But her record has been far from stellar. Let her suffer a bit of indignity. She’s earned it, along with most American politicians.
If she wins, it might make her just a bit more humble. And maybe instill a healthy concern for privacy issues in her mind.
October 30, 2016 at 5:57 PM #802855scaredyclassic
ParticipantSeen on ynez road in temecula thru souplantation window.
Woman in the rain holding a sign “save a baby vote for trump”.
I guess on the bright side banning abortion will be good in terms of providing work for future lawyers. The babies who would have been aborted are more likely to be future criminals.
October 30, 2016 at 8:04 PM #802857ucodegen
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=ucodegen][quote=SK in CV][quote=mixxalot]Hillary will steal the election and win even though Trump will win the popular vote. The global elites want their puppet to win.[/quote]
Good one.[/quote]
Actually Hillary is the elite’s puppet. She has gone so far as to use white noise generators to hide her meetings with global elites from the press.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-static-noise-speech_us_570930dae4b0836057a16748
A bunch of refs – just Google
https://www.google.com/search?q=clinton+using+white+noise+generators[/quote]
LOL, good one. Global elites? Who exactly is that? Some nefarious group running the world that stays hidden from public view?
More cow bell. Less tin foil.[/quote]
You don’t address the point, instead resort to trying to mock the person making the point. Logic fallacy – personal attack proves nothing.That said, I didn’t say they run the world. I did say they are ‘elites’ and I am willing to add that they have undue influence in politics, but that influence is not absolute. Money influences, and lots of money can buy lots of influence.
October 30, 2016 at 8:10 PM #802858SK in CV
Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote=SK in CV][quote=ucodegen][quote=SK in CV][quote=mixxalot]Hillary will steal the election and win even though Trump will win the popular vote. The global elites want their puppet to win.[/quote]
Good one.[/quote]
Actually Hillary is the elite’s puppet. She has gone so far as to use white noise generators to hide her meetings with global elites from the press.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-static-noise-speech_us_570930dae4b0836057a16748
A bunch of refs – just Google
https://www.google.com/search?q=clinton+using+white+noise+generators[/quote]
LOL, good one. Global elites? Who exactly is that? Some nefarious group running the world that stays hidden from public view?
More cow bell. Less tin foil.[/quote]
You don’t address the point, instead resort to trying to mock the person making the point. Logic fallacy – personal attack proves nothing.That said, I didn’t say they run the world. I did say they are ‘elites’ and I am willing to add that they have undue influence in politics, but that influence is not absolute. Money influences, and lots of money can buy lots of influence.[/quote]
What is the point? Who do you think the “elites” are? Names? Do you have evidence they have historically had undue influence on actual policies supported by the candidate? Absent the answers to those questions, you don’t have a point. You have a conspiracy theory which is worthy of nothing more than mockery.
October 30, 2016 at 8:13 PM #802859Guest[quote=ucodegen]You don’t address the point, instead resort to trying to mock the person making the point. Logic fallacy – personal attack proves nothing.[/quote]
You didn’t make a point.
The fact that you think you did is worth a chuckle as a consolation prize for those that had to read your gibberish.
October 30, 2016 at 8:18 PM #802860Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
This is the first time anyone mentioned global elites here.
It’s interesting because around the world people say the people operating in the shadows are us, Americans, via the CIA.Is George Soros any more global elite than Sheldon Adelson?[/quote]
I would not say ‘us’ as a group, but that the ‘elite’ have undue influence, significantly more than you or I. Many of them also live within the United States.. so I would stand to look like it were the Americans (as a group, via the CIA) operating in the shadows.As for the second question, I would tend to feel that George Soros is more in the global elite than Sheldon Adelson.. though I would have to really think about it.
One thing that does concern me specifically about George Soros, is his involvement with voting machines. I don’t understand why the contract for them wasn’t thrown over to the universities like the ArpaNet was.
Oh yeah – Linky for the pedantic: http://www.infowars.com/petition-to-stop-george-soros-voting-machines-hits-100k/Personally – I really don’t like that announcer.
On the other hand, Sheldon Adelson has approx 33% greater net worth – which could count for influence. You also have to consider that it is not always pure wealth that is involved, but how well ‘connected’. NOTE: Not discounting wealth here though.
NOTE: I also know one is Republican, the other a Democrat. I also said that the public in general has been played one side against the other why the elite (both sides) do what they really intend while having the public at each other’s throats over stupid wedge issues.
October 30, 2016 at 8:19 PM #802861GuestKeep reading infowars and check back in when you’ve got it all sorted out.
October 30, 2016 at 8:24 PM #802862Participant[quote=SK in CV]
LOL, good one. Global elites? Who exactly is that? Some nefarious group running the world that stays hidden from public view?More cow bell. Less tin foil.[/quote]
BTW: Clinton has stated that she is the most transparent candidate – however she is using white noise generators when talking to her high value donors, so the outside world can’t catch what she is telling them. That is not transparency.Go ahead and put your head in the sand..
October 30, 2016 at 8:29 PM #802863Participant[quote=SK in CV]
What is the point? Who do you think the “elites” are? Names? Do you have evidence they have historically had undue influence on actual policies supported by the candidate? Absent the answers to those questions, you don’t have a point. You have a conspiracy theory which is worthy of nothing more than mockery.[/quote]All we have to do is look – and you see their money influence. You can choose to ignore, that is your choice. I can’t buy TV station advertisements like Tom Steyer – therefore I don’t have the same influence. There is one right off the top of my head. You don’t have to look far to see the effects of those with crazy wealth using their contacts, money to push agendas that you nor I could because of the lack of both.
I don’t have to prove jack – your wilful ignorance is not a defense or proof of your position.
October 30, 2016 at 8:30 PM #802864Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote=SK in CV]
LOL, good one. Global elites? Who exactly is that? Some nefarious group running the world that stays hidden from public view?More cow bell. Less tin foil.[/quote]
BTW: Clinton has stated that she is the most transparent candidate – however she is using white noise generators when talking to her high value donors, so the outside world can’t catch what she is telling them. That is not transparency.Go ahead and put your head in the sand..[/quote]
She has been the most vetted politician ever. She’s had paparazzi watching her for more than 20 years. Is she not permitted to have a private conversation with anyone? Ever? What do you think she’s telling them? Do you have any evidence of it? Do you have any evidence she’s ever been influenced to change the policies she’s supported because of undue influences? Ever? I’ll ask it again, so maybe you can try to answer the questions. If you can’t answer those questions, you don’t have a point, you have an unfounded conspiracy theory. That’s it.
Go ahead and keep getting those signals from your tin foil hat.
October 30, 2016 at 9:17 PM #802866Participant[quote=SK in CV]
She has been the most vetted politician ever. She’s had paparazzi watching her for more than 20 years. Is she not permitted to have a private conversation with anyone? Ever? What do you think she’s telling them? Do you have any evidence of it? Do you have any evidence she’s ever been influenced to change the policies she’s supported because of undue influences? Ever? I’ll ask it again, so maybe you can try to answer the questions. If you can’t answer those questions, you don’t have a point, you have an unfounded conspiracy theory. That’s it.Go ahead and keep getting those signals from your tin foil hat.[/quote]
All of this has been brought up by more than I, yet you decide that you prefer an echo chamber – can’t help you there.October 30, 2016 at 9:24 PM #802868Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote=SK in CV]
She has been the most vetted politician ever. She’s had paparazzi watching her for more than 20 years. Is she not permitted to have a private conversation with anyone? Ever? What do you think she’s telling them? Do you have any evidence of it? Do you have any evidence she’s ever been influenced to change the policies she’s supported because of undue influences? Ever? I’ll ask it again, so maybe you can try to answer the questions. If you can’t answer those questions, you don’t have a point, you have an unfounded conspiracy theory. That’s it.Go ahead and keep getting those signals from your tin foil hat.[/quote]
All of this has been brought up by more than I, yet you decide that you prefer an echo chamber – can’t help you there.[/quote]No, it hasn’t. At least my questions were never answered. I don’t want echos. I want actual evidence. It seems you’re the one that is in denial. You’ve formed an opinion based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever. And can’t accept it. As I said…tin foil.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.