OT: The Kind of People Who Support Donald Trump

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Post by Quadibloc
who have been in trouble with the
law, and so on, one poster here has been repeatedly badgered to
admit - even after he had done so -

While denying it, literally in the same post, and never once making
a single unambiguous statement.

Post by Quadibloc
that some of them confronted
the police in protests and the like.
Well, just to give some balance to this, here's a news story I
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-boycott-twitter-baycott-iva
nka-1.4061114

1) Candian.

2) Who cares? She's Candian.

3) Not a riot, night after night, while the police stand by and
watch because they approve of pro-Clinton violence.

4) She's Canadian. Who cares?

5) She apparently believes she can be offensive on Twitter, but
nobody else can. Typical liberal halluciatnion, that the rules only
apply to others.

6) Nobody cares because she's Canadian.

7) She is clearly in it for the attention, and neither she nor the
web site are particularly credible.

8) Canadians should know better than to try to sit at the grown-ups
table when it comes to politics.

9) She's Canadian. Nobody cares.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Robert Bannister

2017-04-12 03:45:03 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Whereas the poor people are going win under Trump's gang of billionaires?

Post by Quadibloc
who have been in trouble with the
law, and so on, one poster here has been repeatedly badgered to
admit - even after he had done so -

While denying it, literally in the same post, and never once making
a single unambiguous statement.

Post by Quadibloc
that some of them confronted
the police in protests and the like.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-boycott-twitter-baycott-iva
nka-1.4061114

1) Candian.
2) Who cares? She's Candian.
3) Not a riot, night after night, while the police stand by and
watch because they approve of pro-Clinton violence.
4) She's Canadian. Who cares?
5) She apparently believes she can be offensive on Twitter, but
nobody else can. Typical liberal halluciatnion, that the rules only
apply to others.
6) Nobody cares because she's Canadian.
7) She is clearly in it for the attention, and neither she nor the
web site are particularly credible.
8) Canadians should know better than to try to sit at the grown-ups
table when it comes to politics.
9) She's Canadian. Nobody cares.

--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-12 06:06:37 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal
to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Whereas the poor people are going win under Trump's gang of
billionaires?

If it makes no difference, and it doesn't, why not vote for the more
entertaining of the two? Perhaps Clinton lost because she's *boring*.

(Or maybe because she never learned to *snip*. Dumbass.)
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

h***@gmail.com

2017-04-12 04:34:24 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher levels then isn't it?
They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category $50,000-$99,999 a year.

But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-12 06:08:45 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal
to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

Now that I know you're just another furriner talking out your ass
about something that's none of your business anyway (as well as,
literally, hallucinating), who cares? The only purpose you serve in
life, like most Aussies, is to be the punch line of lowbrow jokes.

Dance, little monkey, dance.

Clinton lost because voters realized just how dishonest - and
criminal - she is, and simply didn't trust her. And rightly so.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Peter Trei

2017-04-12 13:13:25 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal
to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

When GUTS descends into argument-free ad hominems, you know you've
defeated him. Its a good time to stop.

pt

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-12 16:55:20 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:08:46 AM UTC-4, Gutless

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the
higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and
2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

When GUTS descends into argument-free ad hominems, you know
you've defeated him. Its a good time to stop.

Just keep telling youself that, while Mommy applies that lotion to
your rosy red ass.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Alan Baker

2017-04-13 00:42:12 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal
to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You DO realize that more people voted for Clinton that for Trump, right?

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-13 03:20:08 UTC

We're back to the original question, Alan:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Alan Baker

2017-04-13 03:37:10 UTC

No.

Whine all you want, but it won't make it so.

:-)

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-13 06:00:53 UTC

Alan Baker

2017-04-13 06:07:17 UTC

We're certainly back to you whining...

...and avoiding the issue at hand.

:-)

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-13 06:14:01 UTC

Post by Alan Baker
We're certainly back to you whining...
...and avoiding the issue at hand.

Like you've been avoiding my question for several months? And will
continue to do so until you run away, again, with your tail between
your legs, because you _can't_ answer it?

We're back to the original question, Alan:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes
/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/ye
s/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Alan Baker

2017-04-13 06:19:03 UTC

Post by Alan Baker
We're certainly back to you whining...
...and avoiding the issue at hand.

Like you've been avoiding my question for several months? And will
continue to do so until you run away, again, with your tail between
your legs, because you _can't_ answer it?

Whine on, Gutless.

Let's face it: you're a coward.

:-)

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-13 15:39:38 UTC

Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Robert Bannister

2017-04-24 03:09:58 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal
to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

And Trump is honest???

--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

h***@gmail.com

2017-04-24 03:21:37 UTC

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Dance, little monkey, dance.
Clinton lost because voters realized just how dishonest - and
criminal - she is, and simply didn't trust her. And rightly so.

And Trump is honest???

It's terry in full on troll mode.
No way of telling what, if anything, he actually believes about the politics.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-24 04:55:13 UTC

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Dance, little monkey, dance.
Clinton lost because voters realized just how dishonest - and
criminal - she is, and simply didn't trust her. And rightly
so.

And Trump is honest???

It's terry in full on troll mode.
No way of telling what, if anything, he actually believes about the politics.

Plus, I'm right, and you knwo it. You can't refute the facts, so you
attack the messenger.

Which is *very* typical of today's lib-fascists.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-24 04:54:23 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Quadibloc

2017-04-24 06:23:55 UTC

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

Supporters of Hillary Clinton claim that the E-mail server scandal was no such
thing.

While I do not consider myself competent to judge that, one way or another, it
_does_ appear that President Donald J. Trump *himself* could _be_ the worst
breach of national security in U.S. history. Bailed out of his most recent
bankruptcy by Russians with close ties to Putin?

Of course, the fact that Trump recently maintained consistency with Obama's
policy on chemical weapons in the hands of Assad certainly makes it _look_
like he wasn't as much in Russia's pocket as some had feared.

Again, I can't say for sure whether this indeed does decisively refute the
suspicions... or if it was done for show, Assad being a mere pawn, and it
being useful for Russia to have a pretext to cast the U.S. as an aggressor.

From my point of view, the "best possible outcome" would be for Trump to
betray his election promises, and turn out to be a phony populist who was just
another front man for the Illuminati or the Skull and Bones... which is
actually a pity, because while some things about him make me very nervous,
there was much I liked - the protectionism, in my opinion, is plain common
sense, though a clumsy implementation could do much more harm than good (the
arguments against protectionism - at least some of them - make sense too).

But that outcome just stores up trouble for the future, because if there's a
sufficiently large segment of the electorate that was willing to vote Trump
in, then they would be prepared to vote someone even further outside the
mainstream next time in hopes of getting the something different that they
want.

As parties don't generally replace incumbents as their candidate, this would
bode well for someone like Bernie Sanders in 2020, which would be less bad
than a further-right Republican, but still potentially disastrous.

This has me sufficiently worried that I would be *relieved*, not dismayed, if
Trump does manage to be a popularly-acclaimed successful President despite my
misgivings.

John Savard

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-24 17:37:28 UTC

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

Supporters of Hillary Clinton claim that the E-mail server
scandal was no such thing.

Yes, they do. And the director of the FBI testified in front of
Congress that at least 110 emails containing information that was
classified at the time it was sent went to that server. As
discussed before, it is not possible for those emails to be less
than 330 felonies, _which the FBI is required to investigate_.
Since at least one investigator - who is required to know he is
required to investigate - and the director of the FBI - who is also
required to know he is required to investigate - failed to perform
their required duties, there are at least two more felonies
committed in not investigating.

It is a *massive* coverup. Not only has not one been prosecuted for
compromising classified information, so far as anyone can tell,
there is no investigation at all. I can only presume this is
because the felons who sent it were appointees of the Obama
administration, and it would have been too politically embarassing
to crucify them as they deserve.

This coverup could not possibly have occured without Hillary
Clinton's knowledge. (As Secretary of State, there was additional
mandatory training for her on all of this.)
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Greg Goss

2017-04-25 06:27:13 UTC

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

Supporters of Hillary Clinton claim that the E-mail server scandal was no such
thing.

You know that Terry loves trolling people. You really think he
believes what he's saying about Hillary? He's saying it because it
raises our blood pressure.

--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-25 18:22:44 UTC

Post by Quadibloc

Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

Supporters of Hillary Clinton claim that the E-mail server
scandal was no such thing.

You know that Terry loves trolling people. You really think he
believes what he's saying about Hillary? He's saying it because
it raises our blood pressure.

The best trolls of all are the most inconvenient truths. If it
weren't true, it wouldn't piss you off.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Robert Bannister

2017-05-08 02:47:00 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny we don't read
about any of those huge secrets.

--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-08 05:07:56 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the
higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and
2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your
rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny we
don't read about any of those huge secrets.

Manning is in prison, and rightfully so. Clinton is not, despite
far more serious crimes. Assange has never, at any point, been
subject to US national security laws (which only apply to people
who agree to be subject to them as a condition of having access to
classified information).

Clinton was not only subject to - by her own consent - the laws
regarding access to classified information, but as Secretary of
State, also additional laws that apply to people who can classify
things. _She agreed to this_. (Or, if she didn't, there's an even
more massive conspiracy to cover up her being given access without
doing so.)
The head of the FBI testified in front of Congress about how much
classified information was compromised (some of it Top Secret -
information that, if compromised, would case "greivous and
irreparable harm") by Clinton's incompetence (assuming it wasn't
deliberate). The requirements - there is no discretion allowed - to
investigate the minimun of over 300 felonies (there *cannot* be
less than that) are not obscure or secret. And yet, there has been
no investigation, no arrests, and no prosecutions. That kind of
coverup could only have originated at the top of the Justice
Department or in the White House, and if Clinton was unaware of it,
she is so deranged she needs to be institutionalized for her own
safety.

Clinton seriously damaged national security. Get over it.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Peter Trei

2017-05-08 13:09:31 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the
higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and
2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your
rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny we
don't read about any of those huge secrets.

Manning is in prison, and rightfully so. Clinton is not, despite
far more serious crimes.

I know this is a berzerk button for you, but...

I just took my annual Classified Security Refresher Course, which is
required to maintain my clearance.

I looked carefully at the language of the agreements. It said that
exposure of Top Secret information *could* cause grave damage to the United
States, and *may* result in prosecution.

So, (1) do we know if any of Clinton's classified data was actually
hacked by an enemy of the US (As opposed to just being handled and
stored improperly)?

(2) The relevant agencies are allowed to exercise discretion over whether they
prosecute or not.

So, her not being prosecuted is well within the legal options covering the
situation. You may not like it, but that's not your call to make.

pt

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-08 16:51:19 UTC

On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 1:07:50 AM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10,

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton
are poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a
great deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method
of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family
incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost
all the higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her
votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the
category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your
rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny we
don't read about any of those huge secrets.

Manning is in prison, and rightfully so. Clinton is not,
despite far more serious crimes.

There was never any real possibility that Clinton would be
presoecuted. As Comey testified, the stuff they could prove
required intent, and he clearly had no clue she was breaking the
law. The coverup is of the people who _sent_ over a hundred emails
containing information that was classfied at the time.

So, (1) do we know if any of Clinton's classified data was
actually hacked by an enemy of the US (As opposed to just being
handled and stored improperly)?

I don't recall the details, but it was a near certainty that the
server had been accessed by multiple foreign governments. That,
however, is irrelvant to the coverup. The mininum of three felonies
for each email are:

Removing classified information from a secure server

Removing the markings indicating it was classfied (Clinton's
excuse)

Sending classified information through a non-secure network (the
internet).

(2) The relevant agencies are allowed to exercise discretion
over whether they prosecute or not.

But not over whether they investigate, and take efforts to secure
the compromised information, even to the extent of seizing private
property. (And the investigators have their own rules regarding
that, not the same ones as the ordinary security clearance.)

So, her not being prosecuted is well within the legal options
covering the situation. You may not like it, but that's not your
call to make.

I never said _she_ should be prosecuted. In fact, I've said
explicitly otherwise. The political damage done by the winner
putting the loser in prison far exceeds even the damage done by the
criminal acts. And, in the interests of equal protection, those who
committed over 300 felonies really shouldn't be, either, if she's
not.

But investigating and doing what can be done to secure the
compromised information are not the sam thing as filing criminal
chargers.

And completely ignoring the 300+ felonies, pretending they didn't
happen, is a coverup.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Peter Trei

2017-05-08 17:16:50 UTC

On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 1:07:50 AM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10,

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton
are poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a
great deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method
of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family
incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost
all the higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her
votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the
category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the worst
breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny we
don't read about any of those huge secrets.

Manning is in prison, and rightfully so. Clinton is not,
despite far more serious crimes.

So, (1) do we know if any of Clinton's classified data was
actually hacked by an enemy of the US (As opposed to just being
handled and stored improperly)?

I don't recall the details, but it was a near certainty that the
server had been accessed by multiple foreign governments. That,
however, is irrelvant to the coverup. The mininum of three felonies
Removing classified information from a secure server
Removing the markings indicating it was classfied (Clinton's
excuse)
Sending classified information through a non-secure network (the
internet).

(2) The relevant agencies are allowed to exercise discretion
over whether they prosecute or not.

So, her not being prosecuted is well within the legal options
covering the situation. You may not like it, but that's not your
call to make.

I never said _she_ should be prosecuted. In fact, I've said
explicitly otherwise. The political damage done by the winner
putting the loser in prison far exceeds even the damage done by the
criminal acts. And, in the interests of equal protection, those who
committed over 300 felonies really shouldn't be, either, if she's
not.
But investigating and doing what can be done to secure the
compromised information are not the sam thing as filing criminal
chargers.
And completely ignoring the 300+ felonies, pretending they didn't
happen, is a coverup.

In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified material
only get tried if the case is egregious, or they pass it on to 3rd
parties.

Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial punishments,
from a note in the personal file up to firing or early retirement.

Here's an example where there *was* a trial; the guy got probation:
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/sacramento/news/press-releases/folsom-naval-reservist-is-sentenced-after-pleading-guilty-to-unauthorized-removal-and-retention-of-classified-materials

pt

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-08 17:32:29 UTC

On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 12:51:23 PM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella

Post by Peter Trei

On 24/4/17 12:54 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

On 12/4/17 2:08 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10,

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton
are poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a
great deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play"
method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family
incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but
lost all the higher levels then isn't it? They were
48% of her votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came
from them and the category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

And Trump is honest???

Trump didn't participate in a cover up of one of the
worst breachres of national security in US history.

So Hillary revealed more than Manning and Assange? Funny
we don't read about any of those huge secrets.

Manning is in prison, and rightfully so. Clinton is not,
despite far more serious crimes.

There was never any real possibility that Clinton would be
presoecuted. As Comey testified, the stuff they could prove
required intent, and he clearly had no clue she was breaking
the law. The coverup is of the people who _sent_ over a hundred
emails containing information that was classfied at the time.

Post by Peter Trei
So, (1) do we know if any of Clinton's classified data was
actually hacked by an enemy of the US (As opposed to just
being handled and stored improperly)?

I don't recall the details, but it was a near certainty that
the server had been accessed by multiple foreign governments.
That, however, is irrelvant to the coverup. The mininum of
Removing classified information from a secure server
Removing the markings indicating it was classfied (Clinton's
excuse)
Sending classified information through a non-secure network
(the internet).

Post by Peter Trei
(2) The relevant agencies are allowed to exercise discretion
over whether they prosecute or not.

But not over whether they investigate, and take efforts to
secure the compromised information, even to the extent of
seizing private property. (And the investigators have their own
rules regarding that, not the same ones as the ordinary
security clearance.)

Post by Peter Trei
So, her not being prosecuted is well within the legal options
covering the situation. You may not like it, but that's not
your call to make.

I never said _she_ should be prosecuted. In fact, I've said
explicitly otherwise. The political damage done by the winner
putting the loser in prison far exceeds even the damage done by
the criminal acts. And, in the interests of equal protection,
those who committed over 300 felonies really shouldn't be,
either, if she's not.
But investigating and doing what can be done to secure the
compromised information are not the sam thing as filing
criminal chargers.
And completely ignoring the 300+ felonies, pretending they
didn't happen, is a coverup.

In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they pass
it on to 3rd parties.

Once again, this isn't about whether or not Clinton (or anyone
else) gets prosecuted, it's about covering up the fact that over a
hundred emails were sent with classified infromation in them, and
it's being covered up. I can only assume because they were mostly
sent by Clinton or Obama appointees. Because there will be no
investigation to determine who they were.

Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing or
early retirement.

It seems to be, however, that even with a criminal prosecution, it
would be necessary to determine whether or not their clearance
should be revoked because of the carelessness. Since no
investigation occured, those careless people continued to have
access to classified information, no matter how careless they were.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Greg Goss

2017-05-09 08:20:14 UTC

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified material
only get tried if the case is egregious, or they pass it on to 3rd
parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial punishments,
from a note in the personal file up to firing or early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-09 16:27:53 UTC

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they pass
it on to 3rd parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing or
early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

Or at least acknowledgeing that the breach occured, and following the
laws requiring investigation and remediation.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Peter Trei

2017-05-09 16:49:28 UTC

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they pass
it on to 3rd parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing or
early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

Or at least acknowledgeing that the breach occured, and following the
laws requiring investigation and remediation.

The FBI has apparently done so, and decided nothing merited public prosecution.

BTW: Here's some grist for you mill:
https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fworld%2Fnational-security%2Fcomey-misstated-key-clinton-email-evidence-at-hearing-say-people-close-to-investigation%2F2017%2F05%2F09%2F074c1c7e-34bd-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGjXMh9vjQsKJsUID7A2wk_E2ajJw

pt

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-09 17:08:27 UTC

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they
pass it on to 3rd parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing or
early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

Or at least acknowledgeing that the breach occured, and
following the laws requiring investigation and remediation.

The FBI has apparently done so,

Where have they acknowledged the 110+ federal crimes committed by
_sending_ those emails?

and decided nothing merited
public prosecution.

You're still trying to change the subject. I assume on purpose, to
distrate from the serious damage Hillary Clinton did to national
security.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com
%2Fworld%2Fnational-security%2Fcomey-misstated-key-clinton-email-
evidence-at-hearing-say-people-close-to-investigation%2F2017%2F05
%2F09%2F074c1c7e-34bd-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html&sa=D&sntz
=1&usg=AFQjCNGjXMh9vjQsKJsUID7A2wk_E2ajJw

I got a glimpse of the headline before the paywall kicked in.
Looked like it had nothing to do with the coverup, either.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Peter Trei

2017-05-09 19:05:41 UTC

Post by Peter Trei

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they
pass it on to 3rd parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing or
early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

Or at least acknowledgeing that the breach occured, and
following the laws requiring investigation and remediation.

The FBI has apparently done so,

Where have they acknowledged the 110+ federal crimes committed by
_sending_ those emails?

If they decide that revealing those details would compromise
national security they won't do so publicly. Remember, they
have descretion, and if they decide its better not to make
unproven accusations, they won't.

Post by Peter Trei
and decided nothing merited
public prosecution.

You're still trying to change the subject. I assume on purpose, to
distrate from the serious damage Hillary Clinton did to national
security.

Earlier, you were saying she *shouldn't* be prosecuted.

Make up your mind.

The FBI has decided that matter is best closed. Your jumping
up and down doesn't change that.

pt

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-09 21:15:35 UTC

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 1:08:29 PM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-4, Gutless

Post by Peter Trei
In my experience, cleared people who mishandle classified
material only get tried if the case is egregious, or they
pass it on to 3rd parties.
Accidental or casual lapses, without intent, get non-trial
punishments, from a note in the personal file up to firing
or early retirement.

And GUCS was advocating firing. Or non-hiring.

Or at least acknowledgeing that the breach occured, and
following the laws requiring investigation and remediation.

The FBI has apparently done so,

Where have they acknowledged the 110+ federal crimes committed
by _sending_ those emails?

I suspect it would be impossible to keep entirely secret that
dozens of appointees of the previous adminstration were meeting
with FBI agents and looking very nervous.

And the fact that there were over 110 felonies committed *already*
isn't secret. It's in the law books and Comey's testimony under
oath to Congress.

and decided nothing merited
public prosecution.

You're still trying to change the subject. I assume on purpose,
to distrate from the serious damage Hillary Clinton did to
national security.

Earlier, you were saying she *shouldn't* be prosecuted.
Make up your mind.

Where have I said otherwise? A MessageID would be sufficient.
Seriously, dude, I think you're hallucinating. Get help.

The FBI has decided that matter is best closed.

Not really. The investigation continued - publicly - for some time
after Comey's testimony. And, as you point out, they're not
obligated to hold press conferences about it. For all you know,
it's still ongoing.

Your jumping
up and down doesn't change that.

The FBI didn't say she didn't break the law. In fact, they said,
point blank, she did, and compromised classified information in the
process. They just didn't think they could get a conviction on what
they could prove she'd done, because the applicable laws require
intent. In essence, Comey testified under oath that in his
professional opinion, Hillary Clinton is too stupid to form a
criminal intent.

And you're *still* avoiding the issue of the massive coverup of the
110+ felonies committed by other people who *sent* those emails.
And you will continue to do so. In all seriousness, I think you're
having some kind of mental breakdown. You're seeing things that
aren't there. This seems to be common among liberals since the
election.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Quadibloc

2017-05-09 20:15:28 UTC

Distract from the possibly serious damage that she may potentially have
done is more like it. We don't know that any actual damage to national
security actually resulted from her actions.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-05-09 21:16:20 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Distract from the possibly serious damage that she may
potentially have done is more like it. We don't know that any
actual damage to national security actually resulted from her
actions.

The reason we don't know that is that there's been no followup
investigation. That's the coverup.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Robert Carnegie

2017-04-12 20:44:33 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher levels then isn't it?
They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.

My first question is, /why?/

And so are the next, oh, fifteen.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-12 23:50:49 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.
My first question is, /why?/

Because he's stupid.

Post by Robert Carnegie
And so are the next, oh, fifteen.

Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.
Because he's stupid.

HTH.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

h***@gmail.com

2017-04-13 00:19:38 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher levels then isn't it?
They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.

Terry may have provided the correct answer about that.

Post by Robert Carnegie
My first question is, /why?/
And so are the next, oh, fifteen.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-13 03:19:44 UTC

On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 6:44:35 AM UTC+10, Robert

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the
higher levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and
2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.

Terry may have provided the correct answer about that.

And yet, here you still are.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Greg Goss

2017-04-15 15:58:54 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher levels then isn't it?
They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of votes for Clinton came from them and the category $50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.
My first question is, /why?/
And so are the next, oh, fifteen.

Alan's obviously having fun, too. I enjoyed my victory a few years
back. Dunno if Quadi's still being serious after GUTS gave up and
went back to whiny trolling.

--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-16 04:28:53 UTC

On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:22:40 AM UTC+10, Gutless

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are
poor people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great
deal to gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of
government.

Funny that Clinton won votes for people with family incomes
under $30,000 and under $50,000 a year but lost all the higher
levels then isn't it? They were 48% of her votes and 2/3 of
votes for Clinton came from them and the category
$50,000-$99,999 a year.
But I'm sure you won't let fact dissuade you from your rants.

You're debating with Terry Austin... about politics.
My first question is, /why?/
And so are the next, oh, fifteen.

Alan's obviously having fun, too.

He wants you to believe that, anyway. While he continues to dangle
on the hook.

Post by Greg Goss
I enjoyed my victory a few
years back.

And you're still dangling, too, too emtionally weak to admit you
got handed your ass, as usual, only more so.

Post by Greg Goss
Dunno if Quadi's still being serious after GUTS
gave up and went back to whiny trolling.

Quddie's always serious, and always pontless.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Mike Dworetsky

2017-04-12 13:44:22 UTC

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Post by Quadibloc
who have been in trouble with the
law, and so on, one poster here has been repeatedly badgered to
admit - even after he had done so -

While denying it, literally in the same post, and never once making
a single unambiguous statement.

Post by Quadibloc
that some of them confronted
the police in protests and the like.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-boycott-twitter-baycott-iva
nka-1.4061114

1) Candian.
2) Who cares? She's Candian.
3) Not a riot, night after night, while the police stand by and
watch because they approve of pro-Clinton violence.
4) She's Canadian. Who cares?
5) She apparently believes she can be offensive on Twitter, but
nobody else can. Typical liberal halluciatnion, that the rules only
apply to others.
6) Nobody cares because she's Canadian.
7) She is clearly in it for the attention, and neither she nor the
web site are particularly credible.
8) Canadians should know better than to try to sit at the grown-ups
table when it comes to politics.
9) She's Canadian. Nobody cares.

Blaming Canada can lead to serious conflict. Don't you watch Southpark?

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

h***@gmail.com

2017-04-12 14:21:19 UTC

Post by Mike Dworetsky

Post by Quadibloc
Recently, because some supporters of Hillary Clinton are poor
people with little to lose,

And the overwhelming majority are rich people with a great deal to
gain under Clinton's "pay to play" method of government.

Post by Quadibloc
who have been in trouble with the
law, and so on, one poster here has been repeatedly badgered to
admit - even after he had done so -

While denying it, literally in the same post, and never once making
a single unambiguous statement.

Post by Quadibloc
that some of them confronted
the police in protests and the like.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-boycott-twitter-baycott-iva
nka-1.4061114

1) Candian.
2) Who cares? She's Candian.
3) Not a riot, night after night, while the police stand by and
watch because they approve of pro-Clinton violence.
4) She's Canadian. Who cares?
5) She apparently believes she can be offensive on Twitter, but
nobody else can. Typical liberal halluciatnion, that the rules only
apply to others.
6) Nobody cares because she's Canadian.
7) She is clearly in it for the attention, and neither she nor the
web site are particularly credible.
8) Canadians should know better than to try to sit at the grown-ups
table when it comes to politics.
9) She's Canadian. Nobody cares.

Blaming Canada can lead to serious conflict. Don't you watch Southpark?

but it gets members of Rush involved...

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

2017-04-12 16:56:05 UTC

Post by Mike Dworetsky