Re: OT: Epstein: 'Conspiracy theorists' proved right again

9e8-

o in

he

uch, yet you just told us that you are a Republican? Wow, that's something that would have you hating yourself and angry. Trump IS the Republican Par ty, he hijacked it and anyone who is still a Republican is just enabling hi m.

mber the Tea Party, which was a Koch-funded astro-turfing operation - and g ot rid of anybody who wasn't a repulsive right-wing lunatic.

orge Soros is spending money on subverting the Democrats in the way that th e Koch brothers did with the Tea Party movement may appeal to right wingers because they saw it happen to what used to be the Republican Party, but th ere's zero evidence that anything like this has happened.

ROFL. So typical, when it happens in the GOP, well it's one thing, a bad thing. When the same happens in the Democratic Party, well then you lie and claim it's something different. Both parties have their rich extremist s funding and driving what they want.

. Even Bernie Sanders is just peddling standard European social democracy.

weem multi-party democratic socialism, and ostensibly socialist one party s tates like the former Soviet Union, China and North Korea, this may not reg ister with Trader4 who is just as right-wing, and even more stupid.

repulsive jerk - because all the other candidates were even more repulsive , and inept with it.

e s

rnative candidates were even more repulsive - albeit in different ways.

Just like the Democratic party, full of Clinton hacks, did the same to Bernie.

ation anyway. Quite a few of them bailed out at the is point, and what's le ft running the party are the totally unprincipled dregs (and, of course, th e Koch brothers).

Anything else irrelevant you'd like to bring up? and how did that work our for you all/

The Democrats had won with Barak Obama, who had also been a break-through c andidate. She got three million more popular votes than Trump, and if the R ussians had spent a little less on influencing the electorates in what turn ed out to be the swing states, Trump probably wouldn't have got the 60,000 extra votes in the lplaces where it turned out to matter.

ate was even more repulsive and inept. Thanks for bringing that up.

vote, big-time, and scraped home on the Russian interventions (which he ma y not have known about, but clearly helped him).

There is no evidence that Russian meddling on Facebook, buying some BS stuf f there affected the outcome. More likely other things, like Comey announcin g that the FBI had re-opened their investigation into Hillary and her emails just a couple weeks before the election mattered far more. The fact is, Hillary was so abysmal, so awful, that she couldn't beat Trump! Ouch!

he is all they have got. He only appeals to people who are as stupid as you are

er your vote? Or you voted for an even more absurd third part candidate?

I didn't vote for either Hillary or Trump, because they both were totally defective. And my vote would not have mattered anyway, because I'm in a solid blue state.

ublican Party gerry-mandering may have been thorough enough to let them sal vage enough votes to survive.

lunatic,

n that to you.

\

You're the one that needs to realize that it's more complicated than that, you made the stupid claim, not me.

no, no, no. It really is you lying. Like when you deny that the libs here have been howling about Trump and Russia collusion since 2016. It's like saying the sun doesn't come up in the morning. A lie is a lie.

Like asking for an example of the sun coming up, stupid.

I'm totally confident that you're an idiot. I use the term lib, when it applies, like in that your buddy Bill is a lib, because that is what he is. I have not called you a lib. It's not clear WTF you are. You claim to be a Republican, yet you just went on a long, bizarre defense of Hillary being given a pass for negligently handling classified information, creating her home brew server. You went so far as the explain that things like how to handle classified info aren't in her brain, because they get pushed out by newer, more important stuff. ROFL. I've never heard any 'Republican", make such a stupid excuse pitch.

Like what? Allegedly calling up the WH lawyer and telling him to fire Mueller? It would be Trump's account versus McGhann. And even more compelling, McGhann had no authority whatever to fire Mueller. Mueller did not work for McGhanh, he doesn't report to him. Trump could say that he was just blowing off steam, McGhann misinterpreted what he said. McGhann took no action, no one interfered with Mueller and Mueller himself said that. So, good luck proving that case. Same with the rest of it. Is what Trump did wrong? Sure. But impeaching him would go nowhere, it would just be another spectacle to divide the country, probably increase the support for Trump and the Senate isn't going to remove him. Do you actually think you're going to get

66 Senators to vote to remove on that kind of case? The solution is there, the 2020 election.

Cite for us the statutes. The president can give a security clearance to anyone he wants to. I don't think Kushner is fit for any position, but you're going nowhere on that silly angle.

That's how

You're the one who needs to wake up.

Whoey Louie wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

No. It was a short, simple defense, not that a retard like you would be capable of gauging a simple statement.

Oh and the information overload 'pitch' is not mine, it is hers.

More proof that you observed nothing at the time or you would remember.

Her "offense" is not so 'egregious'.

The chinese national 'employee' of LANL that 'lost' the hard drive, which was later found behind a drinking fountain should have been charged, but was not. A far more egregious breech took place there.

A Washington official that had their own email server operating back then wsa not all that uncommon. Once it came to the fore with the whistleblowers, all of those folks have since straightened out their act too. Don't see none of them being scrutinized for their ignorance of the protocols.

All one needs to do is examine your posts over the last 8 months. Any psychologist would determine that you have serious party hatred issues.

You seem to want to exclude many 'classes' of people.

Funny, that... I would immediately exclude you.

In such a way that would make a school of piranha happy.

Or maybe in a tank with just a few, such to prolong the event of your life so you can savor the effects of their feeding... ...as you pass.

Now *that* would make a great youtube video.

Whoey Louie wrote in news:8cdec535-bf38-431d- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

Not true, you retarded f*ck.

:

-49e8-

so in

the

much, yet you just told us that you are a Republican? Wow, that's somethi ng that would have you hating yourself and angry. Trump IS the Republican P arty, he hijacked it and anyone who is still a Republican is just enabling him.

member the Tea Party, which was a Koch-funded astro-turfing operation - and got rid of anybody who wasn't a repulsive right-wing lunatic.

h

George Soros is spending money on subverting the Democrats in the way that the Koch brothers did with the Tea Party movement may appeal to right winge rs because they saw it happen to what used to be the Republican Party, but there's zero evidence that anything like this has happened.

But there's absolutely no evidence that it is happening.

No. I say there's no evidence that it is happening in the Democratic Party.

This is a different claim from the strawman you are putting up.

t.

What would a rich extremist want to drive the Democratic Party to do?

Invest more in universal education and uniuversal health care to get more w ell-trained, healthy and productive employees? Got an example?

ad. Even Bernie Sanders is just peddling standard European social democracy .

etweem multi-party democratic socialism, and ostensibly socialist one party states like the former Soviet Union, China and North Korea, this may not r egister with Trader4 who is just as right-wing, and even more stupid.

a repulsive jerk - because all the other candidates were even more repulsi ve, and inept with it.

P

one

p's

ternative candidates were even more repulsive - albeit in different ways.

Bernie didn't do as well as Clinton in the primaries. The Democratic Party organisation didn't like him, but it was the registered Democrat voters who voted for Hillary, rather than Bernie.

ination anyway. Quite a few of them bailed out at the is point, and what's left running the party are the totally unprincipled dregs (and, of course, the Koch brothers).

Not as well as if should have done

candidate. She got three million more popular votes than Trump, and if the Russians had spent a little less on influencing the electorates in what tu rned out to be the swing states, Trump probably wouldn't have got the 60,00

0 extra votes in the lplaces where it turned out to matter.

idate was even more repulsive and inept. Thanks for bringing that up.

ar vote, big-time, and scraped home on the Russian interventions (which he may not have known about, but clearly helped him).

uff

They bought a lot of BS stuff there, and Trump voters are obviously suscept ible to BS stuff.

s

Yet she got three million more popular votes than he did. Trader4 is remark ably stupid.

e he is all they have got. He only appeals to people who are as stupid as y ou are

ster your vote? Or you voted for an even more absurd third part candidate?

But you didn't bother registering you opinion anywhere it could be counted.

epublican Party gerry-mandering may have been thorough enough to let them s alvage enough votes to survive.

ng lunatic,

ain that to you.

,

But I've said that it more complicated than that, so I do realise it. You r eally are remarkably stupid.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

:

e:

te:

08-49e8-

do so in

of the

so much, yet you just told us that you are a Republican? Wow, that's somet hing that would have you hating yourself and angry. Trump IS the Republican Party, he hijacked it and anyone who is still a Republican is just enablin g him.

remember the Tea Party, which was a Koch-funded astro-turfing operation - a nd got rid of anybody who wasn't a repulsive right-wing lunatic.

ith

t

t George Soros is spending money on subverting the Democrats in the way tha t the Koch brothers did with the Tea Party movement may appeal to right win gers because they saw it happen to what used to be the Republican Party, bu t there's zero evidence that anything like this has happened.

ad

ROFL. More lying and denying.

y.

Lying and denying. And WTF would you know? You're just a silly Aussie, with big penis envy of the USA.

ant.

Ask George Soros or Tom Steyer, stupid.

well-trained, healthy and productive employees? Got an example?

road. Even Bernie Sanders is just peddling standard European social democra cy.

betweem multi-party democratic socialism, and ostensibly socialist one par ty states like the former Soviet Union, China and North Korea, this may not register with Trader4 who is just as right-wing, and even more stupid.

ng a repulsive jerk - because all the other candidates were even more repul sive, and inept with it.

GOP

meone

ump's

alternative candidates were even more repulsive - albeit in different ways.

y organisation didn't like him, but it was the registered Democrat voters w ho voted for Hillary, rather than Bernie.

ROFL. Sure, how logical. Some Facebook ads that Russia paid for are suppo sed to have elected Trump, but the fact that the DNC favored Hillary and screwe d Bernie during the primaries, well that didn't have any effect. Oh, and how do we know that the DNC was screwing Bernie? Thanks to Russia disclosing the DNC emails!

omination anyway. Quite a few of them bailed out at the is point, and what' s left running the party are the totally unprincipled dregs (and, of course , the Koch brothers).

gh candidate. She got three million more popular votes than Trump, and if t he Russians had spent a little less on influencing the electorates in what turned out to be the swing states, Trump probably wouldn't have got the 60,

000 extra votes in the lplaces where it turned out to matter.

ndidate was even more repulsive and inept. Thanks for bringing that up.

ular vote, big-time, and scraped home on the Russian interventions (which h e may not have known about, but clearly helped him).

stuff

ptible to BS stuff.

ils

,

rkably stupid.

Hillary lost, stupid.

Whoey Louie wrote in news:0bb53091-94d2-484c- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

You are an idiot, and no excuse in the world will provide you escape velocity from that factual moniker.

Whoey Louie wrote in news:0bb53091-94d2-484c- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

I have five feet of an NYPD broomstick handle to go up in your ass with repeatedly... Till it comes out that other asshole you have above your chin.

te:

ote:

rote:

2d08-49e8-

o do so in public is enough. Crime is crime. Trump is a foreign enemy of the state colluder. He should face a firing squad.

p so much, yet you just told us that you are a Republican? Wow, that's som ething that would have you hating yourself and angry. Trump IS the Republic an Party, he hijacked it and anyone who is still a Republican is just enabl ing him.

- remember the Tea Party, which was a Koch-funded astro-turfing operation - and got rid of anybody who wasn't a repulsive right-wing lunatic.

with

but

hat George Soros is spending money on subverting the Democrats in the way t hat the Koch brothers did with the Tea Party movement may appeal to right w ingers because they saw it happen to what used to be the Republican Party, but there's zero evidence that anything like this has happened.

bad

Trader4 is enthusiastic about reposting his original assertions.

He seems totally incapable of coming up with anything that might look like supporting evidence. Not even a link to some other demented right-winger wh o might share that particular bizarre delusion.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

that George Soros is spending money on subverting the Democrats in the way that the Koch brothers did with the Tea Party movement may appeal to right wingers because they saw it happen to what used to be the Republican Party , but there's zero evidence that anything like this has happened.

a bad

e supporting evidence. Not even a link to some other demented right-winger who might share that particular bizarre delusion.

You're such a pathetic liar. I bring up the FACTS, like that Tom Steyer an d George Soros are the Democrat equivalent of the Koch brothers. It's just that you're a lying lib that denies, denies, denies. You even have the ball s to deny that the libs here have been howling about Trump and Russian collus ion since 2016! I mean, how stupid and pathetic is that lie?

BTW, Google still broken down under or you to busy humping kangaroos?

Whoey Louie wrote in news:e8320194-bde0-48a4- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

Stated correctly... "The party Trump tried to steal".

He is not a true Republican, but you sure are a true idiot.

You funny guy! ROFL. Tried to steal? TRUMP not only stole the party, he owns it. The "party" is now Trump's puppet. He lies and they swear to it. And the Republican Party, your party, is going to nominate him for a second term! Eight five percent of Republicans approve of Trump, that's the only way he has his 42% overall approval number.

BTW, you never answered my question. What do you think would happen if the RNC saw that 10% or 25% of Republicans withdrew their registration, left the party, in disgust, like I did? By being a member of the GOP, you're just enabling and approving of Trump.

Huh? Public dialogue got 'managed' from abroad, and that DOES affect all that followed. Facebook amplifies the effect, but we can't rewind the clock to prove it, we have to theorize (or remain ignorant). Ignorance is scarier than theorizing- it's just plain DARK in that branch.

Weak, and refuted a thousand times already. Popular vote count says Hilary was a good candidate, your 'absmal' adjective is a distortion that bears no relation to any observable reality. It's DARK in that branch, ignoramus.

Prove that it affected the outcome, ie Trump winning. You can't, there is no evidence that it mattered at all, that it changed any votes.

Facebook amplifies the effect,

Facebook was the main vehicle, what was 'amplified"?

but we can't rewind

Seems you're the one theorizing.

There is nothing to refute, it's a proven fact. She was so abysmal, she couldn't be the God awful Trump. And the silly libs still can't get over that.

Popular vote count says Hilary was

BS. Trump was supposed to be easy to beat, a buffoon, incompetent. And look what happened. You sound like just another sore loser. Even worse, the Democrats are doubling down, they are in the process of doing even worse this time. Of the two dozen running, they are all a bunch of radical, screwy lib loons, with the possible exception of Biden. Open border policies, supporting illegal aliens over Americans, sanctuary cities and states, calling for the elimination of ICE, more freebies for everyone that we have no money for, free healthcare for illegal aliens too! And then if Trump wins again, the silly libs will be blaming something, anything, other than their own stupid positions and choices of candidates.

S stuff there affected the outcome.

Trump's actual winning margin in the electorates that mattered, was about 6

0,000 votes. It's impossible to prove that the Russian intervention changed any votes at all, but the Russians wouldn't have done it if they hadn't th ought that it was going to have an effect, and the scale of their intervent ion was big enough that they could have influenced 60,000 votes where it ma ttered.

The actual Russian posts got "liked" and passed on to other people.

in ignorant). Ignorance is scarier than theorizing- it's just plain DARK in that branch.

Obviously. But the theory is plausible.

!

ctive is a distortion that bears no relation to any observable reality. I t's DARK in that branch, ignoramus.

He should have been. Sadly, his buffoonery and ignorance appealed to the de plorables. There were three million fewer of them than there were of people who approved of Hillary, but not enough of them in the three states that w on Trump the electoral college (where the Russians had been particularly ac tive).

Elizabeth Warren is the very antithesis of a liberal loon. You may not like her policies, but she has a raft of well thought out policies (which you a re certain to dislike, because you can't think straight).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Whoey Louie wrote in news:22a74185-8ecd-4a76- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

No. For taking the pic to start with. It was AT THAT MOMENT that it became "classified", you retarded putz.

He broke the law for taking the camera in. He broke the law again for taking the pic. The moment he took the pic, his phone becomes an instrument of espionage, and the pic on it an illegally obtained classified document.

The circumstance are 100% different than Clinton's.

Whoey Louie wrote in news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

You are full of shit and 99.999% of the shit your upper asshole spews is total bullshit.

I am not enabling Trump and I do not approve of him.

You are truly an instigating idiot bastard, and I would surely plug your upper asshole with an NYPD broomstick handle. I might have to beat the f*ck out of you with it first as that urge would overtake my meal delivery temporarily. But then you would surely eat it... all.