Raphjd, Let's Get Back to Basics.

raphjd

:police: Only Joker out ranks me. :police:

pppucci

:police: Only Joker out ranks me. :police:

Is that really your only reponse to the issues raised by the thread? I repeated on multiple occasions I was not threatening you. There is a group here who is asking for your help, and we are not your enemies.

mhorndisk

I am so sorry for my opinion having offended you. I now support the impeachment of Trump and I'm watching CNN. NOT! You claim that you are upset because we aren't buying your "facts." We don't believe you, and we don't believe your "facts." We believe you are confused and promoting lies. Sorry if you don't like how we feel about the situation, but we reserve the right to disagree and defend the President. We believe that you are dead wrong and that you don't know what you're talking about. So what? We have the right to disagree. If you don't like that we are skeptical of you, sorry, not sorry. We just don't believe you or your fake facts. Get over it. We believe you are promoting propaganda. We will not change our opinion just because you "think" you are right. You are wrong. You are beyond wrong, and treading on the territory of silly. We aren't going to take your word for it. We do not Trust you. We have no reason to Trust you. You are fake news. You present fake information. You present information that we do not believe. If you don't like that we disagree with you, we don't care, obviously. It's reached the point that you guys are just whining constantly about the manner in which we disagree, rather than the content of the disagreement itself. You complain all day that we aren't agreeing with you. We just don't.

Devken

The rules need to be enforced. Look at the list of topics, the majority of them are made by the same person, hardly any of the posts contain anything to discuss. The person who started the thread is also the person making three replies in one hour, and that's called shitposting everywhere else on the net.

It's foul language, ad hominems, and literally contentless posts.

mhorndisk

Ok, let's discuss Hillary bleach-bitting 30,000 emails after a subpoena. What do you have to say about that? You want a discussion? Say something. You don't want a discussion. You just want to tell people what to say.

pppucci

@mhorndisk:

I am so sorry for my opinion having offended you. I now support the impeachment of Trump and I'm watching CNN. NOT! You claim that you are upset because we aren't buying your "facts." We don't believe you, and we don't believe your "facts." We believe you are confused and promoting lies. Sorry if you don't like how we feel about the situation, but we reserve the right to disagree and defend the President. We believe that you are dead wrong and that you don't know what you're talking about. So what? We have the right to disagree. If you don't like that we are skeptical of you, sorry, not sorry. We just don't believe you or your fake facts. Get over it. We believe you are promoting propaganda. We will not change our opinion just because you "think" you are right. You are wrong. You are beyond wrong, and treading on the territory of silly. We aren't going to take your word for it. We do not Trust you. We have no reason to Trust you. You are fake news. You present fake information. You present information that we do not believe. If you don't like that we disagree with you, we don't care, obviously. It's reached the point that you guys are just whining constantly about the manner in which we disagree, rather than the content of the disagreement itself. You complain all day that we aren't agreeing with you. We just don't.

Yet you want us to take your word for it as to what is true, but you seldom have anything to back it up except your own beliefs. You did correct point to a NYT piece that reduced the number of agencies involved in the Russia intelligence investigation from 17 to four, and I also admitted that was true. That did not make the entire story a hoax, nor the existence of the report generated by those four agencies. Yet you reject the findings of the report. You reject anything printed in the mainstream media. You don't even cite conservative outlets, like Breitbart. You rat on and on about conspiracy theories involving the Trilateral Commission and the New World Order, but don't even give references for those theories. You just go on and on about whatever comes into your head and when someone does not acknowledge it soon enough with a reply, you post one yourself that adds nothing to the original post
Senator Daniel Moynihan said, "Every man is entitled to his opinion, but not to his own facts."
Yet that is exactly what you do, especially when rejecting data presented by non-partisan third parties. Your reply to the evaluation of the Clinton foundation by the independent Charity Watchdog Group was "That simply is not true."
I am not offended by your beliefs, and I do think you are sincere. But you clearly are not here to debate, but to
proselytize, You are like a Jehovah's Witness for the alt-right.
This is supposed to be a Politics and Debate forum, not a soapbox for those with the fastest fingers.

sutieday

Nice to see some posters have been warned, and it's the typical rule breakers.

pppucci

@mhorndisk:

Ok, let's discuss Hillary bleach-bitting 30,000 emails after a subpoena. What do you have to say about that? You want a discussion? Say something. You don't want a discussion. You just want to tell people what to say.

What in the world does that have to do with anything in this thread? You want to talk about that, fine–Post a new topic. You are very good at that,

mhorndisk

I honestly don't care if you believe what I do. I will not sit here and listen to proven lies.

The Russia story for instance, you guys have been dead-set on, now it's not even being talked about in the News. It's things like that, that you guys constantly promote, and assert as fact, that destroys your credibility, because it's propaganda, and there's no proof. And yet you keep pressing, and keep on with it, saying, "but, but, but maybe, it's possible." And there you go deflecting off of Hillary's emails. She deleted 30K after a subpoena. And you continue on pointing the finger at ME for mentioning it, when YOU asked for a debate. You are deflecting again, as always. You didn't like my post about how the top ten most violent cities were run by liberals, the top ten states with bankruptcy issues are run by liberals, and the top ten cities with poverty issues are run by liberals. You didn't respond because you don't care about debate. You only care about trashing the President. Just stop. Our President is awesome and when you do that, I'll be here defending him. You only want to hear and spew negative. Anything positive, like the jobs or economy growing, no matter what it is, you just find some way to bash him. It's getting really old.

Devken

@mhorndisk:

I honestly don't care if you believe what I do. I will not sit here and listen to proven lies.

Who are you even replying to? You're like a one-trick pony bleating about trump and hillary… even in a thread that has jack-shit to do with Hillary and Trump.

mhorndisk

I'm replying to YOU. Because you can't answer why it's ok for Hillary to delete 30K emails after an investigation is launched against her. Answer the question. I don't want to hear your excuses about the democrat Comey who didn't recommend an indictment. I want you to tell me WHY you think it's ok for her to delete those emails after a subpoena. Go ahead… How is that not an obstruction of justice? I want an answer.

pppucci

@mhorndisk:

I honestly don't care if you believe what I do. I will not sit here and listen to proven lies.

The Russia story for instance, you guys have been dead-set on, now it's not even being talked about in the News. It's things like that, that you guys constantly promote, and assert as fact, that destroys your credibility, because it's propaganda, and there's no proof. And yet you keep pressing, and keep on with it, saying, "but, but, but maybe, it's possible." And there you go deflecting off of Hillary's emails. She deleted 30K after a subpoena. And you continue on pointing the finger at ME for mentioning it, when YOU asked for a debate. You are deflecting again, as always. You didn't like my post about how the top ten most violent cities were run by liberals, the top ten states with bankruptcy issues are run by liberals, and the top ten cities with poverty issues are run by liberals. You didn't respond because you don't care about debate. You only care about trashing the President. Just stop. Our President is awesome and when you do that, I'll be here defending him. You only want to hear and spew negative. Anything positive, like the jobs or economy growing, no matter what it is, you just find some way to bash him. It's getting really old.

I will admit nothing has been proven about Russian collusion with the Trump Campaign. The reason it is not being talked about is that we on the brink of a nuclear crisis with North Korea. Trump and his cohorts are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but the investigation is ongoing. We don't hear much about it because Mueller runs a tight ship and will not tolerate leaks.
I can talk all day about Hillary deleting 30,000 emails. The FBI said that while there probably were some work-related emails that were deleted, it was not done with malignant intention to obstruct or avoid investigation.
What, in your wildest dreams do you think was deleted? Is she the queen of the NWO? The fourth pillar of the trilateral commission? That she was being bribed by the Saudi's or Russians or Norwegians? What? What? and more importantly, How the hell does it matter in July of 2017?
Do you think if she were proven guilty of some crime, all the liberals in the world would melt like the Wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz? I really don't know how it matters now. But we can talk about it. What do you have to say except that she deleted 30,000 emails? Huh?

sutieday

The topic of this post was a critique of the observed activity constantly occurring on this board, as described by the OP.

Why is it that posters like mhorndisk can just interject into a board and redirect the topic to something non-relevant to the OP's topic? Isn't that hijacking? This among with other issues is why this board is going under.

Devken

@mhorndisk:

I'm replying to YOU. Because you can't answer why it's ok for Hillary to delete 30K emails after an investigation is launched against her. Answer the question. I don't want to hear your excuses about the democrat Comey who didn't recommend an indictment. I want you to tell me WHY you think it's ok for her to delete those emails after a subpoena. Go ahead… How is that not an obstruction of justice? I want an answer.

pppucci

@mhorndisk:

I'm replying to YOU. Because you can't answer why it's ok for Hillary to delete 30K emails after an investigation is launched against her. Answer the question. I don't want to hear your excuses about the democrat Comey who didn't recommend an indictment. I want you to tell me WHY you think it's ok for her to delete those emails after a subpoena. Go ahead… How is that not an obstruction of justice? I want an answer.

Here is you answer, plain and simple. And see if you will accept this fact. Read the damn subpoena:
http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/Kendall.Clinton%20Subpoena%20-%202015.03.04.pdf
It asks for emails from her server that were relevant to the Benghazi investigation. It did not ask for every email on that server.
You again are just repeating the accusations made by Trump.

And, BTW, I told you to start a new topic. This discussion does not belong here, and I have fallen into your trap.

Frederick

@sutieday:

The topic of this post was a critique of the observed activity constantly occurring on this board, as described by the OP.

Why is it that posters like mhorndisk can just interject into a board and redirect the topic to something non-relevant to the OP's topic? Isn't that hijacking? This among with other issues is why this board is going under.

This board IS going under.. as far as the loser moonbats are concerned. You are fighting a losing battle.
Sometimes I wonder if DrW is actually Kim JongUn.

mhorndisk

It matters. You are trying to act like it doesn't. What she did was a felony, and the corruption at the top keeps going on. You cannot excuse her just because you don't understand why she would have done it (like she's some royal bee). We need to stop the criminal behavior, and we cannot allow people to be above the law. All of us have to follow the laws, and if we allow people to break the laws, then why do we even have them? Let's just break out into total chaos then and kill everyone! Should we just accept it as daily life? No. Should we just let criminals get away with it? No. The fact that you don't seem to care is disturbing. If someone you trusted let your family be put into danger and it happened to you, then you'd realize how wrong it is. Like Benghazi. Those families lost their sons. If it was your son, you'd probably care, but since it isn't, it doesn't seem to matter to you. You're basically slapping them in the face when they are seeking justice, and telling them that it doesn't matter. It's a horrendous attitude.

mhorndisk

I'm not reading a report written by Democrats. I'm listening to the families of the victims. It's heart breaking, and yet you ignore their testimony.

EDIT: These are the people that give their lives to defend you, and you're calling them liars. Hillary never offered her life to defend anyone.

EDIT: If you'd like to put the points of the report you linked to in your own words, in a summary, I might consider it.

pppucci

@mhorndisk:

I'm not reading a report written by Democrats. I'm listening to the families of the victims. It's heart breaking, and yet you ignore their testimony.

EDIT: These are the people that give their lives to defend you, and you're calling them liars. Hillary never offered her life to defend anyone.

EDIT: If you'd like to put the points of the report you linked to in your own words, in a summary, I might consider it.

You not only reject known facts. You are ignorant of them. The link I sent you is the famous subpoena you keep mentioning. That was issued by a a Republican-Chaired Congressional Committee. It is not a report. You did not even click on the link, did you? And I am the one spouting lies and ignoring facts? This is exactly what I am talking about. And I am starting a new thread so you cant rant there and get off of this one.

Frederick

@pppucci:

@mhorndisk:

I'm replying to YOU. Because you can't answer why it's ok for Hillary to delete 30K emails after an investigation is launched against her. Answer the question. I don't want to hear your excuses about the democrat Comey who didn't recommend an indictment. I want you to tell me WHY you think it's ok for her to delete those emails after a subpoena. Go ahead… How is that not an obstruction of justice? I want an answer.

Here is you answer, plain and simple. And see if you will accept this fact. Read the damn subpoena:
http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/Kendall.Clinton%20Subpoena%20-%202015.03.04.pdf
It asks for emails from her server that were relevant to the Benghazi investigation. It did not ask for every email on that server.
You again are just repeating the accusations made by Trump.

And, BTW, I told you to start a new topic. This discussion does not belong here, and I have fallen into your trap.

AGAIN.. you are twisting and spinning reality:
Here's REALITY for you:

For the time period of January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012
ANY and ALL documents in your posession, and/or sent from or received by the email address "[email protected]",
"[email protected]," or any other email address or communications device used by you or another on your behalf,
referring or relating to (Libya)

Let me break this long winded statement down:
It orders Hillary to turn over all her documents emails from the years 2011 and 2012.
This is to also include communications made by her or on her behalf related to Libya.

I will grant you that this is a bit confusing. This is typical of government speak.
You are interpreting this order as being restrictive in that they only wanted those e-mails that were related to Libya.
That is not what it says. It says it wants ALL of HER communications of 2011 and 2012.
It also wants the communications made on her behalf if they are related to Libya.

It is absurd to interpret that as giving her the right to not only DELETE, but also make it impossible for anybody, including the FBI and CIA, from getting physical possession of her hard drives to retrieve that DELETED information by using "bleach bit" software. There is a world of difference between not turning something over and DELETING it so it can't be turned over.
She had no business deleting any communications off that server which she illegally had in her own home. This is one reason why it is illegal for the servers to be in private homes such as Hillary's basement. It's not only for security from hackers, but also to ensure that the private person can't go and delete things that don't belong to them. Imagine if Nixon just deleted or burned those "Watergate" tapes. That would put him in prison if he was not a President at the time. Nixon didn't even delete / eliminate the tapes. Perhaps he WOULD have if he could have done it without anybody finding out. In Hillary's case, she wasn't a president, and we DID find out.
Additionally, Hillary told several lies about the e-mails and devices, including that she only used ONE mobile communications device, when in fact she used something like 15 of them. (She destroyed them with a hammer which was to cover up what she was leaking. The information on them would have already been leaked.. so wouldn't it be nice for the US Government to KNOW what was leaked? Not possible since she took a hammer to them. Now only the hackers know what was leaked). She lied about the number of e-mails. She had a private computer firm without security clearance going over those communications.
Even if Congress had not subpoena's those communications, she STILL had no legal authority to delete them. As it turns out, there were many very damaging e-mails coming and going out of her e-mail accounts - including how they plotted to steal the nomination from Bernie Sanders, and pay people to disrupt Trump's rallies (those were obviously not part of thw 2011-2012 subpoena, but she still had no right to DELETE them.. they probably would have been subpoenaed later.. you can't subpoena something that no longer exists.. )
Also, we later found out that COPIES of these deleted e-mails were floating around all over the place, including on the computers of pedo Anthony Weiner, husband of Huma Abedin (Hillary's closest advisor).

I could go on, but clearly Hillary grossly violated the law, and she should never had been eligible to be a candidate while under investigation. This is why that corrupt former Attorney General Lorettta Shudbee Lynch, used the word "matter" instead of "investigation".