Hillary Clinton stumbles -- will her campaign follow? cnn front page

[SpursforSix]

Paul's fantasy deathpool value just skyrocketed.

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s679/thefuzzylumpkins/alll_zpsjbkpkiml.png

[ElNono]

:lol this tin foil hat stuff is hilarious... so why couldn't the scrubbing could've been for another client?

[TheSanityAnnex]

:lol this tin foil hat stuff is hilarious... so why couldn't the scrubbing could've been for another client?

Another client is just far less plausible considering the timing of it all. Why would he ask how to scrub emails illegally the day after his employer Clinton found out the results of the Benghazi committee? Why would Combetta delete all of his posts and accounts linked to his email address when this broke if it were another client?

[Reck]

TSA's full time job is an interesting one. :lol

[ElNono]

Another client is just far less plausible considering the timing of it all. Why would he ask how to scrub emails illegally the day after his employer Clinton found out the results of the Benghazi committee? Why would Combetta delete all of his posts and accounts linked to his email address when this broke if it were another client?

There's zero evidence it's "far less plausible". There's actually way more plausible, reasonable explanations (ie: confidentiality, employement agreements) to the accounts cleanup, considering his persona was linked to the alias.

This is when we get to "what you believe, what he believes", and that's exactly what I'm saying about the vagueness of the evidence.

[Reck]

TSA has El defending the old hag. :lmao

I've seen it all.

[TheSanityAnnex]

TSA has El defending the old hag. :lmao

I've seen it all.
He's not defending. He'll tell you that himself.

[ElNono]

:lol I'm not defending her at all, but all I'm getting from this thing is seemingly that Shillary is shady, corrupt and a liar... I mean, really? who knew?

Do you really need Reddit to dig through this to figure it out?

What's really remarkable, IMO, is that Congress seemingly will get back into this thing.

The fact that the vast majority of people don't really give a shit about "email-gate" anymore is largely due to Congress running this thing to the ground. It's similar to Benghazi in a lot of ways.

[pgardn]

Hillary RAISED $50M more than Trash

Democrats are really not supposed to brag about this.

[TheSanityAnnex]

There's zero evidence it's "far less plausible". There's actually way more plausible, reasonable explanations (ie: confidentiality, employement agreements) to the accounts cleanup, considering his persona was linked to the alias.

This is when we get to "what you believe, what he believes", and that's exactly what I'm saying about the vagueness of the evidence.
Why would he ask how to scrub emails illegally the day after his employer Clinton found out the results of the Benghazi committee? You really think it is more plausible that was just coincidence and he was asking how to scrub for another client?

[ElNono]

Why would he ask how to scrub emails illegally the day after his employer Clinton found out the results of the Benghazi committee? You really think it is more plausible that was just coincidence and he was asking how to scrub for another client?

How do you know how many clients he was working for at the time? Isn't this dude an employee of a contractor?

The whole point is that if you're going to go into potentially a criminal indictment, you need much better evidence than a reddit post that doesn't name Shillary, nor clearly indicates it was a request specifically for her.

[TheSanityAnnex]

:lol I'm not defending her at all, but all I'm getting from this thing is seemingly that Shillary is shady, corrupt and a liar... I mean, really? who knew?

Do you really need Reddit to dig through this to figure it out?

What's really remarkable, IMO, is that Congress seemingly will get back into this thing.

The fact that the vast majority of people don't really give a shit about "email-gate" anymore is largely due to Congress running this thing to the ground. It's similar to Benghazi in a lot of ways.
Wrong. The majority of people do give a shit about Hillary Clinton's emails. Out of all concerns with Clinton it is the top one.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-nearly-70-percent-have-concerns-about-trump-s-controversial-n651876

[TheSanityAnnex]

How do you know how many clients he was working for at the time? Isn't this dude an employee of a contractor?

The whole point is that if you're going to go into potentially a criminal indictment, you need much better evidence than a reddit post that doesn't name Shillary, nor clearly indicates it was a request specifically for her.

Without her being named of course it won't lead to an indictment. Put an indictment aside, given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

[TheSanityAnnex]

With as stupid and sloppy Combetta was and how poorly Clinton's server was set up it would not surprise me in the least if Assange's October surprise is hacked email correspondence between Combetta and Clinton incriminating her.

[ElNono]

Wrong. The majority of people do give a shit about Hillary Clinton's emails. Out of all concerns with Clinton it is the top one.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-nearly-70-percent-have-concerns-about-trump-s-controversial-n651876

It's only a "major" concern for 29% of people. That's basically the republican base.

Here's another look from Pew at what people mostly care about candidates:

http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/21/in-their-own-words-why-voters-support-and-have-concerns-about-clinton-and-trump/

Basically, what we already knew: one is not the other.

[Reck]

Wrong. The majority of people do give a shit about Hillary Clinton's emails. Out of all concerns with Clinton it is the top one.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-nearly-70-percent-have-concerns-about-trump-s-controversial-n651876

A single poll is not indicative of how the rest of country feels about it.

You can do 5 different polls and you get 5 different results.

The ordinary American person is ready to move on from this. The only people who seem to really be invested in this are far leaning republicans.

[ElNono]

Without her being named of course it won't lead to an indictment. Put an indictment aside, given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

"Plausible" won't get you anywhere. You either have the evidence or you don't. In this case, so far, you don't.

[TheSanityAnnex]

A single poll is not indicative of how the rest of country feels about it.

You can do 5 different polls and you get 5 different results.

The ordinary American person is ready to move on from this. The only people who seem to really be invested in this are far leaning republicans.
Find me a poll on Clinton concerns that doesn't have the top concern "liar". What's the first word people polled think of when they hear Hillary Clinton....liar/dishonest.

[TheSanityAnnex]

"Plausible" won't get you anywhere. You either have the evidence or you don't. In this case, so far, you don't.
I asked for your opinion putting the possibility of an indictment aside. Again, putting an indictment aside, given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

[Reck]

Find me a poll on Clinton concerns that doesn't have the top concern "liar". What's the first word people polled think of when they hear Hillary Clinton....liar/dishonest.

Now you're doing mental gymnastics.

Who gives a shit that people's top concern of Hillary is that she's a liar. Duh, part of being a politician means you are a conniving bitch. Rare exceptions are Bernie and Warren bless their hearts.

I dont know how you go from "majority of people care about her emails" to liar being a top concern.

So she's a liar. She was a big liar even before the email server. I dont see how that plays into how people feel about the email story which is that most want to move on.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

Reddit is cooperating http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/297106-oversight-orders-reddit-to-preserve-deleted-posts-in-clinton-probe

[TheSanityAnnex]

Now you're doing mental gymnastics.

Who gives a shit that people's top concern of Hillary is that she's a liar. Duh, part of being a politician means you are a conniving bitch. Rare exceptions are Bernie and Warren bless their hearts.

I dont know how you go from "majority of people care about her emails" to liar being a top concern.

So she's a liar. She was a big liar even before the email server. I dont see how that plays into how people feel about the email story which is that most want to move on.

Reck I'm really having a hard time biting my tongue and not calling you stupid. People think she's a liar because of the emails. You're doing mental gymnastics trying to separate the two.

[Reck]

Reck I'm really having a hard time biting my tongue and not calling you stupid. People think she's a liar because of the emails. You're doing mental gymnastics trying to separate the two.

Let me help you then. No stupid, that's not the reason why people think she's a liar.

She had that perception long before now. People do not trust the Clintons because they are too secretive. They dont like the media or the people in on their business. When they do, they get mad.

That's why they have such shitty overview. The email thing just heightens that perception of them.

Are you new?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Let me help you then. No stupid, that's not the reason why people think she's a liar.

She had that perception long before now. People do not trust the Clintons because they are too secretive. They dont like the media or the people in on their business. When they do, they get mad.

That's why they have such shitty overview. The email thing just heightens that perception of them.

Are you new?
Do you have any polls showing the majority of Americans aren't concerned with her use and set up of a private server?

[Winehole23]

El Nono posted one on the previous page -- short term memory loss?

[Reck]

Do you have any polls showing the majority of Americans aren't concerned with her use and set up of a private server?


El Nono posted one on the previous page -- short term memory loss?

Oh for fuck's sake. :lmao :lmao

[TheSanityAnnex]

El Nono posted one on the previous page -- short term memory loss?
He did not provide a poll asking Americans what their top concern was with Clinton. He provided a poll that asked an open ended to question to only Clinton supporters that asked what their concerns were with their own candidate. So no, this does not satisfy my question to Reck.

http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/21/in-their-own-words-why-voters-support-and-have-concerns-about-clinton-and-trump/campaign_2/

[TheSanityAnnex]

Oh for fuck's sake. :lmao :lmao
You may want to look at the poll before jizzing your pants. When you come down from your premature ejaculation get back to finding the poll I asked for.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Email poll
http://www.westernjournalism.com/new-poll-shows-what-americans-think-of-clintons-use-of-private-email-server/

[TheSanityAnnex]

https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/07/30/poll-results-hillary-clinton/

How serious of a problem do you think it is that Hillary Clinton used a personal email address to conduct government business while working as Secretary of State?
Very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35%
Somewhat serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25%
Not very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16%
Not serious at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16%
Not sure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9%

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/195596/email-dominates-americans-heard-clinton.aspx

[Reck]

He did not provide a poll asking Americans what their top concern was with Clinton. He provided a poll that asked an open ended to question to only Clinton supporters that asked what their concerns were with their own candidate. So no, this does not satisfy my question to Reck.

http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/21/in-their-own-words-why-voters-support-and-have-concerns-about-clinton-and-trump/campaign_2/

Fail

Methodology Survey conducted August 16-September 12, 2016 The American Trends Panel (ATP), created by the Pew Research Center, is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults living in households. Respondents who self-identify as internet users and who provided an email address participate in the panel via monthly self-administered Web surveys, and those who do not use the internet or decline to provide an email address participate via the mail. The panel is being managed by Abt SRBI.


The analysis in this report is based on 4,538 respondents, including 3,941 registered voters, who participated in the August 16-September 12, 2016 wave of the panel (4,195 by Web and 343 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,538 respondents is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points and the margin of sampling error among registered voters is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.



You may want to look at the poll before jizzing your pants. When you come down from your premature ejaculation get back to finding the poll I asked for.

How you feeling now boss?

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57838e50e4b01edea78e82c3

[Reck]

https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/07/30/poll-results-hillary-clinton/

How serious of a problem do you think it is that Hillary Clinton used a personal email address to conduct government business while working as Secretary of State?
Very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35%
Somewhat serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25%
Not very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16%
Not serious at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16%
Not sure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9%


http://www.gallup.com/poll/195596/email-dominates-americans-heard-clinton.aspx

You are such a failure.

That is in line with what El posted. His link says about 29%. Yours says 35%. (I'm giving you the max)

That's in line with the sentiment of how people feel about the email server now.

That is a farcry to what you said. You said the majority of people are concerned.

Since when did 29 or 35 percent become a majority?

Come to dada.

[Reck]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57838e50e4b01edea78e82c3

Resorting to a july poll because he cant find relevant and fresh ones. :lol

[TheSanityAnnex]

Fail

Methodology

Survey conducted August 16-September 12, 2016

The American Trends Panel (ATP), created by the Pew Research Center, is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults living in households. Respondents who self-identify as internet users and who provided an email address participate in the panel via monthly self-administered Web surveys, and those who do not use the internet or decline to provide an email address participate via the mail. The panel is being managed by Abt SRBI.


The analysis in this report is based on 4,538 respondents, including 3,941 registered voters, who participated in the August 16-September 12, 2016 wave of the panel (4,195 by Web and 343 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,538 respondents is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points and the margin of sampling error among registered voters is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.




How you feeling now boss?

I've bitten my tongue long enough. You are the stupidest fucking poster in the political forum and you prove it day after day.

And while you support Clinton for President, what, if anything, concerns you about the candidate?

http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s679/thefuzzylumpkins/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsr1nycnv2.png

Open ended questions asked only of those who support/lean toward Clinton


How you feeling now you boss dipshit?

[Reck]

I've bitten my tongue long enough. You are the stupidest fucking poster in the political forum and you prove it day after day.

And while you support Clinton for President, what, if anything, concerns you about the candidate?

http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s679/thefuzzylumpkins/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsr1nycnv2.png

Open ended questions asked only of those who support/lean toward Clinton


How you feeling now you boss dipshit?

This doesn't even show that their concerns are about emails or servers. In fact, it's not even mentioned.

Damn you are so dumb. And so easy.

[Reck]

Also adress all my other posts, genius.

Tell me how 30% is the new majority. Mr. July. :lmao

[TheSanityAnnex]

You are such a failure.

That is in line with what El posted. His link says about 29%. Yours says 35%. (I'm giving you the max)

That's in line with the sentiment of how people feel about the email server now.

That is a farcry to what you said. You said the majority of people are concerned.

Since when did 29 or 35 percent become a majority?

Come to dada.

You are on a roll with the self ownage tonight.

60% is and always has been a majority.

Just log off and start with a clean slate tomorrow. This is not going well for you.

[TheSanityAnnex]

This doesn't even show that their concerns are about emails or servers. In fact, it's not even mentioned.

Damn you are so dumb. And so easy.
I didn't post it to show that was their concern. It only asked Clinton supporters/leaners an open ended question what their concerns were. It did not ask all Americans therefore it does not satisfy my question of all American me feelings.

Log off dude, you are going full retard.

[Reck]

You are on a roll with the self ownage tonight.

60% is and always has been a majority.

Just log off and start with a clean slate tomorrow. This is not going well for you.

And where are you getting 60 percent?

From your own cherry picked 3 month old poll?

You know you're done when you star proclaiming self victory when everything that you have posted have been throughly rebuked. :lol

[TheSanityAnnex]

Also adress all my other posts, genius.

Tell me how 30% is the new majority. Mr. July. :lmao
35% very serious + 25% somewhat serious = 60% concerned dipshit

adding emojis after your stupidity isn't helping you one bit either

[TheSanityAnnex]

And where are you getting 60 percent?

From your own cherry picked 3 month old poll?

You know you're done when you star proclaiming self victory when everything that you have posted have been throughly rebuked. :lol Kori Ellis give this man a dunce cap emoji under his username.

[Reck]

I didn't post it to show that was their concern. It only asked Clinton supporters/leaners an open ended question what their concerns were. It did not ask all Americans therefore it does not satisfy my question of all American me feelings.

Log off dude, you are going full retard.

Are you this dense?

Your own graphic says "only 3% shown here."

And it goes on to say "see topline to see full set of responses."

Meaning, asshole, that while yes, those sets of questions only had either candidates supporters, it doesn't lump the rest of the correspondents.

And as I already showed in this thread, this was done nationally with RANDOMLY picked participants.

Further fucking more. ElNono pointed out an specific statistic. The 29%. Which by the way doesn't appear on your little graph so what does that tell you?

Time to pull that trigger mein.

[Reck]

Kori Ellis (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=6) give this man a dunce cap emoji under his username.

I dont think calling in backup is going to do you any good.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Are you this dense?

Your own graphic says "only 3% shown here."

And it goes on to say "see topline to see full set of responses."

Meaning, asshole, that while yes, those sets of questions only had either candidates supporters, it doesn't lump the rest of the correspondents.

And as I already showed in this thread, this was done nationally with RANDOMLY picked participants.

Further fucking more. ElNono pointed out an specific statistic. The 29%. Which by the way doesn't appear on your little graph so what does that tell you?

Time to pull that trigger mein.
:rollin I didn't think it was possible but you did it again :rollin

[Reck]

:rollin I didn't think it was possible but you did it again :rollin

This tells me you're given up the ghost.

What was that you said? Adding emojis doesn't help your stupidity. :lmao

[ElNono]

I asked for your opinion putting the possibility of an indictment aside. Again, putting an indictment aside, given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

Look, I always thought Shillary is a crook. But what I think it's besides the point. I won't tell you to stop jacking off dreaming of Shillary sinking due to that Reddit post, the reality is that she won't due to that, IMO. That's my opinion.

I've said it before, but let me repeat it again, I don't think she can fall any deeper in the mistrust/crook department, so unless there's a youtube video of her throwing kittens off a cliff AND Trump doesn't manage to fuck it up, I don't really see this affecting her much. She's really bottom of the barrel as it is.

[ElNono]

He did not provide a poll asking Americans what their top concern was with Clinton. He provided a poll that asked an open ended to question to only Clinton supporters that asked what their concerns were with their own candidate. So no, this does not satisfy my question to Reck.

http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/21/in-their-own-words-why-voters-support-and-have-concerns-about-clinton-and-trump/campaign_2/

It does, however, shows that when you don't ask specifically about email-gate, nobody really gives enough of a crap to bring it up.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Look, I always thought Shillary is a crook. But what I think it's besides the point. I won't tell you to stop jacking off dreaming of Shillary sinking due to that Reddit post, the reality is that she won't due to that, IMO. That's my opinion.

I've said it before, but let me repeat it again, I don't think she can fall any deeper in the mistrust/crook department, so unless there's a youtube video of her throwing kittens off a cliff AND Trump doesn't manage to fuck it up, I don't really see this affecting her much. She's really bottom of the barrel as it is.
My question was straightforward and simple. I didn't ask you if you thought she was a crook and I didn't ask you if this would affect her much. I asked you that given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

[ElNono]

My question was straightforward and simple. I didn't ask you if you thought she was a crook and I didn't ask you if this would affect her much. I asked you that given the timing of the Benghazi committee results requesting her emails the day before is it more plausible he is talking about his client Hillary Clinton or another client?

I already answered that: could be anybody. There's zero evidence it's Shillary or any other client.

[TheSanityAnnex]

It does, however, shows that when you don't ask specifically about email-gate, nobody really gives enough of a crap to bring it up.

It shows nobody voting for/leaning towards Hillary gave enough of a crap to bring it up specifically. Where are the concerns about Hillary by Trump supporters, Republicans, and independents?

[ElNono]

But you're still missing the whole point: what you or I think is irrelevant. What really matters is: can she go down due to that? is that the fabled "smoking gun"?

I don't think it's anywhere near close. Maybe they'll be more leaks in the forthcoming weeks or months and one will show up, but that one isn't it.

Ultimately, what do you care about? What you or I think? or Shillary going down in flames? I'm pretty sure it's the latter.

[TheSanityAnnex]

I already answered that: could be anybody. There's zero evidence it's Shillary or any other client.
You didn't answer it. Which is more plausible?

[ElNono]

It shows nobody voting for/leaning towards Hillary gave enough of a crap to bring it up specifically. Where are the concerns about Hillary by Trump supporters, Republicans, and independents?

I'm sure Republicans are all over it... 29%, 35% sound reasonable... that should tell you also where independents are on this.

And, IMO, it's not that they don't care, but the alternative is Trump on the other end of the ballot, tbh...

[ElNono]

You didn't answer it. Which is more plausible?

I did answer it. You might not like the answer, and it might not be one of the canned answers you proposed, but that's your problem.

[TheSanityAnnex]

I'm sure Republicans are all over it... 29%, 35% sound reasonable... that should tell you also where independents are on this.

And, IMO, it's not that they don't care, but the alternative is Trump on the other end of the ballot, tbh...
I get that. And I'm not coming after you for the poll but using that to say nobody cares about her emails is misleading considering the limited poll respondents. It sent Reck into a tailspin.

[TheSanityAnnex]

I did answer it. You might not like the answer, and it might not be one of the canned answers you proposed, but that's your problem.
I'm like your non-answer. I'm fine with it :bobo

[ElNono]

I get that. And I'm not coming after you for the poll but using that to say nobody cares about her emails is misleading considering the limited poll respondents. It sent Reck into a tailspin.

This election got so bad, shit like this flies under the radar. It's like Trump calling Messicans rapists. They're both still going strong and one of them is going to be the next prez... disgusting.

[ElNono]

I do, however, blame the GOP section of Congress for overdoing a lot of this stuff... ultra-politicizes this stuff, removes meaning from it.

Just as I blame the Dem section of Congress for taking a shit on our privacy rights.

[Reck]

This TSA fucker is a dumbass.

You were proven wrong. Your 35% suddenly became 60 out of thin air after you exhausted all possible comeback.

Also, have you ever heard of coincidences? The fact that the days of the event in question are close doesn't prove shit. Only in your little mind are you connecting the two to be linked.

Yes, great idea, let me, a professional IT guy jump online and ask for help doing something highly questionable and illegal. No one will notice.

You're better off mulling over what your next conspiracy is going to be about. Am I right or am I wrong? :lol

[ElNono]

Yes, great idea, let me, a professional IT guy jump online and ask for help doing something highly questionable and illegal. No one will notice.

He wouldn't be the first guy that thought he was posting anonymously and was eventually found out in the interwebs...

Then again, scrubbing archived email addresses isn't illegal per-se, and nowhere on his post he mentions subpoenas, etc. That's why the post itself isn't really incriminating.

The whole professional IT guy is highly questionable too, IMO, not because of asking questions on Reddit, but particularly the information he provided with the question: At least when it comes to IT security, you don't let other people know you're handling VIPs, that makes you a target. I stopped working specifically in IT security a couple years ago, but I can only imagine the bar is higher at this point, with all the hacks going around.

So, yeah, the guy is probably a dumbass. But that's not necessarily a crime.

[spurraider21]

I'm like your non-answer. I'm fine with it :bobo
i just flipped a coin. was it heads or tails? ANSWER IT DONT DODGE :madrun

[TheSanityAnnex]

This TSA fucker is a dumbass.

You were proven wrong. Your 35% suddenly became 60 out of thin air after you exhausted all possible comeback.

Also, have you ever heard of coincidences? The fact that the days of the event in question are close doesn't prove shit. Only in your little mind are you connecting the two to be linked.

Yes, great idea, let me, a professional IT guy jump online and ask for help doing something highly questionable and illegal. No one will notice.

You're better off mulling over what your next conspiracy is going to be about. Am I right or am I wrong? :lol

I thought you were maybe just drunk last night and were being dumb because of that, but it appears you are just dumb all the time. Use a calculator if you are having trouble with simple addition.


https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/07/30/poll-results-hillary-clinton/

How serious of a problem do you think it is that Hillary Clinton used a personal email address to conduct government business while working as Secretary of State?
Very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35%
Somewhat serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...25%


You did get one thing right though, Mark Combetta, a professional IT guy did go online and ask for help on altering archived emails. Unless you don't think he did of course, which would make you wrong again.

Do you think that was Mark Combetta asking those questions or do you think this is all fabricated?

[TheSanityAnnex]

He wouldn't be the first guy that thought he was posting anonymously and was eventually found out in the interwebs...

Then again, scrubbing archived email addresses isn't illegal per-se, and nowhere on his post he mentions subpoenas, etc. That's why the post itself isn't really incriminating.

The whole professional IT guy is highly questionable too, IMO, not because of asking questions on Reddit, but particularly the information he provided with the question: At least when it comes to IT security, you don't let other people know you're handling VIPs, that makes you a target. I stopped working specifically in IT security a couple years ago, but I can only imagine the bar is higher at this point, with all the hacks going around.

So, yeah, the guy is probably a dumbass. But that's not necessarily a crime.

The emails Assange has been releasing lead me to believe someone had access to the entire server for a long long time. October should be interesting.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

The emails Assange has been releasing lead me to believe someone had access to the entire server for a long long time. October should be interesting.

Why would he wait till October? And furthermore, why does anti-American Assange want Trump to win?

[ElNono]

The emails Assange has been releasing lead me to believe someone had access to the entire server for a long long time. October should be interesting.

Nothing is interesting in this race anymore, IMO. There's 10000x things more interesting than following that trainwreck, tbh


Why would he wait till October? And furthermore, why does anti-American Assange want Trump to win?

He hates Shillary. The reason why has already been posted on one of the Assange threads.

[boutons_deux]

Hillary's campaign ain't stumbling this week. regaining momentum, even her "honesty" approval is way up.

#NeverTrash

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Nothing is interesting in this race anymore, IMO. There's 10000x things more interesting than following that trainwreck, tbh



He hates Shillary. The reason why has already been posted on one of the Assange threads.
he's kinda right about one thing, she voted with Bush to go into Iraq and agreed we needed to get Saddam's WMDs... then she denied it later... liar.

[boutons_deux]

then she denied it later... liar.

link?

[boutons_deux]

The problem for Trump is that even if he wins them, those states aren't enough.

If Trump wins all three — plus Iowa, which is also a tossup in recent polls, and Florida, where Clinton appears to hold a slight lead — he would still fall short of a majority of electoral votes.

To get a majority he needs to do all that and break the Democrats' hold on one of the states they have repeatedly won in recent elections.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/trump-could-win-these-key-battleground-states-but-clinton-would-still-beat-him/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[UNT Eagles 2016]

The problem for Trump is that even if he wins them, those states aren't enough.

If Trump wins all three — plus Iowa, which is also a tossup in recent polls, and Florida, where Clinton appears to hold a slight lead — he would still fall short of a majority of electoral votes.

To get a majority he needs to do all that and break the Democrats' hold on one of the states they have repeatedly won in recent elections.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/trump-could-win-these-key-battleground-states-but-clinton-would-still-beat-him/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29



no... Trump is up in FL (though by less than a point overall at the moment, but most of the pro-HRC polls are older), IA, OH (big time) and NV... all those bring him up to 268 vs HRC's 272. If Trump hauls in that extra electoral vote in Maine E2, it's Trump 269, HRC 271.


If and when those states start going from tossup/slight Trump to likely Trump, he'll just need one more domino to fall. Could be CO, VA, MI, WI, PA (looking less likely), NH (doubtful because it's more blue than media gives it credit for) or none. If it's none, then HRC wins by a hair. If one of those does go Trump, then Trump wins.

[Reck]

I thought you were maybe just drunk last night and were being dumb because of that, but it appears you are just dumb all the time. Use a calculator if you are having trouble with simple addition.


https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/07/30/poll-results-hillary-clinton/

How serious of a problem do you think it is that Hillary Clinton used a personal email address to conduct government business while working as Secretary of State?
Very serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35%
Somewhat serious . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...25%


You did get one thing right though, Mark Combetta, a professional IT guy did go online and ask for help on altering archived emails. Unless you don't think he did of course, which would make you wrong again.

Do you think that was Mark Combetta asking those questions or do you think this is all fabricated?

You didn't have a good last night and you come back for more? Your penchant for humiliation has been noted.

[TheSanityAnnex]

You didn't have a good last night and you come back for more? Your penchant for humiliation has been noted.
You dug one of the deepest holes last night I've ever seen on this site and it dawned on me, I'd been duped. Normally I'd go back post by post and show you but I'm not getting trolled again. It's obvious now you just act dumb and say utterly stupid things you know are wrong just to get a rise out of people. I'm done falling for it but have to commend you for keeping up the schtick for as long as you have. Occasionally you slip out of character and say something intelligent but I'd say you stay in character about 95% of the time. Only poster I can think of that stays in character better is ducks.

[TheSanityAnnex]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton's former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and two other staff members were granted immunity deals in exchange for their cooperation in the now-closed FBI investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server as secretary of state, says a Republican congressman.



Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told The Associated Press on Friday that Mills gave federal investigators access to her laptop on the condition that what they found couldn't be used against her.
Democrats on the committee said Friday the immunity agreements were limited in scope and did not cover statements made to investigators or to potential testimony before Congress.


Still, Chaffetz said he was "absolutely stunned" that the FBI would cut a deal with someone as close to the investigation as Mills. By including the emails recovered from the laptops in the immunity agreements, the Justice Department exempted key physical evidence from any potential criminal case against the aides.


"No wonder they couldn't prosecute a case," said Chaffetz, R-Utah. "They were handing out immunity deals like candy."
Copies of the immunity agreements were provided to the House oversight committee by the Justice Department this week under seal.


Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon accused House Republicans of "trying to make something out of nothing by rummaging through the files of a Justice Department investigation that was closed months ago without any charges whatsoever, and leaking selective details three days before the first presidential debate."


"Congressman Chaffetz continues to abuse his office by wasting taxpayer dollars to try to second-guess the FBI in what amounts to a desperate attempt to boost Donald Trump's chances against Hillary Clinton," Fallon said.
A yearlong investigation by the FBI focused on whether the Democratic presidential nominee sent or received classified information using the private server located in the basement of her New York home, which was not authorized for such messages.
FBI Director James Comey said in July that his agents hadn't found evidence to support any criminal charge or direct evidence that Clinton's private server had been hacked. He suggested that hackers working for a foreign government may have been so sophisticated they wouldn't have left behind any evidence of a break-in.



Chaffetz said in addition to Mills, others granted immunity include John Bentel, then-director of the State Department's Office of Information Resources Management, and Heather Samuelson, Clinton's executive assistant.
The revelation brings the total number of people who were granted immunity as part of the FBI's investigation to at least five.



It had previously been reported immunity had been granted to Bryan Pagliano, a tech expert who set up Clinton's email server, as well as Paul Combetta, a computer specialist for a private firm that later maintained Clinton's email setup.
Chaffetz said he is looking forward to asking Comey questions about the immunity deals when Comey testifies Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee. Chaffetz is also a member of that panel.



Mills, who was among Clinton's closest confidants, voluntarily appeared last year for a lengthy interview as part of the House GOP's investigation into the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, that left three Americans dead.
Pagliano and Combetta, however, have refused to testify before Congress by invoking their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. On Thursday, the GOP-led House oversight committee voted along party lines to hold Pagliano in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with its subpoena.



Congressional Democrats on Friday accused Republicans of playing politics by speaking publicly about the details of the immunity agreements, which had previously been kept confidential.
"Of course, Republicans are trying to make political hay out of this, but the facts are that Ms. Mills cooperated fully with the Justice Department and Congress, the FBI concluded that there was no basis for any criminal prosecution," said Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the oversight committee.


In a statement, the campaign of the Republican presidential nominee criticized both Clinton and the Justice Department.
"No one with judgment this bad should be allowed to serve as president of the United States or hold any public office," Trump spokesman Jason Miller. "What has become abundantly clear is that the Obama Administration is protecting Hillary Clinton from accountability at all costs because she will keep the rigged system in Washington in place."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-lawmaker-fbi-gave-immunity-152833146.html?ref=gs

[ducks]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/22/boom-clinton-just-threw-trump-a-softball-with-her-whopping-65-tax-rate-commentary.html?__source=yahoo%7Cfinance%7Cheadlin e%7Cheadline%7Cstory&par=yahoo&doc=103961720&yptr=yahoo

tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education

tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education


tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education

tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education
tax tax tax tax tax pay for free education

[ducks]

AP-GfK Poll: Just 36% Confident of Hillary's Health

[rmt]

Why would he wait till October? And furthermore, why does anti-American Assange want Trump to win?

He feels that Trump just opening his mouth harms him enough - lol.

[ElNono]

Comey on Clinton email probe: 'Don't call us weasels'
The normally-stoic FBI chief grew emotional as he rejected claims that the FBI was in the tank for Clinton.

FBI Director James Comey is passionately defending the integrity of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email setup, arguing that critics are unfair to suggest that agents were biased or succumbed to political pressure.

“You can call us wrong, but don’t call us weasels. We are not weasels,” Comey declared Wednesday at a House Judiciary Committee hearing. “We are honest people and … whether or not you agree with the result, this was done the way you want it to be done.”

The normally stoic FBI chief grew emotional and emphatic as he rejected claims from Republican lawmakers that the FBI was essentially in the tank for Clinton when it recommended that neither she nor any of her aides be prosecuted in connection with the presence of classified information on Clinton’s private email server. He acknowledged he has “no patience” for such allegations.

“I knew there were going to be all kinds of rocks thrown, but this organization and the people who did this are honest, independent people. We do not carry water for one side or the other. That’s hard for people to see because so much of our country, we see things through sides,” Comey said. “We are not on anybody’s side.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/james-comey-not-weasels-clinton-email-228835

[RandomGuy]

Comey on Clinton email probe: 'Don't call us weasels'
The normally-stoic FBI chief grew emotional as he rejected claims that the FBI was in the tank for Clinton.

FBI Director James Comey is passionately defending the integrity of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email setup, arguing that critics are unfair to suggest that agents were biased or succumbed to political pressure.

“You can call us wrong, but don’t call us weasels. We are not weasels,” Comey declared Wednesday at a House Judiciary Committee hearing. “We are honest people and … whether or not you agree with the result, this was done the way you want it to be done.”

The normally stoic FBI chief grew emotional and emphatic as he rejected claims from Republican lawmakers that the FBI was essentially in the tank for Clinton when it recommended that neither she nor any of her aides be prosecuted in connection with the presence of classified information on Clinton’s private email server. He acknowledged he has “no patience” for such allegations.

“I knew there were going to be all kinds of rocks thrown, but this organization and the people who did this are honest, independent people. We do not carry water for one side or the other. That’s hard for people to see because so much of our country, we see things through sides,” Comey said. “We are not on anybody’s side.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/james-comey-not-weasels-clinton-email-228835

Ish.

That is the level of shrillness the GOP has sunk to.

"truthiness" wins over truth.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Comey on Clinton email probe: 'Don't call us weasels'
The normally-stoic FBI chief grew emotional as he rejected claims that the FBI was in the tank for Clinton.

FBI Director James Comey is passionately defending the integrity of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email setup, arguing that critics are unfair to suggest that agents were biased or succumbed to political pressure.

“You can call us wrong, but don’t call us weasels. We are not weasels,” Comey declared Wednesday at a House Judiciary Committee hearing. “We are honest people and … whether or not you agree with the result, this was done the way you want it to be done.”

The normally stoic FBI chief grew emotional and emphatic as he rejected claims from Republican lawmakers that the FBI was essentially in the tank for Clinton when it recommended that neither she nor any of her aides be prosecuted in connection with the presence of classified information on Clinton’s private email server. He acknowledged he has “no patience” for such allegations.

“I knew there were going to be all kinds of rocks thrown, but this organization and the people who did this are honest, independent people. We do not carry water for one side or the other. That’s hard for people to see because so much of our country, we see things through sides,” Comey said. “We are not on anybody’s side.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/james-comey-not-weasels-clinton-email-228835

Can't recommend prosecution when the five most important people being investigated are all given immunity by the DOJ.


Comey should have kept his mouth shut, the more he speaks the worse the FBI looks


============
Two revealing, if largely unnoticed, moments came in the middle of FBI Director Jim Comey’s Wednesday testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. When combined, these moments prove that Mr. Comey gave Hillary Clinton (http://topics.wsj.com/person/C/Hillary-Clinton/6344) a pass.

Congress hauled Mr. Comey in to account for the explosive revelation that the government granted immunity to Clinton staffers Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson as part of its investigation into whether Mrs. Clinton had mishandled classified information. Rep. Tom Marino (R., Pa.), who was once a Justice Department prosecutor and knows how these investigations roll, provided the first moment. He asked Mr. Comey why Ms. Mills was so courteously offered immunity in return for her laptop—a laptop that Mr. Comey admitted investigators were very keen to obtain. Why not simply impanel a grand jury, get a subpoena, and seize the evidence?


Mr. Comey’s answer was enlightening: “It’s a reasonable question. . . . Any time you are talking about the prospect of subpoenaing a computer from a lawyer—that involves the lawyer’s practice of law—you know you are getting into a big megillah.” Pressed further, he added: “In general, you can often do things faster with informal agreements, especially when you are interacting with lawyers.”



The key words: “The lawyer’s practice of law.” What Mr. Comey was referencing here is attorney-client privilege. Ms. Mills was able to extract an immunity deal, avoid answering questions, and sit in on Mrs. Clinton’s FBI interview because she has positioned herself as Hillary’s personal lawyer. Ms. Mills could therefore claim that any conversations or interactions she had with Mrs. Clinton about the private server were protected by attorney-client privilege.


Only here’s the rub: When Ms. Mills worked at the State Department she was not acting as Mrs. Clinton’s personal lawyer. She was the secretary's chief of staff. Any interaction with Mrs. Clinton about her server, or any evidence from that time, should have been fair game for the FBI and the Justice Department.


Ms. Mills was allowed to get away with this “attorney-client privilege” nonsense only because she claimed that she did not know about Mrs. Clinton’s server until after they had both left the State Department. Ergo, no questions about the server.
The FBI has deliberately chosen to accept this lie. The notes of its interview with Ms. Mills credulously states: “Mills did not learn Clinton was using a private email server until after Clinton’s tenure” at State. It added: “Mills stated she was not even sure she knew what a server was at the time.”


Which brings us to the hearing’s second revealing moment. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) pointed out that the FBI’s notes from its interview with Clinton IT staffer Bryan Pagliano expose this lie. In late 2009 or early 2010, Mr. Pagliano told investigators, he approached Ms. Mills to relay State Department concerns that the private server might pose a “federal records retention issue.” According to Mr. Pagliano, Ms. Mills told him not to worry about it, because other secretaries of state had used similar setups.
More damning, Mr. Chaffetz held up an email that Ms. Mills sent in 2010 to Justin Cooper, whom the Clintons personally employed to help maintain the server. The email reads: “hrc email coming back—is server okay?” Mr. Cooper responds: “Ur funny. We are on the same server.”


To be clear: When Mrs. Clinton had an email problem, Ms. Mills didn’t call the State Department’s help desk. She didn’t call Yahoo (http://quotes.wsj.com/YHOO) YHOO 1.30 % (http://quotes.wsj.com/YHOO) customer service. She called a privately employed Clinton aide and asked specifically about Mrs. Clinton’s “server.” She did this as chief of staff at the State Department. Mr. Chaffetz asked Mr. Comey why the FBI wrote that Ms. Mills was ignorant about the server until later.


Mr. Comey suddenly sounded like a man with something to hide. “I don’t remember exactly, sitting here,” he said, in what can only be called the FBI version of “I don’t recall.” He then mumbled that “Having done many investigations myself, there’s always conflicting recollections of facts, some of which are central, some of which are peripheral. I don’t remember, sitting here, about that one.”


Really? Only a few minutes before he had explained that the Justice Department was forced to issue immunity to Ms. Mills because she had asserted attorney-client privilege. Yet he couldn’t remember all the glaring evidence proving she had no such privilege? Usually, the FBI takes a dim view of witnesses who lie. Had the FBI pursued perjury charges against Ms. Mills—as it would have done against anyone else—it would have had extraordinary leverage to force her to speak about all of her communications regarding the server. It might have even threatened to build a case that Ms. Mills was part of a criminal scheme. Then it could have offered immunity in return for the real goods on Hillary.






But going that route would have required grand juries, subpoenas, warrants and indictments—all things that Mr. Comey clearly wanted to avoid in this politically sensitive investigation. Much easier to turn a blind eye to Ms. Mills’s fiction. And to therefore give Mrs. Clinton a pass.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/jim-comeys-blind-eye-1475191703

[Reck]

^This is the way TSA decides to make his comeback. :lol

[TheSanityAnnex]

^This is the way TSA decides to make his comeback. :lol
What is this comeback you are talking about?

[Splits]

Former Shillary staffer speaks surprisingly good French.

KcH2Al9RZ84

[Reck]

What is this comeback you are talking about?

Haven't you been gone since last week? Or is it just me. I have in and out of this place lately.

[Winehole23]

I'm sure the 2016 concern trolls who knitted their brows. and tut-tutted over the hazard to the republic posed by HRC's health and her campaign's lack of transparency about it, will carry this thread another 14 pages.








Nah.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/press-secretary-says-it-is-dangerous-for-the-country-to-question-whether-she-is-putting-out-honest-info/

[Winehole23]

VERY IMPORTANT NEWS FROM QANON

1195888800955678722

[koriwhat]

VERY IMPORTANT NEWS FROM QANON

1195888800955678722

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

I'm sure the 2016 concern trolls who knitted their brows. and tut-tutted over the hazard to the republic posed by HRC's health and her campaign's lack of transparency about it, will carry this thread another 14 pages.

Nah.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/press-secretary-says-it-is-dangerous-for-the-country-to-question-whether-she-is-putting-out-honest-info/

Hillary's health as it related to doing the POTUS job was obviously in play. She may be fine enough now getting five days of bed rest in between events.

[ChumpDumper]

Turns out Trump can't handle the physical rigors of being president.

Go figure.

[Spurtacular]

Turns out Trump can't handle the physical rigors of being president.

Go figure.

Fake News

Go figure

lol Dump

[ChumpDumper]

Fake News

Go figure

lol DumpI agree. Announcing routine physicals are done in "phases" at Walter Reed is a prime example of fake news.

Have you ever heard of such a thing, derp?

Yes or no.

Derp folds.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

I agree. Announcing routine physicals are done in "phases" at Walter Reed is a prime example of fake news.

Have you ever heard of such a thing, derp?

Yes or no.

Derp folds.

lol derp

Trump has had no health issues significantly hindering him.

:lmao @ you trying to justify your fake news.

lol dump

[Winehole23]

When I don't have any significant health issues is usually when I make unscheduled visits to the doctor, how about you, Spurtacular?

[ChumpDumper]

Trump has had no health issues significantly hindering him.

:lmao @ you trying to justify your fake news.

lol dumpDerp, why did he go to Walter Reed on a Saturday?

Let's see your "real" news.

[Spurtacular]

Derp, why did he go to Walter Reed on a Saturday?

Let's see your "real" news.

I don't know. Tell us your conspiracy theory.

[Winehole23]

Read the fuckin story, there's a link a few posts above you. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know.:lmao ignorant derp can't read anything relevant to the discussion.

He's just here to bite ankles.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao ignorant derp can't read anything relevant to the discussion.

He's just here to bite ankles.

Tell us your conspiracy theory.

[ChumpDumper]

Tell us your conspiracy theory.Don't have one.

Fat, out of shape septuagenarians with poor diets have to go to doctors for all kinds of reasons that aren't routine "phases" of physicals.

Derp, did you read the link that was spoon fed to you?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Fat, out of shape septuagenarians with poor diets have to go to doctors for all kinds of reasons that aren't routine "phases" of physicals.


Even if true, you still haven't supported your claim that health issues are preventing Trump from doing his job.

[ChumpDumper]

Even if true, you still haven't supported your claim that health issues are preventing Trump from doing his job.It's my claim he can't handle the physical rigors of office.

This hospital visit supports that claim.

He's fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

[Spurtacular]

It's my claim he can't handle the physical rigors of office.

This hospital visit supports that claim.



:cry My desperate conjecture supports my claim. :cry

:lmao Faggot Chump

[ChumpDumper]

:cry My desperate conjecture supports my claim. :cry

:lmao Faggot Chump:lol lashing out while missing the irony of your post ITT.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

[Spurtacular]

:lol lashing out while missing the irony of your post ITT.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

There's no irony in a psychopath like you making up a convenient reality. It's pretty standard, frankly.

[ChumpDumper]

There's no irony in a psychopath like you making up a convenient reality. It's pretty standard, frankly.The irony is yours, dumbass.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

The irony is yours, dumbass.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

Yes or no.

I can admit that your moving the goalposts.

[ChumpDumper]

I can admit that your moving the goalposts.I'm seeing if you can accept facts as being true.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

I'm seeing if you can accept facts as being true.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these things, derp.

Can you admit these things?

Yes or no.

No, you're moving the goalposts and hoping to not be called out on it.

[ChumpDumper]

No, you're moving the goalposts and hoping to not be called out on it.Moving the golaposts for where?

I gave my opinion based on the facts. You're allowed to have a different opinion.

Here are the facts.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these facts, derp.

Can you admit these facts?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Moving the golaposts for where?

I gave my opinion based on the facts. You're allowed to have a different opinion.

Here are the facts.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these facts, derp.

Can you admit these facts?

Yes or no.

Your claim was that bad health was significantly hindering Trump's ability to perform the job. Right now, you're just crying his general health. You could keep track of this stuff if your TDS wasn't so bad.

:rollin

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, look at that workload!

1196211271047270400

:lmao PDB at 2PM

[ChumpDumper]

Your claim was that bad health was significantly hindering Trump's ability to perform the job.That's my opinion.

I gave my opinion based on the facts. You're allowed to have a different opinion.

Here are the facts.

Trump is fat, out of shape, has a bad diet and in his 70s.

It's OK to admit these facts, derp.

Can you admit these facts?

Yes or no.

[Winehole23]

Whatever it was, the well-staffed, well-stocked WH medical unit couldn't handle it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Medical_Unit

[ElNono]

VERY IMPORTANT NEWS FROM QANON

1195888800955678722

Looks legit. Nobody is this stupid. Not even Qhris, I don't think.

[Spurtacular]

That's my opinion.


Turns out Trump can't handle the physical rigors of being president.

You're opinion was wrong, so you had to go into rich speculation about Trump's health. Let's not forget that this was all in an effort to sperm shield for Hillary. It's what you do.

[ChumpDumper]

You're opinion was wrongIt's "your"

And Trump hasn't made it through the term yet.

If his schedule remains like Monday's he might make it.

[Spurtacular]

It's "your"

Chalk up that tiny W.

[ChumpDumper]

Chalk up that tiny W.Don't get pissy and draw more attention to it.

[Spurtacular]

And Trump hasn't made it through the term yet.

If his schedule remains like Monday's he might make it.

:lol Might
:lol Sad that your TDS has taken you down so far.

[Spurtacular]

Don't get pissy and draw more attention to it.

I'm drawing attention to your tiny w; but it's what you want, so no doubt you're happy.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Might
:lol Sad that your TDS has taken you down so far.Did you see that soft ass schedule?

You need it spoon fed to you?

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Did you see that soft ass schedule?


:lmao Yea, Hillary's campaign was such a joke. :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao Yea, Hillary's campaign was such a joke. :lmao:lol derpnial

[Spurtacular]

:cry

No, you were right. Hillary needed to stay in bed while Trump was out meeting with the electorate.

[ChumpDumper]

No, you were right. Hillary needed to stay in bed while Trump was out meeting with the electorate.And now Trump needs to start his day at 2PM.

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

And now Trump needs to start his day at 2PM.

:lmao

:cry He had a non 9-5 day :cry

:lol Chump found a talking point.

[ChumpDumper]

:cry He had a non 9-5 day :cry

:lol Chump found a talking point.:lol derp is crying like a bitch

I'd take it easy in the same situation. Dude could die.

[Spurtacular]

Dude could die.

Doubtful. His dad lived to be 93. But you keep fantasizing, snowflake.

[ChumpDumper]

Doubtful. His dad lived to be 93. But you keep fantasizing, snowflake.

Hey, you're the one in derpnial, snowflake.

Your god was in the hospital and now he has to take it easy.

Come to terms.

[Chucho]

Did you stop posting under the Pavlov account so you could continue your derp feud? :rollin

[Spurtacular]

Hey, you're the one in derpnial, snowflake.

Your god was in the hospital and now he has to take it easy.

Come to terms.

Chump making up narratives. Par.

[Winehole23]

:cry He had a non 9-5 day :cry

:lol Chump found a talking point.Pretty much all his days are non 9-5 days.

The President seldom presents himself for work before 11am.

He's with zero doubt the laziest President we've seen in quite some time.

[Winehole23]

Was that Trump's doctor on the tarmac today?

Are grounds being laid for a health-related resignation? Possibly an untreated neurological condition that has rendered him incompetent to form criminal intent, like Sen. Graham recently suggested?

Don't we deserve to know what's going on with the President's health?

[DMC]

Was that Trump's doctor on the tarmac today?

Are grounds being laid for a health-related resignation? Possibly an untreated neurological condition that has rendered him incompetent to form criminal intent, like Sen. Graham recently suggested?

Don't we deserve to know what's going on with the President's health?

Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

[Winehole23]

Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.Wild speculation and solemn assertions of the need for transparency about a candidate's health were all the rage three years ago.

Why not for a President? What changed?

[DMC]

Wild speculation and solemn assertions of the need for transparency about a candidate's health were all the rage three years ago.

Why not for a President? What changed?
Trump president not Hillary

[Winehole23]

Trump president not HillaryThat's the point.

All the concern trolls went away.

[Spurminator]

If what Hillary has is contagious, why is she out in public hugging little girls and shaking people's hands - much less going to Chelsea's apartment where her NEWBORN grandchild is? And does no one question her judgement ignoring her doctor's suggestion to rest?

Does it hurt?

[Spurminator]

It's just another example that she can't take advice from people who know what they are talking about.

Does it hurt?

[Spurminator]

Hillary: Doctor Advised 5 Days Off, But I Didn't Think It Was Big Deal

will she use the same thinking about isis,economy

Does it hurt?

[Spurminator]

Schumer and Biden now talking about their recent bout with Pneumomia :lol How many more Deomcrats will have recently gotten Pneumonia?

Does it hurt?

[Spurminator]

When Jimmy Carter collapsed, the media went into a frenzy about whether he was really fit for the job health wise.
it is not gender bias!

Does it hurt?

[baseline bum]

:lol

[Will Hunting]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FlimsyAchingAxolotl-small.gif

[Spurminator]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FlimsyAchingAxolotl-small.gif

Couldn't find the imbeddable gif, tbh. Bookmarked for future use.

[Splits]

https://i.gifer.com/WFBq.gif

[TSA]

It looked like a fucking seizure in that video. All of a sudden the rightwing conspiracy theory might be right. I'm with ElNono in that it's too late to replace the shitbag and all of a sudden it's looking like she's going to go down in flames. Thanks Hillary you fucking cunt for giving us Trump because you're too stubborn to pull out of the race back when there were alternatives in the party that could have won the election.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FlimsyAchingAxolotl-small.gif

[baseline bum]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FlimsyAchingAxolotl-small.gif

It always hurt seeing Clinton get the nomination.

[Spurminator]

Dunking on someone for correctly predicting Hillary would lose is an interesting approach to trolling.

[SnakeBoy]

Still scarred over Hillary's epic defeat :lol

[Spurminator]

Still scarred over Hillary's epic defeat :lol

I'm good. There are 200,000 dead people and millions of unemployed who aren't, though.

[Will Hunting]

I'm good. There are 200,000 dead people and millions of unemployed who aren't, though.
Trump himself is currently hospitalized because of Hillary's defeat, you can add him to the list of people who are scarred :lol

[baseline bum]

Trump himself is currently hospitalized because of Hillary's defeat, you can add him to the list of people who are scarred :lol

Probably just his lungs though

[Reck]

Trump himself is currently hospitalized because of Hillary's defeat, you can add him to the list of people who are scarred :lol

Trump is now alive and has the best medical care because of Hillary.

Do you think any private citizen has top of the line medical care 24/7 like Trump does right now?

Trump will probably die sometime next year when he doesn't have second by second health check monitoring.

[ChumpDumper]

Still scarred over Hillary's epic defeat :lolYou're still celebrating Trump's miserable failure and you're going to reward him for it.

[Reck]

You're still celebrating Trump's miserable failure and you're going to reward him for it.

Snake on Nov 4th. Who's Trump and what did he do?

[Spurminator]

Snake on Nov 4th. Who's Trump and what did he do?

If Trump does lose, expect a flood of "I was just trolling, I never liked Trump" posts from the MAGA cult in 2021.

[Will Hunting]

If Trump does lose, expect a flood of "I was just trolling, I never liked Trump" posts from the MAGA cult in 2021.
This without question. We're going to get tons of "lol I actually voted 3rd party/didn't vote at all, I was just trying to trigger da libs and never liked DRUMPF!"

[Bogie]

Still scarred over Hillary's epic defeat :lol

you’re still a racist cowardly cuck

[Spurtacular]

I'm good. There are 200,000 dead people and millions of unemployed who aren't, though.

Zombie points!

[Spurtacular]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton's former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and two other staff members were granted immunity deals in exchange for their cooperation in the now-closed FBI investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server as secretary of state, says a Republican congressman.



Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told The Associated Press on Friday that Mills gave federal investigators access to her laptop on the condition that what they found couldn't be used against her.
Democrats on the committee said Friday the immunity agreements were limited in scope and did not cover statements made to investigators or to potential testimony before Congress.


Still, Chaffetz said he was "absolutely stunned" that the FBI would cut a deal with someone as close to the investigation as Mills. By including the emails recovered from the laptops in the immunity agreements, the Justice Department exempted key physical evidence from any potential criminal case against the aides.


The fix was always in.

:cry No deep state :cry

[Reck]

The fix was always in.

:cry No deep state :cry

Derp coming to grips.

[Spurtacular]

Derp coming to grips.

Grips with what?

[Reck]

Grips with what?

It’s all over for you.

[Spurtacular]

It’s all over for you.

I didn't figure you had anything. Your tranny brain operates at a low number of hertz.