Her birthday was October 26th.
On which day he tweeted:
https://mobile.twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/791174475353993216
https://mobile.twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/791364506425315328
Interestingly in the debates Trump referred to a '400 pound hacker'
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/dnc-cyberattack-400-pound-hackers/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/w...trump-comment-ignites-fat-shaming-debate.html
Democrats should ask Hillary Clinton to step aside
You probably shouldn't click his name and read the rest of the articles by him then.This is one of the dumbest articles I've ever read. I regret clicking.
Yeah, I'm sorry, but you had - and still have - more than two choices, though I guess the Uniform Congressional Districts Act made that a little more complicated in 1967. Framing every debate within the Democrat vs Republican paradigm, whether it be about the election, gun control or what have you, creates the ridiculous notion that every issue has two, and only two, possible solutions. You can't solve problems unless you can discuss them rationally and you can't discuss them rationally when everything becomes a death match. The level of hostility between the two parties is higher than it has ever been in modern history. Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump didn't gain the traction they did because everyone's happy with the status quo. A Gallup poll from last year showed that 60 percent of respondents said they wanted new political parties.
Well, the world of NeoGAF. Right? That's what's most pertinent to this specific discussion of who here is or isn't scrutinizing Hillary.
I actually don't think that NeoGAF on the whole gives Hillary that many "passes". Polari was able to criticize her even though he received a backlash for it. Nevertheless, there are some people who get uncomfortable when she's criticized on this issue. It's a thing. People here get uncomfortable when you criticize their favorite video games too.
Sadly not. Yesterday evening one of Germany's public tv stations (so a respected outlet here) ran a special report on the "update in the Clinton email affair and the consequences for the election".
I sighed and turned the tv off.
So if they somehow, for some reason, found Clinton guilty of wrongdoing in this separate investigation....what would happen exactly? Clinton couldn't withdraw this close to the election, could she?
I think a more centrist party in Congress in decent enough numbers would actually help.But another party is not a solution to the gridlock and would not actually fix these core issues.
I think a more centrist party in Congress would actually help.
I just can't believe is US election. It just has to be some new form of hyper-entertainment.
I think a more centrist party in Congress in decent enough numbers would actually help.
So this is nothing... it is just something because nothing else interesting is happening...right?
Outsider looking in:
(1)FBI: Covering its ass just in case Trump gets there. I know some of you will lose your shit for even saying just in case.
or
(2)FBI: Actually has something and is taking serious time to put together all the links so they have the strongest case they can. Announcing this again then having the peoples involved walk would not look good for the FBI at all.
The most likely scenario is...
In their investigation of the Wiener sexting scandal they found some e-mails that are related too, tangentially or otherwise, Clinton's private server and Comey saw this as an opportunity to do two things:
1) Get ahead of any "sources" who would eventually tell the press that these emails were found anyway
2) Make himself look good to partisans on a national scale
These e-mails are like rather innocuous and don't seem to actually be to or from Hillary herself. There is little chance that they have "something" and this will not end up changing the election at all.
I understand the "from a vacuum" view you have, but Comey is a staunch republican and has been getting pressure for months both internally and externally from fellow republicans because he let Clinton off with an admonishment.
I'm sure he'd love to indict Clinton, but unless they have access to more than just Wiener emails I don't see how he'd do it.
Why?Kim Dotcom is speaking out of ignorance. It's impossible for the emails to be in Utah.
Did they catch Ben Ghazi yet?
You're using an example of the current system to explain why my proposed change wouldn't work without applying any reasoning to connect your premise to your conclusion. My proposed system does not have a single party that can control a vote.Not when the current president has proposed centrist or right-leaning legislation and it still got nowhere because the house voted along party lines against them.
The party affiliation matters more than the actual issues at this point. It's maddening.
Nah. The real concern is how this impacts Senate and House races.Trumps going to win isn't he?
Yeah, the dems did it to themselves though.Trumps going to win isn't he?
In somewhat related news...the IBB (biotech ETF) just bounced sharply in reaction to this.
(biotech industry/sector is scared shitless of her coming down on them for drug pricing)
Isn't the thing that should be investigated here at this point how easy it is to hack every server by Wikileaks's?
Yeah, the dems did it to themselves though.
Yes, you're right. Adding yet another political party will revolve legislative gridlock.You're using an example of the current system to explain why my proposed change wouldn't work without applying any reasoning to connect your premise to your conclusion. My proposed system does not have a single party that can control a vote.
...do tell.
Sadly not. Yesterday evening one of Germany's public tv stations (so a respected outlet here) ran a special report on the "update in the Clinton email affair and the consequences for the election".
I sighed and turned the tv off.
Trumps going to win isn't he?
Trumps going to win isn't he?
My point was of the two major choices, both sides are not the same or even close. Democrats did not create the hyperpartisanship. Republicans have these past eight years obstructed more legislation than any Congress in USA history.
One side is racist, the other is not. One side is homophobic, the other not. One side understands our system is meant to be built on compromise, the other does not.
You can choose another choice. Jill Stein is a nutcase and so is Johnson, but those are your choices. That they are indisputably incapable of winning is what it is. This system was not set up to work well with more than two parties. But they are there for you.
People generally are not intellectually consistent. We are doing infinitely better than eight years ago, unemployment is low, crime is down everywhere. We have issues to fix, but i see no solution a third party has offered that could pass congress that would fix those. People see gridlock and instead of blaming the cause - Republicans - they say Washington dont work and we need another party.
But another party is not a solution to the gridlock and would not actually fix these core issues.
Hillary is a phenomenal candidate and Trump is a sociopath. Johnson might be mentally challenged, and Jill Stein is a fucking anti-vaxxer wifi truther. You can vote McMullin too if you are a masochist.
Those are your choices. Your friends problem would not be fixed even if a third party candidate won. Actually, the problems would likely get worse with a Congress made up entirely of political rivals. Least effective presidency ever most like.
Yeah I think he is. I've been saying it for a long while now. There is something horribly inevitable about it.
Unless someone assassinates him before hand.
Yeah I think he is. I've been saying it for a long while now. There is something horribly inevitable about it.
Unless someone assassinates him before hand.
Yeah I think he is. I've been saying it for a long while now. There is something horribly inevitable about it.
Unless someone assassinates him before hand.
Yeah, the dems did it to themselves though.