• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

speculawyer

Member
Oblivion said:
I know Republicans have stopped giving a shit about offering realistic economic forecasts based on their trickle-down policies, but shit's gotten much more blatant recently. Jeb said that he can get 4% growth per year, and today Huckabee came out with his own projection that said he can get shit up to 6%.

Reminder: Even Republican god, Ronaldus Magnus couldn't get 4% with the greatest economic boom in the history of civilization, let alone 6%.

But no, let's keep arguing about how Donald "A lot of people are switching to these really long putters, very unattractive" Trump is the buffoon this competition.
Click to expand...

Well . . . they may just be following his lead. Donald Trump tells us how he has solutions for everything . . . the border, the economy, ISIS, etc. He's basically just making it up.

Well, if he is that popular from just making shit up, they all want in on the game.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
RustyNails said:
pwvtuly.gif
Click to expand...

One of the fair-goers asked the Republican presidential candidate during his appearance on the Des Moines Register Soapbox whether he was being advised by Paul Wolfowitz, George W. Bush's deputy secretary of defense and the architect of his Iraq War policy.

Jeb Bush tried to spin the question away from his legacy as the son and brother of the last two Republican presidents, but he did so awkwardly.

"Paul Wolfowitz is providing some advice," Bush said. "I get most of my advice from a team that we have in Miami, Florida. Young people that are going to be ... they're not assigned, have experience either in Congress or the previous administration."
Click to expand...
Why not fire him if you realize that it is an embarrassment (which it is)? You spineless piece of shit.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
speculawyer said:
Rand is the ONLY one in the race who is standing up for your Liberty, across the board....


How is he on reproductive liberty? Oh yeah, he's not.
Click to expand...
The Paul's both consider personhood to begin at conception, so, no they wouldn't find murder to be a "liberty" to protect.

Neither one considers "Plan B" or birth control in general to be immoral or something to ban.
 
F

FiggyCal

Banned
benjipwns said:
The Paul's both consider personhood to begin at conception, so, no they wouldn't find murder to be a "liberty" to protect.

Neither one considers "Plan B" or birth control in general to be immoral or something to ban.
Click to expand...

Do you agree with them on that issue?

Also I finished The Problem of Political Authority. Thanks for recommending it. The strongest parts of the book was the first few chapters on the social contracts and the chapter on the psychology of authority. I think he also made a strong case for private police in the second half. But it definitely was not as good.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Yeah, that seems to be Rand's take:
"If life starts at conception, should medicine that prevents conception like Plan B be legal?," a woman asked him during a question-and-answer session here.

Paul at first gave a terse answer: "I am not opposed to birth control," he said.

After a pause, Paul elaborated. "That's basically what Plan B is," he said. "Plan B is taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening, and I am not opposed to that."

A number of prominent social conservatives have condemned the morning-after pill as on-demand abortion drugs, sometimes confusing the contraceptive with RU-486, which can be used to induce abortion.

Paul stood by his answer after the event, when asked about the exchange by reporters.

"Plan B is taking birth control," he said. "I am not against birth control and I don't know many Republicans who would be indicating that they are against birth control."
Click to expand...

And from a pro-life group's story, it sounds like Rand may be a bit pandering more than as serious as his dad (who is very anti-abortion):
WASHINGTON, D.C., March 21, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Some pro-life activists were left scratching their heads after a recent interview Senator Rand Paul did on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show “The Situation Room,” in which the senator seemed to say he supported “thousands of exceptions” to his general belief that abortion should be illegal. But Paul spokesman Doug Stafford told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview on Wednesday that the senator’s remarks were misunderstood, reiterating that Paul is staunchly pro-life.

In the interview, Blitzer asked Sen. Paul about his pro-life views, asking, “Just to be precise, if you believe life begins at conception, which I suspect you do, you would have no exceptions for rape, incest, the life of the mother – is that right?”

Paul, who is a doctor as well as a senator, answered, “I think that…puts things in too small of a box. What I would say is there are thousands of exceptions. I’m a physician, and every individual case is going to be different. Everything is going to be particular to that individual case and what is going on that mother and the medical circumstances of that mother.”

“It sounds like you believe in some exceptions,” Blitzer said.

“Well, there is going to be, like I say, thousands of extraneous situations where the life of the mother is involved and other things that are involved,” replied Paul, “so I would say that each individual case would have to be addressed, and even if there were eventually a change in the law – let’s say people came more to my way of thinking – there would still be a lot of complicated things the law may not ultimately be able to address in the early stages of pregnancy that would have to be part of what occurs between the physician, and the woman, and the family.”
Click to expand...
“You can legislate abortifacients like RU-486, and he would,” he said. “But you can’t legislatively ban artificial estrogen and progesterone.”
Click to expand...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
FiggyCal said:
Also I finished The Problem of Political Authority. Thanks for recommending it. The strongest parts of the book was the first few chapters on the social contracts and the chapter on the psychology of authority. I think he also made a strong case for private police in the second half. But it definitely was not as good.
Click to expand...
He recently agreed with the criticism of the second half, which I have as well, and is pondering doing another book to take another stab at it.

Seems like a waste, David Friedman's book and some others are already good enough "theoretical utopian" works.

I'd rather he write a book on his stuff about the irrationally of political beliefs. (And how people think they're actually being rational.) Like in this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JYL5VUe5NQ

FiggyCal said:
Abortion.
Click to expand...
I think its an overuse of force in an eviction. However enforcing any kind of criminality is a logistical and practical nightmare that requires a police state, so going with the woman has priority claim on the property through her initial homesteading solves that. While the overuse of force remains an unfortunate aspect that will hopefully change as it has as technology advances.
 
F

FiggyCal

Banned
benjipwns said:
He recently agreed with the criticism of the second half, which I have as well, and is pondering doing another book to take another stab at it.

Seems like a waste, David Friedman's book and some others are already good enough "theoretical utopian" works.

I'd rather he write a book on his stuff about the irrationally of political beliefs. (And how people think they're actually being rational.) Like in this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JYL5VUe5NQ


I think its an overuse of force in an eviction. However enforcing any kind of criminality is a logistical and practical nightmare that requires a police state, so going with the woman has priority claim on the property through her initial homesteading solves that. While the overuse of force remains an unfortunate aspect that will hopefully change as it has as technology advances.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree that I'd like to read more from Huemer about the psychology and irrationality of political beliefs.

I might read David Friedman's work just to get an idea of what he's advocating for at some point, I think a lot of his ideas are interesting -- like polycentric law, but I'm more interested in libertarian socialists atm, like Proudhon and Kropotkin.
 
T

Trouble

Banned
Oblivion said:
Do conservatives find any practical difference between the two?
Click to expand...

I mean, they should, shouldn't they? If conception never happens, what's their argument against birth control?

Edit: Santorum's "A License To Do Things" will not be accepted as an argument.
 
E

Ecotic

Member
benjipwns said:
The next James K. Polk? I report, you decide:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...esidential-race-promises-one-term-121359.html

A state? Polk got us like five states or more.

Even if he did sell out on FIFTY-FOUR FOURTY OR FIGHT!
Click to expand...

Rhomega Beta said:
When he gets us a state through a war, then we'll call him the next Polk.
Click to expand...

I hate the British, they screwed us in the Oregon Territory and the Alaska Boundary Dispute. As a one-term President Biden should cite historical connections to British Columbia like Putin did to Crimea and gank it. It'd net Democrats some safe electoral college votes too.

20590621771_ac4fb99460_b.jpg
Click to expand...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
FiggyCal said:
I definitely agree that I'd like to read more from Huemer about the psychology and irrationality of political beliefs.

I might read David Friedman's work just to get an idea of what he's advocating for at some point, I think a lot of his ideas are interesting -- like polycentric law, but I'm more interested in libertarian socialists atm, like Proudhon and Kropotkin.
Click to expand...
Friedman's is mostly a longer and more extensive version of that second half of Huemer's. I'm blanking on two others who wrote very similar books, they're basically all the same "oh, so you think we can't have schools without the state? WELL, TAKE THIS AND THIS AND THAT."

It's useful but I don't particularly find them engaging to read because I'm not a fan of utopianism generally. Dystopianism is better, that's why I like Road to Serfdom.

As for polycentric law, one of the reasons I always love to get hit with the Somalian cliche is that after the Communist regime fell, many things got better in Somalia because they had a long history of polycentric law* that effectively stepped in to replace the central state when it collapsed, when the UN and others came in trying to re-establish a central state problems have cropped back up. Especially since Somalian central states don't really have a history of controlling the entire territory. Somalialand being a prominent example.

There's a lot of good stories about stuff like how Somalia became one of the higher cell phone per capita countries for the region and also their gdp per capita because after the central state fell so did the nationalized telecommunications and other services so people just put up cell phone towers, did their own wiring, imported cheap cell phones and so on, now they have one of the better telecommunication systems in African shitholes.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704608104575220570113266984
Banks barely existed in this war-torn African nation a decade ago. Now, Somali residents can bank over their mobile phones.

The rapid evolution of technology in Somalia—and people's access to it—comes as several telecommunications companies here jockey for customers amid the absence of any government-regulated phone or Internet access. The competition to supply phone service has stoked the nascent revival of Somalia's shattered economy, and it shows that some complex businesses can thrive even in one of Africa's least developed markets.

Backed by expertise from China, Korea and Europe—and funded from their own pockets—Somali telecom entrepreneurs are providing inexpensive mobile-phone services. Users can conduct money transfers via mobile phones and gain Internet access, both wireless functions that aren't widely available in many other parts of Africa.

The success of Somalia's telecom sector isn't all that unusual for a war-shattered economy, experts say. In countries with shaky economic foundations, such as Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, telecommunications companies have stepped in to provide missing infrastructure.

In these environments, "the first ones who put in electricity generators in rural areas are the telecom operators," says Svet Tintchev, a World Bank expert on the telecom industry in developing countries. "In a way, their leverage goes beyond pure telecom service."

In 2002, he pooled money with friends and launched Hormuud, a cellphone and land-line telecommunications company. It would later expand to include a bank and a mobile money-transfer service, which Somalis now use to avoid being robbed in this cash-based economy.

The World Bank's Mr. Tintchev says the sector has become among the country's biggest revenue generators, and the service it provides has helped revive the economy. "They became the economic enablers in Somalia," he says.

Four main telecommunications companies now operate in the country.
Click to expand...
To navigate Somalia's tangled web of clan alliances, Hormuud sells shares to all interested parties. In this way, the connection to Hormuud cuts across the country's warring groups, leading Somalis from nearly every clan to feel vested in the company, says Mr. Yusuf, who often surfs satellite news channels in his Mogadishu office.
Click to expand...
Last year, a mortar shell crashed into the gate of the company's headquarters in the main Bakara market in Mogadishu, killing one employee and wounding another. Asked who might have fired the mortar or whether he thinks it was meant to hit the company, Mr. Yusuf shrugs, indicating there are simply too many explosions to tell them apart.
Click to expand...
lol

In some Somali villages, Hormuud no longer offers service because all the people have fled the militant groups. The most formidable force in Mogadishu is al Shabaab, a violent group linked to Al Qaeda that has banned beards, school bells and tractors because, it says, they violate Islamic law.

Al Shabaab has also punished telecom operators, threatening employees who sell scratch cards for cellphone use and demanding "taxes" from any companies that operate in their territory.
Click to expand...
The new Somali government, installed last year, has begun to try to tax the lucrative telecom businesses. Government officials grumble that some companies aren't contributing their share, but Mr. Yusuf says that businessmen like him will pay whoever happens to be in power.
Click to expand...
Huh...the new Somali government and these Islamic warlords sound pretty similar...

http://www.refworld.org/docid/550c35904.html
The Somali Economic Forum states that, as of April 2014, there were more than 20 telecom companies active in Somalia (25 Apr. 2014). Sources note that the major mobile network service providers in Somalia are Hormuud Telecom, Somafone, Telesom, Nationlink, Telecom Somalia (The EastAfrican 18 May 2013; Sheikh Ali and Yusuf Dhaha 2-3 Dec. 2013, 2), and Golis Telecom (ibid.).
Click to expand...
According to a study based on a national survey conducted in 2013 by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), a US federal agency that oversees all US civilian international media (US n.d.), and Gallup, a company that provides "analytics and advice" to leaders and organizations (Gallup n.d.), "more than seven in 10 Somalis (72.4%) say they personally own a mobile phone" (US and Gallup n.d.). The same study notes regional variations, with ownership rates at 78.5% in South-Central Somalia, 73.1% in Puntland, and 56.2% in Somaliland (ibid.).
Click to expand...
Sources state that several mobile phone companies provide Somali citizens with mobile financial transfer services (The EastAfrican 18 May 2013; Sabahi Online 19 Apr. 2012; Sheik Ali and Yusuf Dhaha Dec. 2013, 2). According to a paper presented at the Kuala Lumpur International Business, Economics and Law Conference in December 2013 titled "Factors Influencing Mobile Money Transfer Adoption Among Somali Students," by Ali Yassin Sheikh Ali and Ismail Shiekh Yusuf Dhaha [3],

service providers offer MMT [mobile money transfer] with different brands. For instance, Telesom Somaliland in northern regions provides ZAAD service; Golis Telecom in southern and central regions provides SAHAL service, while Nationlink and Hormuud Telecom in southern and central regions provide E-maal and Electronic Voucher Cards (EVC Plus) respectively. (ibid.)

Sources further note that MMT services are relied upon by individuals because of the lack of a functional banking system in Somalia
Click to expand...
EVC Plus [has] become one of the services that people depend on [when conducting] their daily transactions in south and central Somalia. Most business activities now use this service as payment method including water and electricity bills, while most of the family daily business transactions occur through this service. (ibid.)

Al Jazeera stated in 2013 that "[t]he service is catching on fast and moving into other traditional everyday activities" such as paying electricity bills and booking domestic flights (31 Aug. 2013). The Globe and Mail reports that, in Somaliland, almost every merchant will accept payment through mobile devices (The Globe and Mail 21 June 2013). The same source states that "many companies use Zaad for all of their salary payments to their employees" (ibid.).
Click to expand...
According to the Infoasaid Project in 2012, "internet cafes are extremely popular in areas where there is a connection" (CDAC Jan. 2012). In 2012, the BBC quoted the chief executive of Somalia Wireless, an Internet provider in Mogadishu, as stating that "hotspots now cover nearly 40% of the city, connecting universities, NGOs, hotels, news agencies, and cafes" (BBC 23 Oct. 2012). Reporting by the BBC in 2014 also notes that "people have been flocking to hotels and internet cafes" to try out the fast Internet service since the installation of fibre-optic cables in Mogadishu (ibid. 10 Apr. 2014).
Click to expand...

*heartwarming*

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeer
 
C

Chichikov

Member
Ecotic said:
I hate the British, they screwed us in the Oregon Territory and the Alaska Boundary Dispute. As a one-term President Biden should cite historical connections to British Columbia like Putin did to Crimea and gank it. It'd net Democrats some safe electoral college votes too.
Click to expand...
Hold up, we're not getting the ice road truckers land there, right?
Let's not be hasty, I know BC is nice and all, but I don't know if it's worth it.
I mean, that shit is kinda boring, though you'd think it would be cool, like, right? but it's all rednecks not falling into frozen lakes.

Also, you hate the English, you can hate the British empire, but as a people, hate the English, you'll gain allies that hate them much more than you can ever imagine.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Wikipedia says ice road truckers has taken place in Alaska, the Northern Territories and Manitoba.

With a little bit of the Yukon in one season.

I think we should claim the Yukon just to connect Alaska fully really.

This is all in the NAFTA pact anyway so we can just pick whatever pieces we want.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
benjipwns said:
Wikipedia says ice road truckers has taken place in Alaska, the Northern Territories and Manitoba.

With a little bit of the Yukon in one season.

I think we should claim the Yukon just to connect Alaska fully really.

This is all in the NAFTA pact anyway so we can just pick whatever pieces we want.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia can get rekt.

maybe they moved to Alaska after the first season? I survived like 4 episodes (0 trucks gone to ice).
.

Oh, and we want Whistler and Big White.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Chichikov said:
Wikipedia can get rekt.

maybe they moved to Alaska after the first season? I survived like 4 episodes (0 trucks gone to ice).
.

Oh, and we want Whistler and Big White.
Click to expand...
Well, shows like Top Chef do different cities and stuff, why can't ICE ROAD TRUCKERS on THE HISTORY CHANNEL.
The mining companies that owned the road where the first season was filmed felt that the show portrayed the road in a negative fashion. They felt that the show depicted drivers as cowboys making a mad dash for money and taking excessive risks to do so. Also the companies felt that the cameras and filming created distractions for the drivers (Sherwood walking to the back of the truck to get a coffee cup without stopping on camera). As a result, the owners decided not to participate in future seasons of the show. A new rule for the Tibbitt to Contwoyto Winter Roads was enacted for the 2008 season, prohibiting commercial, media, video or rolling film cameras either inside or attached to the outside of vehicles. The show's producers located an alternate ice road for the second season of the show
Click to expand...
 
K

Konka

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
PD's original schtick (at least as long as I've been here) was that he supported Hillary in the primary and became super jaded when Obama beat her, hence the constant concern trolling that reached its peak in 2012 when he predicted Romney would win and bought into the "polls are skewed!" hype.

He's turning on Hillary now because she's assumed quasi-incumbent status for some reason.

And if Hillary loses he will blame Obama for it
Click to expand...

Another thing I've noticed is that he never responds to posts that point out his ridiculous or trolling statements.

Like just now. All this talk about him and all he has to say is...

PhoenixDark said:
No Tidal playlist? Still not supporting the black community I see.
Click to expand...

But it's like that pretty much of late whenever anyone calls bullshit.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
benjipwns said:
Well, shows like Top Chef do different cities and stuff, why can't ICE ROAD TRUCKERS on THE HISTORY CHANNEL.
Click to expand...
You know, the story is actually interesting, like, the logistics of it all, I feel like it can be a great documentary or a magazine piece.
But no, we had to have a reality show format where they point sex tape cameras and people who take long uneventful drives.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
lol

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...assleys-history-with-the-history-channel.html

Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley's anger at the History network's lack of historical programming has become one of his favorite Twitter hobbyhorses in recent weeks. It all started back in early January, when the senator tweeted, "Ocassionally I turn to History channel hope to c history. Whenevr will the history channel hv a real old fashion histry program." Eloquently put, Senator.

That initial tweet was followed by an occasional spate of similar kvetching: It seems that, try as he might, Grassley just couldn't help going back to the well. And so, in honor of his latest complaint, issued Sunday evening, we seek to put the whole thing in proper historical perspective for you. Grassley wouldn't want it any other way.

...

January 6, 2012: Grassley's rage begins, nearly coinciding with the New Year that, according to Mayan prognostication, might be the last. Coincidence?

February 1, 2012: Grassley, unlike much of America, is not charmed by Pawn Stars. "I turn to History channel frequently bc I like history. There is nevr any history unless u r an antique dealer. Change name!"

February 29, 2012: Grassley is disappointed by Ax Men and plaintively wonders about the title yet again. "Just turned to history channel. No history. I used to get history. Why do we h v such a channel when it doesnt do history."

February 25, 2012. Grassley is disappointed by Mudcats and once again sounds his unbarbaric yawp. "Just love history. So occasionally I turn to history channel. 'mud cats' when wi they put history back on the channel."

March 10, 2012: Grassley is disappointed by Modern Marvels: Muscle Cars. "Just tuned to History channel. Once again no history."

March 13, 2012: Chuck Grassley admits in a public forum to enjoying a History network reality show. It is American Pickers. The occasion is a momentous one. Is he embracing the channel's new slogan, "History, made every day"?

March 14, 2012: Reports surface that History has ordered its first scripted series, Vikings. Chuck Grassley does not comment.

9:35 p.m. on March 18, 2012: Chuck Grassley is disappointed, once again. "History. No history. Axe man Timber Nothing historical. Back to FOX. Sigh. Suggest name to change channel name."
Click to expand...
 
E

Ecotic

Member
benjipwns said:
Wikipedia says ice road truckers has taken place in Alaska, the Northern Territories and Manitoba.

With a little bit of the Yukon in one season.

I think we should claim the Yukon just to connect Alaska fully really.

This is all in the NAFTA pact anyway so we can just pick whatever pieces we want.
Click to expand...

You're right, the Yukon goes too. Luckily we have a historical claim.

20576548422_b6ddf436ac_m.jpg
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Just read this otherwise useless piece by a conservative but it did have an interesting thought in it: If Hillary had stayed in the Senate none of her current scandals would exist. Everything from the speaking fees, to Clinton Foundation, to Benghazi, to these e-mails, etc. And what exactly did she gain politically from being tied to Obama's foreign policy as Secretary of State?

That'd be a moderately interesting alternate history. I wonder if there would have been a chattering classes push for her to run for 2012 against Obama when he was looking in bad shape for a while there in 2011 and also considering the 2010 elections.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Just watch The Military Channel that's where all that old stuff went pretty literally. Since I think History owns it and just tossed all their stuff on it.

Although that's probably about gardening competitions on army bases or something nowdays.

EDIT: Oh, now it's called...and I am not making this up...American Heroes Channel.

In March 2014, the channel was rebranded as American Heroes Channel, with the intent to "provide more history based, narrative-style documentary programming."
Click to expand...

Many of the programs featured on American Heroes Channel are war documentaries, the contents of which deal in large part with modern warfare, and in particular the U.S. military from World War II onward. While the A+E Networks-owned History, Military History and H2 air similar programming, those networks tend to show more programs about other time periods and cultures (ancient, Roman, Medieval, Eastern, and other forms of warfare). AHC has a more contemporary subject matter than those competitors, but it occasionally presents historical programming as well. Actor Dennis Haysbert serves as the network's continuity announcer for its on-air promotions.

In addition, the channel also presents feature films with a military theme (usually within the hosted movie series An Officer and a Movie, which is hosted by Lou Diamond Phillips), as well as individual episodes of other shows (such as Belly of the Beast, Build It Bigger, Extreme Machines, Timewatch and Unsolved History), which incorporate military-related content. These are often shows that were produced for other Discovery Communications-owned channels.
Click to expand...
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Grassley is right. I used to watch the History channel a lot as a kid/teen. The first shift was to 24/7 Nazi stuff, and then a few years later the alien shit began. Then Nazi alien stuff, plus "ancient aliens" shit.

Have I discussed the racist undertones of ancient aliens with you all? It's as if there's a concentrated effort to call into question every great thing black or brown people did x years ago, and instead give the credit to aliens.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
PhoenixDark said:
Grassley is right. I used to watch the History channel a lot as a kid/teen. The first shift was to 24/7 Nazi stuff, and then a few years later the alien shit began. Then Nazi alien stuff, plus "ancient aliens" shit.

Have I discussed the racist undertones of ancient aliens with you all? It's as if there's a concentrated effort to call into question every great thing black or brown people did x years ago, and instead give the credit to aliens.
Click to expand...

The history channel used to be amazing, but then it started a slide into mediocrity that never ended. I miss the history channel I used to know, I learned so much shit that it isn't even funny.

Also my love fest might be due to me being like 4 or 5 beers in, but it really did used to be great.
 
D

dabig2

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Grassley is right. I used to watch the History channel a lot as a kid/teen. The first shift was to 24/7 Nazi stuff, and then a few years later the alien shit began. Then Nazi alien stuff, plus "ancient aliens" shit.

Have I discussed the racist undertones of ancient aliens with you all? It's as if there's a concentrated effort to call into question every great thing black or brown people did x years ago, and instead give the credit to aliens.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but how else can we explain what the Africans, Chinese, Eastern Islanders, Middle Easterners, Mayans, etc. accomplished and built millennia ago without too much help from white people.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
The Countless Crimes of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now
After years of holding herself above the law, telling lie after lie, and months of flat-out obstruction, HIllary Clinton has finally produced to the FBI her server and three thumb drives. Apparently, the server has been professionally wiped clean of any useable information, and the thumb drives contain only what she selectively culled. Myriad criminal offenses apply to this conduct.

Anyone with knowledge of government workings has known from inception that Hillary’s communications necessarily would contain classified and national security related information. Thanks to the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community, it is now beyond dispute that she had ultra-Top Secret information and more that should never have left the State Department.

Equal to Ms. Clinton’s outrageous misconduct is that of the entire federal law enforcement community. It has long chosen to be deliberately blind to these flagrant infractions of laws designed to protect national security—laws for which other people, even reporters, have endured atrocious investigations, prosecutions, and some served years in prison for comparatively minor infractions.

It’s high time for a special prosecutor to be named to conduct a full investigation into Ms. Clinton’s likely commission of multiple felonies, including a conspiracy with Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and possibly others, to violate multiple laws.

While the FBI and Department of Justice have willfully ignored Hillary Clinton’s outrageous conduct, they didn’t hesitate a minute to investigate and prosecute former CIA Director and national hero, General Petraeus. He was just tarred, feathered and ridden out of the CIA on a rail for sharing some information (his own notebook) with his biographer who was both in the military and had a top secret clearance. Yet, Petraeus did not have a secret server set up to house his classified and top secret information or digital satellite imagery; he destroyed nothing; and, there was no “leak.” But that’s not all.

During the same years that Hillary was communicating about national security and world affairs off the grid, the Department of Justice has had no qualms threatening news reporters and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. To hell with the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent, even the New York Times reported that this administration prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers for “espionage” than all prior administrations put together.

Remember Fox news reporter James Rosen? The Holder Justice Department not only seized his emails immediately and without his knowledge, they suggested he was a criminal “co-conspirator” in a leak case—under the Espionage Act—which carries a ten-year term of imprisonment.

And they quickly indicted former House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senator Menendez on extremely stretched or tortured views of vague criminal statutes and factual allegations of conduct that may well not be criminal. Senator Menendez can’t vacation with his best friend but Hillary Clinton and her “Foundation” can accept millions of dollars from foreign governments seeking to curry her favor.

Yet there’s been no criminal investigation of Ms. Clinton and her cabal? They couldn’t seize her server months ago while it contained all the emails? They couldn’t put a stop to it from the beginning?

Oh right, I forgot. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Ms. Clinton had declined to allow an Inspector General at the State Department during her entire tenure—so there was no internal oversight. And oh yes, her name is Clinton, and she has long deemed herself above the law. The rules only apply to everyone else.

But wait, there’s still more. The current Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, Leslie Caldwell, and her Chief of the Corporate Fraud Section, Andrew Weissmann, destroyed Arthur Andersen and its 85,000 jobs on unfounded charges of obstruction of justice for destroying documents the Supreme Court said it had no legal obligation to keep. The laws governing Ms. Clinton’s obligations are clear. Nonetheless, they haven’t even convened a grand jury to look into Ms. Clinton’s longstanding assertion that she wiped her server clean—of documents she was legally required to keep?

On top of that, there can be little doubt that Eric Holder and other high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials themselves wrote Ms. Clinton at Clintonemail.com—not to mention countless communications with the President and “All His Muses”—Counter-terrrorism advisor Lisa Monaco, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and then White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler (not to mention Valerie Jarrett)—about Benghazi and all other top secret and classified issues. The DOJ hasn’t subpoenaed the emails from any of the recipients—or the internet service providers? Or looked for them on the backup government servers of the accounts of all the recipients? And the State Department still today is making statements defending her?

Not only did Ms. Clinton deliberately demonstrate disdain for the Federal Records Act and nullify the protections of the Freedom of Information Act, she violated the Espionage Act by having information relating to the national defense on her server at all. And her deliberate disregard for national security made the job of all hackers that much easier.

...

Ms. Clinton, however, established her entire system to avoid the law and in violation of the Espionage Act—as she and her co-conspirators removed all records from the State Department from its inception. Compounding her crimes, she knowingly and willfully destroyed whatever she wanted to destroy—despite or more likely because of—the incriminating information it contained and in the face of the Benghazi investigation.

There’s still more. The countless false statements are crimes under 18 United States Code Section 1001—both by Ms. Clinton to Congress (“no classified information”) and in writing by Cheryl Mills to the State Department and just filed with Judge Sullivan—in which she states: “On matters pertaining to the conduct of government business, it was her practice to use the officials’ government email accounts.” We already know that Ms. Clinton used her personal server exclusively.

Title 18 United States Code Section 1001 makes it a crime for anyone to “knowingly and willfully” falsify, conceal, or cover up “a material fact,” or make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or misrepresentation,” etc. Countless people are convicted felons under this statute—some for offenses that would never occur to anyone even to be a crime. And these are just a few of the possible statutes that it would appear to any federal prosecutor that she and her corrupt cabal violated.

As Lt. Col. Ralph Peters had the guts to say last night on FoxNews, “Hillary Clinton is a criminal.” Military heroes who have risked their lives for this country have gone to prison for less. The Department of Justice’s selective prosecutions have been well-document. Its favoritism and targeting practices must end.

As discussed on NewsMaxTV’s Hardline last night, it’s time for a national outcry for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate and indict Ms. Clinton’s flagrant violations of some of our most important laws. Anyone else would have been arrested by now.

Until there is a massive change in this country, justice is a game.
Click to expand...
It's too bad Bernie won't even mention any of this, it's time to finally expose the Clinton's criminal organization and someone with his unimpeachable integrity could convince the country of the truth instead of the facade.

Yet there's still going to be GAFfers going all out to put another criminal in the White House rather than a true patriot and human being.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
benjipwns said:
Just watch The Military Channel that's where all that old stuff went pretty literally. Since I think History owns it and just tossed all their stuff on it.

Although that's probably about gardening competitions on army bases or something nowdays.

EDIT: Oh, now it's called...and I am not making this up...American Heroes Channel.
Click to expand...

It got filled with bullshit that has nothing to do with military of the USA or the history of US conflicts. One was a documentary about Jesus, another I think about UFOs, and other conspiracy theory bullshit . Some military stuff still there but it is less now.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
benjipwns said:
The Countless Crimes of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now

It's too bad Bernie won't even mention any of this, it's time to finally expose the Clinton's criminal organization and someone with his unimpeachable integrity could convince the country of the truth instead of the facade.

Yet there's still going to be GAFfers going all out to put another criminal in the White House rather than a true patriot and human being.
Click to expand...
I'd rather have a president who already got killing their lawyer out of their system than one who still hadn't.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Yes and no. I'm going to assume that they indeed believe Hillary Clinton has committed a crime for our purposes here and that it's not cynical gamesmanship.

So you're a pundit. The Hillary stuff is the "big story" so you have to have a take on it. Now you can just bang out something about how it's another in the long line of Clinton corruption and so on. But if you can just find a hook, then you've got something. And that means attention.

Now in this case, we have a lawyer and she's looking at these other examples of the Justice Department going after people and saying "aha!" we can't trust the Justice Department, we need a special prosecutor who's independent! Now she's got her hook.

She heard something about the Espionage Act so looked into it with her legal background and found a way to connect it. Now she's got THREE hooks. 1. Corrupt Obama Justice Administration 2. Special Prosecutor 3. Espionage Act.

Now, she just needs the rest of the conservative world to pick up on this and run with it, the she's got the FOX invite and some other conservative radio/podcast invites rather than having just turned out another in the seas of the same articles that "add nothing" unlike this hard hitting piece that drives the narrative. Then they all start discussing it on their own, but she's the originator.

And then we have an opportunity for the "mainstream" media to start talking about how "some people" maybe even "some legal experts" are calling for a special prosecutor. And they get to bring on Democrats and Republicans and legal experts to fill time.

And now that we've filled two days, that's probably enough time for Trump to have said something again. And we can keep this perpetual motion machine of meaningless going for a couple more weeks and then it's time to start our two weeks of debate speculation.

Speaking of which, if you hadn't seen the moderators are going to be Jake Tapper and Hugh Hewitt. So you've got a moderate journalist to hit em with general election style questions and a conservative talk radio guy to find the primary red meat which seems like a decent plan for these things. And they'll be doing both the undercard and top tier debates. Which will air back-to-back unlike Fox's weird afternoon banishment.

Hewitt also doesn't like Trump btw. Savage and some others were yelling about bias already lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
Top Bottom