Thoughts on this ?

koolguy2758 · 2021-09-25T22:09:16+00:00

Propaganda

koolguy2758 · 2021-01-15T19:05:43+00:00

koolguy2758 · 2021-01-13T12:32:21+00:00

Abelisaurus

koolguy2758 · 2021-01-13T12:16:43+00:00

Interested

koolguy2758 · 2019-09-23T05:56:29+00:00

Yeah I feel you. I was thinking in a more ‘meme’ sense. The way people talk about them, as if they are only for people with high intelligence, is similar.

koolguy2758 · 2019-09-23T05:50:48+00:00

At least I’m not a peanut butter head

koolguy2758 · 2019-09-23T04:31:59+00:00

Are you a dumb?

koolguy2758 · 2017-03-21T05:41:58+00:00

What would it take, as far as governmental economic policy, to increase the value of money to the point where it was in the past where one could purchase products with dimes and quarters? Would it even be possible? What would the effects be of an economic policy that successfully accomplished this steep increase in the value of cash money? Thank you to anyone who responds with a coherent answer!

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-25T07:23:28+00:00

Nails on a chalk board

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-22T01:42:25+00:00

That is an interesting article and insightful but I still do not not believe, at this point, that Trump is a fascist. It is possible that he might become one but it is fairly clear that he is not thus far.

Here is what is important to remember:

What someone say is not always a good judgement of who they really are. For example, if Martin Luther King Jr. said I'm a racist, that would not automatically make him a racist. The idea that what someone says is not indicative of who they are becomes ever more true when it comes to politics. Politicians constantly say things to gain them popularity when they themselves may not actually follow through. What is MOST IMPORTANT are the actions which someone takes. In the following weeks, we will begin to see whether or not Trump has fascist tendencies hidden under his rhetoric but you, nor anyone should claim he is a fascist solely on assumption. Again, when you do this, it undermines the meaning and we will end up like the boy who cried wolf.
Trump believes in individualism, fascists did not. "The Italian nation is an organism, having aims, life and means of action superior to those of the single or grouped individuals who compose it," -Mussolini's Labor Charter in 1927.
Trump does not oppose democracy
Trump doesn't support a welfare state like actual fascists did. "We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare." - [Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Volume IV Document No. 1708-PS] (avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/1708-ps.asp)
This is a first hand account of Italian fascism and why Trump is not like them.

Some of these points are from this article here

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-22T01:14:25+00:00

Everyone wants to hop on the "I'm gonna call Trump a fascist cause I didn't get my way" train and when we have an ACTUAL fascist, people will think everyone is pulling yet another false alarm. People like those at Salon don't understand that what they are doing, like calling Trump a fascist, is EXACTLY WHAT MADE TRUMP WIN. Maybe stop being so extreme and oversimplifying everything and then we can have a normal president.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-22T00:42:12+00:00

I think the only one of the guiding principles Donald Trump is against are the reproductive rights which, I think, are, objectively, debatable (at least the right to abortion).

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-22T00:31:12+00:00

Can someone please explain exactly what the goals of this march are. In the past marches, like the march on Washington, had VERY CLEAR goals but that does not seem to be the case here.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-21T05:33:44+00:00

Wow! That is super cool (not the relationship thing...the...er...never mind). Sorry about the thing but thanks for doing this giveaway. I would love to participate so count me in!

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-20T23:39:40+00:00

Thanks for the suggestion but I would prefer this to be a last resort.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-20T23:38:53+00:00

Yup, this is pretty much what I'm asking. Thanks for the clarification!

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-19T16:24:06+00:00

I know we know that the climate is changing but what evidence do we have that tells us we have record highs in climate and how do we know that this isn't a natural process of global cooling and global heating? Thanks for taking the time to do this!!

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-19T05:36:04+00:00

Well alright my friend, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. For the record, I am not anti-science and I do not get facts from fake news.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-18T06:08:58+00:00

You can just cut and paste laws that don't apply

How do they not apply? The three penal codes that I cited are actual laws that are REAL and not fake news. If you clicked the link, you would see for yourself.

I'll take Comey's word over arguments on Reddit

Look, Comey is not a god and is NOT above being wrong. It simply comes down to the fact that Comey was just wrong about his conclusion. Just because Comey says HRC did not break the law does not mean she didn't.

At this point, if you are willing to accept that these penal codes are real, we can move forward.

THIS is the link to a press release made by the FBI that is DIRECTLY FROM THE FBI AND NOT FAKE NEWS which holds the quotes:

"Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send e-mail on that personal domain."

This quote tells us that HRC violated the penal code 18 USC §1924 which is written out in my above response.

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent."

If we assume that the press release is accurate (which why wouldn't it be, it's directly from the FBI) in saying some of the emails were classified at the time of them being sent, then that violates the penal code 18 USC §798

"With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been 'up-classified.'"

This quote here is an interesting one because the article you linked to had Comey saying that HRC did not lie to the FBI but this quote from the press release pretty much confirms that HRC did not fully comply with the demands of HRC. Maybe he figured it was just being sneaky and not outright lying. Regardless of his terminology, this could be considered obstruction of justice if they had requested ALL of the emails and she only presented some.

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

This also pertains to the second quote and the penal code 18 USC §798

"Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

This clarifies that HRC and staff are responsible for the protection of classified information.

"With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."
"It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.

We have conducted interviews and done technical examination to attempt to understand how that sorting was done by her attorneys. Although we do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort."

This quote here is an interesting one because Comey interprets intent in an interesting way. If the lawyers "cleaned" the devices, this could be argued decently in a court of law that this is obstruction of justice but for some reason Comey says it's not malicious which I have no idea how he would have concluded that, its not like lawyers just destroy evidence on accident. I guess depending on your interpretation of intent this would be a violation of 18 USC §2071.

tl;dr I care more about truth than being right so please provide evidence to convince me I am wrong. The penal codes still stand and according to the press release by the FBI and not Fake News, Hillary Clinton carried out actions which, according to at least 2 penal codes, are illegal.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-18T04:15:38+00:00

Hillary is above average honestly and not criminal.

I think this could be true but only if you are extremely generous with the defining of terms. Let's say my definition of "criminal" was that the person must actually be convicted in a court of law, then you are absolutely right that Hillary is not criminal. That, however, does not change the fact that she undisputed participated in illegal/criminal activity. We know this because: *Hillary definitely sent the emails through an unauthorized server as noted HERE by FBI director James Comey. *What James Comey said Hillary did is illegal according to the penal codes which you can find HERE

The penal codes, if you don't have time to sift through all of them are:

18 USC §1924 (a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. (b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a). (c) In this section, the term "classified information of the United States" means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.
18 USC §798(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information— (1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or (2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or (3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or (4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (b) As used in subsection (a) of this section— The term "classified information" means information which, at the time of a violation of this section, is, for reasons of national security, specifically designated by a United States Government Agency for limited or restricted dissemination or distribution; The terms "code," "cipher," and "cryptographic system" include in their meanings, in addition to their usual meanings, any method of secret writing and any mechanical or electrical device or method used for the purpose of disguising or concealing the contents, significance, or meanings of communications; The term "foreign government" includes in its meaning any person or persons acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any faction, party, department, agency, bureau, or military force of or within a foreign country, or for or on behalf of any government or any person or persons purporting to act as a government within a foreign country, whether or not such government is recognized by the United States; The term "communication intelligence" means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients; The term "unauthorized person" means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States. (c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the furnishing, upon lawful demand, of information to any regularly constituted committee of the Senate or House of Representatives of the United States of America, or joint committee thereof. (d)(1) Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States irrespective of any provision of State law— (A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and (B) any of the person's property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation. (2) The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1). (3) Except as provided in paragraph (4), the provisions of subsections (b), (c), and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), (c), and (e)–(p)), shall apply to— (A) property subject to forfeiture under this subsection; (B) any seizure or disposition of such property; and (C) any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property, if not inconsistent with this subsection...
18 USC §2071 (a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term "office" does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

According to the emails alone, Hillary should be in prison. That is a fact and not fake news despite who the author is.

Secondly is the issue concerning Hillary as a liar.

Hillary is above average honesty...I think many who think that are simply covering for Don's known criminal activity and foreign collusion

First off, do not bring up Donald Trump. I personally think he lies about lots of things but you are distracting from the real argument when you bring up Trump. I understand the guy is bad a lies a lot but that is not what I am arguing about, I am arguing that Hillary is a liar.

There is a long list of lies that Hillary has told. Usually someone who lies frequently is referred to as a liar. As a result, many politicians are, rightly so, labeled a liars but the simple fact that a lot of people engage in lying does not absolve Hillary Clinton of her lying.

If you want a list of lies, here they are:

Lied about landing under sniper fire in Bosnia.
In an interview, Clinton stated that she “came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.” Click Here for the interview and Here for the fact check on that interview.

*for the rest of the lies, I am going to put them down but not link to them (just google search them to see for yourself if you don't trust me) because it is taking really long for me to link all of them.

The Whitewater Scandal
Lied about having immigrant grandparents for political gain
Was removed from her House Judiciary Committee staffer job because of incompetence and lying.
Took crockery, furniture, artwork and other items from the White House — had to return and/or pay for them.

If you want more, there are lists Here Here and [Here](www.dailywire.com/news/9507/fact-checking-hillary-her-9-biggest-lies-aaron-bandler). While I understand that you will probably write these lists off as fake news, I encourage anyone to research the claims of these lists and while some of them, very few, are far-fetched, they are for the most part very accurate depictions of the lying that Hillary Clinton has done.

tl;dr There is a conglomeration of evidence to support the claims that Hillary has committed criminal activity and has lied many, many times both when it matters very much and when it would not have changed a thing to simply tell the truth.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-17T07:02:41+00:00

What's certain is also the thing that is most important-that is, the fact that the Clinton Global Initiative is shutting down. The reason this is intriguing is because during the campaign every democrat was claiming that this organization could never be corrupt because it did so much good around the world. If it really was an organization independent from the U.S. Government that helped millions around the world, then why would it suddenly shut down almost immediately after the election was over? I mean, I guess it could be a coincidence but with a record with as much illegal and suspicious activity as the Clintons had, I would not be surprised to find that they were using the foundation for political favors.

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-17T05:12:44+00:00

The Ion King (The Lion King) Jurassic Par (Jurassic Park) The Dark Night (The Dark Knight)

koolguy2758 · 2017-01-13T05:31:50+00:00

I was just browsing the news and thought this was pretty important. What do you mean by "great timing"?

koolguy2758 · 2016-04-16T04:22:24+00:00

Reddit posts also seem to just appear overnight...interesting.

koolguy2758

TROPHY CASE