Slashdot Mirror

False,They had recounts in all those states.

By your own claim, there was no valid recount in Michigan. And Pennsylvania's wasn't completed either.

In Detroit it was found there was enough significant voter fraud that they were unable to do the recount. The fraud in Detroit appeared to favor Hillary heavily. Michigan was unable to complete a recount that was demanded and paid for by the Jill Stein and the Green party because of how poorly the heavily democratic counties handled votes and counted some ballots 8 times election night. Parts of Michigan that there wasn't obvious voter fraud went strongly to Trump.

Your entire post is an outright lie.
Story

Actually, your post is leaving out something. Who was in charge. So let's see, we have Republicans all over, allegedly, yet they couldn't ensure a fair and honest election?

Oh wait, they're the ones who gerrymandered the state.

No wonder they couldn't ensure fair and honest elections statewide. No wonder we can't trust them. Maybe they didn't count 75,000 votes.

Also remember, the only outright evidence of election rigging was by the DNC, not Trump or Russia.

Oh really, and yet you provide none of this evidence.

Already, you're suspect with your own false claims.

Bias against trump because he's a dickweed isn't racist merely because he's right

I was referring to bias for Obama — the phenomenon known as bigotry of lower expectations. Whether such racism really did motivate the newspapers or not is neither known, nor even knowable. But it certainly is a no less well-supported accusation, than the summary dismissals of Obama's critics as "racist" were.

And your sig is still idiotic because I remember people criticising bush before Obama being called unpatriotic.

And you are an idiot, because this observation does not contradict my signature in any way.

Turns out this was mostly over-sensationalizing from a badly translated story:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...

Ferret

Well lemme see here:

Some people got violent over whether Ann Coulter would speak at Berkley. ...as reported by www.glennbeck.com/.. www.theblaze.com/.../ Breitbart News https://townhall.com/ ....Uhh huh. oh hey, this happened just last April. Yeah, ok, I'm not up to date.

But yeah, I'd denounce planned violence over having that shitbag speak. Bad mojo right there.

I didn't say they changed as a culture, but the whole religion is based on changing as individuals,

Spin baby.

The NHS relies upon the ingenuity of the Americans creating new techniques and improving technology. That is why the latest greatest techniques are generally found in the US and not in England. Innovation costs money, or is that irrelevant to the evaluating health care systems?

http://www.investors.com/polit...

https://www.theguardian.com/he...

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/hea...

It is really good, until it is threatened by cost overruns. But who cares, it is someone else's money.

Must be why the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People gave Jeff Sessions a Governmental Award for Excellence, what with his apparent latent racism and all...

Two Iraqi men in their 20s have been convicted of a bloody sex crime in Colorado that left the victim, a woman in her 50s, in need of immediate surgery and a colostomy bag. Three other Iraqi men, also in their 20s,were convicted on lesser charges as accessories.

Four points set this case apart. First, there is its brutality: Law enforcement officers describe the July 2012 assault as "rare" and "horrific" and "one of the worst in Colorado history." Second, all of these men once assisted U.S. military forces in Iraq as informants and interpreters. Third, every one of them received permanent residency status in the U.S., due in part to efforts made by U.S. military members on their behalf. Fourth, this extraordinary case and the ties that bind it to the U.S. military and the war in Iraq have received little coverage.

Link to full story.

Have we ever considered it's a BAD thing to steal all these talented people from their own societies and hog them all for ourselves? America, already bursting with money that it just wastes, gets richer while the developing world is robbed of the talented people that they so badly need. Imagine 10,000 enterprising, able people suddenly relocated back to their home countries where they will open businesses, employ their countrymen, and add to their own culture's wealth instead of an imperialist power's. Now imagine the Americans that have to fill the gap - suddenly the employers don't hold all the cards any more and it's a seller's market. Employee abuses go down and worker salaries go up. It's win-win...for everyone but the corporations.

Best thing is you look at the data yourself; that's what I did.

Academic studies find the same thing; here is a good summary: http://townhall.com/columnists...

Here is another article debunking other claims of strong racial bias: http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Misattributing the problems of African Americans to systemic racism is really dangerous. It's like insisting your doctor treat you for cancer when you're really suffering from heart disease.

To give an example, his travel/immigration ban covers several Middle Eastern countries, and cited terrorist attacks including 9/11 as cause. And yet, none of the countries the 9/11 hijackers came from are included in the ban. Why?

Quoting looney left talking points isn't helping your case. The reason for the seven countries has been covered extensively - Obama chose them.

Even the lunatics at msnbc know this:

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-j...

and NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/30/...

More reliable information here:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/m...

Because clearly we have 58 states and Obama was right all along!

http://www.snopes.com/politics...

Also, all his "facts" about gun crime/control are entirely accurate.

http://townhall.com/columnists...

The 10% of men number you pulled out of your ass can be explained by "dudes that can't get laid any other way" pretty easily. Yes, it's higher than women who don't see the current feminism as beneficial or helpful for society (and that poll is from a mostly leftist site!). Why not search for the number I gave you instead of trolling you twat!

The poll you gave on abortion being illegal is also skewed, but dumb fucks like you can't figure out the game. Try this one. Making abortions criminal as a general rule is not the same as making them illegal especially when there are circumstances where most pro-life people have no problem with abortion. Pregnancy from rape and incest for example, or in cases where the mother's life is at risk. Quite a different from people who have the perspective that "I can't afford the baby" is not a good enough reason to have an abortion, let alone "I don't feel like being responsible for my choices.

I won't answer any more of your dumb ass trolling, you dumb fucking troll. You can go find facts if you really want to, but like most useful idiots you won't.

I think what you meant to say is that your are amazed that a politician has so quickly fulfilled his campaign promises: 1) to enforce the existing laws of the land through border security and 2) protect national security by halting travel between the USA and 7 countries through which the USA has no formal security setup, some of which are failed states.

Under the prior administrations things were squishy, even though they knew the threats and dangers.

It it time to chose a side. We don't want to end up like Europe. I personally have friends in Germany and France. Their current situation sucks. Their countries are not safe and their refugee friends won't assimilate. My friend in Germany can't even let her little daughters walk to the store alone for fear of refugee men. In France & Belgium, refugee children cheer over the Paris terrorist attacks. Where do they learn this? Is Islam compatible with the US Constitution, freedom, and democracy?

It is time to pause, take a breath, and sort this mess out. And as a friendly reminder, the travel ban countries were chosen by President Obama.

Meanwhile, President Trump is working to get good jobs and the American economy back on track.

This is clearly a man of action, who can't be bought or swayed by polls. This is leadership and getting the job done. It may be a shock. A jolt, but maybe, just maybe this is what we need after 8 years of squishy and 8 prior years of fum-bumbling. I don't agree with President Trump on everything he has done in the first 9 days, but at least their is a leader with America's interests in the White House.

This being a democracy, the congress, and courts with their own powers can fight this out. That is how democracy works. We are also free to protest, start a recall, and/or start a twitter hashtag. History will judge this moment and the moments to come.

I like how you keep repeating this as "Trump's list of seven"...

It's Obama's list of seven. See: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021

Well Trump owns it now. He went much further than Obama and a Republican-dominated Congress did (albeit with Democrat support.) Trump is not just restricting visas granted to people from these countries. He's banning them from entering.

You still haven't addressed how Trump's action would have stopped the San Bernadino shooters. Which it wouldn't. The list is a convenient one for Trump. He can use its prior existence as political cover, appear to be tough on Muslims entering the country, and not piss off his friends in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates.

I like how you keep repeating this as "Trump's list of seven"...

It's Obama's list of seven. See: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021

Cynic in me says they are looking for someone who can be implicated as a terrorist supporter to be used to justify the ban.

Funny thing about that...

Trumps actual order has an exception for immigrants who are already in transit, viz section (e): "[...] when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States."

So holding people up at US airports just some ICE pricks trying to make a false narrative to paint Trump in a bad light.

And other than Syria, which was specifically referenced in the order, Trump is using Obama's list of Muslim countries, viz: "Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries."

So this is just lefties not caring about the actual issue. When they do it it's OK, but thay have to paint Trump in a bad light when he does it.

(Speaking of which, has Hillary been seen in a black church or black community since November? Or was that just an election thing?)

Also, Obama banned Iraq refugees for 6 months and we didn't hear a peep out of the lefties. Once again, they don't care about the issue, only which side does it.

And no, he didn't ban Muslim immigration. Muslims from Turkey and Saudi Arabia (for example) are not affected by this.

There's a fuckton of people on social media who are actually in favor of this, and who see this as a temporary measure intended to create common-sense rules intended to keep us safe. People are also noting that this was one of his campaign promises, and it's both surprising and refreshing to see someone actually keeping those promises.

You guys have 6 1/2 years to groom a replacement, and you'd better get started real soon now. Your campaign strategy of being the "lesser of two evils" won't work the next time around.

If Jared Kushner or Donald Jr. decides to run for president, the current of actually kept promises will be almost impossible to swim against.

Read this.

the US people preferred Clinton.

California preferred Clinton. Clinton's overall vote gap was, what, 3 million votes over Trump? But her vote gap in California was 4 million votes. So judging by just the OTHER 49 States Clinton lost the popular vote. Why should the rest of the country be held captive by the far left political preferences of just one state?

http://www.investors.com/polit...
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/m...

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We are not conducting a criminal trial here and aren't bound by the "innocent until proven guilty" rule.

The fact is, California is ruled by the same Party, which for years objected — and continues to object — to any and all attempts to verify voters' status. It has a large — and growing — number of cities, which offer official sanctuary to illegal immigrants.

They have a motive — illegals tend to support Democrats. They have the opportunity — White House is controlled by a fellow Democrat. We have anecdotal evidence of illegals being registered to vote — and not being prosecuted. Democrats admit it too — when caught on hidden camera. In such a situation, absence of evidence becomes evidence of presence, so to speak. The burden of proof is on those like yourself denying anything is wrong. We do not know the exact scale, and that's a problem...

I've never seen any signs in a Wal-Mart pointing out that the Levi jeans are a special Walmart-only version without the quality of Levi jeans elsewhere.

That's new — the Anonymous OP I was replying to made no allegations of the Walmart-only TVs being lower quality. Reduced feature-set — yes. But he never mentioned quality issues — indeed, his parents are, reportedly, happy enough with the purchase for him to recommend the shop to /. colleagues.

Without adequate information, cheap crap drives expensive quality out of the market

Well, whatever the quality of Walmart's wares, there is obviously still plenty of places to get other kind of stuff on the US market.

if you don't mind how they treat their employees.

I'm unaware of anybody being forced to work there. If people do so voluntarily, I certainly am not going to pay attention to Communists and their rent-seeking running dogs at the various Unions.

Answer is it was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments, 2 of which were Germany and China. I hadn't heard the other 3 named.

Oh yea, that is according to the FBI doing the investigation.

She was not trying for the popular vote

Actually, she was. It's one of the many ways the Clinton campaign was incompetent. They feared they would win the Electoral College but lose the popular vote, so they spent millions on ads in "blue" states.

One source (there are many reporting the same thing):
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

Neither side was trying to win the popular vote

Actually, the Clinton team was. They were concerned that Clinton would lose the popular vote but win the Electoral College, so they spent millions on ads in "blue" states.

One source: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...
There's several others reporting the same information.

A formerly nevertrumper radio host had explained his reasoning for voting Trump this way: "Essentially, I am voting for Trump because of the people who don’t want me to, and I believe I must register my disgust with Hillary Clinton."

http://townhall.com/columnists...

> FFS the WMD was 100% Cheney stovepipe to fit his predetermined actions.

So, kinda like this?

Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin, but not go too far betting on Putin re Syria. Brent

Source email from 2015-12-21 12:09

> The CIA went out of their way to cast doubt on the "intelligence" that curveball'Ed the US into Iraq.

So, something like the FBI is doing now?

In telephone conversations with Donald Trump, FBI Director James Comey assured the president-elect there was no credible evidence that Russia influenced the outcome of the recent U.S. presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee and the e-mails of John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Source

I bet someone is going to blame him for quietly informing Congress of his actions right before the election, but remember this is the same guy who refused to recommend prosecution of Hillary even after this hearing. Feel free to watch the full hearing if you prefer.

An internal investigation of the Transportation Security Administration revealed security failures at dozens of the nation’s busiest airports, where undercover investigators were able to smuggle mock explosives or banned weapons through checkpoints in 95 percent of trials, ABC News has learned.

Given such a terrible TSA track record of finding contraband, them finding 70 guns in one week means over 1,000 guns got through that week. This is security theater that is just training people to do whatever they are told, rights and whether it's actually effective be damned.

"It means serving patrons in a world in which government surveillance is not going away; indeed it looks like it will increase."

Although surveillance expanded dramatically under Obama, these guys didn't object.

They gave Obama a pass, but are exceedingly harsh on Trump. As we know, this can only be explained by racism... So, fook them — they aren't getting a penny from me until they publicly renounce this wasteful effort.

Problem is, there were WMDs, the CIA bought some. Our troops suffered illness and injury from encountering them. So you can argue whether having WMDs was justification for the invasion, but pretending they weren't there is not realistic.

GM bailout was given to keep the Unions solvent and their members employed.

And, in any case, there being more than one company receiving tax-payer cash does not make Fascism and Crony Capitalism any more acceptable. Your kind were screaming bloody murder, when Haliburton was getting government's orders. But now even bona-fide subsidies are Ok?

That SolarCity in particular was owned by Elon Musk's cousins is not mentioned in TFA either — do you think, such tidbit would not ha've been considered newsworthy, had the companies involved were military contractors, coal miners, or oil pumpers?

Sorry, kwbauer, the fact is, we've already heard that sentiment. Republicans have proclaimed they have a mandate. Oh you may sputter over use of another phrasing, and you certainly won't admit the meaning is clear, but we've heard it.

Don't worry, some of us remember. Hypocrisy, and amnesia may be your defect, but others, others have their own recollections, and can spot your lies.

You have done it. You will do it again. Your political side has done it, in this particular instance. They have made the claim, get to the back of the bus. And yet...Trump still has less voters than Obama did. And a tighter margin.

Feel free to shock me, admit my interpretation is correct, then deny that Paul Ryan was correct.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/m...

So I guess it was "necessary" for the FBI to leak, four days before the election that George (H. W.) Bush was himself in-the-know on Iran-Contra?

That's some opinionated statements lacking facts on the current hillary email scandal.

Of course Bush was in the know, he was director of the CIA before he was VP. There's no way he didn't know. But that and the DUI (if true, I know W had one) were completely irrelevant to Clinton winning the 92 election. You can lay the cause of the win directly at the feet of Perot with 19% of the popular vote.

Looks like the FBI has disclosed that not only was Clinton's email server almost certainly hacked, but the hacking got so blatant that even Clinton's own part-time staff who did the incompetent setup of a Microsoft Exchange server were able to figure out that something was going on and shut it down temporarily while she was still using it.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

Clinton's private email server was never hacked. The government servers and FBI data as a result of the investigation on her was compromised. Her own server was far more secure than the classified information they are attacking her for potentially leaking.

"The department also has a policy of not taking unnecessary action close in time to Election Day that might influence an electionâ(TM)s outcome. These rules have been followed during Republican and Democratic administrations."

So I guess it was "necessary" for the FBI to leak, four days before the election that George (H. W.) Bush was himself in-the-know on Iran-Contra?

Clinton's campaign made great hay with this particular October Surprise. That was the election where Clinton displaced Bush, denying him a second term and giving us the FIRST Clinton Presidency.

Ross Perot pulled down more than three times the difference between Clinton and Bush. Clinton was 7% short of a popular-vote majority.

Any bets on whether at least a third of Perot's votes, or at least enough of those (plus conservative voters who just didn't vote for president) to flip a few states and their electoral votes, were people who would have voted for Bush but were disgusted by this and voting for Perot as a protest?

Looks like the FBI has disclosed that not only was Clinton's email server almost certainly hacked, but the hacking got so blatant that even Clinton's own part-time staff who did the incompetent setup of a Microsoft Exchange server were able to figure out that something was going on and shut it down temporarily while she was still using it.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

Telling people what can and cant do with their own property is called Communism.

No, under Communism there is no private property at all — it is all communal. What you are describing is Fascism. It is generally better than Communism, but still quite nasty — and inefficient.

I believe you're actually talking about authoritarianism. Fascism is authoritarian, but there are non-fascistic authoritarian systems too. Communism is quite the opposite, because it is about local direct democracy (in "communes"), and most so-called "communist" countries have instead been authoritarian. You could even describe Stalin as history's most successful fascist, as he was an authoritarian leader running the largest, most integrated state machinery in the world, and he favoured one nation and its people over all others in the world, and even over other nations within the USSR.

Telling people what can and cant do with their own property is called Communism.

No, under Communism there is no private property at all — it is all communal. What you are describing is Fascism. It is generally better than Communism, but still quite nasty — and inefficient.

Problem is, they were right. There WERE WMDs in Iraq. Not counting the ones US soldiers required medical care from, because of finding them on their own.

Do you think that any of the following will change some minds?

• went beyond their duties as a lawyer to defend a first-degree rape of a 12 year old
• smeared and destroyed the lives of Bill Clinton's rape victims
• helped Russia gain control of 20% of all U.S. uranium and then support war with them
• has Parkinson's disease, which can include dementia, which includes changes in memory, concentration & judgment, delusions, especially paranoid ideas, depression, irritability and anxiety
• runs an international money laundering scheme
• uses the immoral 13 Rules for Radicals that will defeat any opponent regardless of political positions
• used the Benghazi scandal as distraction from the national security breach on her insecure e-mail server
• corrupted the FBI and other government agencies to avoid jail
• part of a campaign that conspires to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry, demeans government, and drops civics
• is very angry and hard on her staff, including the Secret Service agents that protect her
• treats public employees as servants and hates them
• is racist and continues to run a racist campaign
• circulated a picture of Obama dressed as a Somali elder in an effort to gin up racial fears
• ripped off Haitians in their time of need in order to spend donated money on her friends
• wants to go along with a plan to destroy Western democracies so her donors can make a profit
• is preferred by established Republicans because they prefer a Bush-Clinton dynasty

Because you want a Bush-Clinton dynasty run by a person who

• went beyond their duties as a lawyer to defend a first-degree rape of a 12 year old
• smeared and destroyed the lives of Bill Clinton's rape victims
• helped Russia gain control of 20% of all U.S. uranium and then support war with them
• has Parkinson's disease, which can include dementia, which includes changes in memory, concentration & judgment, delusions, especially paranoid ideas, depression, irritability and anxiety
• Runs an international money laundering scheme
• uses the immoral 13 Rules for Radicals that will defeat any opponent regardless of political positions
• used the Benghazi scandal as distraction from the national security breach on her insecure e-mail server
• corrupted the FBI and other government agencies to avoid jail
• part of a campaign that conspires to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry, demeans government, and drops civics
• is very angry and hard on her staff, including the Secret Service agents that protect her
• treats public employees as servants and hates them
• is racist and continues to run a racist campaign
• circulated a picture of Obama dressed as a Somali elder in an effort to gin up racial fears
• ripped off Haitians in their time of need in order to spend donated money on her friends
• wants to go along with a plan to destroy Western democracies so her donors can make a profit

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

Yeah, DNC doesn't commit voter fraud. We have no proof. yada yada yada.

And I am not voting for Trump. Here is a very good reason why you shouldn't either. And it has nothing to do with Hillary or Trump ;)

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

Yeah, DNC doesn't commit voter fraud. We have no proof. yada yada yada.

And I am not voting for Trump. Here is a very good reason why you shouldn't either. And it has nothing to do with Hillary or Trump ;)

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/g...

If a foreign state were to eliminate registration records for a particular group of Americans immediately before an election, they could very likely disenfranchise those Americans and swing the results of an election. Recent efforts by some states to make it more difficult to vote only serves to increase the danger of such attacks. This is why I have proposed taking Oregon's unique vote-by-mail system nationwide to protect our democratic process against foreign and domestic attacks

The far bigger danger to the integrity of elections is of the vote early, vote often variety. Well, that, and dead people voting.

Of course, we could just do what European nations do, which is citizen-verifiable voting, government voter and residency address registration based on valid identification, and a requirement that people carry a government-issue photo id and show it on demand. Of course, according to Democrats, Americans are too stupid for that.

The USPS is not losing money as a result of its own operational costs vs income.

Yes it is.

the money the USPS is "losing" is being paid into a fund to pay retiree benefits for employees 75 years into the future

"the Postal Service would have lost $10.8 billion without the prefunding requirement."
- http://townhall.com/columnists...

And the USPS get lots of benefits:

"pays nothing in property tax, nothing in licensing or sales taxes for its vehicles and no state or federal taxes, even on its competitive products. It does pay federal tax on income from those products, but it pays those taxes to itself."
- http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

pay retiree benefits for employees 75 years into the future - YES, that would include costs for employees that have not even been BORN YET.

Completely false.:

"the law only requires pre-funding of obligations to actual current and past employees."
- http://www.cnbc.com/id/4501843...

You're welcome.

The reason our choice of communication-providers is so limited aren't the companies — those are as hungry for our dollars as ever — but the local governments.

They've created these barriers over the years and were happy to milk them. Now Google comes along and it is cool and persuasive, so, instead of honestly removing the regulatory burdens for all, they find a way to ease them just for one company.

This is "crony capitalism", which has about as much to do with capitalism, as a guinea pig has to do with pork... Some may even call it Fascism.

Of course, Charter did not mind the situation themselves — for as long as their de-facto monopoly was not threatened. But we — the consumers — kept losing...

I find this argument to be quite consistent with what I have learned from talking to my local city elected officials and staff. I live in a small suburban town of less than 10,000 about 20 to 30 miles from the center of 2 different large urban cities.

I can choose from the local telco or the local cable TV company for high speed Internet access. That's it. High speed with the Telco seems to be no more than 6 mbps and you have to also subscribe to their TV package; it's AT&T. The cable TV franchise is Charter with 60 mbps as their highest speed. There are no poles in my town; everything is buried. So I don't expect Google Fiber or any other competitor to appear for a long long time.

The reason our choice of communication-providers is so limited aren't the companies — those are as hungry for our dollars as ever — but the local governments.

They've created these barriers over the years and were happy to milk them. Now Google comes along and it is cool and persuasive, so, instead of honestly removing the regulatory burdens for all, they find a way to ease them just for one company.

This is "crony capitalism", which has about as much to do with capitalism, as a guinea pig has to do with pork... Some may even call it Fascism.

Of course, Charter did not mind the situation themselves — for as long as their de-facto monopoly was not threatened. But we — the consumers — kept losing...

It doesn't list Trump voters,it lists white people that killed police officers.

The author effectively says for all anyone knows they could be Trump voters. By the same token they could be Progressive Hillary voters. Either way I doubt he did the leg work to track down their voter registration, and he doesn't offer any evidence.

That piece is an attempt to deflect attention from Black Lives Matter and doesn't acknowledge the growing number of ties between it and cop killers. Nor does it acknowledge the open calls for, and celebration of, killings of police officers at various rallies and protests they have held.

More Black lives matter than just the politically useful ones that Black Lives Matter protests over.

If not a single policeman killed a single black individual anywhere in the United States for this entire year, that would not reduce the number of black homicide victims by one percent. When the mobs of protesters declare "Black lives matter," does that mean ALL black lives matter -- or only the less than one percent of black lives lost in conflicts with police? -- Random Thoughts - Thomas Sowell

There's a huge difference between Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton: by the time Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, email had become the standard way to do things, there was an email system all set up for her, and there were regulations requiring her to use the official email system unless she had a good reason to do something else (and to routinely use her own email system required approval she never asked for and never got).

Colin Powell says he didn't send or receive classified information. Recently, a grand total of two emails that were sent to him were "retroactively classified" (to use Hillary Clinton's term). Neither of the two were classified "Secret" or above. In comparison, of Hillary Clinton's known emails, over 2100 contain classified information, 65 "Secret", 22 "Top Secret" (source)

In 2005, after Colin Powell but before Hillary Clinton, rules were developed over use of email. Colin Powell couldn't have broken them as they were put together after he was already gone, but Hillary Clinton absolutely broke them. She avoided using an official account set up for her to use, and went to great lengths to continue to use it rather than the official one. And she was required to take a training course every year about how to properly keep secrets, but there is no evidence she did so. She took the class once right after she got the job and then never took the class again.

And of course, even if Colin Powell was guilty of the exact same crimes as Hillary Clinton, that still wouldn't excuse her.

And it's obvious to anyone with common sense what her motive was: she wanted to control access to her emails. Some of her email could be embarrassing if someone read it (after filing an FOIA request) so she wanted to make sure there were no official copies of anything she didn't like. She committed conspiracy to avoid keeping Federal records that she was legally required to keep.

If you are willing to excuse Hillary Clinton for this kind of egregious lawbreaking, then you will have no moral right to complain later when President Trump does something just as bad. We're geeks here in ./ and we understand well enough to damn well know why what she did was stupid as well as illegal and wrong. Don't give her a pass for immoral behavior just because she is on your side. If you have to hold your nose and vote for her because you really really just can't even Trump, then fine and dandy, but just admit it to yourself: you would be voting for someone willing to break the law and lie about it (as proven by this email controversy).

http://www.weeklystandard.com/why-colin-powells-emails-are-not-like-hillarys/article/2000949

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/10/the-misleading-democratic-spin-on-hillary-clintons-emails/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/05/no-the-powell-and-condi-classified-emails-story-is-not-a-gamechanger-n2114842

Oh please, the Peace Prize is the popularity contest of the Nobel Prizes [...]

So, you are saying, Obama could still be wrong despite having won the prize? Are we facing something organized, however loosely (and thus possibly predictable), or just random hate-crimes and work-place violence?

Of course, they have a lot of witless mindless soldiers who they've convinced that climatology is really a communist fantasy

You mean like the United Nations Climate Chief?

Uh. You might want to go back and re-read some stuff...like facts. It's the democrats who liked the fairness doctrine, and it was them most recently who tried to get it back in several times in fact. I picked two left-leaning sources. So have some right leaning sources as well. The GOP has been fundamentally against that.

One also can't forget that it was Zuckerburg that threw the hissyfit over "all lives matter" because people think that "black lives matter" is BS.