Slashdot Mirror

Please feel free to list which freedoms Trump has taken away. Which amendments he has violated. He has reafirmed his protection of the 2nd amendment, and the first amendment freedom of religion. He has appointed a constructionist to the supreme court, meaning that your rights as defined by the words written in the constitution will be guaranteed for years to come...

OTOH, the violator in chief was Barak Hussain Obama:

Infringed on the 2nd ammendmet by trying to make some ammo illegal using the BATF, tried to get more gun grabbing regulations, lied about buying guns at gun shows, attacked guns and legal gun ownership every mass shooting event during his tenure. Allowed guns to be illegally sold to Mexican drug cartels with no plan or method of tracking the guns for the sole purpose of creating a false flag crisis in southern border states to facilitate further gun regulations and/or confiscation.

Allowed freedom of religion to be infringed by gay rights activists (1st amendment) by not upholding DOMA and not bitch slapping Oregon state for persecuting Christian bakery owners who refused to participate in Gay weddings. Forced Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraceptive coverage against their religious beliefs and charter... I could go on

This is just off the top of my head, a more extensive list and explanation can be found here: http://www.washingtonexaminer....

I'd like to see them in pain - especially Comcast and AT&T.

Forced "neutrality" hurts them none. To cause them actual pain, promote competition. Government regulations help incumbents — be they cabbies under threat of Uber, hoteliers hurting from AirBnB, or the etablished ISPs facing off would-be competition.

Good citation. Basically, labor force participation has been flat since the end of 2013, falling in the years before.

What I find amusing is how the press report includes "better than expected". It became a running joke during the Obama administration how frequently every piece of economic bad news was unexpected. Now it seems the reverse might start to be true, every piece of good economic news during the Trump administration will now become unexpected!

National Voter Registration Act , along with the states SELLING basically the SAME information to ANYONE. http://www.washingtonexaminer....

Most of the states SELL the same voter registration information requested to ANYONE. http://www.washingtonexaminer....

The STATES SELL basically the same information to ANYONE, for $$$. Also your entire dribble about it violating the constitution is just flat WRONG, the National Voter Registration Act, passed by Congress, delegates the authority to the executive branch. http://www.washingtonexaminer....

San Francisco restaurants are closing due to increased wages for workers. Granted they are lower-reviewed restaurants, but that doesn't lessen the sting for the terminated employee or former employer when their 3/4 star Yelp-rated restaurant closes.
 

First off, if we accept the premise that workers escaped low-wage employers and migrated to larger employers, are we to believe that this was never the case before, that larger employers didn't always offer better pay and benefits packages than smaller employers?

Second, we are expected to believe that increasing the cost of labor in no way encouraged employers to reconsider and possibly cut back on the number of workers they hire and the number of hours they work? A slightly higher wage coupled with fewer hours of work per week leads workers not to enjoy more money in their pocket and increased leisure time, it instead motivates them to seek out additional work to make up for smaller take-home paychecks.

But hey, who knows - in San Francisco restaurants are closing due to increased wages for workers. Granted they are lower-reviewed restaurants, but that doesn't lessen the sting for the terminated employee or former employer when their 3/4 star Yelp-rated restaurant closes.
 

Every other advanced industrial nation has virtually universal access to decent medical care, at much lower cost than in the United States.

"Decent"? I don't think it means what you think it means.

A baby is condemned to death by socialized medicine

Jobs still going to Mexico. I guess Trump's deal wasn't real.

Either that, or he just convinced them to tell a story for a week till everybody forgot about it.

Comey also just declared under oath that the former head of the DOJ directly interfered in his investigation. On top of that Comey also said there was no investigation into Trump regarding Russia. And the actual testimony didn't say that Trump asked him to drop the Flynn investigation. He asked for it to "go away" he didn't order him to stop it. That wording is the difference, you can try and split hairs however you want but all this actually did was implicate the previous administration in subverting justice and if I was Loretta Lynch, I'd be very worried right now that a special prosecutor is going to be named.

Looks like she was just another one of the Obama logic-bomb employees.

No, she was another of the many incompetents in this administration. She was hired on February 13th. Guess who was in the White House on that day?

Trump chooses to believe what and who he wants to believe. In this case, it was Kimberly Guilfoyle of "The Five" on Fox News. This is no joke. When it comes to big decisions, Boss-T, the President of the United States, is picking up the phone to TV celebrities on deliberately-biased cable news shows, rather than the leading tech executives in the country, international diplomats, and god knows who else, including, apparently, MIT Scientists.

If Putin invades Poland, I wonder who he'll call to ask whether he should push the button on Russia?

Big win for Kimberly, though... she's got her eye on replacing Sean Spicer in his thankless job as Trump's mouthpiece, this making her the ONLY winner from this announcement.

I'm sorry, but that's the point of such secret meetings.

You mean like Trump's secret foolproof plan to defeat ISIS in his first 30 days? That kind of secret?

http://www.washingtonexaminer....

We have no measurements at all on what any sort of fake news could of did. You cannot compare a nebulous quantity like this.

Hmm, I suspect that advertisers would disagree with you. They spent lots of money, they want results. You may not trust them, but they do have measurements.

While we have real studies on the likely number of illegals who voted. Studies that show the numbers are in the hundreds of thousands to millions.

Oh really, and you can cite these studies? Sean Spicer couldn't. And I can find other reports that say numbers such as you and Trump claim are bogus.

Sorry, but actual prosecutions are so low, that you have to ask, if your allegations were true, why isn't anybody being charged? You know that does include Trump voters.

I'll believe you care when you get that woman charged. Absent that, I'll believe you don't even care.

Meanwhile, half of the votes in the recounts we did, in Hillary majority districts, could not even be recounted because of problems.

And these problems were? How many Trump votes were included? You know what I noticed about Michigan though?

2,279,543(DT) 2,268,839(HC)
2,564,569(BO) 2,115,256(MR)
2,872,579(BO) 2,048,639(JM)
2,479,183(JK) 2,313,746(GWB)

Hmm. Something odd about how the vote dropped precipitously in 2016. Perhaps you should explain that, instead of chasing a dubious phantom that is ENTIRELY the responsibility of the Republican state government. Because they could have improved the voting systems if they wanted, they could have managed any errors. Mysteriously, they instead chose to gerrymander the state.

And while I suspect you don't want to admit it, if you believe there are indeed millions of unlawful voters, the you can't trust ANY election returns, there are no legally elected officials anywhere.

That means we have an illegitimate government. At all levels. Federal, state, and local.

Good luck calling for all of them to be removed.

I doubt you have the integrity to try.

It's worth noting that whatever Time might have intended, the error here isn't just on the part of the Slashdot summary. Just about every media outlet that mentions the Time cover calls it the Kremlin.

This reflects a truth about the depth of the media's knowledge and understanding of Russia.

It's no strawman. It's no dishonest "debate tactic". There is no leading question. It's an honest and hard question because other rights have had and continue to have a cost in blood. If you think it is a right then that means it is worth dying for. It means it is worth going to war for. Ask the same question for a different right and see the difference. Is the right of free speech, free assembly worth dying/killing for? Is the right of arms worth dying/killing for? Is Habeas Corpus worth dying for? For many Americans the answer is a simple, yes. No bullshit. No accusations of "leading question" or "dishonest debate" because the moment we forget what rights cost to get and keep the more that we will pay that price. Ask me those questions and I will give you an honest answer.

The difference between those in the BoR and your "right of healthcare" is that nearly all of the ones in the BoR do not FORCE another person to do something. Do you understand the difference and why I do not see it as a right?

Even an A.C saw your answer as bullshit by asking how are you different with your "justifiable homicide" than an abortion clinic bomber? They use your same motivation and justification.

Yes, violence is always a last resort but when is it a last resort for your right of healthcare? A contrived Hollywood example that doesn't address it is not an answer. If he had access but would bankrupt him is that the last resort? But eve then it becomes cost and how best to manage cost. Who has the right answer to cost in healthcare system that is universally accepted? Name a solution and I will give you a reason why it can't work and the average voter is in the same quandary. It is very much different than "from my cold dead hands".

Also, you think Cuba healthcare is great? Interesting. I have heard conflicting opinions.

That's why, for example, judges and jurors are sought to be impartial.

There you are! Justifying Trump's dismissing a judge as "biased" because he was of Mexican descent...Racist, racist, racist!

Of course, attacking a judge because of his ancestry is indeed, racist, and Trump's admissionsa actually showed his own realization of the bias and animus he had been demonstrating.

That is what Trump chose to do. He picked a deliberate course of racial antagonism to attack a judge in a lawsuit where it was immaterial. In the media. Nothing more. Remember, Trump University? It didn't get filed as a request for recusal in court, it was merely engaging in political aggrandizement. You don't get a judge to act in a case just because you go on CNN and pout like a crybaby.

You do know this, right? Trump was whining about a judge. He chose to do it with an included racist spin, so it only reflects on Trump. Not the judge. In the realm of public opinion. At least, until it becomes relevant to a legal matter. Now personally, I blame Trump's political advisers, who should have at least made Trump temper his remarks, but he still has a problem with running his mouth. Or twitter fingers, as the case may be. But he's not the only one with a problem with that in his administration. That sort of thing can reflect on you.

Which was why when somebody takes your statements, applies them to you, in a legal case, and submits them to court, well, then you have a judge rule on it.

Now if you want to see a judge who got in trouble because of their own actions, let's try one. That's one where a

That's why, for example, judges and jurors are sought to be impartial.

There you are! Justifying Trump's dismissing a judge as "biased" because he was of Mexican descent...Racist, racist, racist!

Of course, attacking a judge because of his ancestry is indeed, racist, and Trump's admissionsa actually showed his own realization of the bias and animus he had been demonstrating.

That is what Trump chose to do. He picked a deliberate course of racial antagonism to attack a judge in a lawsuit where it was immaterial. In the media. Nothing more. Remember, Trump University? It didn't get filed as a request for recusal in court, it was merely engaging in political aggrandizement. You don't get a judge to act in a case just because you go on CNN and pout like a crybaby.

You do know this, right? Trump was whining about a judge. He chose to do it with an included racist spin, so it only reflects on Trump. Not the judge. In the realm of public opinion. At least, until it becomes relevant to a legal matter. Now personally, I blame Trump's political advisers, who should have at least made Trump temper his remarks, but he still has a problem with running his mouth. Or twitter fingers, as the case may be. But he's not the only one with a problem with that in his administration. That sort of thing can reflect on you.

Which was why when somebody takes your statements, applies them to you, in a legal case, and submits them to court, well, then you have a judge rule on it.

Now if you want to see a judge who got in trouble because of their own actions, let's try one. That's one where a

Castro did indeed create an amazing medical system for a third world nation and their education system isnt so bad.

Stop
spreading
this
myth.
Just stop.

Just use Google ffs.

Opposite of Obama? Yes, that is why we elected him! Maybe now the U.S. can give the Queen of England a proper gift, instead of an iPod and Region Locked DVDs. That man was an embarrassment to everything the U.S. stands for.

Incumbents always have the advantage. Since WWII, only two Presidents ran for a second term and lost.

Actually, three presidents who lost reelection since WWII: Ford, Carter and Bush Sr.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-five-incumbent-presidents-who-lost/article/143176

Incumbents always have the advantage. Since WWII, only two Presidents ran for a second term and lost.

A low bar that I'm sure the North Koreans will respect.

Biden has repeatedly said he won't run.

We shall see. News articles yesterday were so certain, today they're not so certain. Par for the course.

Finally, consider that a Washington Post/ABC News poll last week concluded that in a rematch right now against Hillary Clinton, Trump would win the popular vote 43 percent to 40 percent.

Didn't you get the memo? Hillary's not running in 2020.

Nice pigeon-holing.

*Some* Republicans are conservatives. Some are Progressives. Some are Republican in name only (RINO) and vote with the Democrats often.

Some Democrats are conservatives. Some are Progressives. Some are Communists, some Socialists. Some are Fascists and wear masks, carry weapons, and dress in black while rioting and violently attacking others that do not share their opinions.

What, only black? Not red? Camo? You know, like Cliven Bundy.

Up until just a few short years ago, the Democrats kept a former KKK leader in office, Robert Byrd, as a long-time Senator until he died in 2010. That's right, the Democrats had a Senator who served for decades who was a former KKK leader. Not 'member'. Leader.

You know, it's funny how people who rail about Byrd never mention two things. First, they never mention that Byrd expressly and explicitly repudiated the racist KKK (some go so far as to claim he never did), and Second, they never mention how the beloved Strom Thurmond was belovingly embraced into the GOP, and served pretty much the same time as Byrd.

Can you explain it?

Coincidently, speaking of civil rights and minorities, Democrats (and the KKK) fully support Planned Parenthood is and always has been, to slow the birthrates of 'undesirables' like blacks, the poor, the mentally challenged, and other minorities.

Oh no, because Margaret Sanger didn't want women to be burdened with no choice except to give birth time after time, she's not only anti-black, she's anti-Semitic. A self-hating Jew. You tell others to google her? You should look beyond the nonsense you've found on the pages of right-wing propagandists. She was actually brought into Harlem by the NAACP and the leaders of that community, after they saw the effects of her work in Jewish areas. In reality, it's the KKK that opposed Planned Parenthood, and their adherents in the White Power Quiverfull movement that want to breed themselves into dominance like some sort of infectious virus.

But sure buddy, it's conservatives and Republicans who are racist, etc etc, blah blah blah. Yep. Uh-huh. o_0

Yup. Let's see, there's the wonderful Steve King. There's that state Senator in Florida. There's Reagan's history of Dogwhistling, and there's Trump's rampant birtherism. Not to mention his Mexican Wall, Muslim ban, and inability to remember who David Duke is.

Sorry dude, but it's a telling sign when it's a Republican opposing the removal of monuments to white supremacy.

If you bothered to suck that stuff down, you can see it for yourself. You can see what criminal scum she was from that dump.

http://www.washingtonexaminer....

BTW, they used to do things like that. They'd used to send a guy out to whack such people. They probably still do. No doubt, Russia certainly still does.

Plus, mining is gradually being automated.

That sounds like a LOT of jobs right there, perfect to transition a lot of miners into retirement.

Looks like Trump was right again, mining jobs are coming back after all.

Not to mention that now China is buying a lot more coal from the U.S. than they were prior to Trump.

Trump Trump Trump!

I'm just going to leave this right here. Then when you get to the parts where your arguments fall apart you can let me know.

So she seemed to falsely deny Nunes' claim that individuals were unmasked (though Nunes' claim wasn't restated specifically so it hard to know exactly what she denied), she immediately after went into detail how incidental collection of intelligence was legal, so I think a listener would come away with the proper conclusion that transition officials had gotten caught up in the observation of foreign agents.

If the investigations into Trump were politically motivated you would have heard about them in October.

Funny thing, we found out about them about a month ago. And it was started right after Trump became the nominee. It *almost* seems like the previous president was hoping someone else was going to win, and they could simply sweep this egregious abuse of power under the rug.

Kinda strange isn't it? How come you didn't hear about previous administrations doing this...

Started doing what? Spying on foreign diplomats? Welcome to the 19th century.

I'm just going to leave this right here. Then when you get to the parts where your arguments fall apart you can let me know.

If the investigations into Trump were politically motivated you would have heard about them in October.

Funny thing, we found out about them about a month ago. And it was started right after Trump became the nominee. It *almost* seems like the previous president was hoping someone else was going to win, and they could simply sweep this egregious abuse of power under the rug.

Kinda strange isn't it? How come you didn't hear about previous administrations doing this...

Remember that stat, that 25% of women in colleges have been sexually assaulted? How initially it seems unbelievable because, hey, you wouldn't, and I wouldn't, and most men you know wouldn't, so how can that be?

And then you found out that it was unbelievable because it was a lie?

One office I worked for had such a person

Nothing helps a lie along like a nice little one-off anecdote, am I right?

But the idea it's limited to SV is absurd

It's not limited to SV but it's rare outside of there. In SV it is pervasive. If I were a woman I would stay far away from SV if I valued my mental health. There's plenty interesting stuff going on outside of SV, and then you also avoid being in a huge bubble of groupthink that has fifty Snapchat clones getting funding.

But if you are a women and want a lot of money, suck it up and take SV for all they are worth. After 5-10 years you could probably retire for life if you play your cards right and change companies often enough.

Presidents sometimes, when they're about to leave office, call for a mission to Mars. That way, it's not their responsibility, and they don't have to support it in any way - but if it does happen, they get a bit of the credit for inspiring it. Obama did it in 2016. Bush the Elder did it in 1989.

Trump, however, is doing something new: calling for a Mars mission within a few months of becoming President. That puts him in a position where he has to be the one to support it, for at least 4, probably 8 years - but he only gets a bit of the credit, not the majority of the glory, when the mission actually happens, another 5-or-so years down the line.

That looks like he's being more selfless, and less glory-seeking, than the average President.

The FBI and numerous sources state that it's probable it was hacked. Left wing source and Right wing source just in case you are biased in one direction or the other. Why can be found here, or talk to a security expert who has dealt with forensics if you want the technical details.

I was addressing the specific claim: that gun violence cannot justify gun control laws which may affect current gun owners because it's largely committed with illegal guns

I've never claimed that - I was just trying to keep my claim about sources more conservative.

But let's address YOUR claims then:

Followed by two paragraphs that in no way address any of the arguments I'm trying to defend (which aren't mine, by the way - I was just pointing out the nonsense in quantaman's post).

So in fact homocide rates as a whole DO go down - a LOT. ... Well good thing there is absolutely ZERO evidence that this happens, and no sane reason to think it MIGHT.

30 seconds of Googling (none completely unbiased, but they have actual numbers and citations, unlike some people):
Washington Post: Zero correlation between state homicide rate and state gun laws
Washington Examiner: No, states with higher gun ownership don't have more gun murders
Crime Research: COMPARING MURDER RATES AND GUN OWNERSHIP ACROSS COUNTRIES

It's because a gun is the worst thing in the world to for self defense. A tool that can only be reliably used...

Scaring people off is self defense, even if you never draw your weapon.

Also for the House Benghazi Committee preservation order to apply instead of the FBI preservation order, I believe that .pst file would have had to contain Benghazi e-mails and there is no indication that it did. The CNN article you linked makes that assumption, but I don't know what evidence they base that on.

For example, this article states that the preservation order was only for Benghazi e-mails:

http://www.washingtonexaminer....

There you go believing BS the Post says again.

http://www.washingtonexaminer....
http://www.theatlantic.com/bus...

Also, yes dissent is patriotic...when it's not rooted in racism.
As yours so demonstrably was .

We oppose Trump because he is racist.
You opposed Obama because you were racist.

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.

One of the things I don't like about them is that their aggressive price-cutting monopsony forces manufacturers to cut corners, leading to unique SKU's that are only available at walmart

What's to dislike about that?

a nice large big screen TV (I think it was a Samsung?) that was the Wal-Mart-only model, that was mostly identical to the regular model except with fewer inputs and no smart features

What's to dislike about that?

It is almost like someone has told you to hate Walmart, but you just can't help yourself saying good things about them and recommending the store to others...

Most Slashdotters may not know about the minute details of Russia's propaganda-war on Ukraine, but it had salvos like "When Ukrainians enter cities, they crucify little children".

Trump administration could seek to wipe government websites

Trump could seek to rape every woman too, should these "scientists" not attempt to hide their wives and daughters instead of some data?

Some worry the information could only be retrieved with a taxing Freedom of Information Act request.

OMG! Now we are learning, FoIA-requests are undully taxing...

Hillary flew on private jets of companies that also donated to the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State. Getting donations, flying on their jets, all while being Secretary of State. I'd say that is profiting from contributions while she was Secretary of State. Not to mention her husband earning tens of millions of dollars giving speeches and consulting with the very countries that Secretary Clinton was dealing with at the same time.

The Friends of Putin Club

The friends of Putin have lost the elections and are spending their hours in the waiting rooms of the therapists dealing with grief.

Here is, what real friendship looks like

• The idiotic "Reset" of 2009.
• The 2010 abolition of all sanctions imposed on Russia for Putin's invasion of Georgia — in the (wane) hope of gaining cooperation on Iran — thus, as predicted, inviting Putin to repeat the same scenario in Ukraine and Syria.
• In 2012 ridiculing Mitt Romney's suggestion, Russia may be hostile to the US. Hillary Clinton was particularly scathing.
• Routing billions of dollars of investment into Russian high-tech industry, some of it, obviously, with military connections.
• Getting richly rewarded by Russian companies (all of them on Kremlin's tight leash).

Trump? Oh, yes, he wouldn't reveal his tax-returns, so he must be on Putin's payroll. Right...

lol, reading is hard....

That's why I told you to go back and re-read what I wrote not what you twisted.

[...] try reading the actual article you posted here.

For 40 years, presidents have respected this law. But not Trump. He's taking the Nixonian view that conflict of interests don't apply to him as president.

Nowhere does it mention that a President must liquidate all assets prior to assuming office.

The Office of Government Ethics advised Trump to completely divest from his business empire to avoid conflicts of interest.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ethics-office-reacts-with-joy-at-trumps-decision-to-avoid-conflicts-of-interest/article/2608541

And any middle school teacher will tell you using Wikipedia as a source of information doesn't cut it by even today's lax public school standards.

Wikipedia is a starting point for your own research. Educate yourself.

Obama derangement syndrome was real, but Trump derangement is an order of magnitude worse. In 2008 Obama just had to deal with occasional rumors about his birthplace and whatever remnants of open white supremacy still exist in the 21st century, not a year-long media campaign with open, unabashed attempts to portray him as a literal fascist and the second coming of Hitler. Every president gets compared to Hitler of course, but usually by random nutjobs, not major MSM outlets.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/mainstream-media-scream-cnn-compares-trump-to-hitler-stalin/article/2604155
http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/5-washington-post-writers-liken-trump-to-hitler/
etc.

BTW that voice in your head right now saying "Well that's different, Trump really is Hitler"? That's the TDS talking.

Then of course there is the constant effort to label Trump and everyone associated with him with every "-ism" they can think of. Freaking Ben Carson is a white supremacist; Steve Bannon is a nazi because Breitbart supports confederate flags and Bannon may or may not have said something weakly anti-semitic in a private conversation 20+ years ago; Trump voters are all KKKers because one attention whore neonazi threw a rally attended by more reporters than people and declared himself king of the alt-right.

(Oh yeah, and then there's this thread blaming him for shit happening before he's even in office. And wasn't Obamacare specifically supposed to do the opposite of things like this?)

Clinton, I'm sure she is ready to run for president a third time in 4 years.

Believe it or not, they're now grooming Chelsea to be the next political Clinton operative.

Utterly classic, apparently you failed to read your own source.

From your source:

“In Hennepin County, 650,000 people voted,” he continued. “The Minnesota Majority presented us with 1,500 cases that they felt there were problems with voting. ... At the end of the day, we charged 38 cases. And all but one of them are felons voting who were still under the penalty [of not legally applying to regain individual voting rights].

So, the attorney said there was no problem, but still filed charges in 38 cases. The cases were what was alleged - felons voting despite having lost their right to do so. No doubt he could have prosecuted more, and he says nothing about cases outside his jurisdiction, or how jurisdiction played into the matter. What if 1100 of the cases were outside his jurisdiction?

Okay, my sides still hurt a bit after the laugh I got out of that one.

I guess it's sort of like what Home SImpson said, "It's funny because its true."

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

.... professors from the University of Pennsylvania and Stanford University, found that in some states, felons register Democratic by more than six-to-one. In New York, for example, 61.5 percent of convicts are Democrats, just 9 percent Republican. They also cited a study that found 73 percent of convicts who turn out for presidential elections would vote Democrat.

As opposed to news from, say, CNN which is an alt-left organization that loves to collude with Democrats. But for some reason is considered "mainstream"...

Its' no accident that Trump's surrounded by people like Giuliani and Christie... He's explicitly stated his preference to be surrounded by losers to make himself look good.

http://www.washingtonexaminer....

That the state department, only a few days ago, told a court it will need 5 YEARS to review only about 30K of Hillary's emails.

So, when the Obama admin wants Hillary "cleared" it can do its own secret review and then publicly announce "nothing to see here!" but when a court wants to see less than 1/20th of the emails, the Obama admin says "that will take 5 years".

Note that the 5 years is an apparently arbitrary number (like the age 26 stay on yer parents insurance part of Obamacare) until you think BOTH numbers through ans see the manipulation:

With the emails: 5 years means: until after Hillary serves one term as president and gets through a re-election campaign.

With Obamacare, it meant his 18-year-old energetic supporters would get through both of his terms of office before Obamacare exploded in their faces and they had to face the full brunt of the bills.

You are being manipulated. Are you dumb enough to fall for it?

Or maybe the authorities are sometimes honest, and you end up with a list of 438 convictions for voter fraud, as just a sampling of what's gone on. Never mind nearly 100 ballots for ficticious people being delivered to a single address this last week, no just an administrative mistake, pay no attention! And of course we cannot disenfranchise the dead, right?

Neither is FBI unloading dirt on the presidential candidate. Bush the senior got pwned pretty bad back in the day: http://www.washingtonexaminer....

Somehow I don't think blocking a few rightwing nutjobs caused Twitter to lose value

So which part makes them "nut jobs" the part where they post things offensive to regressive leftists, or the parts where they post politically compromising things that hurt their feelings and they should be silenced before you have too much to think for yourself?

FYI twitter has dug this hole on it's own. The second you start censoring content because it hurts feelings or it's politically inconvenient to a group of people, that's when investors start to flee. Their links are just scratching the surface, twitter ever since they put their 1984ish sounding "Trust and Safety council" has been suppressing trending hashtags and tweets if it shows leftists or democrats in a bad light. Blocking and censoring journalists from showing up in some countries, helping EU countries suppress citizens who are critical of the influx of illegals. And of course censoring content if it's "offensive."

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