Slashdot Mirror

the IRS targeted multiple groups, on both sides, that appeared to be violating the law concerning 501c status.

Sure was. ~496 right-leaning groups vs 12. Much both sides, you read the articles right? You read the IG report? You saw the part where the IG said that the IRS was targeting particular groups. You also saw the part where multiple people quit in the IRS when it came to light that they were targeting groups at the behest of high-level bureaucrats within the IRS. And that the Obama and IRS are still stonewalling, which is why there are still nearly 50 lawsuits on going.

further, no groups actually had their 501c status revoked or denied, and the ones that were delayed the longest were "occupy" related groups.

Uh No. Even the IRS has said it will "stop targeting those groups." One of those groups has been waiting since 2009. Occupy started in 2011.

He also came to the conclusion that ultimately there was no wrong doing, and no specific targeting of a specific political side, but that the investigation gave the impression of impropriety by essentially taking a shortcut, looking at names of groups and policy positions, rather than looking directly for improper campaign involvement, which is the part that is actually illegal. while the names and positions may be an indicator, it isn't a garuntee of violating the 501c rules.

Would you like to save face now and read the report, or shall we just start with a quote directly from it:

The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention. Ineffective management:
 
  1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months,
 
  2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and
 
3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued.

In other words, yes the IRS targeted those groups. And yes, your post is full of bullshit.

lots of whom are given driver's licenses, and are automatically registered to vote by the CA DMV.

See, you make up shit yourself. They aren't registered to vote, no matter how much you want to believe that fairy tale.

Here is your reference.

In California, however, state officials “specifically chose not to make noncitizen license holders searchable in their DMV database,” said True the Vote spokesman Logan Churchwell, who called the newly signed bill “unprecedented.” The measure, Assembly Bill 1461, “will effectively change the form of governance in California from a Republic whose elected officials are determined by United States citizens and will guarantee that noncitizens will participate in all California elections going forward,” Election Integrity Project of California President Linda Paine said in a statement.

I didn't make up anything, it's how the CA system works now. That doesn't mean they are legally allowed to vote, but they are registered, and there is nothing stopping them from voting.

Trump has his stereotype running DHS (female)

No. http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Did you not know about Presidential Study Directive-11 where the Obama regime's absolutely consistent policy is to advance the Muslim Brotherhood
http://www.washingtontimes.com...

If you want to why the Left are doing this then the late, great Middle East analyst Barry Rubin explains during question time. I'm guessing you don't know the hand of Obama's pick Ben Rhodes in all this, right ?
"Barry Rubin: Assessing Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Do you think that "Modern Liberals" of the Left are about Individual Liberty? ROFL ! No, they are about State Power (which actually means, rule by 'elites' which necessarily involves destruction of the Individual Liberty championed by the Classic Liberals of the Limited Government political Right).

Since socialism has failed, utterly, in dozens of countries but the control freak elites still desire power they need a way to gain that power. Their solution is 'population replacement' which imports Third Worlders who don't care about Individual Liberty and always vote for more taxpayer handouts and bigger Government. In the US this is achieved by bringing in Latin Americans - which is why the Left opposes existing enforcing border and immigration law. In Europe this is achieved by opening the borders to the hijra (Islamic invasion by immigration).

Here is the history of the Muslim Brotherhood and it's connection to US anti-Communist groups.

Both the Left and the Right have used the Muslim Brotherhood. The Communist Socialists used them in the Middle East against the Israelis and the US. The US used them in Afghanistan against the Soviets. In each case the Brotherhood gained strength.

Today the Left are using the Brotherhood in Europe and as advisors in the White House, and the Right opposes the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists in general. I understand your need to deny this reality. If you ever understood that you are on the wrong side of history, and enabling the destruction of Enlightenment Civilization your unearned image of yourself as 'the good guy' would dissolve. Thus, the psychological resolution is for you to practice 'cognitive dissonance' where you will deny what the Left is doing in order to preserve your mental self-image. Hence you point out a historical example of the Right continuing the Left's policy of using jihadis, while ignoring the Left using the jihadis to start new wars (all benefiting the Muslim Brotherhood).

So, will you be happy when Islamist Keith Ellison becomes head of the DNC? you've been programmed to value 'diversity' as a good in of itself, so of course you will cheer when an Islamist heads up your team, amirite ? you'll pat yourself on the back for 'transcending' common sense and putting those who advance Islamic Sharia ahead of Enlightenment Civilization.

As I have been saying, the Leftist-Islamist "Red-Green Axis" is now obvious to anyone paying attention. The Left intends to use a Muslim voting bloc to gain power and to smash resistance from existing citizens. That is why they are desperate to import Muslims en-masse and to appease the Muslim Brotherhood. Given your hatred of Individualist Classic Liberals who resist the dominance of the Big State it is a surprise you don't welcome this move by the Leftist elites - you statements show youare working for them, after all.

"Research" is a pretty strong word for links from Politico: https://www.google.com/amp/s/a...

And the WashPo and New York Times: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry... (NYT again:) http://m.washingtontimes.com/n...

The facts are with him, not you...

You didn't actually read through any of the data on those sites you linked to, huh? If you had, you might have discovered:

1. The voting dead turn-out to be just three individuals in Colorado, one of which administrators at the Secretary of State's office admit may have been due to a mistake by an election judge.
2. The list of 438 voter fraud convictions is across all 50 states, and some of those convictions go back to at least 1982. However, it does include Republican Charlie White, the former Indiana Secretary of State, who was convicted of voter fraud, -- among other crimes -- back in 2012.

Overall, the data you've cited actually supports what most experts are saying regarding voter fraud; not that voter fraud doesn't ever happen, but that it happens so infrequently that it's not affecting the results of elections.

Of course, if you look at the statistics behind recent voter ID laws, you'll see that these laws are aimed squarely at black voters, in an attempt to suppress the black voter in favor of white voters, who are more likely to vote Republican.

Ooh sounds like a conspiracy theory, do tell so it can be debunked.

Jones refused to release his data and his algorithms meaning it was impossible to vet and review his claims. Of course, Michael Mann (he who wanted to hide the decline in his own data) now states that we don't really need data because we can just see what happens. Data is irrelevant, anecdotal evidence is all that one needs.

I'm hardly a fan of Glenn Beck, but I must point out that he has been sounding more contrite since he left Fox.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-...
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/0...

see? this is how I know were in a coma for the past 8 years:
100% delusional statements like that one, completely disconnected from reality.

read, and be edumicated:
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2...
http://www.realclearpolitics.c...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
https://mic.com/articles/22662...
http://www.liberalamerica.org/...

You have to assume benevolence as a default

That certainly is a good rule — indeed, a very "Thanksgivingly" one.

And yet, there are certain signs and indicators, which give justified grounds for suspicion in the case of Climate Science.

One such is a conflict of interest. A scientist coming to a conclusion, that global warming is not a big deal, risks his very livelihood — the rest of us will politely thank him for his past work and eliminate funding for more of it. America's spending on climate research, for example, has about tripled since 1993 — is it unreasonable to suspect, that the vast body of people may be at least partially concerned about their careers and mortgages? Would they not frown on and denounce anyone breaking ranks, regardless of whether he is correct or not?

We dismiss judges and jurors because of the conflict of interest — and we are right. But a replacement juror unrelated to suspect is easy to find, whereas finding an independent group of scientists in the era of government paying for 100% of research is impossible...

The above is why we can — should! — question their collective sincerity. But what about their competence? Try as you might to find an actual scientific prediction made by these folks, that turned out to be true, and you'll fail...

Few people realize this, despite me posting this challenge on Slashdot every once in a while. Try it yourself. A valid citation would include a pair of links, one to prediction, the other — to its confirmation:

1. The prediction must be publicly made — you'll need to include a link to it.
2. A separate link should point at the confirmation of the predicted events happening or values achieved (within, say, 20% of the predicted).
3. The prediction and the confirmation publications must be a few years or more apart — predicting tomorrow's weather does not count.
4. The prediction needs to be marginally useful — claiming, it will get either colder or hotter next year is not acceptable

Could you come up with two or three such citations? Don't you think, after spending tens of billions of dollars on it, we are entitled to expect some such results from climate scientists? And, if they can not come up with anything, begin suspecting their competence and sincerity?

Add to that the growing calls by these scientists (not just their hangers-on) to criminalize skepticism, and our suspicion ought to develop into a full blown alarm!

TOTALLY AGREE. As an ex-military NCO with top secret security clearance - requiring quarterly briefings and signed documents attesting to your understanding of the responsibilities and penalties - I am fully aware of the offenses and penalties for abridging the classified document handling procedures.
INTENT is NOT a requirement, only that it HAPPENED by the person's personal choice and their own volition.
THIS, along with being a well-entrenched part of the 'establishment', is what cost "Hillary - dillary - can't touch me - I'm a politician, a lawyer, and I'm rich" the election, even though the choice was an agonizing one of the 'known devil' vs the 'perceived devil'.

Take a trip down memory lane with the following: (some pro, many con'vict')
http://rense.com/general80/hop...
http://www.wnd.com/2000/04/447...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
https://peterfrancisgeracilaw....
https://www.truthorfiction.com...
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/20/...
http://www.politico.com/story/...
http://conservativeamerican.or...
http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

Americans have made their choice, whether through the electoral college or the basic raw vote count - - - being tilted a bit in Hillary's favor, but with the small margin still showing an inherent distrust of the entrenched 2-party system - either side is the same, just a bit different on the talking points - - - basically, the same old shit !

News reports already seem to indicate that president-elect Trump is willing to accept new information and alter his 'campaign promises __LOL__ ' in order to get down to the actual business of running the country.

Trump isn't Republican or right wing. He is a NYC Democrat. Just look at his history.

It's hard to tell what Trump is. It's true that he was a Democrat. It's also true that he has been a (registered) Republican since April 2012. But he has changed his party affiliation at least five times since the late 1980s.

Yes, it was kind of crazy for the right wingers to be certain that any given year of the Obama administration was the one in which he would "take our guns." After all, not nearly enough groundwork was in place to make that leap. However, when the engines of the government are being employed to root out ideological impurities, it may not be all that big a leap to fear the end game.

"Operation Chokepoint," an initiative to reduce unlawful fraud by "choking" illegal players out of U.S. financial institutions, was turned against legal businesses that the Obama administration didn't like, including gun stores and other firearms-related companies, as described here http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2015/01/30/fdic-admits-to-strangling-legal-gun-stores-banking-relationships/#326dcbb327fd and here http://www.infowars.com/holders-latest-scandal-doj-now-pressuring-banks-to-refuse-service-to-gun-stores/ with results like this http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/28/operation-choke-point-forces-bank-to-dump-gun-stor/.

Trump hasn't implemented any policy decisions yet. He doesn't even have the authority to do anything yet, other than start to build his team. So although people may be looking on in trepidation for fear of what he might do, he hasn't (yet) started using the government bureaucracy to further his personal ideology in excess of the law. So let's wait and see what he really does, and judge it whether it's based in law, or based solely in personal ideology.

All major news outlets are too close to the political parties. You want to know who is to blame for that? The NEWS OUTLETS. (FTFY)

Moderator note: your personal disagreement with the following analysis does not make it less relevant or true. Please keep your post election rage/safe space down-mod votes to yourself.

The reality is that for about 30 years, the MSM has been in the tank for the progressive left. They started teaching journalists in school that their goal shouldn't be to "get the scoop" or "get to the truth" or "accurately report the facts." They started teaching them that their goal should be to "change the world." Once that happened, objective journalism died a quick death but the American people have been slow to catch on, but they have caught on, and only 6% of the population now believes that the MSM gives the news without bias/selective filtering/manipulation etc. In the 90s, Rush Limbaugh and later Fox news began providing a counter point to this pervasive bias, and in the case of Fox news, their formula is quite simple, they have guests on from both positions, and their commentators provide relevant history, background, and challenge both positions with facts. (If you are a Fox news hater, realize that doesn't change why Fox has been so successful or what their formula is or why they are the most trusted news network in the US.) Fox is also one of the best researched, best sourced news outlets on the planet. The news they put out is more accurate than most of the other MSM outlets (not necessarily what guests say though, who by definition are supporting a POV but whom are usually challenged by the host/other guest when they are wrong on the facts)

While the MSM usually does not outright fabricate a lie, what they do is source lies from Media Matters/HuffPo/other alt left sources. They take half truths, clips out of context etc that fit their narrative, irregardless of the complete facts. Occasionally they get caught and a producer somewhere gets fired. The level of dishonesty has created an atmosphere where fake news sites have more credibility than the MSM, which is a credibility problem for the MSM, not a commentary on the gullibility of news consumers. The fake news sites have still lied less than the MSM, which has a history of lying going back decades. Why the younger generation is using social media as its news source shows just how hard the MSM has fallen and how low their credibility is. The solution is for Fox news to improve and extend it's online presence so that all those who see the MSM for the shills they are can have a reliable, accurate online news outlet.

The more mature and wiser conservative crowd moved to Fox news or main stream talk radio news sources 20 years ago, and those left consuming MSM pap have been so brainwashed that even the mention, let alone watching Fox news is like salt on a slug. I challenge anyone reading this to take the Fox news challenge. Tune into their primetime lineup for a week before you call them the great satan. Un-brainwashing may be a little unpleasant at first, but it is a liberating experience on the whole.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.poynter.org/2014/th...
http://www.newsweek.com/faults...

So, after 10 days of coloring books and crying over Trump's win, you are back to Slashdot — and have already followed-up on 8 of my earlier posts? I think, they let you out of your Safe Space too early...

For someone claiming to drain the swamp he sure is bringing on board a lot of established Washington players....

Trump transition team announces 5-year lobbying ban for appointees

The ban is for appointees becoming lobbyists not the other way around (first sentence of article you included). At present the Obama administration has a 2-year wait for lobbyists to join the administration - don't know what Trump will do.

For someone claiming to drain the swamp he sure is bringing on board a lot of established Washington players....

Trump transition team announces 5-year lobbying ban for appointees

First point: In my original post above, I did not specify who the outsiders are. Unless the protests are being paid for by the actual protesters, then there must be an outside source of funds. That isn't conspiracy theory, that's economics 101, someone has to pay the bills. Whether is is George Soros or someone else, and whether the outsiders funded thousands of dollars or millions, the point stands that someone with money is funding the protests.

Second point: A Google search for "funding of black lives matter" shows numerous links to articles debating the truth and falsehood of particular persons and groups funding Black Lives Matter in particular, and other similar/related groups in general. Go read a few, and you'll find more than white supremacy to keep you occupied.

Here are a few interesting ones.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...
http://www.snopes.com/ford-mot...
http://www.politico.com/story/...

Third point: I also did not limit my statement to any specific protest group that has happened lately. So how about a Google search for "funding of protests"?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
https://www.lewrockwell.com/20...

I'm sure you will use your cop-out line of "white supremacists" and "alt-right", and whatever hand-waving you have to do, to ignore reports that you don't like. There were certainly links to the sites you mentioned, and others you will also ignore. But it would take a strong will to ignore all of them.

Have a nice day.

From a conservative website.

Trump's the first republican to hold a pride flag on stage. http://m.washingtontimes.com/n... [washingtontimes.com]

On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words “LGBT for Trump” written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way.

And he held the flag upside-down. Further, the only reason he held it up is that someone wrote his name on it. He likes to see his name. And his name was written on the flag upside-down proving that it wasn't anyone from the LGBT community who gave it to him, but merely a prop.

Caitlyn Jenner took Trump up on bathroom offer.

That sounds like the beginning of an interesting story.

Pence is Trump's impeachment insurance.

Trump's the first republican to hold a pride flag on stage. http://m.washingtontimes.com/n...

On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words “LGBT for Trump” written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way.

He's also said trans could use what ever bathroom they wanted and Caitlyn Jenner took Trump up on bathroom offer. http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/...

The majority of people burning down black churches in modern times are black people http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Meanwhile, the definition of fascist sounds a lot like Trump's campaign.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Trump is going to start deporting or murdering anyone who isn't a straight white male.

Mostly because he's said things exactly like that.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Mr. Trump has suggested that he’d order the U.S. military to kill families of Muslim terrorists and institute interrogation techniques worse than waterboarding, itself widely condemned as torture. Torture and retaliatory executions are both war crimes under international law.

You mean like the sailor that took a picture in a classified area?

Petty Officer Saucier was charged last year with one count of unlawful retention of national defense information and one count of obstruction of justice after prosecutors said the sailor used his cellphone to take snapshots in classified engine room on the USS Alexandria, a nuclear submarine where he worked as a mechanic at the time, then attempted to destroy evidence when he learned an investigation had been launched.

Or David Petraeus.

In January 2015, officials reported the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors had recommended bringing felony charges against Petraeus for allegedly providing classified information to his biographer, Paula Broadwell (with whom he was having an affair), while serving as the director of the CIA. Eventually, Petraeus pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information.

Or John M. Deutch

Deutch had agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor for mishandling government secrets on Friday, January 19, 2001, but President Clinton pardoned him in his last day in office, two days before the Justice Department could file the case against him.

[Not holding my breath for an Obama Pardon either]

Or Sandy Berger

was an American political consultant who served as the United States National Security Advisor for President Bill Clinton from March 14, 1997, until January 20, 2001. Before that he served as the Deputy National Security Advisor for the Clinton Administration from January 20, 1993, until March 14, 1997.

On July 19, 2004, it was revealed that the U.S. Department of Justice was investigating Berger for unauthorized removal of classified documents in October 2003 from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were five classified copies of a single report commissioned from Richard Clarke covering internal assessments of the Clinton Administration's handling of the unsuccessful 2000 millennium attack plots. An associate of Berger said Berger took one copy in September 2003 and four copies in October 2003, allegedly by stuffing the documents into his socks and pants. Berger subsequently lied to investigators when questioned about the removal of the documents.

In April 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington.

Or Bryan H. Nishimura.

According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system

Even though Google is attempting to censor searching for Clinton's scandals they are still visible. Mostly based on this, but I added some missed.

Monica Lewinsky: Led to only the second president in American history to be impeached. Hillary is not "pro-woman" as her and pundits will attempt to claim.
Benghazi: Four Americans killed, an entire system of weak diplomatic security uncloaked, and the credibility of a president and his secretary of state damaged.
Asia fundraising scandal: More than four dozen convicted in a scandal that made the Lincoln bedroom, White House donor coffees and Buddhist monks infamous.
Hillary’s private emails: Hundreds of national secrets already leaked through private email and the specter of a criminal probe looming large.
Whitewater: A large S&L failed and several people went to prison.
Travelgate: The firing of the career travel office was the very first crony capitalism scandal of the Clinton era.
Humagate: An aide’s sweetheart job arrangement.
Pardongate: The first time donations were ever connected as possible motives for presidential pardons.
Foundation favors: Revealing evidence that the Clinton Foundation was a pay-to-play back door to the State Department, and an open checkbook for foreigners to curry favor.
Mysterious files: The disappearance and re-discovery of Hillary’s Rose Law Firm records.
Filegate: The Clinton use of FBI files to dig for dirt on their enemies.
Hubble trouble: The resignation and imprisonment of Hillary law partner Web Hubbell.
The Waco tragedy: One of the most lethal exercises of police power in American history.
The Clinton’s Swedish slush fund: $26 million collected overseas with little accountability and lots of questions about whether contributors got a pass on Iran sanctions.
Troopergate: From the good old days, did Arkansas state troopers facilitate Bill Clinton’s philandering?
Gennifer Flowers: The tale that catapulted a supermarket tabloid into the big time.
Bill’s Golden Tongue: His and her speech fees shocked the American public.
Boeing Bucks: Boeing contributed big-time to Bill; Hillary helped the company obtain a profitable Russian contract.
Larry Lawrence: How did a fat cat donor get buried in Arlington National Cemetery without war experience?
The cattle futures: Hillary as commodity trader extraordinaire.
Chinagate: Nuclear secrets go to China on her husband’s watch.
Watergate: Committee chairman stated that if he had the power to fire her he would have. “She was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
Juanita Broaddrick: Another woman attacked and threatened by Hillary who brought rape allegations against Bill Clinton.
Paula Jones: Yet another woman attacked and threatened by Hillary who brought rape allegations against Bill Clinton.

Nope, it's not the "woman" thing people have problems with. We have problems with an extremely long list of scandals and concern for self interests and self preservation. Politicians are supposed to be there for the people, and the Clinton's have left a legacy of doing the exact opposite. Their vast fortune gathered while she held public office and encyclopedic list of legal troubles should tell you all you need to know.

Oh, please. Show me one person who has called for criminal prosecution of climate change deniers.

Does Google not work in your country? I can't be bothered to copy and paste the results for you here, but just do a search for your own phrase "criminal prosecution of climate change deniers" (without the quotes). I am pretty sure you will find more than one.

Oh, ok... here is one to get you started: http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Show me one person who has called for criminal prosecution of climate change deniers

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Sorry, the California Unfair Competition law is not criminal prosecution. It's a civil suit: "The UCL allows the court to prevent the use of unfair competition and to restore money or property to victims of unfair competition. Essentially, this provision allows for both monetary damages and injunctive relief where necessary".

Yeah, if you knowingly engage in false advertising in the course of commercial activity, then the state can sue you for damages resulting from that act. So what?

Show me one person who has called for criminal prosecution of climate change deniers

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Congratulations, you just failed. I am Jack's complete and total lack of surprise. FTFA:

Senate Bill 1161, or the California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016, would have authorized prosecutors to sue fossil fuel companies, think tanks and others that have "deceived or misled the public on the risks of climate change."

This is not about suing people who say that climate change is not happening. This is about suing corporations that know that AGW is happening, but are saying that it is not. Perhaps the best example because they are actually the most scrupulous example is ExxonMobil. They have outright admitted that AGW is real and that they have long known it to be true — immediately after saying that it was not real. You might also note that one of the last public statements from the last Bush administration was that AGW was real — of course, they retained the belief that it was not serious, but they acknowledged that it was a thing.

Now, show one person who has called for criminal prosecution of climate change deniers, as opposed to frauds. So far, you have failed to do so. This is Slashdot, so you may try again. But this is you on Slashdot, so there is little to no point.

Show me one person who has called for criminal prosecution of climate change deniers

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

It was Republicans that gave women the vote in the first place.

The way it's supposed to work, you're supposed to own land in order to vote. So called skin in the game. Today the left wants foreigners, often illegal aliens to vote - for them of course. Bus people from voting place to voting place to pack the ballot box. http://www.americanthinker.com...

Of course now we know about the Clinton campaign and their paying people to beat up people at the Trump rallies, http://www.washingtontimes.com... . Goes on and on and on.

Yet some people will vote for Hillary anyway.

"The Ecuador government respects the principle of non-intervention in other countries' affairs, it does not meddle in election processes underway, nor does it support any candidate specially."

Yet the world was silent when the Obama Administration provided US funds to Israeli opposition election campaigns to oust Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Well considering we have commissioner of the board of elections in NYC admitting to voter fraud on hidden cam and even the Washington Times saying vote fraud is all too real maybe he is onto something?

Frankly the whole conspiracy theory is disgusting. A person is murdered and jump with glee at the opportunity to hijack their memory for you dumbass conspiracy theory.

Sounds just like Benghazi and a movie doesn't it? The establishment jailed the person who made the shitty movie, Hillary remains at large.

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

Even then, gun trade shows aren't constitutionally protected. The purchase and sale of firearms are not protected. What is, is the right to have firearms. How you get them is up for debate...technically speaking...

The purchase, sale, and production are protected insofar as government may not discriminate against them. Cities have found this out when they refuse to allow firearm sales within their boundaries like any other commercial establishment and are the receiving end of a lawsuit.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Hillary admits that campaigns are expensive "I wish it weren't so but I don't know how to change it" and therefore she will need campaign contributions to win! What a calling admission.

And to also admit that maybe professionals who are experts in a field would be necessary to help regulate the industry! Next she is going to say that maybe a computer scientist or white hat hacker should help write cyber defense policy.

Hillary also admitted she has a "public policy" and "private policy", wants unfettered world trade with open borders, and wants to enact gun control via [presidential] executive order.

Feel free to distract people with non-controversial stuff, but realize who you're helping by doing that.

An ID and background check is already required for the licensed dealers who sell at gun shows.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

If you buy a firearm from a licensed dealer at a gun show, the dealer still must process a background check of the purchaser.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

not to mention going after the donors to the organizations...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

> The organization discovered the IRS was using donor lists it extracted from tax-exempt
> organizations during its anti-Tea Party crusade to target the donors themselves for tax audits.

And Google on the phrase...

Lois Lerner hard drive

about losing more government-related emails than Clinton. Since she was going after conservatives, "no reasonable prosecutor..." (who didn't want to end up dead) would file charges against her.

Yeah, and you're the type of person who'd say that there are no connections when 10+ outlets suddenly all come out yesterday with exactly the same talking points about Pence and his non-2020 campaign. Or that 90% of beltway reporters either vote democrat or are registered democrats, or that 80% or so of reporters in general are democrats. Even when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. There might be right-wing talking points, but there sure is a democrat echo chamber.

Although I agree that 'something has to be done', the chip cards in the US at least are no more secure than mag stripes. If you ever have the chance to hook a chip reader to a computer, you can read most of the data from a chip, unencrypted, the same way you do from a mag stripe (primarily for compatibility reasons). Hell, I have a fully encrypted card and it's useless at many large retailers in the US, my parents came here from Europe with their non-magstripe card which was completely useless even though it was issued as international by MasterCard, except for Tim Hortons (for whatever reason) the readers at Walmart and other places simply refused to work and the machine asked to swipe (on a non-magstripe card lol)

Additionally, there have been papers that describe how to abuse and crack the chip cards, the encryption on these things is about 2-3 decades old by now. On the other hand there are hundreds if not thousands of reports of these chip-and-pin countries (like Netherlands and France) of people that got fraudulently charged but because it was 'chip and pin' now the consumer has to eat the cost.

As far as USian sources: http://www.washingtontimes.com...

They run the collect it all systems that connect into the private sector. They know the jargon and terms that allow them to pass effortlessly back into the big US brands and telcos undercover or as part of a gov team.
Re "Hiring contractors to work on sensitive material doesn't make too much sense to me."
That policy is driven by political contacts, no bids and legal teams. If access to the private sector is not granted, access is demanded by politics and the need for creating local jobs.
Re "bump up a few salary grades"
The issue is the skills offered by contractors and the skills the gov, political class and mil then think they need for the collect it all missions.
A rush to the private sector to keep skills and get new skills saw a huge flood of rushed digital clearances or past self signed equivalent digital clearances been updated.
That allowed the US gov to be sold on the story that tech skills, language skills, people with skills that only living within a faith, community or the private tech sector could be found by using contractors.
The huge issue is security teams have not interviewed around the life history of a lot of contractors or even gov staff. No long interviews with extended family, questions to very local courts about sealed local paperwork in the past, no interviews with teachers, friends, looked over a home, looked at books around a home. i.e. radicalisation, cult membership, political issues or the value of another nation.
All the classic work that builds a real picture of the person, not just that they exist on a digital file on some computer in some fly over state.
The other aspect is criminal pasts. The need for language skills, cultural insights, having travelled the world, jargon, slang saw a rush to hire anyone.
Finally political aspects as to who can now get into the US gov is changing. Nothing to do with security just yet, but within a generation the US gov will be flooded with people hired on very different priorities, i.e. basic gov security is not even a consideration anymore.
"Obama’s DOJ blames criminal, citizenship checks of job seekers for lack of police diversity" (Sept. 25, 2016)
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Other nations will ensure trusted generations of their sympathisers, cult members, faith get in and rise up the ranks of the US bureaucracy.
Bulk collection and collect it all will not be able to track insiders as they will never risk any digital device, a distant holiday or religious service will give them time with their handlers.
The fix is so easy, keep it within gov/mil, hire correctly on merit, compartmentalise, walk the real US life story of all US applicants.
Give great rewards, further education and allow for advancement based on merit.
People who have cult, faith or political issues, put their "other" nation first will always be a risk for decades as trusted contractors or staff.
The US always had a great system to hire the best and ensure their pasts showed no sign of working for other interests.
Sadly with political pressure and no bid contractors all that has changed and within a generation a lot of strangers will have total access to mid and low level US secrets daily and without question. How far did they get up the gov and mil system?

The Clinton foundation has been called "a slush fund by Sunlight Foundation — a "progressive" foundation promoting nonprofit transparency.

Additionally:

Last year, Charity Navigator, a nonprofit watchdog that rates charities, put the Clinton Foundation on its “watch list” as a warning to potential contributors because so much Clinton Foundation money was going to salaries, overhead and luxury travel rather than to fulfilling its stated mission.

Eight successful years as Secretary of State.

What is so bloody sad is that you aren't even right about THIS thing, and you probably vote...

Remind me again HOW LONG she was Secretary of State for?

And that is ignoring the "Why were they successful?" point...

Not to bring facts into the argument, but during her stint as SoS, Clinton:

1) Sold 1/3 of our Uranium reserves to Russia
2) Sold dual use (civil/military) tech to Russia
3) Overrode expert opinion and ordered military intervention into Libya that led to the downfall of Gaddafi

That #3 is interesting. Clinton was advised that Gaddafi was the only thing keeping militant islamists at bay, and that taking him out would result in them forming a separate state based on terrorism.

We now know that by overriding the advice of experts, Clinton essentially caused the formation of ISIS and the subsequent deaths of hundreds of people, here and abroad.

Here's what the Washington Times reported at the time:

“I had facts that indicated America was headed once again into an intervention that was going to be disastrous,” Mr. Kucinich told The Times. “What was being said at the State Department — if you look at the charge at the time — it wasn’t so much about what happened as it was about what would happen. So there was a distortion of events that were occurring in Libya to justify an intervention which was essentially wrong and illegal.”

People say that Trump is scary and will lead us into war, but they conveniently forget that Hillary Clinton actually *did* lead us into war - under false pretenses!

Oh, and let's not forget all the people who had access to top secret classified information on Hillary's server.

You mean other than in California where the State can confiscate your firearms on an anonymous "tip" that you are a danger. And it can do it without warning, and does not have to return the firearms until you can prove that you are not a danger.

Oh and they have criminalized possession of magazines that were previously legal, meaning if you did not turn them in to the police on-time, then you run the risk of losing all your firearms - permanently (convicted of a gun violation = automatic, lifetime loss of firearm privileges in CA).

But other than that, yeah - no one's coming for your guns...

"I'd rather vote for a student of the Grand fucking Wizard of the KKK."

You have that choice...

Shh. Don't tell the partisan hacks that. They'll get upset when you show that only 7% of the US media identifies as republican. And nearly 30% identify as democrats, which is less then 1992 when nearly 45% of the media self-identified as democrats. Or that democrats get more positive press. Or that90% of reporters in the DC area AKA beltway reporters either are declared democrats or vote democrat.

Now? The right wing have always accused the ACLU of having a liberal bias.

And you think that is "odd"?

The ACLU’s Communist, Atheist Roots
The ACLU’s untold Stalinist heritage

They aren't quite as bad as they started, but they still are trying to drive American society towards its vision, which is very different than that of the Founders.

Then again, I'm not sure there is anything they haven't accused of having a liberal bias.

I'm curious, have you even investigated to see if there might be anything to it?

Survey: 7 percent of reporters identify as Republican
Republicans’ media bias claims boosted by scarcity of right-leaning journalists

Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement
Moving Further to the Left

Lawyers are more liberal than general population, study finds; what about judges?

Do you think we need to cover unions? Civil servants?

And if you have the curiosity, you might find a surprise or two, or three.

Some places to find new perspectives:
National Review
Weekly Standard
Commentary
Reason
Instapundit
Dennis Prager / Prager U
Hugh Hewitt

Now? The right wing have always accused the ACLU of having a liberal bias.

And you think that is "odd"?

The ACLU’s Communist, Atheist Roots
The ACLU’s untold Stalinist heritage

They aren't quite as bad as they started, but they still are trying to drive American society towards its vision, which is very different than that of the Founders.

Then again, I'm not sure there is anything they haven't accused of having a liberal bias.

I'm curious, have you even investigated to see if there might be anything to it?

Survey: 7 percent of reporters identify as Republican
Republicans’ media bias claims boosted by scarcity of right-leaning journalists

Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement
Moving Further to the Left

Lawyers are more liberal than general population, study finds; what about judges?

Do you think we need to cover unions? Civil servants?

And if you have the curiosity, you might find a surprise or two, or three.

Some places to find new perspectives:
National Review
Weekly Standard
Commentary
Reason
Instapundit
Dennis Prager / Prager U
Hugh Hewitt