You are right, keep to facts. There were several emails referencing the acknowledgement of wrong doing. This puts the category as willful. If PersonA was beating a dog and ignored people telling her to stop should she be innocent of animal cruelty? What if that person as deaf? There is absolutely criminal conduct, but again in Hillary's case it was ignored.
The Clinton's have made lots and lots of enemies here in the US. I find it much more likely that these leaks are from insiders who are pissed. You know, like the guy who is believed to have been responsible for the DNC leak who ended up shot dead in a Nothing Stolen Robbery? You think the law abiding people in the FBI like what Comey did and how it makes them look? Come now, this is much more plausible than the evil Russians who already do business with Hillary.
I should also add that my facts are based on recorded testimony from FBI Directory Comey, Hillary Clinton, mostly responding to questions by Trey Gowdy during the Congressional hearings. Those are not allegations, but testimony given under oath. Quite different than a little boy claiming "Hillary raped me" showing up in the media.
No, you should really try to read it again. Claiming that Hillary is still subject to criminal punishment is not the same as claiming she should be in jail for allegations. I laid out facts demonstrating her guilt, which you have not questioned.
The reason for my post requires reading the article linked, which claims that Trump should be jailed for an allegation. If allegations were the only measure, both Bill and Hillary should be in jail with Trump.
The US can use discretion when dealing with foreign hostile nations, including but not limited to those holding hostages. Yes, the US has laws and you should really try to get a grasp on them before correcting others.
My opinion of Trump did not change, because I read the transcript. It should take about 10 seconds to figure out that this is manufactured hysteria. My opinion of Media and Hillary did go down slightly, but it's already so far down that I can't measure a difference.
There is no sudden and severe drop in the pound, this was all seen by economists for quite some time. I realize that it takes some study to figure out, but there are experts out there talking about economics outside of the cronies in Government. Brexit was the smartest thing the people could do, because the whole of the Eurozone is tanking. Look at Deutchbank for pity sake, who Friday was trading at 7% of last years value. That is Germany, the heart of the Euro. Nobody in the EU has money, they are all running at massive debt and spending more and more on corrupt programs and massive immigration which harms their economies even more. What do you do with 1,000,000 immigrants when you already have 9% unemployment? Tax and handout is what has been done, and that is simply not sustainable.
The levels of corruption in the UK today far exceed what I remember in the 80s and 90s which were at least similar to the US.
My request was for fair treatment, yours was claiming guilty by allegation. Not that you really care (shill much?) but for the accidental reader:
Bill was proven guilty of both sexual assault and perjury, check the court records. He settled one case for $850,000.00. He was disbarred for misconduct, check the Bar records. Bill also faced numerous allegations which were never brought to court. By your standard, he should be in jail for all of those allegations.
Hillary was also proven guilty by admitting she destroyed emails after receiving a subpoena from Congress which is at a minimum Obstruction of Justice. She is guilty of perjury again by looking at her own testimony where either she lied to Congress or the FBI Director did. Within the statues of the law, she is guilty of mishandling classified information. Proven by the FBI directory who for her case, and only her case, put a stipulation of mens rea on filing charges. NO other cases in the US have used intent as a stipulation for assessing guilt, NONE. Intent has not even been used in the sentencing of cases against US Military mishandling classified materials. Some of which were completely accidental (US Marine who found a paper in his laundry and turned it in only to be handed over to the courts).
The same way corruption is harming the US economy. Money is being funneled from the private to the public sector and dumped on crap instead of things like Infrastructure which could put people to work. In the US for example, the 1.2 Billion dollars handed to Iran for hostages could have been used for roads and money been recirculated by the public. Instead, someone in Iran has a very nice retirement package. I gave you one of the UK examples, in the Government pissing away money to stifle speech and spy on the public.
Of course the allegations should play out in court, but the stream of bullshit we have seen from the Media, Democratic Party, and Clinton's in general have lost all credibility. If you want to play the "guilty by allegation" routine why is Hillary not sitting in one jail and Bill not in another? Is it only guilt by allegation when it's against a Republican?
To those who would claim Cruz or Rubio would be better off than Trump, time to fact check how the Church going Romney was treated by the media and Democratic party in the US. Anyone on the Republican ticket is vilified by all means necessary including flat out lies.
I remember a time when we had this Constitutional right to Due Process and being Innocent until proven guilty. Bill and Hillary have both been proven to be guilty, though the latter was given a free pass and the DOJ denied the ability to prosecute. She is still subject to perjury to Congress and Obstruction of Justice charges however, and those we know she _is_ guilty of by the Director of the FBIs admission.
Conflating issues are we? The pound being low has nothing to do with the current levels of political corruption in the UK? How about the mass of immigrants they are dealing with when jobs were already scarce? How about the massive increase in government programs to stifle free speech and spy on the populace? Oh but it's all because they left the EU, which was only half ass adopted in the UK to begin with right? Good grief.
Hearing the media, progressives, and phony right career politicians claim doom and gloom for Trump is a narrative that benefits the left. It's obvious why they push the narrative, but I trust them with that as much as I trust them not to try and tag team Trump in debates. The left is so sure they won the USA they are playing sloppy. Remember Brexit was going to be a blowout too, and all the elites wanted to remain in the EU. I seem to remember the people of the UK getting the result that the majority wanted though, and not what the establishment "predicted".
Virtually everything you hear from the media in the US is contrived to manipulate Hillary into office. I have studied Philosophy, Rhetoric, Logic, and the necessary History, Psychology, Math, etc.. to make sense of the world. I can spot the crap from miles away, but this election requires very little insight. The Trump audio was released the same day as Wikileaks dumps. Would you like to bet money that they get another paid spokesperson to claim Trump touched her "no-no" place to distract from this one? Today or tomorrow you will see another contrived claim and even more hysterical phony outrage from people.
Only what you should have heard already. 1. Hillary want's open borders and free employment with all of South America (say buh bye to the lower and middle class jobs). 2. Hillary has private positions and what she tells the public (not a big shock, but the admittance is nice). 3. The State Department worked with media to suppress stories about Hillary's (illegal) email activities. (Good to see our tax dollars at work I guess.) 4. Hillary wants Wall Street to make it's own rules and Politicians should stay out of their way. (as with 2, not a big shock but the admittance is nice).
It's easy to find the diamonds, it's a lengthy process connecting dots and finding the smaller gems. I am a part time Philosopher who does this for my own sanity and entertainment value (also because the media is corrupt and refuses to employ journalists). Don't look to me for breaking news, I'm better for corroboration or denials.
Assange has made it a point to dump material for Journalists to report on. Wikileaks my occasionally provide some commentary, but that is not the service they want and not the service they claim to provide.
The real issue is that we have a massive media monopoly in the US. Journalism has died and entertainment took it's place. IMHO, the US DOJ should start breaking up the media monopolies. We have laws for that.
Deny Deny Deny, Distract, Distract, Distract. Sorry folks, but if you are just now waking up you may want to go back to sleep. Politics is full of criminals and criminal actions, each trying to cover up for each other. The media has been in on the scam, as has been Department heads in charge of prosecuting wrong doing.
It's going to take me a while to read through this lot, I'm not done with the last dump. You can bet your ass the Media won't bother with this, because 11 years ago Trump said the P word. For the people focusing on that instead of actual political corruption, you deserve what is planned by the Left.
Free Speech _IS_ a blank check. Private organizations can say what ever they wish, just like people can say what they wish including people working in Government. If a company promotes bad policy they go out of business. If a person misrepresents the company, they can be terminated but still speak their piece. If a politician says things you don't like you vote for the alternative candidate and remove them from office. You can only get to those positions by actually listening to a side you may disagree with.
Your attempt to jump from free speech to libel demonstrates a complete lack of maturity and failure to comprehend "accountability". If I lie about you sure, I can and should be sued for lying. I stand up for my words and attempt to avoid dishonesty, but I can say what I like. You don't have to agree, and if I'm wrong prove me wrong. Do so in court and get a paycheck if the Judge believes you.
What you, and the Marxist/Progressive/Left attempt to do is criminalize and silence thoughts they dislike. You believe that thought and action must always coexist. Ever been mad enough to commit violence against someone? You may not have acted on it, but by your own definition you should be in jail for life because we all rationalize good and bad behavior. The difference between the criminals and everyone else is that the criminals act on the rationalization, most of us do not.
The best way to defend against speech is to let people hear it and either ignore it or learn to argue against it. Free speech is essential for this reason, and if that was not the case the world and US would never have been able to improve. Not just science and technology, but overall social improvements. We would not have Government Welfare if not for people advocating an unpopular position, as one easy example.
What you are doing is attempting to claim that every person involved in a movement is responsible for every other single individual's actions and statements within the movement. If you want to play that game, do you believe that all people in BLM want to kill all cops, rob and vandalize all people with more money than they have (which is not much when you are not working), and kill all white people? I'm guessing that in that case because it's your side you would deny the over generalization, but yet you use that same over generalization with others.
Do you have any other double standards or hypocritical positions you would like me to explain to you?
I should have added that mens rea is not used in determination for breaking the law and is not in the statutes. Again, Trey Gowdy's portion of the hearing makes that clear and provides statutes. Motive as not used to jail a marine for 20 years who posted a selfie not realizing a monitor in the background contained a picture marked as classified. The motive is not being used in the case against the sailor who disposed of a cell phone with a photo which had metadata showing the position of a ship at one time. Motive it seems is the excuse not to allow a prosecutor to touch Hillary, and it is the _ONLY_ time this has been done in US History. Facts may be inconvenient, but you should really learn to use them.
Not being able to prove "why" she did it is not the same as proving "that" she did it. "Why" requires a bit of character investigation which was completely ignored. Literally a trail of such "luck" follows both Clinton criminals^Wpoliticians (yes, both of them), mainly because the media has covered for them since Clinton was Governor.
Hillary claimed she had no classified emails on her server. FBI director claimed she "did in fact" have classified emails on her server. Clinton claimed "none marked classified" and again the FBI director stated "there were emails _marked_ classified. Read Trey Gowdy's questions if you have doubts, but I'm guessing that you find facts inconvenient. You can find his portion of the hearing on Youtube if you are too lazy to read.
Clinton and her staff can't even tell the truth about her being ill, which perfectly demonstrates the character of the person. Being responsible and not coughing pneumonia carrying bacteria over at least the dozens of people that heard her speaking was not as important as her lust for power. And go ahead and ask your doctor about that so called "non contagious" variety which amazingly does not exist. I guess this was the great diagnosis from the amazing medical institute called "Chelsea's apartment". Whew, I feel so much better now!
Sadly I don't see Johnson as Libertarian at all. He Governed his State that way from what I hear, but during his Presidential campaign he looks very much like a Democrat. That "could" just be that he's a bad spokesperson for himself, but considering the way this election cycle has gone I'm skeptical of everything and everyone in politics.
Making false claims about someone and then claiming to be the victim has become the normal. Victim hood has become a currency and is used extensively as such. People who don't learn about the Hegelian dialectic are doomed to fall prey to the tactic.
Trump using the laws is not the same thing as Politicians making and signing laws, in fact that makes him a Law abiding citizen. The fact that you can't reference that fact in good faith and resort to an ad hominem instead of an attempt to prove my facts wrong demonstrates what you really are.
So tell us, how does that Hillary genital taste? Never mind. You are not high enough on the totem pole to actually get any. Her and her ilk would not deem you worthy of sniffing her excrement. Yet another low life peasant happy to remain a low life peasant, pandering for their lordlings to remain in tight control of them.
I'd say grats on that, but there are many low life peasants pandering to their lords in the US today.
While there are no other exceptions I can think of, the possessive form of "it" does not have the same rules. "It Is" is "it's", while the possessive form removes the quote. E.G. "The cat chased its own tail." Is a correct statement, where "The cat chased it's own tail." would expand to "The cat chased it is own tail." and would not be correct.
I believe this same odd rule exists in UK English as well as American English as I have seen it enough.
Slashdot Mirror
You are right, keep to facts. There were several emails referencing the acknowledgement of wrong doing. This puts the category as willful. If PersonA was beating a dog and ignored people telling her to stop should she be innocent of animal cruelty? What if that person as deaf? There is absolutely criminal conduct, but again in Hillary's case it was ignored.
The Clinton's have made lots and lots of enemies here in the US. I find it much more likely that these leaks are from insiders who are pissed. You know, like the guy who is believed to have been responsible for the DNC leak who ended up shot dead in a Nothing Stolen Robbery? You think the law abiding people in the FBI like what Comey did and how it makes them look? Come now, this is much more plausible than the evil Russians who already do business with Hillary.
I should also add that my facts are based on recorded testimony from FBI Directory Comey, Hillary Clinton, mostly responding to questions by Trey Gowdy during the Congressional hearings. Those are not allegations, but testimony given under oath. Quite different than a little boy claiming "Hillary raped me" showing up in the media.
No, you should really try to read it again. Claiming that Hillary is still subject to criminal punishment is not the same as claiming she should be in jail for allegations. I laid out facts demonstrating her guilt, which you have not questioned.
The reason for my post requires reading the article linked, which claims that Trump should be jailed for an allegation. If allegations were the only measure, both Bill and Hillary should be in jail with Trump.
The US can use discretion when dealing with foreign hostile nations, including but not limited to those holding hostages. Yes, the US has laws and you should really try to get a grasp on them before correcting others.
My opinion of Trump did not change, because I read the transcript. It should take about 10 seconds to figure out that this is manufactured hysteria. My opinion of Media and Hillary did go down slightly, but it's already so far down that I can't measure a difference.
There is no sudden and severe drop in the pound, this was all seen by economists for quite some time. I realize that it takes some study to figure out, but there are experts out there talking about economics outside of the cronies in Government. Brexit was the smartest thing the people could do, because the whole of the Eurozone is tanking. Look at Deutchbank for pity sake, who Friday was trading at 7% of last years value. That is Germany, the heart of the Euro. Nobody in the EU has money, they are all running at massive debt and spending more and more on corrupt programs and massive immigration which harms their economies even more. What do you do with 1,000,000 immigrants when you already have 9% unemployment? Tax and handout is what has been done, and that is simply not sustainable.
The levels of corruption in the UK today far exceed what I remember in the 80s and 90s which were at least similar to the US.
My request was for fair treatment, yours was claiming guilty by allegation. Not that you really care (shill much?) but for the accidental reader:
Bill was proven guilty of both sexual assault and perjury, check the court records. He settled one case for $850,000.00. He was disbarred for misconduct, check the Bar records. Bill also faced numerous allegations which were never brought to court. By your standard, he should be in jail for all of those allegations.
Hillary was also proven guilty by admitting she destroyed emails after receiving a subpoena from Congress which is at a minimum Obstruction of Justice. She is guilty of perjury again by looking at her own testimony where either she lied to Congress or the FBI Director did. Within the statues of the law, she is guilty of mishandling classified information. Proven by the FBI directory who for her case, and only her case, put a stipulation of mens rea on filing charges. NO other cases in the US have used intent as a stipulation for assessing guilt, NONE. Intent has not even been used in the sentencing of cases against US Military mishandling classified materials. Some of which were completely accidental (US Marine who found a paper in his laundry and turned it in only to be handed over to the courts).
The same way corruption is harming the US economy. Money is being funneled from the private to the public sector and dumped on crap instead of things like Infrastructure which could put people to work. In the US for example, the 1.2 Billion dollars handed to Iran for hostages could have been used for roads and money been recirculated by the public. Instead, someone in Iran has a very nice retirement package. I gave you one of the UK examples, in the Government pissing away money to stifle speech and spy on the public.
Of course the allegations should play out in court, but the stream of bullshit we have seen from the Media, Democratic Party, and Clinton's in general have lost all credibility. If you want to play the "guilty by allegation" routine why is Hillary not sitting in one jail and Bill not in another? Is it only guilt by allegation when it's against a Republican?
To those who would claim Cruz or Rubio would be better off than Trump, time to fact check how the Church going Romney was treated by the media and Democratic party in the US. Anyone on the Republican ticket is vilified by all means necessary including flat out lies.
I remember a time when we had this Constitutional right to Due Process and being Innocent until proven guilty. Bill and Hillary have both been proven to be guilty, though the latter was given a free pass and the DOJ denied the ability to prosecute. She is still subject to perjury to Congress and Obstruction of Justice charges however, and those we know she _is_ guilty of by the Director of the FBIs admission.
It is bad, but hey. Enjoy your servitude.
Conflating issues are we? The pound being low has nothing to do with the current levels of political corruption in the UK? How about the mass of immigrants they are dealing with when jobs were already scarce? How about the massive increase in government programs to stifle free speech and spy on the populace? Oh but it's all because they left the EU, which was only half ass adopted in the UK to begin with right? Good grief.
Hearing the media, progressives, and phony right career politicians claim doom and gloom for Trump is a narrative that benefits the left. It's obvious why they push the narrative, but I trust them with that as much as I trust them not to try and tag team Trump in debates. The left is so sure they won the USA they are playing sloppy. Remember Brexit was going to be a blowout too, and all the elites wanted to remain in the EU. I seem to remember the people of the UK getting the result that the majority wanted though, and not what the establishment "predicted".
Virtually everything you hear from the media in the US is contrived to manipulate Hillary into office. I have studied Philosophy, Rhetoric, Logic, and the necessary History, Psychology, Math, etc.. to make sense of the world. I can spot the crap from miles away, but this election requires very little insight. The Trump audio was released the same day as Wikileaks dumps. Would you like to bet money that they get another paid spokesperson to claim Trump touched her "no-no" place to distract from this one? Today or tomorrow you will see another contrived claim and even more hysterical phony outrage from people.
Only what you should have heard already. 1. Hillary want's open borders and free employment with all of South America (say buh bye to the lower and middle class jobs). 2. Hillary has private positions and what she tells the public (not a big shock, but the admittance is nice). 3. The State Department worked with media to suppress stories about Hillary's (illegal) email activities. (Good to see our tax dollars at work I guess.) 4. Hillary wants Wall Street to make it's own rules and Politicians should stay out of their way. (as with 2, not a big shock but the admittance is nice).
It's easy to find the diamonds, it's a lengthy process connecting dots and finding the smaller gems. I am a part time Philosopher who does this for my own sanity and entertainment value (also because the media is corrupt and refuses to employ journalists). Don't look to me for breaking news, I'm better for corroboration or denials.
Assange has made it a point to dump material for Journalists to report on. Wikileaks my occasionally provide some commentary, but that is not the service they want and not the service they claim to provide.
The real issue is that we have a massive media monopoly in the US. Journalism has died and entertainment took it's place. IMHO, the US DOJ should start breaking up the media monopolies. We have laws for that.
Deny Deny Deny, Distract, Distract, Distract. Sorry folks, but if you are just now waking up you may want to go back to sleep. Politics is full of criminals and criminal actions, each trying to cover up for each other. The media has been in on the scam, as has been Department heads in charge of prosecuting wrong doing.
It's going to take me a while to read through this lot, I'm not done with the last dump. You can bet your ass the Media won't bother with this, because 11 years ago Trump said the P word. For the people focusing on that instead of actual political corruption, you deserve what is planned by the Left.
Free Speech _IS_ a blank check. Private organizations can say what ever they wish, just like people can say what they wish including people working in Government. If a company promotes bad policy they go out of business. If a person misrepresents the company, they can be terminated but still speak their piece. If a politician says things you don't like you vote for the alternative candidate and remove them from office. You can only get to those positions by actually listening to a side you may disagree with.
Your attempt to jump from free speech to libel demonstrates a complete lack of maturity and failure to comprehend "accountability". If I lie about you sure, I can and should be sued for lying. I stand up for my words and attempt to avoid dishonesty, but I can say what I like. You don't have to agree, and if I'm wrong prove me wrong. Do so in court and get a paycheck if the Judge believes you.
What you, and the Marxist/Progressive/Left attempt to do is criminalize and silence thoughts they dislike. You believe that thought and action must always coexist. Ever been mad enough to commit violence against someone? You may not have acted on it, but by your own definition you should be in jail for life because we all rationalize good and bad behavior. The difference between the criminals and everyone else is that the criminals act on the rationalization, most of us do not.
The best way to defend against speech is to let people hear it and either ignore it or learn to argue against it. Free speech is essential for this reason, and if that was not the case the world and US would never have been able to improve. Not just science and technology, but overall social improvements. We would not have Government Welfare if not for people advocating an unpopular position, as one easy example.
What you are doing is attempting to claim that every person involved in a movement is responsible for every other single individual's actions and statements within the movement. If you want to play that game, do you believe that all people in BLM want to kill all cops, rob and vandalize all people with more money than they have (which is not much when you are not working), and kill all white people? I'm guessing that in that case because it's your side you would deny the over generalization, but yet you use that same over generalization with others.
Do you have any other double standards or hypocritical positions you would like me to explain to you?
I should have added that mens rea is not used in determination for breaking the law and is not in the statutes. Again, Trey Gowdy's portion of the hearing makes that clear and provides statutes. Motive as not used to jail a marine for 20 years who posted a selfie not realizing a monitor in the background contained a picture marked as classified. The motive is not being used in the case against the sailor who disposed of a cell phone with a photo which had metadata showing the position of a ship at one time. Motive it seems is the excuse not to allow a prosecutor to touch Hillary, and it is the _ONLY_ time this has been done in US History. Facts may be inconvenient, but you should really learn to use them.
Not being able to prove "why" she did it is not the same as proving "that" she did it. "Why" requires a bit of character investigation which was completely ignored. Literally a trail of such "luck" follows both Clinton criminals^Wpoliticians (yes, both of them), mainly because the media has covered for them since Clinton was Governor.
Hillary claimed she had no classified emails on her server. FBI director claimed she "did in fact" have classified emails on her server. Clinton claimed "none marked classified" and again the FBI director stated "there were emails _marked_ classified. Read Trey Gowdy's questions if you have doubts, but I'm guessing that you find facts inconvenient. You can find his portion of the hearing on Youtube if you are too lazy to read.
Clinton and her staff can't even tell the truth about her being ill, which perfectly demonstrates the character of the person. Being responsible and not coughing pneumonia carrying bacteria over at least the dozens of people that heard her speaking was not as important as her lust for power. And go ahead and ask your doctor about that so called "non contagious" variety which amazingly does not exist. I guess this was the great diagnosis from the amazing medical institute called "Chelsea's apartment". Whew, I feel so much better now!
Sadly I don't see Johnson as Libertarian at all. He Governed his State that way from what I hear, but during his Presidential campaign he looks very much like a Democrat. That "could" just be that he's a bad spokesperson for himself, but considering the way this election cycle has gone I'm skeptical of everything and everyone in politics.
Good catch, though I can honestly blame spell checking which flags Hegalian. I corrected once on an edit and missed the second on a submit.
Making false claims about someone and then claiming to be the victim has become the normal. Victim hood has become a currency and is used extensively as such. People who don't learn about the Hegelian dialectic are doomed to fall prey to the tactic.
Trump using the laws is not the same thing as Politicians making and signing laws, in fact that makes him a Law abiding citizen. The fact that you can't reference that fact in good faith and resort to an ad hominem instead of an attempt to prove my facts wrong demonstrates what you really are.
So tell us, how does that Hillary genital taste? Never mind. You are not high enough on the totem pole to actually get any. Her and her ilk would not deem you worthy of sniffing her excrement. Yet another low life peasant happy to remain a low life peasant, pandering for their lordlings to remain in tight control of them.
I'd say grats on that, but there are many low life peasants pandering to their lords in the US today.
While there are no other exceptions I can think of, the possessive form of "it" does not have the same rules. "It Is" is "it's", while the possessive form removes the quote. E.G. "The cat chased its own tail." Is a correct statement, where "The cat chased it's own tail." would expand to "The cat chased it is own tail." and would not be correct.
I believe this same odd rule exists in UK English as well as American English as I have seen it enough.
While most of us expect commenters not to read TFA, most of us expect that they read at least a couple sentences of the summary.