OT: Epstein: 'Conspiracy theorists' proved right again

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c9040e17-9695-4ee6-9247-69042649e7e2@googlegroups.com:

You are truly an instigating idiot bastard, and I would surely
plug
your upper asshole with an NYPD broomstick handle. I might have
to beat the fuck out of you with it first as that urge would
overtake my meal delivery temporarily. But then you would surely
eat it... all.

I've added that to your running list of threats.

Outline the threat, idiot. There was no threat. I did not say "I
will do this or that", I said I WOULD do this or that. BIG
DIFFERENCE, you illiterate piece of shit.

At some point I
will need to take it to the authorities, you could be the next El
Paso nut case.

They will laugh at you. You are a Usenet loon, and 99% of the shit
folks say to you is 100% deserved.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:af6f8180-8c5a-418d-
8e24-aafd60791b7f@googlegroups.com:

Of course you did that in a lame
attempt to defend HILLARY? And what "Republican" does that?

You have a serious perception problem, and you are really bad at it,
punk. HOAD, fucktard.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:af6f8180-8c5a-418d-8e24-aafd60791b7f@googlegroups.com:

ROFL. No, that is not what you said. You said that he was
convicted for having the camera in a secured area.

No I did not.

Look, dumbfuck... you blurted what he was charged with the first
time you pitched your fat assed bitch about it. I never said "what
he was convicted for" ever.

I told you what he did. Then what they charged him with, which was
actually aside from what he did. That is the part you seem to have a
problem with.

And they could never charge Clinton with what they charged him
with. He was charged under the UCMJ. She would have to be charged
by the DOJ.

Maybe if you stop rolling around on the filthy floor you can clean
the shit out of your eyes well enough to read. Oh that's right...
you are shit, so there can be no cleaning.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:5540eb5c-572b-4c65-
b888-d2e9d07c86b6@googlegroups.com:

Nuff said on that one.
and you think it's cool.

You are retarded enough to think that there was ever any actual
threat. A common theme with 40 IQ dopes like you that dumbed it down
to about a 20 IQ with your political fanaticism.

I can see you on the playground...

"I tell my mommy on youuuuu!"

 

[whit3rd]

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 4:30:28 PM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 6:21:56 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 9:24:02 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:

There is no evidence that Russian meddling on Facebook, buying some BS stuff
there affected the outcome.

Huh? Public dialogue got 'managed' from abroad, and that DOES
affect all that followed.

Prove that it affected the outcome, ie Trump winning.

Hell, no. I won't prove it, any more than you'll put your elbow in your
ear, for similar reasons, as you well know

but we can't rewind
the clock to prove it, we have to theorize (or remain ignorant). Ignorance is
scarier than theorizing- it's just plain DARK in that branch.

Seems you're the one theorizing.

Yes, that's it exactly. Theorizing is the right way to consider alternatives to history,
because repeating history is WAY too expensive. Theorizing is the right way, and I'm
going there, and leaving you in the dust.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-08-19, Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1-
8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

By being a member of the GOP,
you're just enabling and approving of Trump.

You are full of shit and 99.999% of the shit your upper asshole spews
is total bullshit.

I am not enabling Trump and I do not approve of him.

Or course you are enabling Trump. You're still a member of the Republican
Party, which 85% support Trump. They are in the process of nominating him
again! And you refuse to answer the simple question;

What do you think would happen if 10 percent, 25 percent of the Republican
Party withdrew their voter registration as Republicans?

Given that the Republican Party 85% supports Trump and those most likely to
quit are those that don't, such an event would mean 95 to 100% support for
Trump in the Republican Party.

Is that the result you were hoping for?

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

 

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
news:63898ca9-4522-4a88-88e8-a6a4f2c888b1@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 4:30:28 PM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 6:21:56 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 9:24:02 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie
wrote:

There is no evidence that Russian meddling on Facebook,
buying some BS stuff there affected the outcome.

Huh? Public dialogue got 'managed' from abroad, and that DOES
affect all that followed.

Prove that it affected the outcome, ie Trump winning.

Hell, no. I won't prove it, any more than you'll put your elbow
in your ear, for similar reasons, as you well know

but we can't rewind
the clock to prove it, we have to theorize (or remain
ignorant). Ignorance is scarier than theorizing- it's just
plain DARK in that branch.

Seems you're the one theorizing.

Yes, that's it exactly. Theorizing is the right way to consider
alternatives to history, because repeating history is WAY too
expensive. Theorizing is the right way, and I'm going there, and
leaving you in the dust.

+1

 

Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote in
news:qjgbds$n2j$3@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org:

On 2019-08-19, Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1- 8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

By being a member of the GOP,
you're just enabling and approving of Trump.

You are full of shit and 99.999% of the shit your upper
asshole spews
is total bullshit.

I am not enabling Trump and I do not approve of him.

Or course you are enabling Trump. You're still a member of the
Republican Party, which 85% support Trump. They are in the
process of nominating him again! And you refuse to answer the
simple question;

What do you think would happen if 10 percent, 25 percent of the
Republican Party withdrew their voter registration as
Republicans?

Given that the Republican Party 85% supports Trump and those most
likely to quit are those that don't, such an event would mean 95
to 100% support for Trump in the Republican Party.

Is that the result you were hoping for?

Are you a retarded parrot?

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 5:01:29 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2019-08-19, Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1-
8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

By being a member of the GOP,
you're just enabling and approving of Trump.

You are full of shit and 99.999% of the shit your upper asshole spews
is total bullshit.

I am not enabling Trump and I do not approve of him.

Or course you are enabling Trump. You're still a member of the Republican
Party, which 85% support Trump. They are in the process of nominating him
again! And you refuse to answer the simple question;

What do you think would happen if 10 percent, 25 percent of the Republican
Party withdrew their voter registration as Republicans?

Given that the Republican Party 85% supports Trump and those most likely to
quit are those that don't, such an event would mean 95 to 100% support for
Trump in the Republican Party.

Is that the result you were hoping for?

Of course not. If 10% or 20% of Republicans terminated their registration
as Republicans because they are disgusted with Trump and the party, the
RNC and most Republicans would take note of that disaster, go into a panic
and likely dump Trump. And regardless, those that leave would have a clear
conscience and no longer be enabling Trump.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 3:01:41 AM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 4:30:28 PM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 6:21:56 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 9:24:02 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:

There is no evidence that Russian meddling on Facebook, buying some BS stuff
there affected the outcome.

Huh? Public dialogue got 'managed' from abroad, and that DOES
affect all that followed.

Prove that it affected the outcome, ie Trump winning.

Hell, no. I won't prove it, any more than you'll put your elbow in your
ear, for similar reasons, as you well know

but we can't rewind
the clock to prove it, we have to theorize (or remain ignorant). Ignorance is
scarier than theorizing- it's just plain DARK in that branch.

Seems you're the one theorizing.

Yes, that's it exactly. Theorizing is the right way to consider alternatives to history,
because repeating history is WAY too expensive. Theorizing is the right way, and I'm
going there, and leaving you in the dust.

You can "theorize' all you want. The simple fact is it appears extremely
unlikely that the Russians buying some Facebook ads changed anyone's minds.
Those that want to theorize should go find some voters who the ads were
targeted at and see if they even saw them or paid any attention to them.
I suspect the reason no one is looking is that they know the likely answers.
Everyone knew who Hillary was, who Trump was, both had been totally
overexposed by election day. It's just that Democrats are sore losers
and they can't accept that they picked a throwback, a defective candidate,
that was so bad, even Trump the Horrible beat her.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 1:35:41 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:c463fbd8-cff7-4bcf-8013-d38af89c321d@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 12:07:07 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1- 8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

snip

I've added that to your running list of threats. At some point I
will need to take it to the authorities, you could be the next El
Paso nut case.

Granting Trader4's intellectual short-comings, the police might
well take a dim view of him wasting their time, and save DLUNU
from having to take the trouble to find the twit.


I never said I would do any such thing as 'find him' or any other
act. I said what *should* happen to him. I said what I would like
to do to him.

So sad to see you two not getting along......

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Monday, August 19, 2019 at 11:14:51 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 6:14:45 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Monday, August 19, 2019 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 12:07:07 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1-
8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

snip

I've added that to your running list of threats. At some point I will need
to take it to the authorities, you could be the next El Paso nut case.

Granting Trader4's intellectual short-comings, the police might well take a dim view of him wasting their time, and save DLUNU from having to take the trouble to find the twit.

That figures, we have an angry poster here who has now graduated to
making actual physical violence threats and you support him.

Nuff said on that one, and you think it's cool.

DLUNU clearly has anger management issues, and does waste time venting them.

The anger isn't a useful response to your persistent fatuity, but it is entirely understandable. If this were a moderated group, you wouldn't be allowed to waste the groups time, but it isn't, so we have to settle for regular derision.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Of course if it was moderated, you;d be allowed to spew your BS though.
Amazing how libs work.

 

[Robert Baer]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
news:63898ca9-4522-4a88-88e8-a6a4f2c888b1@googlegroups.com:

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 4:30:28 PM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 6:21:56 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 9:24:02 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie
wrote:

There is no evidence that Russian meddling on Facebook,
buying some BS stuff there affected the outcome.

Huh? Public dialogue got 'managed' from abroad, and that DOES
affect all that followed.

Prove that it affected the outcome, ie Trump winning.

Hell, no. I won't prove it, any more than you'll put your elbow
in your ear, for similar reasons, as you well know

but we can't rewind
the clock to prove it, we have to theorize (or remain
ignorant). Ignorance is scarier than theorizing- it's just
plain DARK in that branch.

Seems you're the one theorizing.

Yes, that's it exactly. Theorizing is the right way to consider
alternatives to history, because repeating history is WAY too
expensive. Theorizing is the right way, and I'm going there, and
leaving you in the dust.


+1

Yes, repeating history is WAY too expensive, BUT we do it all of the
time...

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 1:09:39 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 5:01:29 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2019-08-19, Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1-
8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

By being a member of the GOP,
you're just enabling and approving of Trump.

You are full of shit and 99.999% of the shit your upper asshole spews
is total bullshit.

I am not enabling Trump and I do not approve of him.

Or course you are enabling Trump. You're still a member of the Republican
Party, which 85% support Trump. They are in the process of nominating him
again! And you refuse to answer the simple question;

What do you think would happen if 10 percent, 25 percent of the Republican
Party withdrew their voter registration as Republicans?

Given that the Republican Party 85% supports Trump and those most likely to
quit are those that don't, such an event would mean 95 to 100% support for
Trump in the Republican Party.

Is that the result you were hoping for?

Of course not. If 10% or 20% of Republicans terminated their registration
as Republicans because they are disgusted with Trump and the party, the
RNC and most Republicans would take note of that disaster, go into a panic
and likely dump Trump.

And find a more attractive candidate? One more likely to win a presidential election? Where? The Tea Party had purged the Republican party of anybody remotely respectable, and Trump has thinned them out even more.

And regardless, those that leave would have a clear
conscience and no longer be enabling Trump.

But very little prospect of seeing a Republican win the presidency.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:7156a3b3-c40e-4920-962f-e0c8e977daa7@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 1:35:41 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:c463fbd8-cff7-4bcf-8013-d38af89c321d@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 12:07:07 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 11:52:37 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:2d1342cd-dfd3-45e1- 8cce-3b42f4a9131d@googlegroups.com:

snip

I've added that to your running list of threats. At some
point I will need to take it to the authorities, you could be
the next El Paso nut case.

Granting Trader4's intellectual short-comings, the police might
well take a dim view of him wasting their time, and save DLUNU
from having to take the trouble to find the twit.


I never said I would do any such thing as 'find him' or any
other
act. I said what *should* happen to him. I said what I would
like to do to him.


So sad to see you two not getting along......

Dumbfucktard. The reference was about your lame claim that I
threatened you. Get a clue, dipshit.