OT: Epstein: 'Conspiracy theorists' proved right again

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:10:49 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 4:31:43 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 1:32:17 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 8:54:47 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 1:23:33 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 10:52:25 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 12:28:42 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 9:49:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux....@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:cdf88e02-4c07-4145-
aa53-c7ba60953a08@googlegroups.com:

That is a hell of a lot different than a sex
trafficker of a person in office colluding with a foreign (enemy)
entity to affect ANYTHING in our nation.

Hillary colluded with the Russians? Wow!

Nice try, putz boy. I made no reference to her. I referred to Epstein and Trump, as if your wee wittle bwain is having processing issues.

Epstein colluded with the Russians? Tell us more? Trump colluded? After $35 mil and two years, Mueller concluded that there was no evidence that Trump, anyone in the Trump campaign or any American colluded with Russia.

A couple of members of the Trump election team have gone to prison for acting for Russian interests within notifying the people they should have done about what they were doing.

Sure, from years ago, before they had anything to do with Trump, Manafort and Gates worked for pro-Soviet schmucks in Ukraine. Had nothing to do with any Russian meddling in the election, which was the central allegation, the whole purpose of the $35 mil, two year investigation. So, they found those two failed to register as foreign agents. Not the first to do so and typically all that happens is you file.

That's not the way the New Yorker put it.

Well there you have it! The oracle of all lib truth, the NY Yorker puts
it another way, so it must be so. Stupid lib.

Mueller concluded that the Trump team and the Russians hadn't colluded to influence the election - the Trump team were such a bunch of loose cannons that nobody even vaguely sane would include them in any conspiracy.

Hysterical that you say that now, when for two years all the lefties have been so sure that Trump and his campaign did collude.

What makes you think that?

Because the libs have been yelling about it for the last two years?
Hello? Stupid lib.

Cite?

ROFL. Stupid lib. You libs have been howling about Trump colluding with
Russia since 2016.

You can claim what you like, but since you typically misunderstand what you have read, so your unsupported claims don't carry any weight at all.

Stupid alt-right people do confuse concerns about possible collusion with "yelling about" actual collusion, and Trader4 is remarkably stupid.

The evidence that the Russians helped Trump has always been pretty clear, but collusion is harder to prove, and this particular leftist (from your point of view) has always thought that Trump was too erratic to be somebody anybody would risk colluding with .

The Russians did influence the election, but strictly in their own interests, and the Trump team were avid to pick up and dirt that the Russians might might have leaked to them.

That part you have mostly right, except the Russians were not leaking to Trump's campaign they were just leaking to the world.

There are specific e-mails within the Trump team that suggested that they thought otherwise.

Mueller didn't conclude that the Trump team hadn't done anything criminal, but did rule out explicit collusion - being dumb enough to be played by the Russians isn't collusion.

He did rule out anything criminal with regard to the election or election meddling. That was his charter. It's just that the stupid, bitter Democrats still won't accept it.

He did rule out collusion. The hush money paid to Stormy Daniels was "election meddling" and should have been reported as an election expense.

Oh, BS, that's pure nonsense. You know what the best defense to that BS is? I'd say to the jury, OK, the prosecution says the Trump campaign was supposed to treat this as a campaign expenditure, not personal. Suppose the Trump campaign paid it, reported it as a campaign expense. Then we'd be here in court with the Trump campaign charged with using campaign donations for PERSONAL expenses. And then, they probably would have a case.

They wouldn't have been under any obligation to report it as a campaign expense. It was a personal expenditure that wouldn't have been paid if it couldn't have influenced the campaign,

BS. Trump had plenty of other motives to try to buy silence. Like it
being a disaster to his marriage, Melania, his family and the Trump brand..

He's had several marriages, and none the previous marriages ended well, which doesn't seem to have damaged the Trump brand with anybody silly enough to take it at face value.

It wouldn't have helped his election campaign if the current marriage had fallen apart during the campaign.

So, smart guy, where is the federal form to figure out how to apportion
the $100K between those categories and the campaign.

Who needs a form? He's never before gone to any trouble to avoid looking like a sleaze-bag, so the whole expenditure in on the election campaign.

And you ignored the central tennent here, which is they claim it had to be
treated as a campaign donation.

No. As an election expenditure.

Yet if Trump had used campaign donations
to pay Stormy, why then you libs would be charging him with the crime of
using campaign funds for a PERSONAL expenditure.

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even live here?
I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be big and powerful like
the USA.

Trump's idiotic enthusiasm for trade wars is damaging the world economy (as well as the US and China - screwing up China's economy cuts the amount they spend on importing stuff from Australia).

Quite how Australia could get to be big and powerful like China or the US escapes me. If waving a magic wand might do it, there are people who might like it to happen, but multiplying our population by twelve would change the place out of all recognition, and it would take a while to set up the infrastructure in which all those extra people would be useful and could be fed or housed.

That kind of big penis envy would be rather like admiring a guy with elephantiasis

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

who had to carry his penis around in wheel-barrow.

Trump is definitely that kind of useless prick, and you are entirely welcome to keep him for yourselves.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 1:26:30 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:04:11 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c48847d7-e4d1-4a59-849a-6973074d2de4@googlegroups.com:

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even live
here? I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be big and
powerful like the USA.


Events within the USA affects the entire globe, you retarded piece of
shit.

The problem is Bill is obsessed with the US. I don't see him bitching
about what Putin just did, about the freedom riots in China, etc.

They don't screw us up the way Trump's idiot actions are screwing us up.

> It must be big penis envy, he knows the US is the biggest and best.

The European Union is bigger, Airbus is selling more airliners than Boeing, and even US semiconductor companies are buying their lithography machines from AMSL in the Netherlands.

The US is past it's sell-by date, and this is getting more an more obvious.

Trump campaigned on the slogan "Make America Great Again" which of course asserts that it isn't all that great at the moment. The fact that all his ideas for making it better involve making it more like it used to be do suggest that that he doesn't have any plans to make it more competitive with the rest of the advanced industrial world, liked improving health care and getting US life expectancy up to what the rest of the advanced industrial world can manage.

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

It's in 31st place at the moment,just ahead of Cuba, and slipping back

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-life-expectancy-drops-third-year-row-reflecting-rising-drug-overdose-suicide-rates-180970942/

Trader4 regularly goes out of his way to remind us how poor his grasp of reality is, but this is a bigger pratfall than usual.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[bitrex]

On 8/13/19 12:03 AM, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 6:03:33 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 2:45:31 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 1:59:24 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:434ae82e-585b-4d18-
8d92-9fda17149e3d@googlegroups.com:

It's too bad the Democrats picked an even more defective candidate,
so bad that she lost against the orange clown.

No. She didn't. I took the corrupted Electoral college to put the
lard assed criminal in office.

There you go again. There is nothing corrupted about the electoral college,
it worked just like it's worked for two centuries. You just don't like
the result.

Yes, I have never liked the idea that a handful of "key" states determine the Presidential election. It should be 1 man/woman, 1 vote like we do in all our other elections.

We are working to fix this. There is an effort called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in which states commit to assigning all their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Once enough states have signed to make it effective in deciding the Presidential election it will take effect.

It's not about Republican vs. Democrat or liberal vs. conservative. It's about letting the people choose our President.

--

Rick C.


It's very much about liberals, because they want the high population blue states to determine the outcome and screw all the fly-over country. They win. A bunch of sore losers, who want to change the rules. Between favoring open borders and putting illegal aliens over Americans,proposing free health care for illegal aliens, and this, if you keep it up, we are headed for civil war.

There's already a civil war going on such as it is, not-mentally-ill
guys in their 20s are getting out there and gunning down Mexicans in
Wal-Mart for Trump from time to time.

Shooting unarmed people in a spree killing is the only "war" any
American gun-prepper, young or old, is qualified to engage in.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/14/19 1:24 PM, bitrex wrote:

On 8/13/19 1:48 AM, Rick C wrote:

It's very much about liberals, because they want the high population
blue states to determine the outcome and screw all the fly-over
country.  They win.  A bunch of sore losers, who want to change the
rules.  Between favoring open borders and putting illegal aliens over
Americans,proposing free health care for illegal aliens, and this, if
you keep it up, we are headed for civil war.

You see, that's the problem.  You want to elect a President by states
choosing because that suits your political goals.  I want a popular
vote because that is right.  It has nothing to do with loosing.  If I
were a  Republican I would still support an end to selecting a
President by anything other than a choice by a majority. I don't give
a damn about the politics.  I want to do what is right.

There are numerous reasons for the origin of the electoral college.
None of them are still valid.


No, the problem is that the executive branch has too much power in
relation to the other two and has for some time.

The idea of the executive branch was to have a check on the other two
while Congress does most of the bickering, not to have the general
population waste about three years out of every eight and the candidates
spending about billion dollars combined bickering over who gets to be
the next celebrity cult-of-personality God-emperor for a while.

That is to say the fact that the presidential election has become such
an obsessive process is IMO de facto evidence the executive branch is
over the limit.

I think everyone would be happy if presidential elections didn't matter
as much. Also it would mean that if you want to be actually involved in
politics you actually have to "write your Congressman" and put in real
work and not just cast your one vote every four years and kick back and
gloat or bitch for four years, depending, like everything that happens
in the country after that is a fait accompli.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/13/19 1:48 AM, Rick C wrote:

It's very much about liberals, because they want the high population blue states to determine the outcome and screw all the fly-over country. They win. A bunch of sore losers, who want to change the rules. Between favoring open borders and putting illegal aliens over Americans,proposing free health care for illegal aliens, and this, if you keep it up, we are headed for civil war.

You see, that's the problem. You want to elect a President by states choosing because that suits your political goals. I want a popular vote because that is right. It has nothing to do with loosing. If I were a Republican I would still support an end to selecting a President by anything other than a choice by a majority. I don't give a damn about the politics. I want to do what is right.

There are numerous reasons for the origin of the electoral college. None of them are still valid.

No, the problem is that the executive branch has too much power in
relation to the other two and has for some time.

The idea of the executive branch was to have a check on the other two
while Congress does most of the bickering, not to have the general
population waste about three years out of every eight and the candidates
spending about billion dollars combined bickering over who gets to be
the next celebrity cult-of-personality God-emperor for a while.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/13/19 11:40 AM, Whoey Louie wrote:

The only reason the Senate didn't go Democratic in the last election is because very few Republican seats were up for election. In 2020 it will be a different story. We will see if the entire tide swings the other way.

We'll see, with the radical left Democrats running, I would not place
any bets. Those people in fly-over country that you want to screw by
getting rid of the electoral college are voters, you know.

They're not getting "screwed" - dirt doesn't vote! Why would the people
in fly-over country deserve more representation than the one vote per
person everyone else gets because of where they live??

<https://twitter.com/thelovebel0w/status/1109123454920523788>

 

[bitrex]

On 8/13/19 1:48 AM, Rick C wrote:

It's very much about liberals, because they want the high population blue states to determine the outcome and screw all the fly-over country. They win. A bunch of sore losers, who want to change the rules. Between favoring open borders and putting illegal aliens over Americans,proposing free health care for illegal aliens, and this, if you keep it up, we are headed for civil war.

You see, that's the problem. You want to elect a President by states choosing because that suits your political goals. I want a popular vote because that is right. It has nothing to do with loosing. If I were a Republican I would still support an end to selecting a President by anything other than a choice by a majority. I don't give a damn about the politics. I want to do what is right.

There are numerous reasons for the origin of the electoral college. None of them are still valid.

Civil war? Lol. You are nearly alone in that idea. There are a few crackpots in this group who will support you, but that's about it. People revolt when they are stressed and suffering. Only a small minority in this country are really stressed or suffering. That's why groups like the KKK and the various civilian militias are small and ineffective. People with these ideas are few and far between.

If grumpy right-wing baby-boomers had wanted to fight a war they should
have gone to Viet Nam instead of dodging the draft like someone we know
and then jerking off to the thought of shooting other Americans in their
golden years.

As the son of a Army combat veteran I find the mentality pretty gross.
Fuck old-ass never-serveds who talk about fighting wars you weren't
there when your country actually needed you now it's too late bitches.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 12:18:25 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:10:49 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 4:31:43 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 1:32:17 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 8:54:47 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 1:23:33 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 10:52:25 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 12:28:42 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 9:49:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:cdf88e02-4c07-4145-
aa53-c7ba60953a08@googlegroups.com:

That is a hell of a lot different than a sex
trafficker of a person in office colluding with a foreign (enemy)
entity to affect ANYTHING in our nation.

Hillary colluded with the Russians? Wow!

Nice try, putz boy. I made no reference to her. I referred to Epstein and Trump, as if your wee wittle bwain is having processing issues.

Epstein colluded with the Russians? Tell us more? Trump colluded? After $35 mil and two years, Mueller concluded that there was no evidence that Trump, anyone in the Trump campaign or any American colluded with Russia.

A couple of members of the Trump election team have gone to prison for acting for Russian interests within notifying the people they should have done about what they were doing.

Sure, from years ago, before they had anything to do with Trump, Manafort and Gates worked for pro-Soviet schmucks in Ukraine. Had nothing to do with any Russian meddling in the election, which was the central allegation, the whole purpose of the $35 mil, two year investigation. So, they found those two failed to register as foreign agents. Not the first to do so and typically all that happens is you file.

That's not the way the New Yorker put it.

Well there you have it! The oracle of all lib truth, the NY Yorker puts
it another way, so it must be so. Stupid lib.

Mueller concluded that the Trump team and the Russians hadn't colluded to influence the election - the Trump team were such a bunch of loose cannons that nobody even vaguely sane would include them in any conspiracy.

Hysterical that you say that now, when for two years all the lefties have been so sure that Trump and his campaign did collude.

What makes you think that?

Because the libs have been yelling about it for the last two years?
Hello? Stupid lib.

Cite?

ROFL. Stupid lib. You libs have been howling about Trump colluding with
Russia since 2016.

You can claim what you like, but since you typically misunderstand what you have read, so your unsupported claims don't carry any weight at all.

It's no surprise you won't admit that the libs have been screeching about Trump
colluding with the Russians since 2016. It's what libs do, they lie.

Stupid alt-right people do confuse concerns about possible collusion with "yelling about" actual collusion, and Trader4 is remarkably stupid.

The evidence that the Russians helped Trump has always been pretty clear, but collusion is harder to prove, and this particular leftist (from your point of view) has always thought that Trump was too erratic to be somebody anybody would risk colluding with .

The Russians did influence the election, but strictly in their own interests, and the Trump team were avid to pick up and dirt that the Russians might might have leaked to them.

That part you have mostly right, except the Russians were not leaking to Trump's campaign they were just leaking to the world.

There are specific e-mails within the Trump team that suggested that they thought otherwise.

Mueller didn't conclude that the Trump team hadn't done anything criminal, but did rule out explicit collusion - being dumb enough to be played by the Russians isn't collusion.

He did rule out anything criminal with regard to the election or election meddling. That was his charter. It's just that the stupid, bitter Democrats still won't accept it.

He did rule out collusion. The hush money paid to Stormy Daniels was "election meddling" and should have been reported as an election expense.

Oh, BS, that's pure nonsense. You know what the best defense to that BS is? I'd say to the jury, OK, the prosecution says the Trump campaign was supposed to treat this as a campaign expenditure, not personal. Suppose the Trump campaign paid it, reported it as a campaign expense. Then we'd be here in court with the Trump campaign charged with using campaign donations for PERSONAL expenses. And then, they probably would have a case.

They wouldn't have been under any obligation to report it as a campaign expense. It was a personal expenditure that wouldn't have been paid if it couldn't have influenced the campaign,

BS. Trump had plenty of other motives to try to buy silence. Like it
being a disaster to his marriage, Melania, his family and the Trump brand.

He's had several marriages, and none the previous marriages ended well, which doesn't seem to have damaged the Trump brand with anybody silly enough to take it at face value.

Irrelevant of course to the fact that any fair person would recognize that
money that Trump paid PERSONALLY would serve more purposes than just helping
his election. But then you're not fair.

It wouldn't have helped his election campaign if the current marriage had fallen apart during the campaign.

And it would have hurt Melania, Baron, his other kids, the Trump brand, etc..
Good grief, you're either incredibly stupid or just totally biased.
Actually, it's both.

So, smart guy, where is the federal form to figure out how to apportion
the $100K between those categories and the campaign.

Who needs a form?

That one went right over your head too. The point is, if such an expenditure
is to be treated correctly, then where is the federal form, the rules,
the procedure to establish what percent of the payment was for personal
benefit and what percent is to be treated as a campaign expenditure?
That there is no form, no rules, speaks for itself.





He's never before gone to any trouble to avoid looking like a sleaze-bag, so the whole expenditure in on the election campaign.

And you ignored the central tennent here, which is they claim it had to be
treated as a campaign donation.

No. As an election expenditure.

Both actually. If it was just a campaign expenditure, then Trump would have
no direct responsibility, he was not filing the forms. They were after Trump
on the angle that it if you consider paying off a woman to shut her up, then
it's a CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION and TRUMP, would have been
personally responsible to report it as a CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION. That's right,
the big stink is that Trump, who could give as much as he pleased to his own
campaign, was supposed to have committed a crime by not putting it on a form.

And what you fail to address is that if instead, the Trump campaign had paid
Stormy $100K using CAMPAIGN FUNDS, why then Trump and the campaign would be
charged with using campaign funds for a PERSONAL expense! And that's
exactly what you libs would be claiming and with that court case, you likely
could get a conviction. They'd be screaming, Trump paid off a porn star
with campaign money! So, I'm still waiting for someone to explain how
you can pay a woman legally. Pay her yourself, that's illegal. Use campaign
funds, that;s illegal. Which is why I asked for the federal form, the rules,
to figure out how to do it. There is no form, because it's all BS.
Even the prosecutors knew it.

Yet if Trump had used campaign donations
to pay Stormy, why then you libs would be charging him with the crime of
using campaign funds for a PERSONAL expenditure.

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even live here?
I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be big and powerful like
the USA.

Trump's idiotic enthusiasm for trade wars is damaging the world economy (as well as the US and China - screwing up China's economy cuts the amount they spend on importing stuff from Australia).

Nice half-assed try. Problem there is that you obviously try to follow all
kinds of minutia about the US, way beyond any trade or similar issue that
affects Australia. You're just brought up the above crap, for example,
which is about as insignificant and immaterial as it gets. Simple fact
is, you're a lefty loon with big penis envy.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 12:39:56 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 1:26:30 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:04:11 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c48847d7-e4d1-4a59-849a-6973074d2de4@googlegroups.com:

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even live
here? I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be big and
powerful like the USA.


Events within the USA affects the entire globe, you retarded piece of
shit.

The problem is Bill is obsessed with the US. I don't see him bitching
about what Putin just did, about the freedom riots in China, etc.

They don't screw us up the way Trump's idiot actions are screwing us up.

ROFL. Thanks for proving my point.

It must be big penis envy, he knows the US is the biggest and best.

The European Union is bigger, Airbus is selling more airliners than Boeing, and even US semiconductor companies are buying their lithography machines from AMSL in the Netherlands.

The US is past it's sell-by date, and this is getting more an more obvious.

Trump campaigned on the slogan "Make America Great Again" which of course asserts that it isn't all that great at the moment. The fact that all his ideas for making it better involve making it more like it used to be do suggest that that he doesn't have any plans to make it more competitive with the rest of the advanced industrial world, liked improving health care and getting US life expectancy up to what the rest of the advanced industrial world can manage.

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

It's in 31st place at the moment,just ahead of Cuba, and slipping back

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-life-expectancy-drops-third-year-row-reflecting-rising-drug-overdose-suicide-rates-180970942/

\\

Always obsessed with America, you sill lib kangaroo humper.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 1:16:38 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 8/13/19 11:40 AM, Whoey Louie wrote:

The only reason the Senate didn't go Democratic in the last election is because very few Republican seats were up for election. In 2020 it will be a different story. We will see if the entire tide swings the other way.

We'll see, with the radical left Democrats running, I would not place
any bets. Those people in fly-over country that you want to screw by
getting rid of the electoral college are voters, you know.


They're not getting "screwed" - dirt doesn't vote! Why would the people
in fly-over country deserve more representation than the one vote per
person everyone else gets because of where they live??

https://twitter.com/thelovebel0w/status/1109123454920523788

No one gets exactly one vote per person, it all goes through the
Electoral College, as it always has. Only now the libs are sore losers.
Instead of attributing their 2016 loss to picking a defective, throwback
candidate to the past, they want to try to blame anything but that.
And right now, they are in the process of doubling down on the last
stupidity, they have two dozen idiots that mostly want open borders and free
healthcare for illegal aliens, among other things.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 6:22:36 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 12:18:25 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:10:49 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 4:31:43 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 1:32:17 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 8:54:47 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 1:23:33 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 10:52:25 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 12:28:42 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 at 9:49:32 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:cdf88e02-4c07-4145-
aa53-c7ba60953a08@googlegroups.com:

That is a hell of a lot different than a sex
trafficker of a person in office colluding with a foreign (enemy)
entity to affect ANYTHING in our nation.

Hillary colluded with the Russians? Wow!

Nice try, putz boy. I made no reference to her. I referred to Epstein and Trump, as if your wee wittle bwain is having processing issues.

Epstein colluded with the Russians? Tell us more? Trump colluded? After $35 mil and two years, Mueller concluded that there was no evidence that Trump, anyone in the Trump campaign or any American colluded with Russia.

A couple of members of the Trump election team have gone to prison for acting for Russian interests within notifying the people they should have done about what they were doing.

Sure, from years ago, before they had anything to do with Trump, Manafort and Gates worked for pro-Soviet schmucks in Ukraine. Had nothing to do with any Russian meddling in the election, which was the central allegation, the whole purpose of the $35 mil, two year investigation. So, they found those two failed to register as foreign agents. Not the first to do so and typically all that happens is you file.

That's not the way the New Yorker put it.

Well there you have it! The oracle of all lib truth, the NY Yorker puts
it another way, so it must be so. Stupid lib.

Mueller concluded that the Trump team and the Russians hadn't colluded to influence the election - the Trump team were such a bunch of loose cannons that nobody even vaguely sane would include them in any conspiracy.

Hysterical that you say that now, when for two years all the lefties have been so sure that Trump and his campaign did collude.

What makes you think that?

Because the libs have been yelling about it for the last two years?
Hello? Stupid lib.

Cite?

ROFL. Stupid lib. You libs have been howling about Trump colluding with
Russia since 2016.

You can claim what you like, but since you typically misunderstand what you have read, so your unsupported claims don't carry any weight at all.

It's no surprise you won't admit that the libs have been screeching about Trump colluding with the Russians since 2016. It's what libs do, they lie..

This is krw logic. He is disagreeing with me - I can't imagine that I'm wrong so he must believe that I'm right, so he has to be lying.

I could invite you to spot the logical fallacy in that train of logic, but that would be way above your pay grade.

<snip>

He did rule out collusion. The hush money paid to Stormy Daniels was "election meddling" and should have been reported as an election expense.

Oh, BS, that's pure nonsense. You know what the best defense to that BS is? I'd say to the jury, OK, the prosecution says the Trump campaign was supposed to treat this as a campaign expenditure, not personal. Suppose the Trump campaign paid it, reported it as a campaign expense. Then we'd be here in court with the Trump campaign charged with using campaign donations for PERSONAL expenses. And then, they probably would have a case.

They wouldn't have been under any obligation to report it as a campaign expense. It was a personal expenditure that wouldn't have been paid if it couldn't have influenced the campaign,

BS. Trump had plenty of other motives to try to buy silence. Like it
being a disaster to his marriage, Melania, his family and the Trump brand.

He's had several marriages, and none the previous marriages ended well, which doesn't seem to have damaged the Trump brand with anybody silly enough to take it at face value.

Irrelevant of course to the fact that any fair person would recognize that
money that Trump paid PERSONALLY would serve more purposes than just helping
his election. But then you're not fair.

Trader4 thinks that he's a "fair" person, and that anybody who doesn't share his particular delusions is being "unfair". Pity about that.

It wouldn't have helped his election campaign if the current marriage had fallen apart during the campaign.

And it would have hurt Melania, Baron, his other kids, the Trump brand, etc.
Good grief, you're either incredibly stupid or just totally biased.
Actually, it's both.

Trump has had several failed marriages, which clearly hurt the family members involved. His antics them didn't show any desire not to hurt those family members. The proposition that he has finally found true love with Melina isn't exactly plausible. Donald Trump loves Donald Trump and there's no room for anybody else in that relationship.

So, smart guy, where is the federal form to figure out how to apportion
the $100K between those categories and the campaign.

Who needs a form?

That one went right over your head too. The point is, if such an expenditure
is to be treated correctly, then where is the federal form, the rules,
the procedure to establish what percent of the payment was for personal
benefit and what percent is to be treated as a campaign expenditure?
That there is no form, no rules, speaks for itself.

Your idea that such an expense might be "treated correctly" implies the existence of such proceduree, which you then tell us don't exist. You demonstrate your stupidity more or less non-stop.

He's never before gone to any trouble to avoid looking like a sleaze-bag, so the whole expenditure in on the election campaign.

And you ignored the central tennent here, which is they claim it had to be
treated as a campaign donation.

No. As an election expenditure.

Both actually. If it was just a campaign expenditure, then Trump would have
no direct responsibility, he was not filing the forms.

He told Michael Cohen to pay her off, but denied that he had done it. You can try to evade responsibility that way, but once Michael Cohen got nailed, it stopped working.

They were after Trump
on the angle that it if you consider paying off a woman to shut her up, then
it's a CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION and TRUMP, would have been
personally responsible to report it as a CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION. That's right,
the big stink is that Trump, who could give as much as he pleased to his own
campaign, was supposed to have committed a crime by not putting it on a form.

That's exactly right.

And what you fail to address is that if instead, the Trump campaign had paid
Stormy $100K using CAMPAIGN FUNDS, why then Trump and the campaign would be
charged with using campaign funds for a PERSONAL expense!

I doubt if they would have been worried about the personal expense angle.

> And that's exactly what you libs would be claiming and with that court case, you likely could get a conviction. They'd be screaming, Trump paid off a porn star with campaign money!

The problem isn't where the money came from, but that it was paid out to influence the election without being reported as an election expense.

> So, I'm still waiting for someone to explain how you can pay a woman legally.

Do it before the election campaign is under way.

<snip>

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even live here?
I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be big and powerful like
the USA.

Trump's idiotic enthusiasm for trade wars is damaging the world economy (as well as the US and China - screwing up China's economy cuts the amount they spend on importing stuff from Australia).

Nice half-assed try. Problem there is that you obviously try to follow all
kinds of minutia about the US, way beyond any trade or similar issue that
affects Australia. You're just brought up the above crap, for example,
which is about as insignificant and immaterial as it gets.

I don't try to follow it. I get it shoved in my face by loons like you.

The trade war isn't insignificant or immaterial, and it's just one more example of Trump meddling in matter he doesn't understand.

> Simple fact is, you're a lefty loon with big penis envy.

But the "big penis" I'm supposed to be admiring looks more like a symptom of elephantiasis than anything remotely enviable.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:6454cffc-48d4-4efa-
942a-68f95466be03@googlegroups.com:

Simple fact
is, you're a lefty loon with big penis envy.

And you are a perfect example of a jackass whom would be dead the
very next morning as the result of a duel, which, motherfucker, you
would lose. And then your (tiny) dick and your nuts would be your last
meal.

Although rolling your lard ass over might prove difficult. Snipping
that nasty shit off of you to feed it to you would also be a very hard
task to perform, so you would likely get a vomit sauce garnish.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:6454cffc-48d4-4efa-942a-68f95466be03@googlegroups.com:

It's no surprise you won't admit that the libs have been
screeching about Trump colluding with the Russians since 2016.
It's what libs do, they lie.

Umm... No. Not 'libs'. MANY Americans have noted the behavior and
that it was beyond 'conduct unbecoming'. It registered as criminal
in a very high percentage of intelligent Americans.

The simple fact is that you do not number among them (the class).

And it has absolutely been since 2016 when the stupid fuck actually
pulled the stupid, criminal shit. You dig yet, dumbfuck?

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:c2b89bc9-13f6-45f2-
bcd1-fdeb5c825f64@googlegroups.com:

Always obsessed with America, you sill lib kangaroo humper.

When the shotgun blast hits you in the face, all you can muster is
another obsession jab?

Bwuahahahahaha! You even look sad as you face loss. And yes,
dipshit... you lost that one... too.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:030a8273-7db1-44c7-
b03e-9a2e03dd94d8@googlegroups.com:

Only now the libs are sore losers.

It has ab-so-fucking-lutely NOTHING to do with ANY of your
fanatical brain's retarded assesments.

Folks have complained about the electoral college even in election
cycles when it matched the popular vote. For DECADES.

You relating it to the current cycle is simply YOU being STUPID AND
LAME.

You are simply being clueless, agenda boy.
File that in your lib-RARY, dumbfuck.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:030a8273-7db1-44c7-
b03e-9a2e03dd94d8@googlegroups.com:

No one gets exactly one vote per person, it all goes through the
Electoral College, as it always has.

We KNOW how it is currently, you dumb fucktard.

We ALSO KNOW that the electoral college is susceptible to and is
corrupted... CURRENTLY AND IN THE PAST AS WELL. YOU DIG, FUCKTARD!?

We ALSO KNOW that we do not need it any longer.

We also know that you not only wear horse blinders, but you must
have been asleep for the last 50 years!

Wake the fuck up and grow the fuck up, child.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:bf05499b-31f1-4b4b-bff6-03894b218f9f@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:04:11 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c48847d7-e4d1-4a59-849a-6973074d2de4@googlegroups.com:

And again, why all this focus on the US, when you don't even
live here? I know, big penis envy, you wish Australia could be
big and powerful like the USA.


Events within the USA affects the entire globe, you retarded
piece of
shit.

The problem is Bill is obsessed with the US. I don't see him
bitching about what Putin just did, about the freedom riots in
China, etc. It must be big penis envy, he knows the US is the
biggest and best.

You are such an immature child as to not be worthy of conversation
with adults. Ejection from the group would be the proper response in
a proper world.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:f7272aee-5aac-456e-a8fb-b0ab96ac89b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:02:40 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:c48847d7-e4d1-4a59-849a-6973074d2de4@googlegroups.com:

ROFL. Stupid lib. You libs have been howling about Trump
colluding with Russia since 2016.



You are an idiot. He did collude.

Thanks for proving my point.

Wrong, always wrong.

Your sig still fits you.

Not a 'lib', you retarded putz. I am a republican. I simply just
happens that I possess a working brain. Unlike Trump supporters and
'libspew' idiots like you.

Nice snip of the link proving he did. The mere statement alone was
criminal.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:c64bd557-2d08-49e8-
854e-0eaa43556f33@googlegroups.com:

> Well, obviously they were wrong.

No, they were not. Obviously you make shit up.

He committed the crime and the crime of him asking them to do so in
public is enough. Crime is crime. Trump is a foreign enemy of the
state colluder. He should face a firing squad.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:71a959d3-0f18-46cd-
824b-83993459cbad@googlegroups.com:

Wrong, always wrong. I didn't call you a lib, that was in response
to a post by your butt buddy, Bill. You are easily confused.

You have been calling anyone disagreeing with you 'a lib' for the
last half year. Essentially, you are dumber than dogshit. And that is
an insult to the bacteria therein.