Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

jtssrx

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15,705

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Posts posted by jtssrx

    Gypsy Moths Are Destroying Forests as the Climate Dries

    in Current Events

    Posted

    47 minutes ago, ckf said:

    I haven't noticed any bare trees around here, but have seen several photos from southern New England with completely bare trees.

     

     

    Gypsy moths were introduced here in Michigan by the DNR to kill something else. Of course they created other issues. I don't see them anymore here in Michigan. 

     

    11 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

    Doe Dumber and JT Meathead keep telling us the earth is cooling :lol: 

     

    You side with those clowns Junior - think about it :lmao: Grow a pair Junior :bc: 

    You really are clueless arn't you?? I have clearly maintained up until this year the climate remained flat. I have also always maintained man doesn't cause the warming. I also maintained that the earth has warned since the last ice age. 

     

    Keep running around running your trap. I didn't think you could make yourself look any dumber but here you go you did it again. Cheers loser

    Bernie Sanders a fraud just like MC

    in Current Events

    Posted

    1 minute ago, SnowRider said:

    JT - :lol: MC is not voting for Hillary...why do you refise to acknowledge that?  Are you dumb, dishonest, or both? :lmao: 

    Same with bipolar drunk Jimmie - we can disagree - but agree Dump is the biggest joke.  You?  Wait for the wind to blow :lol: 

    I don't buy it. Anyone who runs around defending her as much as he does is certainly voting for her. 

    Bernie Sanders a fraud just like MC

    in Current Events

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Mainecat said:

    Another angry woman starting a thread with a members name. 

    I live in your head.

    You never had any credibility, if you stuck with your support of Bernie and refused to vote for Hillary you would have shown a lot of credibility. If you truely supported Bernie's message there is no way you vote for her. You're a fraud!!! 

     

    As as far as being in my head goes it's laughable. You're trying to deflect or your simply just an idiot. You know I'm 100% spot on or maybe you're so delusional you've convinced yourself otherwise. 

    Bernie Sanders a fraud just like MC

    in Current Events

    Posted

    1457143477.png
     
    Picture
     
    By Chris Rossini

    While Bernie Sanders, from a perspective of ideas, provides nothing desirable to a person who craves liberty, the one thing that libertarians could say about him was that at least he seems to believe in what he's saying.

    Well, that officially came to an end today.

    Not only did Sanders not "go all the way to the convention" as he repeatedly promised, he actually endorsed a candidate that is as "establishment" and "1%" as it gets. Bernie is officially a part of the "rigged" system that he claimed he was against.

    Sanders had the chutzpah to tell Americans: "Together we will continue to fight for a government which represents all of us, and not just the 1%". This while standing next to and endorsing Hillary Clinton!

    How can anyone take Sanders seriously now? 

    Hillary Clinton would then take the mic and add to the charade. She would say: "We have to reform our broken criminal justice system," and "When people say the game is rigged, the best evidence is our taxcode." 

    Bernie and Hillary poured buckets of irony all over America's television screens. What does that tell Bernie's young followers? What does it tell them about principles? What kind of example does this set?

    Even Donald Trump was able to toss some truth into the air. He     said: "Bernie Sanders endorsing Crooked Hillary Clinton is like Occupy Wall Street endorsing Goldman Sachs."

    It didn't have to be this way. 

    After all, Ron Paul was a true outsider when he ran for President. If Bernie thinks he received the short end of the party stick with superdelegates, he should have seen what Republicans and the media did to Ron Paul. Bernie at least got tons of media coverage. He wasn't blacked out across the board. Furthermore, the rules weren't changed on Sanders in the middle of the race either.

    But Ron Paul bowed out gracefully. He, more importantly, didn't toss the principles of liberty into the fire after ending his campaigns.

    Tom Woods reminds us that: "Ron Paul held his own counter convention down the street from McCain coronation." Yep, more than 10,000 lovers of libertybought tickets to attend that convention. Ron Paul wouldn't endorse Mitt Romney either in 2012.

    That's how you stick to principles, and that's why the liberty movement is still, in the words of Samuel Adams, "setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." Ron Paul continues to set those fires on a daily basis.

    It's a good thing that Bernie decided to let the Clinton Borg swallow him whole. After all, his authoritarian and deadly ideas have no place in a free society. This provides a perfect opportunity share the virtues of liberty, voluntary interactions, sound money and private property with Bernie's former followers.
     
     
    • Like 1

    Snowrider-This thread Is For You.

    in Current Events

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Mainecat said:

    I say your a butt hurt pussy of a man. Why would anyone  think they would need to call out someone on a obscure quasi sno mobile site because they dont like their political stance?

    Jesus man get a friggin life.

    Why do you feel the need to defend all the sites liberal posters?

    Also You're the pussy. Didn't you threaten to beat me up a few years ago on this site. Go fuck yourself asshole. 

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg bashes Trump

    in Current Events

    Posted

    2 hours ago, SnowRider said:

    She's spot on and it's her right to share her opinion.  Scalia spoke all the time and Thomas does also.  Hardly news worthy. 

     

    48 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

    She probably shouldnt of spoken but she is correct. Watch for more of this as the election progresses.

    You both support a criminal. Your opinions on everything are invalid 

    FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

    in Current Events

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

    They didn't change the fuckin laws. What pure bullshit. You ass clowns lap this shit up as real.

     

    No he didn't adhere to the law which is essentially changing it. 

    Its sad how you've gone from blindly supporting the bush family to blindly supporting the Clintons.

    people like you are what's wrong with this country 

    Hillary lies revealed by FBI investigation

    in Current Events

    Posted

    Hillary’s Lies Revealed

    Five revelations from the FBI investigation confirm worst about Clinton

    While FBI Director James Comey may have decided not to recommend indicting Hillary Clinton, he did prove conclusively on Tuesday that she did indeed violate the law and lied publicly and repeatedly about doing so. Here are the most shameful lies Comey’s press conference exposed:

    Lie #1
    Clinton claimed she set up her private server out of a matter of convenience so she could use just one mobile device. She wanted to have all of her communications streamlined, so she decided to forego her official State Department account in order to use her own personal system.

    TRUTH: Not only did Clinton use more than one mobile device — she also used more than one email server. "I have so far used the singular term, 'email server,' in describing the referral that began our investigation," Comey said. "It turns out to have been more complicated than that. Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send email on that personal domain."

    Lie #2
    "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email," Clinton originally said in March 2015. "There isn't classified material. I'm certainly well aware of the classification requirements, and did not send classified material."

    TRUTH: Clinton emailed classified material repeatedly. "From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received," Comey said. "Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification."

    Lie #3
    Clinton's home-brew private email server was permitted under State Department policy at the time it was set up.

    TRUTH: Comey put to rest any claims that Clinton's private server was kosher. "None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system," he said. "Their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at departments and agencies of the U.S. Government — or even with a commercial service like Gmail."

    Lie #4
    Obama's State Department cooperated fully with the investigation, handing over every email the FBI requested.

    TRUTH: The State Department did not hand over every requested email, and some of the ones they didn't produce contained classified information. "The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional emails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private email domain," Comey confirmed.

     
     

    Lie #5:
    Clinton's email server didn't put national security at risk. Even President Obama has supported this lie, telling Fox News in April that "Hillary Clinton was an outstanding secretary of state. She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy."

    TRUTH: Comey confirmed on Tuesday that Clinton did indeed put America in jeopardy. "We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account," Comey said. "We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."

    Hillary may have escaped having to explain her actions to a federal judge, but she will still have to explain her litany of lies to the American people.

    IF YOU LIKE THIS, READ
     

    FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

    in Current Events

    Posted · Edited by jtssrx

    1 hour ago, Mainecat said:

    Yeah they changed the law....lmao you go with that.

    You do know Andy McCarthy was a federal prosecutor right? 

     

    There is is no intent in the law he made that up as Andy says. 

     

    Oh and it would be nice for once if you would get past your partisan view of politics and call a spade a spade? 

    FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

    in Current Events

    Posted

    logo-print.jpg
    FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook
    By Andrew C. McCarthy — July 5, 2016

    There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey(disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comeyeven conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

    Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.

    GET FREE EXCLUSIVE NR CONTENT

    In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

    I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed.

    It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged.

    It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information.

    I think highly of Jim Comey personally and professionally, but this makes no sense to me.

    Finally, I was especially unpersuaded by Director Comey’s claim that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence uncovered by the FBI. To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case.

    What an absolute disaster .....

    in Current Events

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Mainecat said:

    So you don't vote?

    I voted for Rand Paul in the primary. I voted for a man that has deticated his life to medicine to help people. I voted for a man that believes in the constitution.

     

    You voted for Bernie Sanders. A man that vilifies the rich and the white man. You voted for a admitted socialist who hates the constitution. 

     

    I'll be voting for Gary Johnson. You'll be voting for Hilary Clinton. See the difference 

     

     

    What an absolute disaster .....

    in Current Events

    Posted

    7 hours ago, Mainecat said:

    Dumb fuck conspiracy theorists like yourself are a political distraction.

    I have supported a National Healthcare Plan since the 1972 election when it was part of the dem platform

    bla bla bla. You think your vote matters and that. Politics is something it's not. Both partys are pathetic jokes who's only interest is the next election and keeping thier power. Idiots like you line up to hand them more power. 

    • Like 1

    What an absolute disaster .....

    in Current Events

    Posted

    1 hour ago, f7ben said:

    http://www.investors.com/politics/policy-analysis/minnesota-shows-everything-wrong-with-obamacare/

     

    There is no doubt that Obamacare is a disaster .....it is indefensible and most knew this would be the outcome. Those who are young and healthy are saying fuck you and paying the fine. The risk pool is such that premiums are skyrocketing. Coverage for most under the ACA is nothing more than an extremely costly catastrophic coverage plan. p

     

    The only people who are benefiting from this disaster at all are those who are receiving the full subsidy. So the government took control of an industry ....wasted trillions of dollars and we are left with a situation far worse than what we had.

    Dumb tucks like MC like it because they like anything Obama does. They won't like it when we have single payer and the good care we had is gone. They will respond and tell me what an idiot I am that single payer is the answer. However I say look no further then the VA for your answer on single payer. 

     

    When you look at industry as a whole the only thing holding back anything in this country is government. Government run single payer healthcare isn't a free market. Once the Feds control it the doctors will get lazy simply because tgen incentive to earn a lot goes out the window.  

    Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion access law

    in Current Events

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Capt.Storm said:

    Gotta  give Texas credit though for trying.

    They pulled a move like the dems are doing by trying to limit certain guns and ammo.

    And that's all I'm saying ..lets try to get the abortion number down some with more birth control education and promoting adoption more.

    Funny how the dems don't push more for prevention.of abortions but go full bang on for guns.

    Democrats want to take away gun rights because they don't think gun ownership is truely a constitutional right.

     

    Don't confuse the two!!! 

×
×
  • Create New...