Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Crash those towers.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Cake Smashing Boob posted:

after a cursory examination of some third party candidates I'm starting to think maybe democracy isn't such a good fit for the US after all

Don't worry. We're getting rid of it.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


a bone to pick posted:

Tomorrow's headlines: James Asher found dead at the bottom of a river, cops rule suicide.
Whatever you say, Infowars :smug:

*puts human nail clippings and teeth in bag, ties bag to rock, throws bag into ocean after burning separate bag of human hair*

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


John Denver Hoxha posted:

what, are you suggesting the name los pepes? i like it but might have too many death squad connotations
Pics or it didn't happen.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Cool. We got our Wikileaks thread back. Complete with Clintonites coming in to set the record straight! The rogue's gallery of familiar characters will soon stop lurking and come in swinging with both hands!

Also, Hillary Clinton is a oval office and should be in prison.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Boomstick Quaid posted:

Please reserve the word oval office for brash rogues and anatomical vaginae
She and I are both brash rogues and I can't speak to her anatomy.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Robot Pride posted:

also, when prosecuting a person like hillary that has a treasure trove of US secrets and other secrets regarding multitudes of others in public office things can get very messy in a high profile trial if she decides to start going all "scorched earth"
Do you really think this is likely? One person trying to strongarm powerful people in DC and other sectors?

That aside, we *know* she has a treasure trove of secrets, chiefly because she's not especially good at keeping them.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Robot Pride posted:

yeah, this has happened in the past where someone got squeezed and starting "anonymously" leaking personal dirt on others people involved or past events

all it takes is public wifi connection to start smearing poo poo all over the internet and humans do these things when backed into a corner. i wouldn't put hillary above it and i wouldn't put donald above it either
But someone this far ensconced in the halls of power? I was born in the mid 80's so the only thing comparable to that in my life (iirc) was the Iran-Contra affair. Before that, the closest thing that comes to my mind was when Nixon tried to play his own people for patsies e.g. John Dean.

But the Clintons are so plugged in to the political/economic/business sectors that if she started to squeal, I can't imagine any of her former confederates from a lifetime of shady deals being comfortable. And once they got to tugging on their collars, it's seems more likely the political and business world would just quietly drum her out of the public arena for life. She'd be persona non grata at everything but funerals.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Every election is horrible, but somehow this is the worst one in a while.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Lemming posted:

I'm not sure that "Chelsea Clinton is a director of a company" is a particularly relevant rebuttal to "Donald Trump is a violent rapist"
It's the Daily Beast.
Which posted the article in question.
You know this.

Whether he raped a woman fool enough to marry him ~20 years ago isn't really that interesting anyway. And from her revision, either a) it didn't happen at all or b) she took a big bag of hush money. Or, I guess, c) it happened but she's been waiting for the right time to hit him where it hurts for the highest dollar value.

The point is, gently caress the stupid daily beast and its lovely yellow journalism. That goes for pretty much everybody else in the (mostly Clinton-sponsored) msm.

e: And for amusement's sake - please argue that last point. It'll get a chuckle.

phasmid fucked around with this message at 08:19 on Sep 20, 2016

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Lemming posted:

The article just reported that the facts from the book exist. Which part do you think isn't true?

She wrote a book and said things which she later revised. There is no way to know what really happened. If you're saying Trump is a rapist, then say it. Personally, I think it's strange how plenty of Clinton supporters can shoot from the hip and call Trump supporters any name in the book and then feign sympathy for a lady greedy enough to marry the vile man.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Lemming posted:

She didn't write any book. You are extremely simple, so I'll spell it out for you: Ivana Trump, in her divorce proceedings with Donald Trump, submitted in a deposition a description of an event that happened between them. The event was Donald Trump violently raping her. A reporter, Harry Hurt III, wrote about this in his book, Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump. The divorce ended up being granted: "Cruel and inhuman treatment by Mr. Trump was cited as the grounds for the uncontested divorce." from http://www.nytimes.com/1990/12/12/nyregion/trumps-get-divorce-next-who-gets-what.html

When the book was written, Trump's lawyers got Ivana to write a statement that attempts to soften what was written in the deposition, which confirmed that it was accurate but that she didn't want it to be considered rape in the "criminal sense."

Considering all these factors, the evidence says that Trump is indeed a violent rapist. The fact that you keep blaming her for it is pretty disgusting.
You're either dumb or playing dumb.

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


Lemming posted:

Ah, projection; the Trump strategy. I see you identify closely with your chosen candidate.

"RAPE RAPE RAPE" "Hey guy, you don't have any proof" "WAY TO ENDORSE RAPE!"

And what makes you think he's my chosen candidate? You're calling me simple?

But way to sling around accusations when they fit your cause. How many rape victims do you know? Because if the answer is "one or more" you would know telling people they're rape apologists is pretty goddamn low. You want disgusting, look in a mirror.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

phasmid
Jan 16, 2015

Booty Shaker
SILENT MAJORITY


By the way, I noticed you were right about the book thing. It *was* just her deposition. I read that article over the summer (not sure if Chelsea was the director of DB then :confused:) and remember thinking "wouldn't be surprised." Maaan, politics is confusing when you get all your info from morons on the internet!

  • Locked thread