Ponderable

espola said:
That's for 2014.
Click to expand...

I know. But if she spent as much on security system fees, $16.00(Profit or Loss from Business Schedule C Part v Expenses) during the e-mail fiasco as she did in 2014 then Donald's call for hacking is probably useless. Is it any wonder that Asange and Snowden have managed to access e-mails/documents?
 
tenacious said:
Starting a conversation about how you don't crop dust followed by a couple sentence making broad and generalized attacks on unnamed groups of "democrats"... sure makes it seem like you're cropdusting.
Click to expand...
I did that for Wezzer's benefit...as an example. That's why I said I was his huckleberry.
Then I transposed what he said about republican's and used democrats instead. Tricky huh?
One must read carefully to understand what had happened.
You seem more daft today than "normal".
Are you okay?
 
tenacious said:
Well t's not just that Politico uncovered huge payments to Trump from a Russian Oligarch (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/donald-trump-2016-russian-ties-214116). Its more that Trump has called for the end of NATO (http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/trump-nato/492341/), asked Putin to help him get elected (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?_r=0) mixed in with how he refers to Putin as a friend and someone he admires (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vladimir-putin/) that makes me think he can't be trusted.
Click to expand...


Well there you go.
What the Clintons are doing is just fine with you?
Selling their services, expertise and the office they hold... Perfect!

PS Trump didn't call for the end of NATO.
 
tenacious said:
Well t's not just that Politico uncovered huge payments to Trump from a Russian Oligarch (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/donald-trump-2016-russian-ties-214116). Its more that Trump has called for the end of NATO (http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/trump-nato/492341/), asked Putin to help him get elected (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?_r=0) mixed in with how he refers to Putin as a friend and someone he admires (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/donald-trump-praises-defends-vladimir-putin/) that makes me think he can't be trusted.
Click to expand...

"Donald Trump, the GOP presidential nominee, appeared to make U.S. military support for NATO member states conditional on whether those states have met their financial obligations to the bloc, which has served as the cornerstone of global security after World War II."http://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/trump-nato/492341/

So you are against other NATO countries paying their fair share as a NATO country? Interesting.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
I know. But if she spent as much on security system fees, $16.00(Profit or Loss from Business Schedule C Part v Expenses) during the e-mail fiasco as she did in 2014 then Donald's call for hacking is probably useless. Is it any wonder that Asange and Snowden have managed to access e-mails/documents?
Click to expand...

Any internet-connected system that depends only on an alphanumeric password for protection is inherently insecure against an antagonist with sufficient resources.

Neither Assange nor Snowden are especially-gifted hackers. Assange provides a vehicle for others to expose things they have found. Snowden got access to all his material through legal channels, and then absconded with it.
 
Lion Eyes said:
Hillary is a Democrat.
Bernie believed he was getting hosed by the establishment.
Hillary is the Democrat Party, Debbie Wasserman Shultz is her wet nurse.
The released emails proved Bernie was getting hosed by the DNC.
Wasserman Shultz resigned the day before the convention, because she was complicit and untruthful.
She certainly was not impartial or neutral.
Umm capiche umm?
Click to expand...

Time to put your big boy pants on Lion... political parties try and influence elections.

RNC member accuses party leaders of undermining Trump
The member says never-Trump Republicans have friends in high places, opening the door to unseating the presumptive nominee at the convention.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...ers-of-undermining-trump-224672#ixzz4FqzGzwYX
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
Click to expand...

Kinda funny how you never seemed to have a problem with it when it was on the Republican side.
 
Lion Eyes said:
Well there you go.
What the Clintons are doing is just fine with you?
Selling their services, expertise and the office they hold... Perfect!

PS Trump didn't call for the end of NATO.
Click to expand...

I thought America did very well under Clinton's leadership. And I expect the same out of Hillary.

If you don't understand that Trump was effectively calling for the end of NATO by wanting to stop funding it- then you have some serious blinders on. But don't take my word for it, look up how the Pentagon and our European Allies have reacted to his comments.
 
espola said:
Any internet-connected system that depends only on an alphanumeric password for protection is inherently insecure against an antagonist with sufficient resources.

Neither Assange nor Snowden are especially-gifted hackers. Assange provides a vehicle for others to expose things they have found. Snowden got access to all his material through legal channels, and then absconded with it.
Click to expand...
You don't need to be a gifted hacker if you're up against a $16.00 security system.
 
tenacious said:
Time to put your big boy pants on Lion... political parties try and influence elections.



Kinda funny how you never seemed to have a problem with it when it was on the Republican side.
Click to expand...

Time to take your dunce cap off TD...
Political parties are suppose to be impartial during the Primary elections when it comes to who their constituents choose . Once the candidate is picked, they then try to influence the election. Wasserman Shultz as the head of the DNC didn't do that. She was not impartial, she conspired against Bernie Sanders for HRC. She got caught. News for you, the head of the RNC didn't send out emails (that have been produced) trying to influence who won the Republican primaries.
Once Wasserman Shultz was exposed for the less than honest leader she claimed to be...even Hillary had to sacrifice her buddy.
 
Lion Eyes said:
Time to take your dunce cap off TD...
Political parties are suppose to be impartial during the Primary elections when it comes to who their constituents choose . Once the candidate is picked, they then try to influence the election. Wasserman Shultz as the head of the DNC didn't do that. She was not impartial, she conspired against Bernie Sanders for HRC. News for you, the head of the RNC didn't send out emails trying to influence who won the Republican primaries.
Once Wasserman Shultz was exposed for the less than honest leader she claimed to be...even Hillary had to sacrifice her buddy.
Click to expand...

Yeah they were suppose to be... and yet neither the DNC or RNC was. Didn't cause you to change your vote, stop with the fake outrage that it's not going to cause me to change my vote.
 
tenacious said:
If you don't understand that Trump was effectively calling for the end of NATO by wanting to stop funding it- then you have some serious blinders on. But don't take my word for it, look up how the Pentagon and our European Allies have reacted to his comments.
Click to expand...
If you don't understand that Trump was effectively calling for other NATO countries to pay their fair $hare-then you have some serious blinders on. But don't take my word for it you clown, think about how many salaries and pensions at the Pentagon and European leadership are dependent on U.S. taxpayers for their futures!! Come on BOZO, think!
 
Bruddah IZ said:
If you don't understand that Trump was effectively calling for other NATO countries to pay their fair $hare-then you have some serious blinders on. But don't take my word for it you clown, think about how many salaries and pensions at the Pentagon and European leadership are dependent on U.S. taxpayers for their futures!! Come on BOZO, think!
Click to expand...
What would their fair share be? The biggest beneficiary of the existence of NATO is the USA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top