Welcome to Thunderdome

GORDON wrote: The only person I know who ever talks about Alex Jones or reads Infowars is a liberal. Interesting.

I hunt for hot takes when I look for other-side-of-the-aisle reaction stories. Alex's just happen to always be molten.

Reminds me of.that Howard stern movie... Half his listeners were people who hated him and were looking for reasons to complain about him.

Wink.

GORDON wrote: Reminds me of.that Howard stern movie... Half his listeners were people who hated him and we're looking for reasons to complain about him.

Wink.

We're back to blaming me for Alex Jones' rabid following again.

It's true. I'm 90% of the site traffic on Infowars.com. The rest are google bots. Liberal google bots.

I said nothing of the sort, malcolm. I said you're the only person I know following him and/or that site. I never heard of it before you started talking about it, I've never heard of it since outside of you, and I made no conclusions based on my observation, I merely said I found that data point interesting.

Which I do.

But her emails.

Take not my name in vain, mortal.

Leisher wrote: Seth Rich might have been Wikileaks' leak.

The family is trying to refute it, but there's at least one federal investigator saying it's true.

Why is this important? Because if he was the one who leaked the emails that showed the DNC was rigging the primaries for Hillary, then Rich's murder now has motive.

Not for nothing, but why is it completely unimportant and forgotten that the DNC was caught trying to change the political direction of the country illegally?

Nope

Well, "nope" for what the unabashedly right wing "news outlets" were reporting.

One guy involved is back tracking some comments, but a lot of the facts still stand or haven't been proven wrong. Why is he back tracking? Well considering that article says the family is considering suing him for breaching a non-disclosure agreement it does make one wonder. Also, please note:

Wheeler said he was referring to information that had already been reported in the media.

Holy crap, I just saw someone mention "infowars" in a reddit thread! Troy isn't the only person I've ever seen talk about it any more!

But her emails.

Bruce Spiva, a lawyer for the DNC, argued in its motion to dismiss that the party holds the right to select its candidate any way it chooses and is not bound by pledges of fairness.

“We could have voluntarily decided that, ‘Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.’ That's not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right,” Spiva argued.

Although the Article 5, Section 4 of the Democratic Party charter stipulates that it will function with total neutrality during Democratic primaries, the DNC lawyer argued the promise was non-binding.

As insane as it sounds, if they argument they're making is, "The DNC charter isn't legally binding," they might have a decent point.

“And there's no right to not have your candidate disadvantaged or have another candidate advantaged. There's no contractual obligation here,” he said.

Except when you back the wrong horse. Seriously, the year they pick to royally fuck up is the year the orange douche runs.

Malcolm wrote:
As insane as it sounds, if they argument they're making is, "The DNC charter isn't legally binding," they might have a decent point.

Truth. However, if those people then don't come out to vote, tough shit.

Leisher wrote: However, if those people then don't come out to vote, tough shit.

They'll come out to vote next time. I think some Bernie 2.0 will be at the front in 2020. I doubt the alien queen's getting another shot, and if it isn't the actual Bernie it'll be someone with Bernie-like beliefs. You betting the left didn't take a look at the last election and have a sudden brainstorm that, "Hey, extremist stupidity worked over there. No reason it won't over here. We just didn't pick someone psychotically volatile and polarizing enough. We need to double down on that shit." Problem is that neither party has a reason to pick someone less crazy now.

Sanders will get beat by Oprah or The Rock.

Leisher wrote: Sanders will get beat by Oprah or The Rock.

As for the former, don't fucking give them ideas. As for the second, while I'd be amused, I have shades of Jessie Ventura dancing in my head.

Both have already publicly stated the thought of running has crossed their mind.

I'm rooting for president Oprah. I can't wait to see what's hidden under my seat!

Dianne Feinstein suggests an investigation into Lynch's influence on Comey in regards to Clinton's campaign.

Wow. I really enjoy when politicians act on behalf of the people rather than their party.

Leisher wrote: Dianne Feinstein suggests an investigation into Lynch's influence on Comey in regards to Clinton's campaign.

Wow. I really enjoy when politicians act on behalf of the people rather than their party.

I can negate any questions regarding Clinton dishonesty with two words:

Buttery males!

Checkmate.

Leisher wrote: Seth Rich might have been Wikileaks' leak.

The family is trying to refute it, but there's at least one federal investigator saying it's true.

Why is this important? Because if he was the one who leaked the emails that showed the DNC was rigging the primaries for Hillary, then Rich's murder now has motive.

Not for nothing, but why is it completely unimportant and forgotten that the DNC was caught trying to change the political direction of the country illegally?

Fake news

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: Seth Rich might have been Wikileaks' leak.

The family is trying to refute it, but there's at least one federal investigator saying it's true.

Why is this important? Because if he was the one who leaked the emails that showed the DNC was rigging the primaries for Hillary, then Rich's murder now has motive.

Not for nothing, but why is it completely unimportant and forgotten that the DNC was caught trying to change the political direction of the country illegally?

Fake news

Is he dead? Yes.

Was he murdered? Yes.

Are the motive and killer unknown? Yes.

The fake part came from the suggested tie to wikileaks, that doesn't make everything else fake. This poor bastard got murdered and nobody gives a fuck why. All they care about is that he didn't email wikileaks...as far as can be proven.