Is the gleam off the "Melanoma Gold" yet?

[George M. Middius]

Election Memorandum
To: Sackhead, Witlessmongrel, et al.
From: Washington Post
re: Toljaso!


Drumpf has been accused of embezzling. A criminal investigation is in
the offing. Hillary's not looking so bad now, right? Admit it!

[Chelm Aylik]

Search:
Washington Post website:
Trump embezzle
Last 7 days
No results.

Search :
CNN website
No such story

Search Google entire web
No such news story

My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have conflated into a story about embezzlement.

[George M. Middius]

“I represent 700 nonprofits a year, and I’ve never encountered
anything so brazen,” said Jeffrey Tenenbaum, who advises charities at
the Venable law firm in Washington. After The Washington Post
described the details of these Trump Foundation gifts, Tenenbaum
described them as “really shocking.”

<https://www.washingtonpost.com>

[George M. Middius]

Apparently Drumpf's hole-in-one jackpot scheme was a complete fraud
from the moment it was conceived. The hole in question was less than
140 yds from tee to pin, but Drumpf set up the underwriter's policy to
pay off for an ace on a hole of 150 yds.

Fraud. Bunco. Scam. You choose.

[Chelm Aylik]

Clinton Foundation
CGI
travel expenses

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2a202d16-b688-4579...@googlegroups.com...

> Clinton Foundation
> CGI
> travel expenses

Trumps use of foundation money is wrong, but it is peanuts compared to the
Clinton's.
But the media will fixate on the peanuts like monkeys often do.

ScottW

[Chelm Aylik]

If there is to be any investigation it should be a joint investigation of both candidates by one special prosecutor, non partisan and not directed by the Democratic administration, or Rrpublican administration after Trump wins. The report should address both situations and lay out the facts, and the reasons for the conclusions.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/first-read-trump-s-charitable-foundation-takes-another-hit-n651801

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/politics/washington-post-trump-foundation-report/

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/us/politics/donald-trump-foundation-charity.html?_r=0

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-use-of-charity-donations-raises-eyebrows/

http://nypost.com/2016/09/20/trump-spent-charity-money-on-business-fines-portrait-report/

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-clinton-camp-trump-foundation-s-1474390140-htmlstory.html

[MiNe109]

On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
>> Search:
>> Washington Post website:
>> Trump embezzle
>> Last 7 days
>> No results.
>>
>> Search :
>> CNN website
>> No such story
>>
>> Search Google entire web
>> No such news story
>>
>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>
> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.

<snip many links Art won't look at>

The magic words are "trump self-dealing".

[Chelm Aylik]

Talk to me after you have addressed the long history of Clinton scandals collecting political funding and other goodies in exchange for doling put public governmental resources. Lincoln bedroom, diplomatic visas, prime seats at state dinners, access to meet with public officials etc.
this has been going on for decades

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...

I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not being looked at.
Kettle, the pot is black....

Here's a question. The reward offers are out for dirt on trump. How much did
the hillary campaign pay for this little trinket to distract from their own pot
of gold?

ScottW

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...

Here's a link you should look at. Will you?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/money-laundering-scheme-exposed-14-pro-clinton-super-pacs-non-profits-implicated

ScottW

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd30764f-32c1-4f2f...@googlegroups.com...

> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
>> Search:
>> Washington Post website:
>> Trump embezzle
>> Last 7 days
>> No results.
>>
>> Search :
>> CNN website
>> No such story
>>
>> Search Google entire web
>> No such news story
>>
>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have conflated
>> into a story about embezzlement.
>
> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.

How about this little bubble buster.

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/cigars-fact-sheet

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 10:50:41 AM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Talk to me after you have addressed the long history of Clinton scandals collecting political funding and other goodies in exchange for doling put public governmental resources. Lincoln bedroom, diplomatic visas, prime seats at state dinners, access to meet with public officials etc.
> this has been going on for decades

Typical conservative deflection. No one brought up Hillary. We're talking about Drumpf.

[ScottW]

"ScottW" <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nru83j$56q$1...@dont-email.me...

Ever look into the child labor used to produce your beloved tobacco?

from https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods/

ArgentinaTobaccoChild Labor
BrazilTobaccoChild Labor
CambodiaTobaccoChild Labor
IndonesiaTobaccoChild Labor
KenyaTobaccoChild Labor
Kyrgyz RepublicTobaccoChild Labor
LebanonTobaccoChild Labor
MalawiTobaccoChild Labor, Forced Labor
MexicoTobaccoChild Labor
MozambiqueTobaccoChild Labor
NicaraguaTobaccoChild Labor
PhilippinesTobaccoChild Labor
TanzaniaTobaccoChild Labor
UgandaTobaccoChild Labor
ZambiaTobaccoChild Labor

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Trump does smoke cigars. So perhaps we should be worried about whether he is fit enough to be POTUS.

Good point.

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:df5b130c-1006-4633...@googlegroups.com...

Typical progressive reaction. Put your head in the sands and claim we're
looking at your ass.

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Have you?

https://trumpstore2016.com/products/trump-2016-commemorative-cigar-box-of-10?variant=14531762759

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea4c1e1f-6760-4d9a...@googlegroups.com...

We should.
Let's have him and Hillary engage in a public fitness test and see who lives to
talk about it.

Still, I haven't heard Trump claiming in ignorance cigars lack of danger to
your health.

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

The typical progressive reaction is to point out the fallacy? If you say so.

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5dfcb26-7ff2-44d0...@googlegroups.com...

Nope, I don't buy 'em. How many boxes did you order?

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

I haven't seen any evidence of child labor being used in cigar factories where my favorite smokes are produced, either. Your argument had an excluded middle.

Besides, eating pizza and packing on the pounds in your sixties is far more of a health risk than an occasional cigar.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

If Trump's name is on them, they have to be shitty.

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:28a570d6-9250-42ff...@googlegroups.com...

Translation: We're deflecting here and rules don't allow a deflection of a
deflection.
We wrote the rules and deflection via a rules debate is also prohibited by the
adendum to the rules which cannot be changed under any circumstances...unless or
until it is necessary under the rules.

ScottW

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a653d93-8e7d-4231...@googlegroups.com...

Spoken like a true and honest unbiased reviewer of cigars.
Boon's motto: Like audio gear, the most important thing about a fine cigar is
the little label band and the price tag.

ScottW

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:40c21b88-8aa8-49b2...@googlegroups.com...

Do they grow tobacco in those factories too?
Your argument is based on your own ignorance. It's a winner.

>
> Besides, eating pizza and packing on the pounds in your sixties is far more of
> a health risk than an occasional cigar.

Being 60 is a health risk. I know you're afraid to die so you're having a
mid-life health panic. But I fail to see why everyone else has to share your
paranoia.

BTW, I had two big slices of thick and cheesy Papa Dels for dinner. Delicious.
It might have been better for me than you think but you still can't have any.
No cauliflower crust.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/news/high-fat-cheese-the-secret-to-a-healthy-life/

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Scott's motto: If it belongs to Trump, I'll stick it in my mouth.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Generally speaking, the factories are located on the plantations where they grow the tobacco.

I've been to a few cigar factories. I've seen no children. Most of the torceadores are elderly and have been doing what they do for decades.

Now if you want to talk about elder abuse...

> Your argument is based on your own ignorance. It's a winner.

Your argument is based on the fact that you know nothing about the premium cigar industry.

Does Jayna's wedding ring have a diamond in it? If you want to talk about the tobacco industry, which has no record of child labor abuses, then we'll talk about the people who died so you could put a rock on your wife's finger.

>
> >
> > Besides, eating pizza and packing on the pounds in your sixties is far more of
> > a health risk than an occasional cigar.
>
> Being 60 is a health risk. I know you're afraid to die so you're having a
> mid-life health panic. But I fail to see why everyone else has to share your
> paranoia.

If I was afraid to die, I'd have religious beliefs.

>
> BTW, I had two big slices of thick and cheesy Papa Dels for dinner. Delicious.
> It might have been better for me than you think but you still can't have any.
> No cauliflower crust.

I went to Pepe's over the weekend, moron. Did you forget already?

>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/news/high-fat-cheese-the-secret-to-a-healthy-life/

Nothing wrong with cheese or even fat. It's all the bleached white flour and the hydrogenated oils, idiot.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

You're fucked, Fatty:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB4549.html

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-health-risks-of-cigar-smoking.html

[Chelm Aylik]

This is just today's treasure trove. Toe score for today. Trump has a mountain of catching up to detriment the Clintons from King of the landfill mountain

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Red Auerbach, 89
Milton Berle, 93
George Burns, 100
Fidel Castro, currently 90
Charlie Chaplin, 88
Winston Churchill, 90
Zino Davidoff, 87
Marlena Dietrich, 90
Thomas Edison, 84
Arturo Fuente, 86
Don Carlos Fuente, 81
Milton Hershey, 88
Alfred Hitchcock, 80
Groucho Marx, 86
Jose Padron, currently 90
William S. Paley, 89
Dan Rather, currently 84
Arthur Rubinstein, 95

Man, those heavy cigar smokers are droppin' like flies.
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., 89
Nat Sherman, 86

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 12:56:19 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> This is just today's treasure trove. Toe score for today. Trump has a mountain of catching up to detriment the Clintons from King of the landfill mountain

Once you wean yourself off the conservative echo chamber, you'll find that the opposite is true. But that requires the ability to do simple Google searches, which you can't do.

[George M. Middius]

Still no rational explanation from the RAO Idiots' Brigade for their
devotion to Drumpfenstein. Every time another chapter in his
kleptochronology is revealed, Witless and Sackhead trot out the
predictable evasions. The stoopid pooch digs up the same bone he's
been chewing for months (i.e. Boon is the antichrist), and Sacky
screeches "Pneumonia! Benghazi! Clinton Foundation!"

Drumpf is a horrorshow. Hillary may not be wonderful, but she has no
history of fraud, conning investors, shameless slander, and being a
deadbeat. Nobody with a functioning brain could possibly prefer Drumpf
to Hillary. But still, Witless and Sackhead refuse to acknowledge any
of the Cheeto Monster's evil deeds. Sad.

[Chelm Aylik]

Not to worry. He is a hypocritical health nut who claims to carry 585 lbs of boxes, in 7 trips, down 2 flights of stairs in 98 degree temperature all in ten minutes.

Instead of debates we should have human feats of strength competitions. Debate no 2 will be a pizza eating contest, all pizzas having cauliflower crust.

[Chelm Aylik]

The alternative vote is for Hillary. For me, that's not going to happen. My prince has a few warts. Hillary is pure evil.

[Chelm Aylik]

'At leased' he doesn't eat cauliflower crust pizza

[Chelm Aylik]

Evident you have visited the factories and seen for yourself. But did you visit the growing farms too? A bunch of old men were cutting the leaves? Yes, you forgot about the plantations, you just flapped your gums about the factories, which in reality you also know nothing about

[Chelm Aylik]

I know lots of cigarette smokers who have not developed lung cancer. By your 'logic' that proves that cigarette smoking does not cause cancer.

[Chelm Aylik]

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 1:02:31 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Not to worry. He is a hypocritical health nut who claims to carry 585 lbs of boxes, in 7 trips, down 2 flights of stairs in 98 degree temperature all in ten minutes.
>
> Instead of debates we should have human feats of strength competitions. Debate no 2 will be a pizza eating contest, all pizzas having cauliflower crust.

Such an inferiority complex you have, putz. So much kvetching. Such a schmendrick.

Simple fact is this: you and Scott are morbidly obese old men who shovel pizza and pasta into your quivering jowls while trying to tell me that premium cigars are going to kill me. Then, with your limited intellect, you tried to prove that my claims about unloading a truck were incorrect--by changing everything that I said so that I didn't make sense.

What's the Yiddish phrase for "hopelessly mediocre"?

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 1:05:06 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> The alternative vote is for Hillary. For me, that's not going to happen. My prince has a few warts. Hillary is pure evil.

All womenfolk are evil, right? Their vaginas are the gates of hell and damnation.

You think Hillary is pure evil because you've been told she's pure evil. If you were able to think for yourself, you'd come up with a different conclusion.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 1:14:34 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> I know lots of cigarette smokers who have not developed lung cancer. By your 'logic' that proves that cigarette smoking does not cause cancer.

It's not logic, it's anecdotal evidence. It goes hand in hand with my observation that there is little to no overlap between my friends who smoke cigars and my friends who have battled cancer.

Cigarettes are a far different thing. Show me someone who is a heavy cigarette smoker, and I'll show you someone who sooner or later is going to have a health issue. I have friends who have smoked heavily and they have had cancer, heart disease, strokes, emphysema, etc. Very few people live their lives as a smoker and make it into their 80s in good health. But a surprisingly high amount of cigar smokers do.

Some of the newer data is showing this as well. If you smoke one cigar per day, the increased risk for cancer is statistically insignificant. And I smoke far less than that.

[Chelm Aylik]

Hillary is judged on the basis of her own particular demerits. Another woman running for President is not evil, Jill Stein. I just happen to disagree with almost all of her views.
My opinion has nothing to do with the presence of a vagina. That's a typical ridiculous and thoughtless Democratic smear. The sex (or is it gender?) card.

[Chelm Aylik]

You keep erecting straw men. I never said that cigar smoking is as bad for health as cigarette smoking. The health of your cigar smoking associates is no matter. The fact is, cigar smoking is a health risk. That's ok. Lots of other behaviors are health risks. But if you strike a pose as a model for good healthy living, cigar smoking shouldn't be one of your activities, if you want to be considered serious

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 2:51:51 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> You keep erecting straw men. I never said that cigar smoking is as bad for health as cigarette smoking. The health of your cigar smoking associates is no matter. The fact is, cigar smoking is a health risk. That's ok. Lots of other behaviors are health risks. But if you strike a pose as a model for good healthy living, cigar smoking shouldn't be one of your activities, if you want to be considered serious

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Clint Eastwood, Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Michael Jordan, Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck, Mel Gibson, Demi Moore, Jeff Bridges, Jay-Z, John Travolta, Robert DeNiro, Pierce Brosnan, Wayne Gretzky, Rihanna, Andre Agassi, Tom Watson, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Jennifer Lopez, Samuel L. Jackson, Benedict Cumberbatch and Sammy Sosa might disagree with you there, fatty.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 2:47:23 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Hillary is judged on the basis of her own particular demerits. Another woman running for President is not evil, Jill Stein. I just happen to disagree with almost all of her views.
> My opinion has nothing to do with the presence of a vagina. That's a typical ridiculous and thoughtless Democratic smear. The sex (or is it gender?) card.

Then tell me why you think Hillary is evil, so I can debunk it.

[Chelm Aylik]

Fine. The American cancer society disagrees with you. So does the Mational Cancer Institue
As well as the American Medical Association

[Chelm Aylik]

You can't convince me don't waste your time. Better spend it exercising, toting heavy boxes, smoking cigars or whatever else you think
Promotes your health.

I don't want to argue the totality of Hillarys evil with you. It's too voluminous to compute Life is too short. It's a wTr of my time to list everything and a waste of your time to try and refute it

If you are fine with her, good for you. I'm not going to convince you otherwise. You're not going to convince me that she is a good person

[Chelm Aylik]

It's contained in thousands of pages in books written by others. Real all of Kleins Clinton books. Read the Byrne book Read Dick Morris' books. read scott Taylor and Karl Limbacker. Diana Johnstone and Peter Schweiker.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 3:54:17 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Fine. The American cancer society disagrees with you. So does the Mational Cancer Institue
> As well as the American Medical Association

So what? Life is full of risks. You might get hit by a truck. You might get cancer from your morning commute with all of the chemicals you breathe from car exhaust. You might clog your arteries with a bunch of pizza cheese.

The benefits outweigh the risks. It reduces stress. It's a hobby to enjoy with friends. It's a social activity. It's fun.

I've got Chicken Little Wittevrongel on one end scouring the Internet for things to hate and fear and despise, and I got you on the other end saying oh, I don't believe you carried heavy boxes in the heat through a vestibule, you must be a gorilla pounding his chest to do such a Herculean feat!

The truth is merely that you and Scott are boring as fuck. I'm not the most interesting man in the world. It's just that the two of you are so uninteresting. Dull, pedestrian, overly-cautious, fearful, without joy or enthusiasm.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

You're just like every other Hillary-hater I've encountered:

You: I hate Hillary!
Me: Why?
You: Because she lies!
Me: What did she lie about?
You: These things over here. She lied about all this.
Me: Well, here's the proof that she didn't lie about any of it.
You: I don't care. I know she lied.

There's a word for that. DUMB. Here are some more words: NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Here are some more words: SHUT THE FUCK UP AND SIT DOWN OVER THERE, WITH ALL THE OTHER IDIOTS.

Nobody cares what you think or what you believe. Your beliefs are worthless to everyone but you--except for the fact that even morons get to vote.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 4:18:20 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> It's contained in thousands of pages in books written by others. Real all of Kleins Clinton books. Read the Byrne book Read Dick Morris' books. read scott Taylor and Karl Limbacker. Diana Johnstone and Peter Schweiker.

NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

[Chelm Aylik]

Your NOT GOOD ENOUGH is pretty damn lame.

[Chelm Aylik]

If you want to have a fun hobby that entails risks, that's fine with me. That's not my argument. Just don't present yourself as a model of healthy living

[MiNe109]

On 9/21/16 9:52 AM, ScottW wrote:
> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik
>>> wrote:
>>>> Search: Washington Post website: Trump embezzle Last 7 days No
>>>> results.
>>>>
>>>> Search : CNN website No such story
>>>>
>>>> Search Google entire web No such news story
>>>>
>>>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have
>>>> conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>>>
>>> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.
>>
>> <snip many links Art won't look at>
>
> I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not being looked
> at. Kettle, the pot is black....

Since I pretty much know what your links go to, nope.

> Here's a question. The reward offers are out for dirt on trump. How
> much did the hillary campaign pay for this little trinket to distract
> from their own pot of gold?

Assumes facts not in evidence. And if you think the respective
charitable foundations are equivalent, you've checked your faculties at
the door.

[George M. Middius]

MiNe109 wrote:

> > Here's a question. The reward offers are out for dirt on trump. How
> > much did the hillary campaign pay for this little trinket to distract
> > from their own pot of gold?
>
> Assumes facts not in evidence. And if you think the respective
> charitable foundations are equivalent, you've checked your faculties at
> the door.

Drumpf seems to believe that the highest purpose of a "charitable"
foundation is as a tax shelter. Tens of thousands of beneficiaries of
the Clinton Global Initiative would disagree.

[Chelm Aylik]

Tips of the iceberg
She lied about her emails. We know that.
She defended her husband's sexual assaults and improper touching and improper sexual encounters with various women. She verbally attacked the victims and demeaned them
and marginalized them. She lied about them and discounted their experiences at the hands of her hisband. Well, about 50 or so years later, at least Huma Abedin Has the moral sense to divorce her scoundrel of a husband. Hillary won't. She probably wants to, but it would interfere with the only thing that matters to her, getting elected President.

[Chelm Aylik]

Tens of thousands of beneficiaries include wealthy contributors who benefitted with special access It includes felons who were pardoned by her husband. It includes the high and mighty of Wall Street and hedge fund managers. It includes all he sycophants who are rewarded with paid positions. It includes friendly and corrupt corporate executives who get special deals arranged for their corporations.

[Chelm Aylik]

Boon is one of my favorite "faculties"

[MiNe109]

On 9/21/16 9:57 AM, ScottW wrote:
> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik
>>> wrote:
>>>> Search: Washington Post website: Trump embezzle Last 7 days No
>>>> results.
>>>>
>>>> Search : CNN website No such story
>>>>
>>>> Search Google entire web No such news story
>>>>
>>>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have
>>>> conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>>>
>>> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.
>>
>> <snip many links Art won't look at>
>

> Here's a link you should look at. Will you?
>
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/money-laundering-scheme-exposed-14-pro-clinton-super-pacs-non-profits-implicated

I'll take a look...

Googling zerohedge clinton autofills to zerohedge clinton body count, so
there's a strike against.

Looks like they're not doing their own reporting, just linking to
others, something you had a big problem with.

Yes, it's a hit piece on David Brock.

http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/8/25/7-tips-for-using-tax-exempt-charitable-gifts-to-get-your-can.html

Maybe the IRS should do something.

[Chelm Aylik]

http://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2016/09/sociopath-alert-hillary-clinton.html?m=1

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0a04840c-cbff-4d86...@googlegroups.com...

You get a misogynist smear, I get a weak gay slur insult. Boon's on a roll.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <hootervil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5fd40837-b4bf-46f3...@googlegroups.com...

> Your NOT GOOD ENOUGH is pretty damn lame.

Ridiculously lame, but it's a step up from his usual so he gets an I for
improvement.

ScottW

[Chelm Aylik]

Ah. His usual response is to charge icky-bwai

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:00420919-6914-47df...@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 12:56:19 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
>> This is just today's treasure trove. Toe score for today. Trump has a
>> mountain of catching up to detriment the Clintons from King of the landfill
>> mountain
>
> Once you wean yourself off the conservative echo chamber, you'll find that the
> opposite is true. But that requires the ability to do simple Google searches,
> which you can't do.

The personal attack fails as a substitute for a fact based reasoned argument.
I've yet to hear anything to refute the well established and majority accepted
position that Hillary has not told the truth.
More people believe HRC is a liar than believe in AGW. It isn't even close.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-hillary-clinton-lies-health-emails-benghazi-20160920-story.html

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <hootervil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:abe1def5-45ec-4a0b...@googlegroups.com...

40% of her appointments were Clinton Foundation or campaign contributors.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-gave-state-department-appointments-to-194-donors/article/2602272

ScottW

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:nruup0$m1q$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On 9/21/16 9:52 AM, ScottW wrote:
>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>> On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Search: Washington Post website: Trump embezzle Last 7 days No
>>>>> results.
>>>>>
>>>>> Search : CNN website No such story
>>>>>
>>>>> Search Google entire web No such news story
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have
>>>>> conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>>>>
>>>> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.
>>>
>>> <snip many links Art won't look at>
>>
>> I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not being looked
>> at. Kettle, the pot is black....
>
> Since I pretty much know what your links go to, nope.

and that is why you live in ignorance.

>
>> Here's a question. The reward offers are out for dirt on trump. How
>> much did the hillary campaign pay for this little trinket to distract
>> from their own pot of gold?
>
> Assumes facts not in evidence. And if you think the respective
> charitable foundations are equivalent, you've checked your faculties at
> the door.

and where is that fact in evidence? I don't think they're equivalent. Not
even close.
Trump may have misused charitable contributions in his personal business empire
but Hillary abused her position as SoS for money funneled into the foundation
which
has been little more than a slush fund to finance Clinton family expenses and
give Clinton cronies a paycheck while idling until their next stint in gov't.
Since Hillary was working for every US citizen as she abused her position and
Trump was in private business, I think the scope of their crimes isn't even
close.

ScottW
>

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:nruvhe$nhf$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On 9/21/16 9:57 AM, ScottW wrote:
>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>> On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Search: Washington Post website: Trump embezzle Last 7 days No
>>>>> results.
>>>>>
>>>>> Search : CNN website No such story
>>>>>
>>>>> Search Google entire web No such news story
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you have
>>>>> conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>>>>
>>>> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.
>>>
>>> <snip many links Art won't look at>
>>
>> Here's a link you should look at. Will you?
>>
>> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/money-laundering-scheme-exposed-14-pro-clinton-super-pacs-non-profits-implicated
>
> I'll take a look...
>
> Googling zerohedge clinton autofills to zerohedge clinton body count, so
> there's a strike against.
>
> Looks like they're not doing their own reporting, just linking to others,
> something you had a big problem with.

I had a problem with presuming the linked conclusion was valid without any
effort to verify.
It was the very essence of echo chamber crap.

>
> Yes, it's a hit piece on David Brock.

Yes, just like the issue on the Trump foundation is a hit piece.

The question is...is the criticism valid?
They are providing some evidence but I would like to see somebody else verify.

>
> http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/8/25/7-tips-for-using-tax-exempt-charitable-gifts-to-get-your-can.html
>
> Maybe the IRS should do something.

And the FBI should have done something.
He likely gets a fine. At worst the foundation loses it's charity status.
But expecting the IRS to do anything as it's commissioner faces impeachment
after the election is not likely.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <hootervil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:b4660801-1060-4253...@googlegroups.com...

> If you want to have a fun hobby that entails risks, that's fine with me.
> That's not my argument. Just don't present yourself as a model of healthy
> living

One moment he's trashing our lifestyles, calling us names, and making crap
up...then he wants to argue he's the free spirit and the center of all that is
fun.

Too bad he isn't what he wants to be. He'd be a better person if he was.

ScottW

[Chelm Aylik]

If he truly were what he wanted to be, he'd have a Charley horse

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:60a5b868-7aef-402b...@googlegroups.com...
On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 1:02:31 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Not to worry. He is a hypocritical health nut who claims to carry 585 lbs of
> boxes, in 7 trips, down 2 flights of stairs in 98 degree temperature all in
> ten minutes.
>
>> Instead of debates we should have human feats of strength competitions.
>> Debate no 2 will be a pizza eating contest, all pizzas having cauliflower
>> crust.

>Such an inferiority complex you have, putz. So much kvetching. Such a
>schmendrick.

>Simple fact is this: (snip the BS).

Here's the reality. Boon just dropped a bunch of weight on an admitted doctor
supervised weight loss program. Good for him.
It was probably because his doctor explained to him that type 2 diabetes that he
admitted he had at his age is going to begin to cost him if he doesn't do
something. So he did.
That's great. We'd congratulate him but he's a horses ass about how great he
is so the congrats aren't forthcoming.

Now he wants to parade around as god's gift to humanity as an example of fitness
and make shit up about everyone else.
Meanwhile, I just got my complete physical back. Blood work, colonoscopy,
pressure, cardiac ....the works. All good. Doc said, "I like the easy
follow-ups, come back in a year."
I had linguine with creamy white clam sauce...and 2 Guiness in celebration.

ScottW

[Chelm Aylik]

Congrats to Boon. But he should have kept his mouth shut. Instead he presents himself as a foolish hypocrite given his cigar smoking hobby. Nobody is perfect but it's a good thing he lost weight, even though he still smokes cigars. Improving one aspect of ones life is better than not improving any aspects of ones life. BUT. He should not be trying to present himself as a model
Of fitness and health

[ScottW]

"Chelm Aylik" <hootervil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:23d420e2-3c42-45c7...@googlegroups.com...

or honesty, integrity, character, success, intelligence, work ethic, husband,
stability, loyalty, maturity (I could go on all night).....

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:37:34 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Your NOT GOOD ENOUGH is pretty damn lame.

No, it's simple and to the point. You can't reason or think--you're just contrary and you think that's good enough. It's not.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:39:57 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> If you want to have a fun hobby that entails risks, that's fine with me. That's not my argument. Just don't present yourself as a model of healthy living

Enjoying life is healthy. Gaining weight and looking forward to the next bowl of pasta is not.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:46:29 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Tips of the iceberg

Guilty until proven innocent.

> She lied about her emails. We know that.

No laws were broken.

> She defended her husband's sexual assaults and improper touching and improper sexual encounters with various women. She verbally attacked the victims and demeaned them
> and marginalized them.

Sexual assault? No.

"What I would say, with Bill Clinton and extra-marital relationships, is that there are two sets of people. There are people with whom he has acknowledged consensual affairs - there is no dispute about that. Then there is this other set that we are talking about, women who have, very publicly and on the record, leveled accusations. But Bill Clinton has never acknowledged these to be true, he's always maintained that these are false, and there's never been an adjudication, trial or hearing that has confirmed these claims to be true or false."

She lied about them and discounted their experiences at the hands of her hisband. Well, about 50 or so years later, at least Huma Abedin Has the moral sense to divorce her scoundrel of a husband. Hillary won't. She probably wants to, but it would interfere with the only thing that matters to her, getting elected President.

You're now presuming that you know what went on behind closed doors between Bill and Hillary. I remember differently--it's obvious they took some time to work things out. I read other accounts that said they really did come to the brink of divorce. But now you hate Hillary because she decided to stand by her man. And because she really wants to be President.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:50:45 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Tens of thousands of beneficiaries include wealthy contributors who benefitted with special access It includes felons who were pardoned by her husband. It includes the high and mighty of Wall Street and hedge fund managers. It includes all he sycophants who are rewarded with paid positions. It includes friendly and corrupt corporate executives who get special deals arranged for their corporations.

Citations, please.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 9:15:17 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Ah. His usual response is to charge icky-bwai

That's because Scott's usual response is an IKYABWAI.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Look at you two, consoling each other.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Gay slur? Where?

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

You're supporting your point by what people think and believe. You're a moron.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 9:42:15 PM UTC-4, ScottW wrote:
> "Chelm Aylik" <hootervil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:b4660801-1060-4253...@googlegroups.com...
> > If you want to have a fun hobby that entails risks, that's fine with me.
> > That's not my argument. Just don't present yourself as a model of healthy
> > living
>
> One moment he's trashing our lifestyles, calling us names, and making crap
> up...then he wants to argue he's the free spirit and the center of all that is
> fun.

And yet you've spent years trashing my lifestyle, calling me names, and telling lies about me, my family and my business...and now you want to pretend you've been the good guy.

>
> Too bad he isn't what he wants to be.

You have no idea what I want to be, since you constantly make that part up.

> He'd be a better person if he was.

I'm a far better person than you. You're a selfish, shallow coward with no moral compass.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 10:04:46 PM UTC-4, ScottW wrote:
> <vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:60a5b868-7aef-402b...@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 1:02:31 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> > Not to worry. He is a hypocritical health nut who claims to carry 585 lbs of
> > boxes, in 7 trips, down 2 flights of stairs in 98 degree temperature all in
> > ten minutes.
> >
> >> Instead of debates we should have human feats of strength competitions.
> >> Debate no 2 will be a pizza eating contest, all pizzas having cauliflower
> >> crust.
>
> >Such an inferiority complex you have, putz. So much kvetching. Such a
> >schmendrick.
>
> >Simple fact is this: (snip the BS).
>
> Here's the reality.

Here we go again. Scott makes up a long story about me based on his imagination, and he calls it reality. You see that this is the very essence of your personality disorder, right?

Of course you can't. It's a personality disorder.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 11:16:53 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Congrats to Boon. But he should have kept his mouth shut.

I did. I lost that weight two years ago. But Scott started in with the Pillsbury doughboy comments and I felt the need to correct him.

Funny how you've ignored this in an effort to keep your one friend.

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

You could go on all night?

FAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAPFAP...

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 10:02:30 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> If he truly were what he wanted to be, he'd have a Charley horse

What does that even mean, Art?

[MiNe109]

On 9/21/16 8:26 PM, ScottW wrote:
> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:nruup0$m1q$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 9/21/16 9:52 AM, ScottW wrote:

>>> I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not being
>>> looked at. Kettle, the pot is black....
>>
>> Since I pretty much know what your links go to, nope.
>
> and that is why you live in ignorance.

What was it you just said about Boon? "The personal attack fails as a

substitute for a fact based reasoned argument."

>>> Here's a question. The reward offers are out for dirt on trump.
>>> How much did the hillary campaign pay for this little trinket to
>>> distract from their own pot of gold?
>>
>> Assumes facts not in evidence. And if you think the respective
>> charitable foundations are equivalent, you've checked your
>> faculties at the door.
>
> and where is that fact in evidence? I don't think they're
> equivalent. Not even close. Trump may have misused charitable
> contributions in his personal business empire but Hillary abused her
> position as SoS for money funneled into the foundation which has been
> little more than a slush fund to finance Clinton family expenses and
> give Clinton cronies a paycheck while idling until their next stint
> in gov't. Since Hillary was working for every US citizen as she
> abused her position and Trump was in private business, I think the
> scope of their crimes isn't even close.

Yes, you've got it wrong. You have no idea how the Foundation operates
and what programs it supports.

Trump's? Just keep watching the news.

[MiNe109]

But repeating the entire piece is okay?

>> Yes, it's a hit piece on David Brock.
>
> Yes, just like the issue on the Trump foundation is a hit piece.

No, the Trump's foundation issue is valid as there are laws concerning
what organizations can do.

> The question is...is the criticism valid? They are providing some
> evidence but I would like to see somebody else verify.

I'd presume that Brock's bounty led to scrutiny of publicly available
info about his organizations that looks bad to people who don't know how
501c orgs are financed.

>> http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/8/25/7-tips-for-using-tax-exempt-charitable-gifts-to-get-your-can.html
>>
>>
>> Maybe the IRS should do something.
>
> And the FBI should have done something. He likely gets a fine. At
> worst the foundation loses it's charity status. But expecting the IRS
> to do anything as it's commissioner faces impeachment after the
> election is not likely.

You realize that the complaint was that the IRS didn't allow right wing
groups to organize as quickly in the same way?

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f04f6845-a993-468e...@googlegroups.com...

On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:46:29 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> Tips of the iceberg

Guilty until proven innocent.

> She lied about her emails. We know that.

>No laws were broken.

Under most circumstances, lying is not illegal.
But she lied to congress and the FBI has admittedly not investigated for "lack
of referral" which they now have and presumably, an investigation is in process.

> She defended her husband's sexual assaults and improper touching and improper
> sexual encounters with various women. She verbally attacked the victims and
> demeaned them
> and marginalized them.

Sexual assault? No.

"What I would say, with Bill Clinton and extra-marital relationships, is that
there are two sets of people. There are people with whom he has acknowledged
consensual affairs - there is no dispute about that. Then there is this other
set that we are talking about, women who have, very publicly and on the record,
leveled accusations. But Bill Clinton has >never acknowledged these to be true,

He didn't acknowledge his affair with Lewinsky until they had his DNA on her
dress.
He was impeached and disbarred for lying under oath....but you want to take his
word?
Of course you want us to believe you too...so it figures.

ScottW

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e096740-3b53-4e8a...@googlegroups.com...

> On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:37:34 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
>> Your NOT GOOD ENOUGH is pretty damn lame.
>
> No, it's simple and to the point.

Not nearly good enough.

ScottW

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f70b0279-1a0f-4579...@googlegroups.com...

You spit 'em out like old gum and don't even know it. Pathetic.

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 10:03:27 AM UTC-4, ScottW wrote:
> <vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f04f6845-a993-468e...@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 5:46:29 PM UTC-4, Chelm Aylik wrote:
> > Tips of the iceberg
>
> Guilty until proven innocent.
>
> > She lied about her emails. We know that.
>
> >No laws were broken.
>
> Under most circumstances, lying is not illegal.
> But she lied to congress and the FBI has admittedly not investigated for "lack
> of referral" which they now have and presumably, an investigation is in process.

Another one? I thought you were a fiscal conservative. But I guess the $200 million plus cost for investigating Hillary for decades without achieving results is justified by your hatred of her.

>
> > She defended her husband's sexual assaults and improper touching and improper
> > sexual encounters with various women. She verbally attacked the victims and
> > demeaned them
> > and marginalized them.
>
> Sexual assault? No.
>
> "What I would say, with Bill Clinton and extra-marital relationships, is that
> there are two sets of people. There are people with whom he has acknowledged
> consensual affairs - there is no dispute about that. Then there is this other
> set that we are talking about, women who have, very publicly and on the record,
> leveled accusations. But Bill Clinton has >never acknowledged these to be true,
>
> He didn't acknowledge his affair with Lewinsky until they had his DNA on her
> dress.
> He was impeached and disbarred for lying under oath....but you want to take his
> word?

I didn't like him while he was POTUS. I thought he was sleazy then. But then he left office and it turned out he did an excellent job. Same with Hillary. But there's such a thing as redemption, and Hillary has proven her worth as Senator and SOS. Through her hard work and dedication she has earned my respect.

> Of course you want us to believe you too...so it figures.

You are pathologically unable to withhold personal attacks when someone disagrees with you, and that's all we need to know about the level of your intelligence.

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d4c82c62-2d6d-499a...@googlegroups.com...

I support my point with the facts....that most people believe and which you
cannot refute.
You are in an extreme minority with no substantive argument.
Claims the opposite is true if you could...blah blah blah is not an argument.
It's unsubstantiated. Do you know what that means?

ScottW

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Simple and to the point isn't good enough for you?

Do you think about your lame retorts before you type them, or is it all done in the heat of ejaculation and you can't stop yourself?

[vinylana...@gmail.com]

Every time you are asked to support a claim you make, you toss out a lame retort and then run away.

You are not smart enough to be here. You need to go away.

[ScottW]

<vinylana...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d1fb7b84-bb5b-42e1...@googlegroups.com...

Now who can't do a google search?

Here, let me help.
https://www.google.com/#q=Hillary%27s+pay+to+play

21,200,000 hits. Have fun reading.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:ns0l34$108r$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On 9/21/16 8:26 PM, ScottW wrote:
>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:nruup0$m1q$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>> On 9/21/16 9:52 AM, ScottW wrote:
>
>>>> I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not being
>>>> looked at. Kettle, the pot is black....
>>>
>>> Since I pretty much know what your links go to, nope.
>>
>> and that is why you live in ignorance.
>
> What was it you just said about Boon? "The personal attack fails as a
> substitute for a fact based reasoned argument."

Let's see if this conclusion (which you don't like and therefore reject as a
personal attack) is unsubstantiated.

You won't look at many links based on their history or your perception of their
bias.
Even when told the link is offering video of an actual event you still refuse to
look at it.
Conclusion....you live in ignorance.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:ns0lfu$1129$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On 9/21/16 8:34 PM, ScottW wrote:
>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:nruvhe$nhf$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>> On 9/21/16 9:57 AM, ScottW wrote:
>>>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:nru55v$192o$2...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>>>> On 9/21/16 8:31 AM, vinylana...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 7:36:05 PM UTC-4, Chelm
>>>>>> Aylik wrote:
>>>>>>> Search: Washington Post website: Trump embezzle Last 7 days
>>>>>>> No results.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Search : CNN website No such story
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Search Google entire web No such news story
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My guess is you have some non relevant kernel of truth you
>>>>>>> have conflated into a story about embezzlement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Keep living in your conservative bubble, moron.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip many links Art won't look at>
>>>>
>>>> Here's a link you should look at. Will you?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/money-laundering-scheme-exposed-14-pro-clinton-super-pacs-non-profits-implicated
>>>
>>>
>>>>
> I'll take a look...
>>>
>>> Googling zerohedge clinton autofills to zerohedge clinton body
>>> count, so there's a strike against.
>>>
>>> Looks like they're not doing their own reporting, just linking to
>>> others, something you had a big problem with.

Read the piece and you'll see evidence in the form of clips non-profits
disclosure statements
The other links are just references to support statements.

>>
>> I had a problem with presuming the linked conclusion was valid
>> without any effort to verify. It was the very essence of echo chamber
>> crap.
>
> But repeating the entire piece is okay?

Too vague.

>
>>> Yes, it's a hit piece on David Brock.
>>
>> Yes, just like the issue on the Trump foundation is a hit piece.
>
> No, the Trump's foundation issue is valid as there are laws concerning what
> organizations can do.
>
>> The question is...is the criticism valid? They are providing some
>> evidence but I would like to see somebody else verify.
>
> I'd presume that Brock's bounty led to scrutiny of publicly available info
> about his organizations that looks bad to people who don't know how 501c orgs
> are financed.
>
>>> http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/8/25/7-tips-for-using-tax-exempt-charitable-gifts-to-get-your-can.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe the IRS should do something.
>>
>> And the FBI should have done something. He likely gets a fine. At
>> worst the foundation loses it's charity status. But expecting the IRS
>> to do anything as it's commissioner faces impeachment after the
>> election is not likely.
>
> You realize that the complaint was that the IRS didn't allow right wing groups
> to organize as quickly in the same way?

and harrassed, requested information they had no right to demand, and
then lied to congress in testimony.
As usual, that last bit is going to be what gets 'em in trouble.

ScottW

[MiNe109]

On 9/22/16 9:20 AM, ScottW wrote:
> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ns0l34$108r$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>> On 9/21/16 8:26 PM, ScottW wrote:
>>> "MiNe109" <pianof...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:nruup0$m1q$1...@gioia.aioe.org...
>>>> On 9/21/16 9:52 AM, ScottW wrote:
>>
>>>>> I find it amusing to see you commenting about links not
>>>>> being looked at. Kettle, the pot is black....
>>>>
>>>> Since I pretty much know what your links go to, nope.
>>>
>>> and that is why you live in ignorance.
>>
>> What was it you just said about Boon? "The personal attack fails as
>> a substitute for a fact based reasoned argument."
>
> Let's see if this conclusion (which you don't like and therefore
> reject as a personal attack) is unsubstantiated.
>
> You won't look at many links based on their history or your
> perception of their bias. Even when told the link is offering video
> of an actual event you still refuse to look at it. Conclusion....you
> live in ignorance.

There has to be a point to a providing a link. What point was that video
making that wasn't already made by your description?

Do you know whether I've already seen your links discussed in other
venues? Do you have a history of providing time-wasting cites that often
do not support your argument or are from laughable sources? Isn't it
true that many of your points disintegrate when the facts are known?
Isn't wait-and-see a reasonable response because of this?

When I treated your views with respect years ago, I found that much of
what you espoused to be little more than Bircher fairy tales with no
supporting evidence.