At 8/4/16 07:40 PM, Feoric wrote:

At 8/4/16 07:04 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/conspiracy-theories-swirl-around-murder-of-dnc-staffer/

Here is another DNC conspiracy. Figure I would just post it here in the conspiracy topic.

Also alarming: juice boxes are turning us gay.

Did you see the part about the murder? Nobody deserves to be murdered.

At 8/4/16 07:57 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Nobody deserves to be murdered.

I do.

At 8/4/16 08:59 PM, Feoric wrote:

At 8/4/16 07:57 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Nobody deserves to be murdered.

I do.

Nah, you are a cool guy. Thanks for the link about the juice boxes making people gay conspiracy.

At 8/4/16 09:54 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Nah, you are a cool guy. Thanks for the link about the juice boxes making people gay conspiracy.

You're welcome. Stay informed.

At 8/2/16 08:25 PM, Feoric wrote: Yeah, Dems will definitely gain seats in both chambers of Congress, but the filing deadlines are up and there aren't a whole lot of worthy Democratic contenders on the ticket for a lot of otherwise vulnerable seats. Ryan will probably be worse off than Boehner was come 2017, but I'm not putting any money on the Dems taking the House. Them taking the Senate is far, far more likely, however.

After watching the Trump campaign the last few days, I might have spoken too soon. I'm seriously starting to think that if the current trend lines continue (i.e; the campaign continues to be a bona fide dumpster fire) the House could actually be in play. That's how bad it is.

At 8/4/16 10:25 PM, Feoric wrote:

At 8/4/16 09:54 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Nah, you are a cool guy. Thanks for the link about the juice boxes making people gay conspiracy.

You're welcome. Stay informed.

I will stay informed. Keep watching the skies.

At 8/4/16 10:53 PM, Feoric wrote: After watching the Trump campaign the last few days, I might have spoken too soon. I'm seriously starting to think that if the current trend lines continue (i.e; the campaign continues to be a bona fide dumpster fire) the House could actually be in play. That's how bad it is.

Trump still has time to fix things, before November. Unless, there is a conspiracy against him from the GOP.

At 8/5/16 03:50 PM, gumOnShoe wrote: It'll be 3 weeks before we know with any certainty whether this bump was "significant and lasting". So, we'll check in on the theory at the end of Aug, I guess.

That is true. We have to be patient and not get too excited over bumps.

That said; People vote straight ticket more often and the hair on fire now cast on 538 insinuates that Georgia & Arizona may have been put into play as swing states (again, we'd have to wait 3 weeks to see if the current trend holds).

If Georgia and Arizona become swing states, they would get much more candidate and media attention. Not that it is always a good thing to be under the microscope. lol

At 8/6/16 06:05 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: If Georgia and Arizona become swing states, they would get much more candidate and media attention. Not that it is always a good thing to be under the microscope. lol

I lived in Ohio during 2008. Trust me, I know.

At 8/4/16 10:53 PM, Feoric wrote: After watching the Trump campaign the last few days, I might have spoken too soon. I'm seriously starting to think that if the current trend lines continue (i.e; the campaign continues to be a bona fide dumpster fire) the House could actually be in play. That's how bad it is.

How many "bad weeks" has he had? Right before the first Super Tuesday he failed to condemn David Duke when he tried to endorse him! Then he swept the Super Tuesday states! Early on he had called John McCain not a war hero because he got captured..... Unless he gets a really bad week that includes Election Day I don't know.

At 8/8/16 01:02 PM, Korriken wrote: I had an inkling that Trump was a Democrat supporter....

Sometimes I think he's a closet Democrat who has the money to pull shenanigans to give the media fuel to burn the GOP with.

Looks like I may not have been too far off the mark. Now that he's been nominated, all he has to do is be a complete jackass through November and his decades old friend is President.

That would be a very sad day if that is true. Hillary is just horrible and untrustworthy.

Just belatedly sticking the mod head in:

We've all kind of derailed this sucker good into another slinging mud at Trump and Hillary thing. Does anybody have anything to add on the point of the thread? Because if people don't want to converse about that anymore, then I think it's just time for us to move the conversation over to a more appropriate topic for it.

Trying to get it back: Julian Assange interviewed by Bill Maher over this very issue. From last Friday.

At 8/9/16 02:07 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Trying to get it back: Julian Assange interviewed by Bill Maher over this very issue. From last Friday.

Glad to see that Bill Maher is trying to get to the bottom of the conspiracy. He does a good job at asking and answering questions.

Sorry dems, you just sealed your fates:
Befolgen Sie meine Befehle! Get the Muslims out! Wir machen Amerika groß wieder , jetzt marschieren !!!

At 8/10/16 08:28 AM, StCyril wrote: Sorry dems, you just sealed your fates:
Befolgen Sie meine Befehle! Get the Muslims out! Wir machen Amerika groß wieder , jetzt marschieren !!!

Which conspiracy are you talking about?

At 8/9/16 02:07 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Trying to get it back: Julian Assange interviewed by Bill Maher over this very issue. From last Friday.

He's also heavily implied that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC leaks. I already thought the circumstances of his death were extremely suspicious, and now this. The thing is, I'm no conspiracy nut, but this is just too weird to be a coincidence. It seriously makes me wonder, since nothing was stolen from the man's house.

At 8/10/16 08:25 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: He's also heavily implied that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC leaks. I already thought the circumstances of his death were extremely suspicious, and now this. The thing is, I'm no conspiracy nut, but this is just too weird to be a coincidence. It seriously makes me wonder, since nothing was stolen from the man's house.

Normally, there are no coincidences. This whole thing seems fishy, and the conspiracy continues.

At 8/10/16 10:03 PM, Korriken wrote: It wouldn't surprise me in the least. If nothing else, change up the names and you got the beginning of the plot of a murder mystery movie.

It has all the makings of it....but for this to work, you also have to assume top level government agencies are so in the pocket of one party that they're willing to lie and blame a powerful foreign nation that we've always been on shaky terms with, falsify evidence, etc. Just to cover up one murder. That seems way too extreme for me without some way more solid evidence behind it.

At 8/10/16 10:03 PM, Korriken wrote:

At 8/10/16 09:37 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

Normally, there are no coincidences. This whole thing seems fishy, and the conspiracy continues.

A guy sees something that offends his morals so much that he leaks it, and gets shot and killed in the street for it as a warning to anyone else who may think of leaking anything. Those involved in the murder blame another culprit, Russia for the leaks because if this was implicated as the leaker, the timing of his death would be impossible to ignore.

Yes, now that more details have come out, there is much more to this story than original thought.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least. If nothing else, change up the names and you got the beginning of the plot of a murder mystery movie.

They say that truth is stranger than fiction.

At 8/10/16 10:10 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: It has all the makings of it....but for this to work, you also have to assume top level government agencies are so in the pocket of one party that they're willing to lie and blame a powerful foreign nation that we've always been on shaky terms with, falsify evidence, etc. Just to cover up one murder. That seems way too extreme for me without some way more solid evidence behind it.

That one murder could be just the beginning. Maybe there were more murders and crimes that haven't been connected yet?

At 8/11/16 11:09 AM, Korriken wrote:

At 8/11/16 02:25 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

That one murder could be just the beginning. Maybe there were more murders and crimes that haven't been connected yet?

They won't be connected or really investigated. Obama will make sure of that. The Queen must take her throne to continue Obama's legacy.

Yes, Obama is determined to make Hillary the next President.

If the local police get "too close" the FBI will step in, clear the real killer and implicate some extremely poor "person of color" with a rap sheet that involves armed robbery/mugging, give him a rigged trial with forged evidence, then lock him away for life.

This conspiracy is getting deeper the more you look into it.

Why? Because, you'd be surprised at how willing a few people would be to burn an innocent, knowing they're burning an innocent, to keep and/or forward their career.

Hilary must be part of this large conspiracy.

At 8/11/16 11:32 AM, Korriken wrote: In other news, more emails got released. These emails show that Huma Abedin worked as a go between for the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.

More e-mails will provide evidence about this conspiracy.

Anyone want to place bets on how long it'll be before Huma either "gets killed in a botched robbery" or "commits suicide"?

That is what they normally due to tie up loose ends.

Maybe Huma can commit suicide by shooting herself in the chest multiple times and once in the head with a lever action rifle.

Would that work? A drug overdose would be easier.

At 8/11/16 02:42 PM, Korriken wrote: The Democrat part is desperate to get Clinton into office because the prize is a supreme court seat and possibly several more over the next 4-8 years.

This is why the conspiracy was started.

Likewise, 6-7 conservative activists on the bench, especially if the Republicans put in younger ones would help the Republicans achieve their goals and stifle the Democrats' plans for a very long time.

The GOP needs to watch out for this , and other conspiracy.

There's more at stake in this election than most realize. Of course, if Clinton wins, I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of the conservative justices commit suicide or get killed in botched robberies.

Clinton has been planning this conspiracy for a long time. She will do anything to continue it.

At 8/11/16 02:42 PM, Korriken wrote: The Democrat part is desperate to get Clinton into office because the prize is a supreme court seat and possibly several more over the next 4-8 years.

I wouldn't say "desperate". Do you really have to act in a desperate manner when the bench wasn't super deep and the opposition is inept? Also the Supreme Court question could and should be settled by now with compromise candidate Merrick Garland. But the Republicans are bitching about a situation they have in fact created.

Whichever side wins this year can fill those seats and determine the direction of this country.

Well, there's only the one seat right now....

5 left vs 4 right can help, but 6-7 Liberal activists on the bench can do a LOT to help the Democrat party achieve its goals and stifle the Republicans' plans, especially if they can find some younger justices to put on the bench that will be around for the next 30 years.

Well, as I said, right now it's just the one seat and I've seen little evidence of Obama putting activist judges on the bench. There HAVE been some appointments in that direction from the other side though....

There's more at stake in this election than most realize. Of course, if Clinton wins, I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of the conservative justices commit suicide or get killed in botched robberies.

Wow....just wow....you've officially gone over the edge now dude.

At 8/11/16 08:13 PM, Korriken wrote: Time marches on and 8 years is a long time, especially when Ginsburg is 82, Kennedy is 80, and Breyer is 77. in 8 years time, Ginburg will be 90, Kennedy will be 88, and Breyer will be 85. The odds of all 3 surviving the next 8 years? Possible, but I would not count on it. Assuming Clinton does get elected (a safe assumption) and gets reelected (a safe assumption) she could be replacing up to 4 (possibly more) judges.

A first term for me is a given barring something that forces one or both candidates off their party ticket. Yeah, agreed, the second term? I don't know so much. I think this election will guarantee 2020 is going to need to be a very different game. Hillary will need a very good first term to overcome her unfavorables. I think even a half decent Republican candidate next time out of that doesn't happen could probably drop her. The disaster that is Trump is the best thing that could have happened to her.

Given that two of those are Bill Clinton's justices, A Republican replacing them with conservative activists as well as Scalia's seat would be a huge shift in US politics.

It would. For me, not a very good one since I think that takes us backwards socially in a lot of ways. But as you say, there's probably little chance of that unless the Repubs get their act together finally by 2020 or whatever party comes out of their ashes (which I still don't rule out) puts up.

Considering just about every SCOTUS decision is 5-4 in either direction shows both parties put in justices who think similarly to themselves. Seems like Roberts is the only one who leans either direction.

Oh sure. I mean, if you're one of the few Presidents' who get to put a Justice on the Court, that's sometimes a way more lasting legacy then any policy decision or achievement you make.

Nah I was just kidding (though it really wouldn't surprise me if a justice did die of mysterious circumstances in the next 4 years)

Ya just Trumped son. Ya just Trumped.

At 8/12/16 08:07 PM, Korriken wrote: So, judicial activism is good, so long as it's left wing judicial activism?

Hey, you're learning!

At 8/12/16 11:11 PM, Korriken wrote: Yeah Russian farmers once thought that was a good idea too. Many of them found themselves at the end of a rope. Literally.

Hopefully we can all evade the horrors of noted Trotskyite Merrick Garland by electing Donald Trump.

At 8/12/16 08:07 PM, Korriken wrote: Also, you may want to watch that line of thinking. Venezuela "moved into the 21st century" with Hugo Chavez and now they're in the 1700's again, with people being forced to toil in the fields for their lord's benefit.

Was Hugo Chavez ever involved in a conspiracy?

At 8/11/16 11:19 PM, Korriken wrote: Barring Trump getting shot, or dying of a massive coronary, with Pence taking over, I'd say Hillary's got this.

Pence is a shitty loser of a candidate too. She'd be able to pick him apart on many levels as well. She'd still win, just not by as many electoral votes.

Considering how oafish Trump is acting, I would say he's actively TRYING to lose, which is why I keep thinking he joined the race in order to hand the win to Clinton.

See, I used to believe that one too. Up until about a month ago, and if somebody could show me evidence that'd prove it....I wouldn't be shocked. But there's so many articles coming out now (one as recently as today) that I've now developed a new theory that I'll be laying out here and there in this post, but the headline name for it is this: "Donald Trump is/was that stupid"

Whether Clinton is actually in on it, I have no idea.

Again, I could believe it either way. But I don't think if you go and look at the evidence, the "Donald Trump is/was that stupid" theory is becoming more likely.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Trump was actively trying to destroy the GOP (and is actually succeeding) for financial reasons.

That would have made sense at the beginning of the year, but things have changed since then quite radically. This is a pure ego stroke/not understanding the job he's trying to get thing.

Loan himself millions to run, say he's "self funding his campaign" which of course resonates with people tired of bought and paid for politicians, then use the money from donations later to pay it all back.

Possible, and it fits the way Trump works. The PROBLEM is it's been evident since at least February that Trump has almost NEVER been doing a self-financed campaign. He's accepted big time donor money as well as small time money. I think Trump honestly believed he could win this because he thinks it's a matter of selling his brand and letting somebody else do the actual work like most of his businesses have worked.

In the end it costs him nothing, he's knocked out the other GOP candidates and he's free to torch the place to the ground on the money he got from the fools who donated to him. Once his best friends, The Clintons are in office, he can cash in on it.

I don't see that. I've seen no solid links between the two, Hillary and Bill have no incentive to fund him now (and every reason to steer clear). I honestly think what happened is this moron tricked himself based on primary voter numbers, a lack of understanding how to do and run a campaign, and the crowds he gets at his rallies that he's the smartest guy in the room and he could beat the conventional wisdom because he's Donald Fucking Trump, and now the house of cards once again is collapsing in on him.

Clever bastard.

Hardly.

In theory it shouldn't matter. In theory most cases should end in a 9-0 or a 8-1 or maybe 7-2. Problem is, people with different perspectives want to frame the constitution in different ways, which worries me if one side gets too many justices.

That's been a problem forever. I've seen how the Conservatives do it with horrors like Citizen's United and others....so you know, I'm ok giving the progressives more of a chance since they tend to be the ones that put down the social ills like segregation and such.

Putting 3-4 of them? That would be huge.

No doubt. It's the biggest political wet dream there is.

Nothing really surprises me anymore. This election killed my ability to be surprised about anything.

I think we can safely agree on that.

At 8/12/16 11:54 PM, Feoric wrote: Hopefully we can all evade the horrors of noted Trotskyite Merrick Garland by electing Donald Trump.

Glad to see that Donald Trump is not involved in a conspiracy. Looks like it is all democrats.