DNC Contractors discuss voter fraud

[kutter]

"It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, ‘Well, they’re busing people in.’ … We’ve been busing people in to deal with you f-----‘ a------- for fifty years and we’re not going to stop now, we’re just going to find a different way to do it,” says Foval, who indicates using personal vehicles for each voter arouses less suspicion than busing in a large number of people from out of state at once. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/19/draw-them-to-punch-2-dem-operatives-lose-jobs-after-undercover-video-comments.html)

And just in case you think this is only a fox news thing: A Democratic operative whose organization was helping Hillary Clinton's campaign announced Tuesday that he would be "stepping back" from the campaign after an edited video suggested that he and other staffers hired people to attend Donald Trump's campaign rallies and incite violence. (http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/politics/project-veritas-action-robert-creamer-donald-trump-rallies/index.html)

Although, not surprisingly, the CNN article does not mention voter fraud admitted to by Froval.

[Androidpk]

One of the operatives that was paying people to incite violence was fired from his organization.

[Gnomad]

I'd be a lot more concerned about this if it didn't come from O'Keefe. Dude's a charlatan.

[Androidpk]

If the allegations are true then what difference does it make who the source is?

[Taernath]

I'd be a lot more concerned about this if it didn't come from O'Keefe. Dude's a charlatan.

I'm more interested in seeing how he selectively edited this video than anything that might have been said in it.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2016/06/23/okeefe1.png

[SpiffyJr]

I'm more interested in seeing how he selectively edited this video than anything that might have been said in it.

If you watch both videos there are several clips that are long enough and damning enough on their own.

[kutter]

Why is it when someone gets caught on tape, people immediately say, 'Well he edited it, so it is crap' Is O'Keefe a douche, could be, I have no idea, that does not change the fact that people being paid by the DNC are conspiring to commit large scale voter fraud in the current election and have admitted to doing as much in past ones. And you say the whole Wikileaks thing is tampering with it? Wikileaks cannot cast a single vote, they cannot bus people to the polls, they cannot cast ballots for dead people.

But I suppose all if this is ok, because it is those well intention liberals doing it, not the evil conservatives. Guess what, eventually both sides will use the same tactics, and maybe we will have parity but we will not have an honest election.

[Androidpk]

It's a knee-jerk reaction to information they don't want to acknowledge.

[Taernath]

Why is it when someone gets caught on tape, people immediately say, 'Well he edited it, so it is crap' Is O'Keefe a douche, could be, I have no idea

You having no idea who O'Keefe is is the problem. You should always be critical of sources and their bias, especially of guys who selectively edit videos to create false impressions. I'm going to wait for an actual, independant investigation, not just a knee-jerk reaction to a political hit piece.

[Androidpk]

You having no idea who O'Keefe is is the problem. You should always be critical of sources and their bias, especially of guys who selectively edit videos to create false impressions. I'm going to wait for an actual, independant investigation, not just a knee-jerk reaction to a political hit piece.

You haven't even watched the video have you.

[Taernath]

You haven't even watched the video have you.

I have. I've also watched his ACORN and Planned Parenthood videos, so I know that what's left out is sometimes as or more important than what's left in.

[time4fun]

I'm more interested in seeing how he selectively edited this video than anything that might have been said in it.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2016/06/23/okeefe1.png

Yeah, not only are these contractors (not actually a part of the campaign), but this guy has made a living off of deceptive video footage that destroys peoples' lives.

ACORN did amazing work for a lot of people- the fact that it was wiped out by a lie is tragic. This guy should be in prison.

[Androidpk]

This guy should be in prison.

Why? He was never indicted for a crime.

[Ashliana]

Why? He was never indicted for a crime.

Wow. You might want to spend 5 seconds googling that. Indicted, convicted, sentenced.

[Androidpk]

Wow. You might want to spend 5 seconds googling that. Indicted, convicted, sentenced.

And miss out on the fun watching you idiots get riled up? No thanks.

[Ashliana]

And miss out on the fun watching you idiots get riled up? No thanks.

"Pfft. I don't have time to inform myself on the issues. I only have time to discuss them without that knowledge."
-Androidpk

[Androidpk]

"Pfft. I don't have time to inform myself on the issues. I only have time to discuss them without that knowledge."
-Androidpk

So like you constantly accusing me of being a Trump loving conservative. Gotcha!

[Ashliana]

So like you constantly accusing me of being a Trump loving conservative. Gotcha!

This thread is further evidence that you're a conservative. You've instantly bought into the "THERE'S VOTER FRAUD!" mentality that Trump has been pushing hard -- that Republicans, as a whole, aren't. Believing there's widespread voter fraud -- when studies into the issue, by both state and federal authorities, and independent universities have found that it's not existent -- requires coming to an arbitrary conclusion and then doing mental gymnastics to retroactively justify your position.

This video is also about supposed voter fraud in, what, New York? Really? The electoral votes of an incredibly blue state like New York are being stolen? So the thinking here -- even if the video isn't presenting a wildly out-of-context edited clip, as O'Keefe's done in several other cases, so that's a huge if -- every state has independent voting mechanisms. Where, supposedly, is this voter fraud taking place? Where, if it was, would it have the most impact on an election? Swing states--where Republicans tend to have more, not less, influence over the elections process, like in Ohio, where the GOP elections official is saying that Trump's claims are baseless?

But no, I'm sure you're going to prove me wrong and demonstrate your ability to think critically, in total isolation from your usual positions.

[Androidpk]

So what about all the liberals that are constantly screaming over voter fraud coming from the Russians? Are they conservative? You're just doubling and tripling down on this idiocy aren't you?

[Ashliana]

So what about all the liberals that are constantly screaming over voter fraud coming from the Russians? Are they conservative?

It sounds like you're having a tough time sorting out stories. Are you referring to the many people across the political aisle--not "all the liberals"--who are criticizing Russia's attempts to intervene in our election? That's not the same thing as voter fraud, FYI.


You're just doubling and tripling down on this idiocy aren't you?

Hilarious irony alert. Lack of self-awareness reaching Trump-like levels.

[Thondalar]

Wow. You might want to spend 5 seconds googling that. Indicted, convicted, sentenced.

He plead guilty to a misdemeanor. Not exactly prison-worthy.

[Androidpk]

So something has to be from across both aisles if it's to be believed? So like the accusations coming from both parties that there was massive voter fraud committed by Hillary and company during the Democratic primaries?

And seriously, stop talking about lack of self-awareness, especially if you continue to accuse people of something they're not, in the face of contrary evidence.

[Ashliana]

You've managed to bake a half-dozen nonsensical positions into such a short post. That's impressive.


So something has to be from across both aisles if it's to be believed?

1) The "aisles" here refer to the fact that, unlike your assertion, it wasn't just "liberals" who've had a problem with Russia's actions.
2) You characterized the issue as "liberals" being upset over Russia's "voter fraud." Either you don't understand the issues people across the spectrum were upset with, or you don't actually know what voter fraud is. Either way, you're coming off uninformed. And that's putting it lightly.


So like the accusations coming from both parties that there was massive voter fraud committed by Hillary and company during the Democratic primaries?

Nothing of the sort was ever demonstrated. The only thing the DNC hack showed was that a few people at the top of the DNC had a preference for Hillary over Bernie, and one talked about potential methods one could use to attack Bernie, which were never carried out. Jumping to "the nomination was fixed by voter fraud" is a hilarious, totally uninformed leap by you. And I don't recall many (any, actually) liberals ever making that assertion, though there's always a few crazies in every bunch, as you yourself demonstrate.


And seriously, stop talking about lack of self-awareness, especially if you continue to accuse people of something they're not, in the face of contrary evidence.

"Stop calling me a conservative! It's just a random coincidence that I routinely buy into conservative conspiracy theories and all my stances seem--for some magically unidentifiable reason--to coincide with alt-right/Trump-leaning news sources, and it's only a coincidence that I clash on these boards near-exclusively with liberals, on conservative stories!"
-Androidpk

You've already embarrassed yourself enough in this thread.


He plead guilty to a misdemeanor. Not exactly prison-worthy.

That doesn't make Androidpk's statement any less false. Either way, O'Keefe's credibility as a "journalist" is totally shot. He's been caught, repeatedly, in his efforts to deliberately misinform. That doesn't necessarily mean this time is, similarly, an attempt to misinform -- we'll see.

[Tgo01]

Believing there's widespread voter fraud

And the story of the ever moving goalposts continue.

First the argument among Democrats was "There is no voter fraud!"

Then when people started providing examples they shouted "The number is slow it's almost zero!!!"

Then when people started providing more examples they changed the argument to "There is no widespread voter fraud!"

I can't wait to see where the goalpost moves to next. I know! "We have more important issues to worry about!"

[Tgo01]

That doesn't make Androidpk's statement any less false.

Yes actually, it does. He was replying to this comment from time4fun:


ACORN did amazing work for a lot of people- the fact that it was wiped out by a lie is tragic. This guy should be in prison.

The obvious implication being he should be in prison for what he "did" to ACORN.

O'Keefe pled guilty to a totally unrelated crime, the sentence for which he received did not include jail time.

You like context, right? In context it was very obvious what pk was talking about. But you love to play these little "gotcha!" games where you just end up making yourself look like a tool.

You tool.

[Ashliana]

Oh, hey. It must be a day ending in Y, because Tgo01's making a retarded argument.


First the argument among Democrats was "There is no voter fraud!"

"There has never been a single case of voter fraud!" is a straw man argument upon which your entire position rests. Your position, in reality, is not only not based on evidence, it requires that you discount the evidence: states, including conservatives ones, the federal government, and universities--including conservative ones--have studied the issue and all concluded that voter fraud is essentially non-existent, with a handful of cases out of more than a billion votes in your adult lifetime.

Exactly as I predicted, you've reached a totally arbitrary conclusion and are working backwards to rationalize it. You aren't interested in reality.

:clap:

[Ashliana]

Yes actually, it does.

No, "actually," it doesn't.


Why? He was never indicted for a crime.

This statement is demonstrably false. With or without "context," it's false. Time referred to O'Keefe's career, not just this one incident. And even if she had, your position would not only require magical mindreading abilities, but would alternatively represent hilariously poor diction on PK's part. And O'Keefe's crimes definitely relate to his now-longstanding career of trying to deliberately misinform and reflect on his credibility.

Keep doing those backflips.

[Tgo01]

"There has never been a single case of voter fraud!" is a straw man argument upon which your entire position rests. Your position

lol

Reading! How does it work! I didn't say Democrats say there is no voter fraud. My whole point is the ever moving goalposts...I mean I literally just got finished saying that. Yes, back when Democrats first started making a stink about voter ID laws the go to argument was "There is no voter fraud." Then the argument evolved to the point where Democrats are saying there is no "widespread" voter fraud and stupid shit like people getting struck by lightning is more common than voter fraud.

You can find thousands of examples of voter fraud on Google right now, and this typically isn't even the number Liberals love to point to when they discuss how rare voter fraud is, rather they point to the much lower number of people convicted of voter fraud. It would take a serious lack of grey matter to believe that our legal system and our election system is so perfect that we catch 100% of voter fraud when it happens. Shit, there are millions of ballots cast every year, there is no way our current system could even come close to catching 100% of voter fraud, especially when you consider in many places there is typically just one or two election officials keeping an eye on everything.

So thousands of cases of voter fraud that was caught, how many more thousands never get caught? Have any studies researched that?

But hey, "let's think of the children!"

[Tgo01]

This statement is demonstrably false. With or without "context," it's false.

Holy God damn you fail at knowing what context is.

No, with context it is not false.

Here's an analogy:

Bob: Hey Jim, my sister says you've been beating her.
Jim: What? I've never touched her!
Bob: You've never even hugged her?
Jim: Of course I've hugged her.
Bob: So you have touched her!
Jim: Yes but I never beat her.
Bob: You just got finished saying you never touched and that was a lie! How can I believe you now?

Context, you fucking simpleton. Context.

Likewise when time4fun says O'Keefe should be in jail for his "mistreatment" of ACORN, and pk says he was never indicted for a crime, the obvious implication is he was never indicted for a crime for his video of ACORN, which he wasn't.

[Tgo01]

You've earned yourself another one, you deluded imbecile.

Second one in 3 days, Ashliana. And you have the audacity to give PB shit for all of the "mean" rep comments he left you.

Wait wait, according to you PB is secretly gay because of the "sexual" nature of the rep comments he left you.

So let's look at your two latest rep comments toward me:


People like you are why you should need a license to have reproduce. Please, do us all a favor and--FOR THE LOVE OF GOD--get a vasectomy.

You've earned yourself another one, you deluded imbecile.

So since you're leaving a lot of "dur yer retarded!" rep comments, then I guess going by your own logic this means you yourself are the retarded one, right?

I love it when a plan comes together.

[Ashliana]

First the argument among Democrats was "There is no voter fraud!"
Then when people started providing examples they shouted "The number is slow it's almost zero!!!"


I didn't say Democrats say there is no voter fraud.

Are you even reading what you're writing? By nature of you implying "Democrats" have "moved the goalposts," you are necessarily asserting that Democrats insisted that voter fraud "doesn't exist," and then changed their argument to "almost doesn't exist."

If you were actually interested in the legitimacy of our elections, you could easily find more information (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/) on it. But you're not. You're trying to rationalize away your candidate's inevitable loss. Enjoy those salty, sour grapes.


Holy God damn you fail at knowing what context is.

No, with context it is not false.

With or without "context," it's false: You're invented context that doesn't actually exist. You're tripping over your own inability to comprehend English. As usual. Time referred to the career which O'Keefe's made for himself, not just the ACORN matter. Your stance requires that you 1) be able to read PK's mind, 2) for PK to have misinterpreted Time in the same way you did, and 3) then subsequently to have chosen his words hilariously poorly, still indefensibly.

Try again, you deluded imbecile.

Tgo01 right now:

https://media.giphy.com/media/mlFi4eXsTiXks/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

Are you even reading what you're writing?

So you know about this magical thing called past and present tenses?

Here let me see if I can help you unravel this mystery:


First the argument among Democrats was "There is no voter fraud!"

The bold word there indicates we are talking about something that has happened in the past, known as a past tense.


I didn't say Democrats say there is no voter fraud.

See that same bold word twice? That indicates something that is happening in the present, as in present tense.

Yes, I said that in the past Democrats have said there is no voter fraud, but today (the present) their argument has changed.

Are you honestly this mentally handicapped, Ashliana? This is shit you learn in grade school.

[Ashliana]

Oh, look. It's another retarded Tgo01 post that contains a half-dozen things wrong with it.


The bold word there indicates we are talking about something that has happened in the past, known as a past tense.

That's already implied by the notion that "goalposts" were moved. You're not pointing out anything here that changes your position's reliance on a straw man. In order for you to claim that Democrats have "moved the goalposts" from (1) to (2) requires that you assert (1) was ever the case, and (1) is the straw man.



Are you honestly this mentally handicapped, Ashliana? This is shit you learn in grade school.

Zero. Self. Awareness.

[Tgo01]

That's already implied by the notion that "goalposts" were moved.

I know, which is why I'm still shocked at your confusion. Do you smell burnt toast?

[Ashliana]

Your inability to understand that your argument is predicated on a straw man only reflects on you.

[Parkbandit]

Ashliana is having another mental meltdown.

I'm going to miss It when It leaves again.....

[Androidpk]

Nothing of the sort was ever demonstrated. The only thing the DNC hack showed was that a few people at the top of the DNC had a preference for Hillary over Bernie, and one talked about potential methods one could use to attack Bernie, which were never carried out. Jumping to "the nomination was fixed by voter fraud" is a hilarious, totally uninformed leap by you. And I don't recall many (any, actually) liberals ever making that assertion, though there's always a few crazies in every bunch, as you yourself demonstrate.




Yeah that's why the DNC leadership stepped down in disgrace. That's why there were numerous reports all across the country of massive voter fraud coming from Camp Hillary. That's why hundreds of thousands have abandoned the Democratic party this year. Keep those party blinders on though, they look great on you.

[Warriorbird]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/150902160240-russian-internet-trolls-780x439.jpg

[Parkbandit]

This thread is further evidence that you're a conservative. You've instantly bought into the "THERE'S VOTER FRAUD!" mentality that Trump has been pushing hard -- that Republicans, as a whole, aren't. Believing there's widespread voter fraud -- when studies into the issue, by both state and federal authorities, and independent universities have found that it's not existent -- requires coming to an arbitrary conclusion and then doing mental gymnastics to retroactively justify your position.

This video is also about supposed voter fraud in, what, New York? Really? The electoral votes of an incredibly blue state like New York are being stolen? So the thinking here -- even if the video isn't presenting a wildly out-of-context edited clip, as O'Keefe's done in several other cases, so that's a huge if -- every state has independent voting mechanisms. Where, supposedly, is this voter fraud taking place? Where, if it was, would it have the most impact on an election? Swing states--where Republicans tend to have more, not less, influence over the elections process, like in Ohio, where the GOP elections official is saying that Trump's claims are baseless?

But no, I'm sure you're going to prove me wrong and demonstrate your ability to think critically, in total isolation from your usual positions.

Would you agree that any voter fraud is a problem and we should do whatever we can to eliminate it?

And before you go on about how little it matters.. you do realize that Bush was elected by less than 600 votes, right?

[Androidpk]

Would you agree that any voter fraud is a problem and we should do whatever we can to eliminate it?

And before you go on about how little it matters.. you do realize that Bush was elected by less than 600 votes, right?

It only matters when Republicans do it.

[Thondalar]

No, with context it is not false.

Context, you fucking simpleton. Context.

Likewise when time4fun says O'Keefe should be in jail for his "mistreatment" of ACORN, and pk says he was never indicted for a crime, the obvious implication is he was never indicted for a crime for his video of ACORN, which he wasn't.

Good example.

I would go a step further and note that it wasn't O'Keefe that cut ACORN funding and ultimately caused their bankruptcy and dissolution, but Congress. While O'Keefe's tactics might be suspect, I don't see where he has done anything worse than what Michael Moore has done. O'Keefe edited a few videos to tell his narrative, Moore edited several movies/"documentaries" to tell his. At this point we could say O'Keefe is "journalist" and Moore is a "movie director", and they should be held to different standards, and I'll admit that's an extreme example. We could use Judith Miller instead, if that would be more to your liking.

And for those of you wringing your wrists and weeping softly for the state of ACORN, fear not...the organization still exists. Like GMAC Financing rebranded itself to Ally Bank after the bailout fiasco, ACORN rebranded itself and changed from a single National organization to more localized, individual organizations, such as The Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, Affordable Housing Centers of America, New York Community for Change, etc.

[Latrinsorm]

lol Reading! How does it work! I didn't say Democrats say there is no voter fraud. My whole point is the ever moving goalposts...I mean I literally just got finished saying that. Yes, back when Democrats first started making a stink about voter ID laws the go to argument was "There is no voter fraud." Then the argument evolved to the point where Democrats are saying there is no "widespread" voter fraud and stupid shit like people getting struck by lightning is more common than voter fraud.Here's what's stunning to me about this coming from you. In another thread you just got done vehemently denying that Trump had ever said the IRS wouldn't let him release his tax returns, then when you were given sourced quotes of Trump saying exactly that your argument shamelessly evolved into the claim that he wasn't saying that right now. In this thread, you excoriate Democrats for allegedly doing the same thing, and on top of that will never produce the quotes you claim exist.
Would you agree that any voter fraud is a problem and we should do whatever we can to eliminate it?The Constitutionally guaranteed right to vote without abridgment on the basis of race is more important than the current level of voter fraud, in the same way that the Constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms is more important than the current level of gun violence.

[Ashliana]

Yeah that's why the DNC leadership stepped down in disgrace. That's why there were numerous reports all across the country of massive voter fraud coming from Camp Hillary. That's why hundreds of thousands have abandoned the Democratic party this year. Keep those party blinders on though, they look great on you.

They stepped down in response to the embarrassment and to not serve as a distraction to the party during an election. The rest of your post? Total fantasy-land. Especially this gem:

"That's why hundreds of thousands have abandoned the Democratic party this year."

:Rofl:

Trump will be losing in a few weeks. It's time you come to terms with reality. And yes, I know, I know "you're not a conservative, or Trump supporter." Which I totally believe.


Would you agree that any voter fraud is a problem and we should do whatever we can to eliminate it?

And before you go on about how little it matters.. you do realize that Bush was elected by less than 600 votes, right?

"Exists at all"? Sure. "Is a problem"? Sure. "Exists, at all" doesn't equal "massive problem," nor "will be the excuse for Trump's loss." A solution for any problem should be proportional to the threat it presents. If there are, say, 5 cases of voting fraud a year, are we justified in denying thousands (or likely more) the ability to vote? In my book, no.

[Androidpk]

They stepped down in response to the embarrassment and to not serve as a distraction to the party during an election. The rest of your post? Total fantasy-land. Especially this gem:

"That's why hundreds of thousands have abandoned the Democratic party this year."

:Rofl:

Trump will be losing in a few weeks. It's time you come to terms with reality. And yes, I know, I know "you're not a conservative, or Trump supporter." Which I totally believe.



Textbook example of delusional.

[drauz]

I would love for the full videos to be released. I would love to know how these people's statements are justified because I am struggling to figure out what questions could be asked that could illicit these responses.

[Tgo01]

Here's what's stunning to me about this coming from you. In another thread you just got done vehemently denying that Trump had ever said the IRS wouldn't let him release his tax returns, then when you were given sourced quotes of Trump saying exactly that your argument shamelessly evolved into the claim that he wasn't saying that right now.

Latrin, I know you know how to read, why are you going to great lengths to compete with Ashliana in the dumbshit award?

I never once said Trump's argument has changed, I said and still maintain that Trump has said he won't release his tax returns because of the ongoing IRS audit. That is different than saying the IRS is literally preventing Trump from releasing his tax returns. That was always my argument and still is my argument.

[Tgo01]

I would love for the full videos to be released. I would love to know how these people's statements are justified because I am struggling to figure out what questions could be asked that could illicit these responses.

Obviously the question asked was "Say the exact opposite of what really happens and what you really believe." If you don't believe that then you're a racist, sexist, bigoted, xenophobic, Islamophobic asshole.

[Ashliana]

Textbook example of delusional.

Thankfully, we live on Earth -- not Androidpk's alternate conservative universe. If only you had the power to unilaterally rewrite reality, then you might not be hilariously full of shit, and not basing your entire worldview on conspiracy sites.

[Androidpk]

Thankfully, we live on Earth -- not Androidpk's alternate conservative universe. If only you had the power to unilaterally rewrite reality, then you might not be hilariously full of shit, and not basing your entire worldview on conspiracy sites.

Thankfully we all know you're a nut case.

[Ashliana]

Thankfully we all know you're a nut case.

What a witty response. Then again, you don't know how to do anything but double down... and quadruple down .. and octuple down -- for its own sake, no less. When your worldview is informed by conspiracy theories, I imagine you see the entire world as one big, mean ol' conspiracy engineered just to keep you down and tell you that you're wrong about everything.

[drauz]

Thankfully, we live on Earth -- not Androidpk's alternate conservative universe. If only you had the power to unilaterally rewrite reality, then you might not be hilariously full of shit, and not basing your entire worldview on conspiracy sites.

Says the person that thought no major news outlet saw the DNC e-mail leaks as them trying to rig the primary towards HRC. Then when presented with articles from EVERY news organization they requested still wouldn't believe it. But yeah, conservatives are the ones who believe everything that is spoon fed them... That is where you lost the last shred of being believable.

[Androidpk]

What a witty response. Then again, you don't know how to do anything but double down... and quadruple down .. and octuple down -- for its own sake, no less. When your worldview is informed by conspiracy theories, I imagine you see the entire world as one big, mean ol' conspiracy engineered just to keep you down and tell you that you're wrong about everything.

Pretty sad that this is all you got. Vast right wing conspiracy! Conservative! Trump! Putin! Russians!

[Tgo01]

I think Ashliana gets paid by the word to shill and gets bonuses for every word he bolds and italicizes.

[Ashliana]

Says the person that thought no major news outlet saw the DNC e-mail leaks as them trying to rig the primary towards HRC. Then when presented with articles from EVERY news organization they requested still wouldn't believe it. But yeah, conservatives are the ones who believe everything that is spoon fed them... That is where you lost the last shred of being believable.

You do realize there are gradients between:

A) DNC has a preference for Hillary over Bernie
B) DNC has shown preferential treatment to Hillary over Bernie
C) DNC has done everything in their power short of vote fixing to ensure Hillary wins
D) DNC has fixed the outcome of the nomination process in (X) number of states
E) DNC has fixed the outcome of the nomination process in all states

And what, pray tell, evidence do you think was revealed in the hacks? Spoiler Alert: It's A, and maybe shades of B. You, however, and the rest of your ilk, want to jump to E, with ZERO EVIDENCE to that effect. But go on, tell me about what is and isn't believable, and what you think those news organizations' stances were about which letter you think they supported.

Imbecile.

[Ashliana]

Pretty sad that this is all you got. Vast right wing conspiracy! Conservative! Trump! Putin! Russians!

Translation:

"It's not fair that I got called out for believing in conspiracy theories! It's actually your fault that I have no evidence! My believing in a left-wing conspiracy is somehow you accusing me of a right-wing conspiracy theory!"
-Androidpk

[drauz]

gets bonuses for every word he bolds and italicizes.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/12RxlnztZZb2qk/200.gif

[Androidpk]

Calm down and take your meds, Ashliana, before you hurt yourself again.

[Ashliana]

Calm down and take your meds, Ashliana, before you hurt yourself again.

Translation: "I couldn't come up with a substantive reply."
-Androidpk

[drauz]

You do realize there are gradients between:

A) DNC has a preference for Hillary over Bernie
B) DNC has shown preferential treatment to Hillary over Bernie
C) DNC has done everything in their power short of vote fixing to ensure Hillary wins
D) DNC has fixed the outcome of the nomination process in (X) number of states
E) DNC has fixed the outcome of the nomination process in all states

And what, pray tell, evidence do you think was revealed in the hacks? Spoiler Alert: It's A, and maybe shades of B. You, however, and the rest of your ilk, want to jump to E, with ZERO EVIDENCE to that effect. But go on, tell me about what is and isn't believable, and what you think those news organizations' stances were about which letter you think they supported.

Imbecile.

Is this where you are going to redefine rigged again? Just because you think rigged means E, doesn't mean the dictionary and the rest of the world does.

[Androidpk]

Translation:

http://i1007.photobucket.com/albums/af191/wayofusgaro/hhhhhhiiiiiii.gif

-Ashliana

[Ashliana]

Is this where you are going to redefine rigged again?

Is this where you're going to quibble about what the word "rigged" can mean with no regard to how it's being used and the implication being clearly made?

Translation: You couldn't answer my question.

[drauz]

Is this where you're going to quibble about what the word "rigged" can mean with no regard to how it's being used and the implication being clearly made?

Translation: You couldn't answer my question.

When you use a word incorrectly and then try to use that to shove words in my mouth, yes. Since I was the one using it, I felt I knew what context I meant but I'll be sure to ask you what I mean after I say something next time. Since you know best.

Since you actually want an answer to your question. I would place it between B and C.

[Ashliana]

Right. I'm trying to misrepresent you. Okay.


I would place it between B and C.

Okay. Are you saying that you think the revealed evidence shows that, or you simply believe that's likely based on what was shown? I don't think I'm misrepresenting the conservatives on the board who very clearly believe--with no evidence--that the answer is "obviously" E.

[drauz]

Right. I'm trying to misrepresent you. Okay.



Okay. Are you saying that you think the revealed evidence shows that, or you simply believe that's likely based on what was shown? I don't think I'm misrepresenting the conservatives on the board who very clearly believe--with no evidence--that the answer is "obviously" E.

Again all the newspapers and I believe that the revealed evidence show that there appears to be a conspiracy against Sanders.

I don't think the conservative are saying E, but I think that is what you hear. I don't care about what other people have said or ultimately how you portray them. I care (a little) how you portray me.

[Latrinsorm]

Latrin, I know you know how to read, why are you going to great lengths to compete with Ashliana in the dumbshit award?

I never once said Trump's argument has changed, I said and still maintain that Trump has said he won't release his tax returns because of the ongoing IRS audit. That is different than saying the IRS is literally preventing Trump from releasing his tax returns. That was always my argument and still is my argument.In that case you aren't even reading what Trump said, which actually tracks a lot better because you weren't reading what Dems actually said either. Phew! Thanks Terry, it's a relief to see that your view on reality, while completely wrong, is at least internally coherent.

[Tgo01]

In that case you aren't even reading what Trump said

Here is a pretty comprehensive list of all of the excuses Trump has given for why he is not releasing his tax returns, as well as times he said he would release his tax returns:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2016/09/15/a-running-tally-of-trumps-many-excuses-for-why-he-wont-release-his-tax-returns/

Granted I skimmed most of that but I didn't see a quote where he literally said "The IRS won't let me." If you have a quote that didn't make the cut that shows Trump did say this then please let me know.

[Latrinsorm]

Here is a pretty comprehensive list of all of the excuses Trump has given for why he is not releasing his tax returns, as well as times he said he would release his tax returns:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2016/09/15/a-running-tally-of-trumps-many-excuses-for-why-he-wont-release-his-tax-returns/

Granted I skimmed most of that but I didn't see a quote where he literally said "The IRS won't let me." If you have a quote that didn't make the cut that shows Trump did say this then please let me know.“I’m being audited … so I can’t.”

[Tgo01]

“I’m being audited … so I can’t.”

That's funny because the challenge was to find a quote of him saying "The IRS won't let me."

And yet not a single word from the challenge quote was found in your answer quote, not even the most common word in the English language, "the"!