Obama orders probe into election hacking

[rahtruelies]

Obama orders ‘full review’ of 2016 election hacking

Seems pretty likely the Russians did, indeed, mess with our election.

This story should be FAR bigger than the reporting currently warrants. Victory was handed to an incurious moron who has a mancrush on Putin, even though he didn't get even close to the most votes.

The Real Investigation needs to be into just how many million non-citizen and other fraudulent votes went to hrc. Was it three million? Five? More?

 

[Wry Catcher]

What a non partisan Congress would do is to have a full and open investigation on the security of the voting method in every state, making as sure as possible that every eligible to vote citizen is allowed to vote, and that no hacking or any other means of tampering the results can be accomplished.

What a non partisan Attorney General in every state, and the new AG in the cabinet in an independent investigation, ought to do is to have a full and open investigation on the voting means and security in all states and in the District.

What a non partisan Supreme Court must do is repeal both CU decisions, first thing on the first week of Oct. 2017.

Sadly, non partisans no longer exist, and the new Executive, the New Congress and (presumably) the new Supreme Court will be more partisan than an government in our nation's history.

it's not the partisanship you are complaining about, it's the other sides partisans being in control, you cheap, dime-store hack.

You defined yourself! Simply because I disdain callous conservatives, the NRA and fools (like you) does not make me a partisan hack. Hearing the comments post election from The Speaker should make every patriot nauseous. Ryan is to me the devil in blue jeans, that is, someone who shows interest or kindness that is insincere to the hoi polloi, as has Trump.

And, Trump has surrounded himself with the power elite, former Governors and elected officials, Generals, and multi millionaires and billionaires, i.e. cronies in direct opposition to the promises he made to the masses. That is not all he has back away from, and time will tell if the POTUS - elect is a Plutocrat, an Autocrat or grows into the job. For now he is known as a liar, and that forebodes he will make no sincere effort to make governance transparent.

Actually, it does. All your complaints are about conservatives and republicans. Haaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkk.

He's picking people you don't like, so that's +1 right there.

Now go back to bitching about the peasants being able to get firearms, you retired statist asshole.

Name calling is the best you've got? You're a punk Marty, and it's no wonder NY has strict gun control rules, they want to keep a gun out of the hands of people like you.

No, it's the best you deserve, you "guns for me, not for thee" statist ****. You demand privileges you would easily deny others, just because back in the day you worked for the government.

You are a useless hack drone, and, probably a *****, judging by how mewling you get when called out.

You're an angry guy Marty, and your emotions cloud your judgment. Worse however is your inability to see any controversy clearly; thus you need to resort to name calling and offering nothing more substantive than a hysterical rant.

As for gun control I support it. What I do not support is the repeal of the 2nd A.

I've posted my ideas on the issue in detail ad nausea, and yet you and others continue to build a straw man and claim I want to deny sober, sane and law abiding citizens the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm to protect their property, family and themselves.

I support it, but with these caveats.

• Licensing
• Registration
• Insurance
• Duty to report a lost or stolen gun
• Laws preventing the sale or gifting of any gun to an unlicensed person
• Proper gun storage
• Limits on magazine size
• Strict rules on CC
• All of which to be laws passed, or not, and enforced by each individual state.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

obama is the liar in chief.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama orders ‘full review’ of 2016 election hacking

Seems pretty likely the Russians did, indeed, mess with our election.

This story should be FAR bigger than the reporting currently warrants. Victory was handed to an incurious moron who has a mancrush on Putin, even though he didn't get even close to the most votes.

Clearly we need a national photo ID and maybe a Baghdad purple finger fool proof election system

 

[martybegan]

it's not the partisanship you are complaining about, it's the other sides partisans being in control, you cheap, dime-store hack.

You defined yourself! Simply because I disdain callous conservatives, the NRA and fools (like you) does not make me a partisan hack. Hearing the comments post election from The Speaker should make every patriot nauseous. Ryan is to me the devil in blue jeans, that is, someone who shows interest or kindness that is insincere to the hoi polloi, as has Trump.

And, Trump has surrounded himself with the power elite, former Governors and elected officials, Generals, and multi millionaires and billionaires, i.e. cronies in direct opposition to the promises he made to the masses. That is not all he has back away from, and time will tell if the POTUS - elect is a Plutocrat, an Autocrat or grows into the job. For now he is known as a liar, and that forebodes he will make no sincere effort to make governance transparent.

Actually, it does. All your complaints are about conservatives and republicans. Haaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkk.

He's picking people you don't like, so that's +1 right there.

Now go back to bitching about the peasants being able to get firearms, you retired statist asshole.

Name calling is the best you've got? You're a punk Marty, and it's no wonder NY has strict gun control rules, they want to keep a gun out of the hands of people like you.

No, it's the best you deserve, you "guns for me, not for thee" statist ****. You demand privileges you would easily deny others, just because back in the day you worked for the government.

You are a useless hack drone, and, probably a *****, judging by how mewling you get when called out.

You're an angry guy Marty, and your emotions cloud your judgment. Worse however is your inability to see any controversy clearly; thus you need to resort to name calling and offering nothing more substantive than a hysterical rant.

As for gun control I support it. What I do not support is the repeal of the 2nd A.

I've posted my ideas on the issue in detail ad nausea, and yet you and others continue to build a straw man and claim I want to deny sober, sane and law abiding citizens the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm to protect their property, family and themselves.

I support it, but with these caveats.

• Licensing
• Registration
• Insurance
• Duty to report a lost or stolen gun
• Laws preventing the sale or gifting of any gun to an unlicensed person
• Proper gun storage
• Limits on magazine size
• Strict rules on CC
• All of which to be laws passed, or not, and enforced by each individual state.

Anger in the face of tyranny and those that support it is not a vice or a fault.

all of the things you list can be abused by government's that decide the people are not worthy to own their own firearms. Again, NYC is a prime example of this. The regulations they have in place are for making it as time consuming as possible, so as to deter people from even starting the process. It is an infringement, nothing more or less.

Of course loopholes are in the system to allow certain people to bypass it, like retired law enforcement officers, so a new tier of citizenship is created. "Guns for me, not for thee"

I do not support any laws proposed by people who's goal is the de facto dismemberment of the 2nd amendment, and that is what your proposed rules are all about. That you have the gall to lie about it shows your duplicity, and that you are not to be trusted.

All of these rules add to the cost of owning a firearm, probably over $1000 per year. So basically you are saying that the 2nd amendment is only there for people who can afford it.

Tell me again, what is your position on requiring a $10 ID to vote?

 

[Nosmo King]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

 

[martybegan]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

 

[Nosmo King]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

 

[martybegan]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

They were on him because they thought he would bury himself. They didn't understand what he was saying, and how it was resonating with a certain part of the electorate. That it backfired on them is just proof they were actively gunning for him.

And guess what? These hacks were accomplished long before Trumps's statements on them, so your rant about it is facetious on its face.

Maybe you should be condemning Hillary and the Dem's for being a bunch of two faced, elitist assholes.

 

[Nosmo King]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

They were on him because they thought he would bury himself. They didn't understand what he was saying, and how it was resonating with a certain part of the electorate. That it backfired on them is just proof they were actively gunning for him.

And guess what? These hacks were accomplished long before Trumps's statements on them, so your rant about it is facetious on its face.

Maybe you should be condemning Hillary and the Dem's for being a bunch of two faced, elitist assholes.

Mr. Responsible Leader. What a crock

 

[martybegan]

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

They were on him because they thought he would bury himself. They didn't understand what he was saying, and how it was resonating with a certain part of the electorate. That it backfired on them is just proof they were actively gunning for him.

And guess what? These hacks were accomplished long before Trumps's statements on them, so your rant about it is facetious on its face.

Maybe you should be condemning Hillary and the Dem's for being a bunch of two faced, elitist assholes.

Mr. Responsible Leader. What a crock

The hack had already happened.....

And again, you fall into the pitfall of treating what he says like it came from a polished politicians, i.e. liar.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You defined yourself! Simply because I disdain callous conservatives, the NRA and fools (like you) does not make me a partisan hack. Hearing the comments post election from The Speaker should make every patriot nauseous. Ryan is to me the devil in blue jeans, that is, someone who shows interest or kindness that is insincere to the hoi polloi, as has Trump.

And, Trump has surrounded himself with the power elite, former Governors and elected officials, Generals, and multi millionaires and billionaires, i.e. cronies in direct opposition to the promises he made to the masses. That is not all he has back away from, and time will tell if the POTUS - elect is a Plutocrat, an Autocrat or grows into the job. For now he is known as a liar, and that forebodes he will make no sincere effort to make governance transparent.

Actually, it does. All your complaints are about conservatives and republicans. Haaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkk.

He's picking people you don't like, so that's +1 right there.

Now go back to bitching about the peasants being able to get firearms, you retired statist asshole.

Name calling is the best you've got? You're a punk Marty, and it's no wonder NY has strict gun control rules, they want to keep a gun out of the hands of people like you.

No, it's the best you deserve, you "guns for me, not for thee" statist ****. You demand privileges you would easily deny others, just because back in the day you worked for the government.

You are a useless hack drone, and, probably a *****, judging by how mewling you get when called out.

You're an angry guy Marty, and your emotions cloud your judgment. Worse however is your inability to see any controversy clearly; thus you need to resort to name calling and offering nothing more substantive than a hysterical rant.

As for gun control I support it. What I do not support is the repeal of the 2nd A.

I've posted my ideas on the issue in detail ad nausea, and yet you and others continue to build a straw man and claim I want to deny sober, sane and law abiding citizens the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm to protect their property, family and themselves.

I support it, but with these caveats.

• Licensing
• Registration
• Insurance
• Duty to report a lost or stolen gun
• Laws preventing the sale or gifting of any gun to an unlicensed person
• Proper gun storage
• Limits on magazine size
• Strict rules on CC
• All of which to be laws passed, or not, and enforced by each individual state.

Anger in the face of tyranny and those that support it is not a vice or a fault.

all of the things you list can be abused by government's that decide the people are not worthy to own their own firearms. Again, NYC is a prime example of this. The regulations they have in place are for making it as time consuming as possible, so as to deter people from even starting the process. It is an infringement, nothing more or less.

Of course loopholes are in the system to allow certain people to bypass it, like retired law enforcement officers, so a new tier of citizenship is created. "Guns for me, not for thee"

I do not support any laws proposed by people who's goal is the de facto dismemberment of the 2nd amendment, and that is what your proposed rules are all about. That you have the gall to lie about it shows your duplicity, and that you are not to be trusted.

All of these rules add to the cost of owning a firearm, probably over $1000 per year. So basically you are saying that the 2nd amendment is only there for people who can afford it.

Tell me again, what is your position on requiring a $10 ID to vote?

Is it an infringement by government to require a license to be a doctor, a contractor or to drive a car? No more so than to license someone who wants to own/possess a gun. In fact the doctor and the contractor, et al, need to prove competence by passing a test and too carry insurance!

Your argument that the second cannot be infringed in such a manner is specious at best, for guns do kill people as do drivers, doctors and contractors.

Grow the hell up and quit being such a whiner. Gun control can when properly administrated reduce the number of deaths and injuries as have seat belts and other laws and regulations have done.

 

[martybegan]

Actually, it does. All your complaints are about conservatives and republicans. Haaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkk.

He's picking people you don't like, so that's +1 right there.

Now go back to bitching about the peasants being able to get firearms, you retired statist asshole.

Name calling is the best you've got? You're a punk Marty, and it's no wonder NY has strict gun control rules, they want to keep a gun out of the hands of people like you.

No, it's the best you deserve, you "guns for me, not for thee" statist ****. You demand privileges you would easily deny others, just because back in the day you worked for the government.

You are a useless hack drone, and, probably a *****, judging by how mewling you get when called out.

You're an angry guy Marty, and your emotions cloud your judgment. Worse however is your inability to see any controversy clearly; thus you need to resort to name calling and offering nothing more substantive than a hysterical rant.

As for gun control I support it. What I do not support is the repeal of the 2nd A.

I've posted my ideas on the issue in detail ad nausea, and yet you and others continue to build a straw man and claim I want to deny sober, sane and law abiding citizens the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm to protect their property, family and themselves.

I support it, but with these caveats.

• Licensing
• Registration
• Insurance
• Duty to report a lost or stolen gun
• Laws preventing the sale or gifting of any gun to an unlicensed person
• Proper gun storage
• Limits on magazine size
• Strict rules on CC
• All of which to be laws passed, or not, and enforced by each individual state.

Anger in the face of tyranny and those that support it is not a vice or a fault.

all of the things you list can be abused by government's that decide the people are not worthy to own their own firearms. Again, NYC is a prime example of this. The regulations they have in place are for making it as time consuming as possible, so as to deter people from even starting the process. It is an infringement, nothing more or less.

Of course loopholes are in the system to allow certain people to bypass it, like retired law enforcement officers, so a new tier of citizenship is created. "Guns for me, not for thee"

I do not support any laws proposed by people who's goal is the de facto dismemberment of the 2nd amendment, and that is what your proposed rules are all about. That you have the gall to lie about it shows your duplicity, and that you are not to be trusted.

All of these rules add to the cost of owning a firearm, probably over $1000 per year. So basically you are saying that the 2nd amendment is only there for people who can afford it.

Tell me again, what is your position on requiring a $10 ID to vote?

Is it an infringement by government to require a license to be a doctor, a contractor or to drive a car? No more so than to license someone who wants to own/possess a gun. In fact the doctor and the contractor, et al, need to prove competence by passing a test and too carry insurance!

Your argument that the second cannot be infringed in such a manner is specious at best, for guns do kill people as do drivers, doctors and contractors.

Grow the hell up and quit being such a whiner. Gun control can when properly administrated reduce the number of deaths and injuries as have seat belts and other laws and regulations have done.

There is no right to be a doctor, or a contractor, or whatever. I have a right to a firearm, and that right is not to be infringed.

Those licenses are also not designed to be as hard as possible so as to deny a person the right to get one. Again, the only reasons for these laws is to make it so hard an expensive that most people won't go through it, except insder twats like yourself who get passes because you worked for the government.

And your last statement has no basis in proof, you ******* ****.

And also, go **** yourself with a tire iron, an AIDS infested tire iron.

 

[Nosmo King]

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

They were on him because they thought he would bury himself. They didn't understand what he was saying, and how it was resonating with a certain part of the electorate. That it backfired on them is just proof they were actively gunning for him.

And guess what? These hacks were accomplished long before Trumps's statements on them, so your rant about it is facetious on its face.

Maybe you should be condemning Hillary and the Dem's for being a bunch of two faced, elitist assholes.

Mr. Responsible Leader. What a crock

The hack had already happened.....

And again, you fall into the pitfall of treating what he says like it came from a polished politicians, i.e. liar.

And here I was under the impression that the words of a President Elect had weight to them, meaning to them, sincerity to them.

But, I'm dealing with a huckster buffoon better suited to the mindless wasteland of reality television and the mouth breathing sycophants surrounding him.

 

[martybegan]

you guys had most of the media as willing accomplices, but that's OK to you because it was helping you out. If it was RNC emails being leaked you would be trying to find the hackers and give them a medal.

All they did was shine daylight on the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary's campaign.

You have a short memory. Trump got far more free media than Clinton. Every time he went off on one of his juvenile rants against someone who maybe slighted him, the media was on the story like flies on a watermelon rind.

Trump ENCOURAGED the Russians to continue to hack and divulge information. He WANTED Russian help to win the election.

And you're thinking it was a good thing that foreigners influenced an American election. Are we supposed to admire you for your irresponsibility?

They were on him because they thought he would bury himself. They didn't understand what he was saying, and how it was resonating with a certain part of the electorate. That it backfired on them is just proof they were actively gunning for him.

And guess what? These hacks were accomplished long before Trumps's statements on them, so your rant about it is facetious on its face.

Maybe you should be condemning Hillary and the Dem's for being a bunch of two faced, elitist assholes.

Mr. Responsible Leader. What a crock

The hack had already happened.....

And again, you fall into the pitfall of treating what he says like it came from a polished politicians, i.e. liar.

And here I was under the impression that the words of a President Elect had weight to them, meaning to them, sincerity to them.

But, I'm dealing with a huckster buffoon better suited to the mindless wasteland of reality television and the mouth breathing sycophants surrounding him.

No you are used to being lied to by polished professionals. Trumps problem is he is an amateur liar.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Actually, it does. All your complaints are about conservatives and republicans. Haaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkk.

He's picking people you don't like, so that's +1 right there.

Now go back to bitching about the peasants being able to get firearms, you retired statist asshole.

Name calling is the best you've got? You're a punk Marty, and it's no wonder NY has strict gun control rules, they want to keep a gun out of the hands of people like you.

No, it's the best you deserve, you "guns for me, not for thee" statist ****. You demand privileges you would easily deny others, just because back in the day you worked for the government.

You are a useless hack drone, and, probably a *****, judging by how mewling you get when called out.

You're an angry guy Marty, and your emotions cloud your judgment. Worse however is your inability to see any controversy clearly; thus you need to resort to name calling and offering nothing more substantive than a hysterical rant.

As for gun control I support it. What I do not support is the repeal of the 2nd A.

I've posted my ideas on the issue in detail ad nausea, and yet you and others continue to build a straw man and claim I want to deny sober, sane and law abiding citizens the right to own, possess and have in their custody and control a firearm to protect their property, family and themselves.

I support it, but with these caveats.

• Licensing
• Registration
• Insurance
• Duty to report a lost or stolen gun
• Laws preventing the sale or gifting of any gun to an unlicensed person
• Proper gun storage
• Limits on magazine size
• Strict rules on CC
• All of which to be laws passed, or not, and enforced by each individual state.

Anger in the face of tyranny and those that support it is not a vice or a fault.

all of the things you list can be abused by government's that decide the people are not worthy to own their own firearms. Again, NYC is a prime example of this. The regulations they have in place are for making it as time consuming as possible, so as to deter people from even starting the process. It is an infringement, nothing more or less.

Of course loopholes are in the system to allow certain people to bypass it, like retired law enforcement officers, so a new tier of citizenship is created. "Guns for me, not for thee"

I do not support any laws proposed by people who's goal is the de facto dismemberment of the 2nd amendment, and that is what your proposed rules are all about. That you have the gall to lie about it shows your duplicity, and that you are not to be trusted.

All of these rules add to the cost of owning a firearm, probably over $1000 per year. So basically you are saying that the 2nd amendment is only there for people who can afford it.

Tell me again, what is your position on requiring a $10 ID to vote?

Is it an infringement by government to require a license to be a doctor, a contractor or to drive a car? No more so than to license someone who wants to own/possess a gun. In fact the doctor and the contractor, et al, need to prove competence by passing a test and too carry insurance!

Your argument that the second cannot be infringed in such a manner is specious at best, for guns do kill people as do drivers, doctors and contractors.

Grow the hell up and quit being such a whiner. Gun control can when properly administrated reduce the number of deaths and injuries as have seat belts and other laws and regulations have done.

There is no constitutional promise that you can be a doctor or drive a car.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What a non partisan Congress would do is to have a full and open investigation on the security of the voting method in every state, making as sure as possible that every eligible to vote citizen is allowed to vote, and that no hacking or any other means of tampering the results can be accomplished.

What a non partisan Attorney General in every state, and the new AG in the cabinet in an independent investigation, ought to do is to have a full and open investigation on the voting means and security in all states and in the District.

What a non partisan Supreme Court must do is repeal both CU decisions, first thing on the first week of Oct. 2017.

Sadly, non partisans no longer exist, and the new Executive, the New Congress and (presumably) the new Supreme Court will be more partisan than any government in our nation's history.

Clearly we need a national photo ID and maybe a Baghdad purple finger fool proof election system

 

[theHawk]

"election hacking" The same shit lefty dumbfucks said couldn't happen?

IT'S NOT CHEATING UNTIL WE LOSE!!!

To the collection of Republican zipperheads:

It's not hacking into Board of Elections databases, it's the hacking of the DNC database. Then using hacked information to INFLUENCE the election.

You were primed and loaded to dispute what your boy called a 'rigged system' had he lost. But, with a victory, you are ready willing and able to overlook the foreign influence on an American election. And by the Russians to boot!

Would you tolerate such influence in free elections? Would you be tolerant of Russian interference had your boy lost? Can we finally reasonably call you hypocrites or ignorant based on your attitude on this issue?

The idiots in the DNC left themselves open for attack. They were dumb enough to click on maleware links. That is not the same as being hacked by a foreign government. The information gathered was released on Wikileaks. If the Dems were so ashamed of their own acts, then they should had used better security for their email. They were stupid, they showed the whole world how utterly corrupt they are with their own words. How is it any less unfair than using a recording without the consent of the person being recorded? We don't hear you lefties crying about how that was used to influence the election against Trump.

Bottom line is all the "hacking" of the DNC did was inform people of the truth. Naturally only progressives would be upset about that. Spewing lies about Trump sexually assaulting women, or not paying his taxes though, well that's all ok.

 

[Nosmo King]

A couple points need to be made here.

One, free, fair and open elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. Foreign interference no matter the motivation, outcome and cannot be tolerated.

Two, Trump sang loud and clear about a 'rigged system' yet today he is refuting that claim and demeaning the intelligence officials for making their report. Is he digging a credibility hole for himself with not only the intelligence community but the American people?

Three, we all knew that both Trump and Clinton were horrible choices to fill the Oval Office. But his supporters seem all too quickly to forget anf forgive any and all problems he himself has caused.

 

[TNHarley]

Two, Trump sang loud and clear about a 'rigged system' yet today he is refuting that claim and demeaning the intelligence officials for making their report. Is he digging a credibility hole for himself with not only the intelligence community but the American people?

.

And when he was doing that the left was like "nu-uh"
Now what?