OMG! Hillary has a paid army of internet shills!

[320 Years of History]

If you have legitimate reasons, reasons more substantive than pure conjecture, for thinking there is coordination between any given candidate and a Super PAC, you are withholding material evidence about the commission of a crime. Have you more to go on than speculation? If so, by all means, share your information with the FEC and IRS; they are the ones who need it, not us.

Some methods of classic logic are very legit but not admissible as evidence in a court.

The patterns of behavior involved here demonstrate conspiracy, corruption and collusion across multiple professions and institutions that are supposed to be neutral, objective and primarily purposed to defending the publics interest instead of multinational corporations.

Red:
No methods of logic are submitted as evidence at trial unless the method itself is evidence of something that happened; evidence consists only of facts about events that occurred, testimony given by people, and objects. Methods of logic are used to substantiate attestations of guilt or not guilty. Methods of logic are used to "connect the dots" of the evidence. Fallacious methods of logic are generally objected to by attorneys, but that doesn't mean that they do so, nor does it mean that when they do so, the judge will sustain the objection.

Blue:
Actually, patterns of behavior go to intent. It's the actual behavior itself that demonstrates "conspiracy, corruption and collusion."

 

[louie888]

The absolutely ridiculous headless-chicken-like scrambling has not only been a real hoot to watch, but also proves this thread's truth.

Thanks all around.

 

[louie888]

BOTTOM LINE:

Hillary's paid trolls are an embarrassment to this country.

Even Kerry figured this out...

John Kerry blasts Trump and Hillary Clinton for humiliating America during US election | Daily Mail Online

Of course he has no problem bombing schools and hospitals... what an asshole.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Blue:
Actually, patterns of behavior go to intent. It's the actual behavior itself that demonstrates "conspiracy, corruption and collusion."

And taking hammers to a dozen cell phones and bleachbitting 33,000+ subpoena'd emails does not speak to intent?

roflmao

 

[320 Years of History]

Blue:
Actually, patterns of behavior go to intent. It's the actual behavior itself that demonstrates "conspiracy, corruption and collusion."

And taking hammers to a dozen cell phones and bleachbitting 33,000+ subpoena'd emails does not speak to intent?

roflmao

It ambiguously speaks to intent of some sort, yes. Does it speak to intent to violate Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act? No. Physically destroying the phones and "bleachbitting" them most vividly speaks to the intent to ensure that the information the phones cannot be obtained by others.

I have not seen any evidence indicates that the 33K emails that were subpoenaed were digitally destroyed. As far as I know, the subpoena was for work related emails. I haven't seen evidence that the 33K messages that were destroyed were or were not work related. Also, I've not seen evidence proving the deletion occurred after the subpoena was issued. Have you? If so, most importantly with regard to the temporal aspect, please do share.

 

[kaz]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Let them waste their money. Every liberal on these boards parrots the DNC. Why are they paying a few people to do what the rest of them do for free?

 

[FA_Q2]

Blue:
Actually, patterns of behavior go to intent. It's the actual behavior itself that demonstrates "conspiracy, corruption and collusion."

And taking hammers to a dozen cell phones and bleachbitting 33,000+ subpoena'd emails does not speak to intent?

roflmao

It ambiguously speaks to intent of some sort, yes. Does it speak to intent to violate Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act? No. Physically destroying the phones and "bleachbitting" them most vividly speaks to the intent to ensure that the information the phones cannot be obtained by others.

I have not seen any evidence indicates that the 33K emails that were subpoenaed were digitally destroyed. As far as I know, the subpoena was for work related emails. I haven't seen evidence that the 33K messages that were destroyed were or were not work related. Also, I've not seen evidence proving the deletion occurred after the subpoena was issued. Have you? If so, most importantly with regard to the temporal aspect, please do share.

Then you have not been paying attention. It has already been proven that many of the missing emails were work related and Comey directly stated such. They recovered thousands of work emails that had been deleted in various ways.

As far as when they were deleted, that is less cut and dry.

 

[320 Years of History]

Blue:
Actually, patterns of behavior go to intent. It's the actual behavior itself that demonstrates "conspiracy, corruption and collusion."

And taking hammers to a dozen cell phones and bleachbitting 33,000+ subpoena'd emails does not speak to intent?

roflmao

It ambiguously speaks to intent of some sort, yes. Does it speak to intent to violate Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act? No. Physically destroying the phones and "bleachbitting" them most vividly speaks to the intent to ensure that the information the phones cannot be obtained by others.

I have not seen any evidence indicates that the 33K emails that were subpoenaed were digitally destroyed. As far as I know, the subpoena was for work related emails. I haven't seen evidence that the 33K messages that were destroyed were or were not work related. Also, I've not seen evidence proving the deletion occurred after the subpoena was issued. Have you? If so, most importantly with regard to the temporal aspect, please do share.

Then you have not been paying attention. It has already been proven that many of the missing emails were work related and Comey directly stated such. They recovered thousands of work emails that had been deleted in various ways.

As far as when they were deleted, that is less cut and dry.

Red:
Okay...I can at least accept that may be so. The "email-gate" matter has been so ridiculously in need of very precise articulation -- largely because of how Mrs. Clinton handled it from square one -- that I know I may have lost track of "what's what." What I didn't lose track of is the nature and extent of actus rea and mens rea that must be shown and Gorin's role in that regard. Once I understood the legal theory on mens rea, I moved on because that theory and its relevance isn't going to change anytime soon.

Blue:
Well, if they knew when the deletion occurred, the government's ability to show intent applicable to "something," although that something may or may not be intent to violate 793(f), would become far closer to "cut and dried." AFAIK, however, the government do not know when the deletions happened; thus there's not much point in talking about what it would mean if they had in the past or might in future.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It ambiguously speaks to intent of some sort, yes. Does it speak to intent to violate Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act? No. Physically destroying the phones and "bleachbitting" them most vividly speaks to the intent to ensure that the information the phones cannot be obtained by others.

I have not seen any evidence indicates that the 33K emails that were subpoenaed were digitally destroyed. As far as I know, the subpoena was for work related emails. I haven't seen evidence that the 33K messages that were destroyed were or were not work related. Also, I've not seen evidence proving the deletion occurred after the subpoena was issued. Have you? If so, most importantly with regard to the temporal aspect, please do share.

You are avoiding the obvious conclusions and yes, people have been convicted of negligence without proving intent, which is the nature of negligence laws. And no I am not going to read up on that law you keep talking about. Why? Because there are many OTHER laws on negligence and it is not worth my time to pursue something that is patently obvious to anyone with any sense, except of course a lawyer.

Are you a lawyer?

Clinton and her minions have destroyed subpoena'd evidence and that is a crime, Period, whether she had 'intent' or not is obvious. She had intent to destroy government documents which is illegal. She had intent to obstruct justice by not complying with the subpoenas. She lied repeatedly to the FBI about the whole matter repeatedly, which is not only indicative of intent but also is itself illegal.

You have not one leg to stand on but you will keep arguing this point to the horizon of Reason and Sanity and beyond to protect this criminal bitch who is part of the worst criminal syndicate to ever run for the Presidency in our nations history.

You should be ashamed of yourself, but you wont be. No Clintonista has a shred of shame left in them.

 

[rightwinger]

I am still under contract to Obama until mid January

I have not seen the rates that Clinton will be offering but I hear she is offering a significant bonus to experienced message board posters

I have talked to some paid message board posters who signed on with Trump. They are worried that he will stiff them and refuse to pay what was contracted for

 

[320 Years of History]

It ambiguously speaks to intent of some sort, yes. Does it speak to intent to violate Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act? No. Physically destroying the phones and "bleachbitting" them most vividly speaks to the intent to ensure that the information the phones cannot be obtained by others.

I have not seen any evidence indicates that the 33K emails that were subpoenaed were digitally destroyed. As far as I know, the subpoena was for work related emails. I haven't seen evidence that the 33K messages that were destroyed were or were not work related. Also, I've not seen evidence proving the deletion occurred after the subpoena was issued. Have you? If so, most importantly with regard to the temporal aspect, please do share.

You are avoiding the obvious conclusions and yes, people have been convicted of negligence without proving intent, which is the nature of negligence laws. And no I am not going to read up on that law you keep talking about. Why? Because there are many OTHER laws on negligence and it is not worth my time to pursue something that is patently obvious to anyone with any sense, except of course a lawyer.

Are you a lawyer?

Clinton and her minions have destroyed subpoena'd evidence and that is a crime, Period, whether she had 'intent' or not is obvious. She had intent to destroy government documents which is illegal. She had intent to obstruct justice by not complying with the subpoenas. She lied repeatedly to the FBI about the whole matter repeatedly, which is not only indicative of intent but also is itself illegal.

You have not one leg to stand on but you will keep arguing this point to the horizon of Reason and Sanity and beyond to protect this criminal bitch who is part of the worst criminal syndicate to ever run for the Presidency in our nations history.

You should be ashamed of yourself, but you wont be. No Clintonista has a shred of shame left in them.

no I am not going to read up on that law you keep talking about. Why? Because there are many OTHER laws on negligence

The specific law Dir. Comey considered that Mrs. Clinton may have violated, Section 793(f) of the Espionage Act, is one for which the SCOTUS has provided an explicit ruling (Gorin) indicating that intent is required to be shown. That means Gorin is the one SCOTUS decision you should read to become informed about what is and is not required re: 793(f).

Even though you are unwilling to read that decision, the prosecutors and judge who would participate in a trial in which a defendant is charged in connection with 793(f) will have read it, and they will have no choice but to apply it, even though you are unwilling to do so. Whereas you are indeed free to prattle on interminably and ignorantly of Gorin, judges and attorneys handling cases relevant to it have no such leeway.

Individuals who examine Gorin and other cases brought under 793(f) would, as the legal editor of Fortune did, find seven relevant civilian prosecutions under it. (There are cases of individuals having been charged with violating 793(f), but they plead guilty -- either to 793(f) violations or to other crimes -- thus there was no prosecution.)

• A case involving “larceny” of a notebook marked “SECRET,”
• A case in which a sailor “stuffed the document down his pants front and walked out of the building with it”;
• A case whereby an airman took classified photos home because he found them “amusing”;
• A case in which a longtime custodian of classified records, who had actually taught courses on the subject, intentionally took home 311 classified items to use as “personal reference material”;
• A case in which an Air Force serviceman, whose job required him to destroy classified documents in a prescribed manner, took the materials home instead and just tossed them in a dumpster, where they were discovered by children. He had also filed false reports attesting that he had disposed of the documents properly.
• United States v. Rickie L. Roller: In 1989, a Marine Corps sergeant was working in a secured area where he habitually, and lawfully, placed classified material in his desk. After some nasty run-ins with his superior, he was transferred. On his last day, packing his office, he threw a bunch of personal effects from his desk into a gym bag including, as it happens, several classified documents, some of which were Top Secret. A few weeks later, he discovered the classified materials. Fearing reprimand, he hid them in his garage. He planned, he later testified, to destroy them when he got to his next duty station. When he did move to the new location, however, the professional movers helping him came across the classified documents. They notified the authorities. After a search, the remaining documents were found. Roller was sentenced to five years, which was commuted to 10 months confinement.
  
• United States v. Arthur E. Gonzalez: In February 1979, an Air Force staff sergeant took a trip to visit an oil worker friend in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. When he arrived, he discovered that he’d inadvertently intermingled two Top Secret messages with some personal mail he’d taken. He put the documents in a desk drawer in his friend’s room, intending to pick them up when he returned to his squadron. When he departed on February 25, however, he forgot the documents, leaving them in the desk. Gonzalez’s friend shared the room with another oil worker, with each occupying it on alternate weeks. In early March, the other oil worker discovered the documents, gave it to his oil company supervisor, who gave it to the Air Force authorities. Gonzalez was sentenced to five months confinement, which was commuted to 43 days.

Are you a lawyer?

I am a CPA, which means I have a general understanding of how the law works. One of the ways in which the law works is that regardless of whether some thing did in fact exist -- in this case, intent -- there must also be convincing evidence of its existence. The lawyer James Comey asserted that convincing evidence did not exist as of last July.

But, no, I am not an attorney, which is I why I have referenced and relied upon analysis offered by people who are. For example:

• WHY INTENT, NOT GROSS NEGLIGENCE, IS THE STANDARD IN CLINTON CASE
  
• ‘Extreme Carelessness’ is Not Enough to Indict Clinton

Clinton and her minions have destroyed subpoena'd evidence and that is a crime, Period, whether she had 'intent' or not is obvious. She had intent to destroy government documents which is illegal.

Well, I bid you advise the FBI and DOJ that Mrs. Clinton be prosecuted not for 793(f) violations, but rather for obstruction of justice.

 

[toxicmedia]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

 

[ChrisL]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

It's probably a minimum wage job.

 

[toxicmedia]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

It's probably a minimum wage job.

Still better than the big $0 I get paid for posting on this old site

 

[rightwinger]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

 

[toxicmedia]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

I'm calling Hillary's people!

I'm already putting up with the ridiculous posters on this board.

Been doin' that since 08 I think...a little long in the tooth

 

[rightwinger]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

I'm calling Hillary's people!

I'm already putting up with the ridiculous posters on this board.

Been doin' that since 08 I think...a little long in the tooth

It's not as easy as it appears

You have to serve an apprenticeship where you make no money. Once you hit the big time, the money just rolls in

 

[ChrisL]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

You must bring in like $2.50 an hour. Lol.

 

[rightwinger]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

You must bring in like $2.50 an hour. Lol.

I get $5 a post and $1000 for every poster I turn into the Internet Police. I also get $25 every time someone gives me one of those "funny" smilies

 

[ChrisL]

If Hitler and Stalin had the internet, they would do this too. I can't believe that this is going on in America. It's shameful!

And this is verified by MULTIPLE sources:

Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

Hillary PAC Spends $1 Million to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Million Dollar Professional Internet Troll Army

A former paid “Internet troll” for Clinton speaks out: It was “nasty” and “left a very bad taste” (UPDATED)

BUSTED: Pro-Clinton Super PAC Caught Spending $1 Million on Social Media Trolls

KING: Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online

Be nice to Hillary Clinton online — or risk a confrontation with her super PAC

This is crazy!

Where do I apply?

You mean I coulda got paid for this shit???

Being a paid messageboard poster is not as glamorous as it appears. Sure, chicks go crazy over you, but you got to put up with the ridiculous posts on this board

You must bring in like $2.50 an hour. Lol.

I get $5 a post and $1000 for every poster I turn into the Internet Police. I also get $25 every time someone gives me one of those "funny" smilies

Come on, your posts aren't worth more than 50 cents a pop.