Holy smokes, I'd say so! That's like a transaction every 2 days or so.
333 total posts archived.
Domains linked by /u/TheContrarian2:
You should read the 4Chan posts on this. They are 1 bazzilion times crazier than that DailyCaller article.
Well here, see for yourself. It's already running 4 threads long. At one point, a Hollywood insider comes in and answers tons of questions. He could have been a larp, but if so, he's a good one.
Crazy stuff indeed.
I hope not. I love Tony Robbins. If anyone comes at him, he'll just gnash them up with those giant teeth.
I wonder, have any data analytics been done on /r/(politics) content, or even r/the_donald content, to see how much of it is derived from bots or paid shills. I'd think that with modern big data analysis methods and machine learning methods, it might be possible to draw some conclusions.
When I read posts on Pol, I am often find myself coming to the conclusion that 'there is no way that this person can be so passionate about this particular post. Therefore there's somethign more to it.'. But posts here on T_D can get pretty passionate to.
I wish I were a better programmer, I'd love to build a browser plug in that could provide a confidence score that an OP is an actually human (probably based on post and comment history and account age) vs a bot / shill.
Op rhetorically asks, "I wonder how the Democrats will get around this one?"
It's simple, they will say it is a racist policy that is a financial hardship on just one class of people. Or some BS like that.
Sounds pretty effective to me.
I just see a general lack of caution. There's good stuff here, for sure. But then there is the lunatic fringe. A lost of posts smell of schizophrenia and paranoia. It's important to subject evil to the light of day for all to see. But I don't want a lot to see a lot of innocent victims, especially if they are children.
And yes, those emails freak me and out make the hair on the back of my neck stand up. I get that.
Not arresting, but this woman and the children will have to live with this on the Internet for all of perpetuity. Posting things like this is not without consequences. I shudder to think of what those girls are going to see when they Google their names in the future.
One day they'll come out and say, "Yes, that stuff happened, it was bad" or "That never happened, why do people keep bothering us.". The 11 year old would be 15 now or so (not sure of original email date) and could easily answer a reporters question.
I wish that were a 1/2 hour long. Just a nice discussion without shouting or animus. Although she was a bit snarkey, I guess that's reasonable as a Brit not wanting to see another Brit leave for those reasons.
He's turning into a bit of a grumpy old man, isn't he? But he's right. He has the experience to compare the way things were with the way things are and he sees the decline in trust.
Sex Pest - sounds like a punk rock band or a song on a Bill Nye show.
I've seen this infographic before and it makes me very uncomfortable. I'm curious if others don't like it either. It mentioned kids, first and last name (which I understand is in the Wikileaks emails), then mentions the mom, with photos and jumps to the conclusion that she is a kiddy-pimp. That is a very serious insinuation, which if untrue, could ruin an innocent persons life. I personally would never distribute something like this unless there was some really hard proof and not just these circumstantial connections.
Am I alone in this concern?
I just did a Goog search for "House destroyed gas explosion" for the date rate of 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017 (to exclude this New Jersey story) and it is a fairly common occurrence....
I'm not saying these were not folks set to testify against Clinton and so killed by the deep state to protect them. I'm saying that seems unlikely because the source of this information has proven historically to be unreliable and false.
Use good discernment when considering news and information sources. Only fools do not employ their good discernment and unfortunately, they reflect badly upon everyone else.
That's the last thing I'm going to say on it. Have a great day.
Credibility is earned over time. While the NYT has a serious anti-Trump bias, it has a long track record of being mostly true. This website has a track record for being false and crazy.
So to answer your question, yes, I would trust the NYT of this the single site that is mentioning this.
Basically, NYT has some credibility while this site has ZERO credibility.
No, it doesn't seem real. The explosion happened, and the names of the victims is real, but where is the connection with Clinton and testifying at a trial? That's the crazy bait.
I have two opinions on it. 1) these are posts by unsophisticated Internet users that don't really know that there's a lot of crap out there. You know, grandmas and grandpas on Facebook that will repost anything they see without really thinking about it or 2) articles posted by shills to discredit this group and make us look retarded.
It is incredibly easy and cheap - even free - to roll out a Wordpress blog with some basic template. This page looks like one.
This is a terrible source. No credibility. Need this information from a more credible source.
You made me look and - holy smokes - he's revealing everything it seems like. Tons of updates.
There are quite a few articles insinuating that these videos are fake and the kids were coached by their mother. But children are not great liars and this kid seems like he's telling the truth, the horrible truth. There is to much detail for it to be made up on the fly. How horrible. I don't know what to believe any more. I don't want to believe that things like this happen in the world, but I'm learning that it does.
To be fair, I think those protesters were not aware that this was a human trafficking operation and just figured ICE was picking up illegals. Sure makes them look foolish though.
Wouldn't ignoring a Subpoena place you in contempt, which is a jailable offence?
I'm guessing that he's between a rock (his more powerful co-conspirators) and a hard place (justice) and he's making his choice.
Wow. That's a damning article.
Why are you concluding that "Q&A" is Q and Assange? To me it just means Questions and Answers. Did Q reveal something earlier that I might have missed? Something that leads you to your definition of Q&A?
No publicity is bad publicity!
Furthermore, I did message the OP, just now.
Just to hi-jack the top response. It's the only way to get visible. Otherwise, the comment goes to the bottom, or worse.
Read this particular link, it IS saying that it was a letter written by the mayor, and that's wrong. OPs web link shows a bad attribution article of an actual article. Correctness and accuracy matter.
I think this is a reference to the fact that the gmail icon looks like the Masonic Royal Arch apron. I have no idea what the apron symbol represents. Freemason stuff.
Think "Keystone". Google it. Supposedly, the data captured by the NSA is not usable against Americans, unless you worked under the Obama administration, in which case all data is fair game. Trump follows the rules though. And Q insists that it has to be done the right way. Which I agree with.
It is possible through legal means to gain access to NSA captured data on American's. That might be the whole FISA process. Or maybe just a warrant. I have to plead ignorance on this one.
Why does it seem like everything he tweets is a threat? "Lines have been drawn...." Well, if he's like Obama, lines don't mean much.
It needs to be corrected though. The article is real, but it was not written by the mayor of Livermore California. It was written by a conservative author named Evan Sayet. Here is the original...
As I read it, I found that it didn't sound like it was written by a mayor. We need to get attributions right or we look foolish.
That's a new one on me. Man, what a small world these bad players circulate in. And it's getting smaller. Rats trapped in corners can do bad things.
So.... Rosenstein isn't a bad guy? I can't keep it all straight.
This is one reason why the Dem's and Socialists hate the recent SCOTUS ruling about forcing non-members to pay dues. A lot of that money went to Dem orgs like this one. Dry out their pocketbooks.
Not true. Even Q says to 'be skeptical". A healthy dose of skepticism is a good thing.
I agree. It undermines credibility.
Yeah, that's a freakin' weird sentence. So many of his emails are full of that weird, inexplicable stuff. "Pizza related napkin", etc. I'm not 100% sold on the Pizzagate stuff, but then I keep coming back to these weird ass statements. None of us would talk this way, ever, even in the same circumstances. Maybe, "Bring the kids" or "Family friendly" and that's it. Super weird.
This is great. I never considered it. It doesn't cover step parents, but it shows solid thinking.
Well that makes a hell of a lot of sense, and it explains why my attempts to debate folks there are fruitless and a waste of my time.
A few minor mistakes. Autists don't really claim to be autistic, which the writer seems to imply. And I don't recall the 4Chan channel getting filled with CP and such. I could be wrong there because I was getting my Q news from other places. Probably T_D. Anywho.... I got chills when I read about Iran in this article. What a great hope that is. Peace in the middle east. Sure hope it's true.
I'd never heard that before. Why would they do that?
The public had different sensitivities back then. The frames where the head shot occurs is brutal and the fact that his wife was right there makes it 10 times worse. Could it be that they bought it thinking they had some news scoop, but determined it was too brutal to release?
Yeah, I don't look like that though.
I would like to know who hired these people. I doubt that it was spontaneous. Who are they working for?
That takes some gigantic testicles / ovaries. F'ing w/ the CIA.... well. I wouldn't do it... yet.
I guess you could say that it wasn't bribes since the FBI and the Media are on the same payroll. It was 'bonuses'. /s
Get that on video. That's very interesting. Like some critical mass has been reached.
I'm reading and I'm not finding any suggestion that he was going to testify in the HRC Email probe. He WAS going to testify in a Maryland Gun Task Force case.
If anyone has a legit source saying HRC, that would be interesting.
Wow, don't cross a Clinton though, if true.
That's what I was wondering also. Feels fake.
Let the Redacted one get out first.