USA Election '16

Lux of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish.

Who will you vote for this Novermber in the United States of America Presidental contest?

1 - Trump - Republican Party
5
24%
2 - Hillary Clinton - Democratic Party
6
29%
3 - Bernie Sanders - Independent/Caucuses with Democratic Party in the senate
5
24%
4- Gary Johnson - Libertarian Party
2
10%
5 - Jill Stein - Green Party
1
5%
6 - Other
0
No votes
7 - None of the above
1
5%
8 - Staying home rather than vote in this circus!
1
5%
 
Total votes: 21

User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Wed Jul 13, 2016 6:04 pm

ACTUALLY, Sasquatch, waiting around for a MeteorITE is the SHEEP's way. The TRUE American will launch himself into space and find a meteor and then land on it, plant a flag, set up rockets to aim it towards Earth, and only THEN take his helmet off to die of asphyxiation.

User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:38 am

Sanders votes whited out
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There is the link to the last quote I posted S&A. full disclosure two of the end paragraphs I added in from other sources/stories on other research I was doing on Election Fraud. However I am pleased to see that finally Congress is set to pick apart that sham of a charity called "the Clinton Foundation"! It's years overdue really...

Is the Clinton Foundation a fraud?


As national security analyst and writer Patrick Poole said in May, "These regimes are buying access. ... There are massive conflicts of interest. It's beyond comprehension."

It took Wall Street financial analyst and investment advisor Charles Ortel -- whom the Sunday Times of London once described as "one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet" -- to untangle the mess in a series of ongoing reports. Ortel alleges that contribution disclosures by the foundation often don't fit with what donors' own records say -- big red flag.

"This," Ortel summed up, "is a charity fraud."

As a reminder, this isn't just some political vendetta. As far back as 2013, an alarmed New York Times warned that the foundation had become "a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest."

It turns out that's a gross understatement.

Testifying last week to Congress, FBI chief James Comey called Hillary Clinton "extremely careless" about her use of a private email server while secretary of state. But, curiously, he refused additional comment "on the existence or nonexistence of any other ongoing investigations." This needs to be disclosed. Americans deserve to know whether the person they're likely to put into the White House this November is merely a misunderstood career public servant -- or a pocket-lining career criminal.
Not even back in the WH and already scandal looms months b4 the Election. 8)

p.s. Clinton does best where voting machines flunk hacking tests
At the end of the climactic scene (8 minutes) in HBO’s Emmy nominated Hacking Democracy (2006), a Leon County, Florida Election official breaks down in tears. “There are people out there who are giving their lives just to try to make our elections secure,” she says. “And these vendors are lying and saying everything is alright.” Hundreds of jurisdictions throughout the United States are using voting machines or vote tabulators that have flunked security tests. Those jurisdictions by and large are where former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is substantially outperforming the first full wave of exit polling in her contest against Senator Bernie Sanders.

User avatar
Shockandawe
Lux Vigilante
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:33 am
Location: In orbit around Kerbin.

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Shockandawe » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:23 am

Again you've linked to a website that, as far as I can tell, has no credible sources. A youtube video of people talking doesn't prove anything. They could have grabbed anyone off the street.

There are plenty of legitimate areas to dislike or attack Hillary on. Chasing fantastical theories in pursuit of a miracle for Bernie is only going to get you ignored.

His campaign was run terribly at a local level. Just look at how they handled their delegates in Colorado. Many didn't volunteer to be or down right didn't know they'd been chosen.

User avatar
camaro
Lux Demon
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:33 pm
Location: WV, United States
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by camaro » Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:33 pm


User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:10 pm

The biggest lie, Clinton vs Espionage Act
As you can see, despite attempts by the Democratic Party and the majority of Clinton supporters to portray the Espionage Act as an arcane, byzantine law that remains completely incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t passed the bar – both of these subsections (and indeed the entire act) are written in language simple enough for your average armed forces officer to understand; likely by necessity when you consider how often non-lawyers are required to handle sensitive material in various branches of the US military. There are however, a few important legal distinctions to note here.

The first, and arguably most important thing to observe here is that virtually everything in this subsection references defense information and or materials important to the national defense. What this means in practical terms is that we’re not merely talking about standard classified information, but rather the most important secrets the United States has in terms of national security – things like Special Access Program information, data from spy satellites or NSA Intelligence reports containing signals intelligence (intercepted transmissions) about foreign leaders. This is important not only because the sheer, obvious sensitivity of this material speaks to the seriousness of this crime, but also because anyone with the proper security clearance to actually view such information would undoubtedly know it was classified or at least be aware that they were legally required to confirm it’s classification level before storing/sharing it on an insecure, private server. I am well aware that Mrs Clinton disputes this point and that for reasons utterly unfathomable to anyone familiar with legal practices in general, Comey has decided to take her word for it; as you’ll see throughout the course of this article however, this idea strains credulity to the point of snapping.

In reference to subsection D, the statute requires that the offender willfully communicate, deliver or transmit defense information “the possessor has reason to believe could be harmful to the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation” with literally any person not authorized to receive it. Please note that while the term willfully in this subsection clearly speaks to the concept of intent, that intent is not necessarily the intent to harm the government or aid foreign nations – merely the intent to share the information with someone not authorized to receive the defense information in question. This too has been a major point of contention among famous Democrats with law degrees who almost certainly should know better; if Clinton had actually intended to harm the United States we’d be talking about Treason charges as well! Finally, it should be remembered that this particular subsection requires that Clinton actually shared the information in question with someone unauthorized to see it (although it does not require them to have actually seen it) – as opposed to merely moving/copying the sensitive information and storing it in an insecure location.

Subsection F is a little more complicated as it contains two separate clauses; including the “through gross negligence” article that Comey focused on almost exclusively in order to misdirect viewers away from the clearly intentional crimes Clinton committed. While it is in fact true that any reasonable person watching this case could easily conclude that Clinton’s behavior represented a “careless disregard for and blatant indifference to her legal duties” in regards to securing and storing classified information; the simple truth is that there is no strict definition of gross negligence available in our legal system and the typical standard used appears to be “more careless than even a normal careless person.” The highly subjective nature of this determination remains a vital part of Comey’s notably irregular excuse for failing to recommend Mrs Clinton be indicted under the Espionage Act – one might of course wonder if that wasn’t in fact a determination better left in the hands of a Judge, but in Comey’s fantastic new legal system prosecutors are apparently required to perform the duties of council, judge and jury before ever bringing a case to trial.

This then leaves us with the second and surprisingly even more damning clause that roughly states that if a person entrusted with classified defense information becomes aware that said information has been moved or “delivered to anyone in violation of it’s trust” they are required to immediately report the breach to their superior officer; which in Hillary Clinton’s case would be the President of the United States.

Building the Case for Indictment

At this point, if you’ve been clicking along with the links I’ve already provided, you probably realize that Hillary Clinton is without question, guilty of willfully violating multiple subsections of the Espionage Act on both a felony and a misdemeanor level.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where the media has already picked the next President of the United States and where the director of the FBI can re-write law to protect that soon-to-be President – despite being neither a judge nor the actual, final prosecutor of a potential indictment. No, seriously folks, Comey’s original roll in this investigation was (and remained) simply to advise Attorney General Loretta Lynch re: a possible indictment; even after Lynch’s bizarre and ethically questionable decision to accept the FBI’s recommendation before she even knew what it was to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

Regardless, let’s take the whole thing once more from the top in the form of a question and answer period because I’m honestly starting to wonder if the people who don’t get it are f'ing brain-dead:

Did Hillary Clinton have an unauthorized, private email server that she never reported to her direct superior; President Obama?

Yes, actually she had multiple private servers and devices during her time as Secretary of State. Furthermore this arrangement was absolutely not allowed by the State Department and at no point in time did she inform President Obama that she had set up the Server for literally all of her State Department business – she absolutely never even opened a secure, state.gov account. Keep this last point in mind because it’s going to come up again when we talk about intent, I assure you.

Was there classified data stored on/transmitted through that unauthorized server and if so, was it really serious classified or just over-classification/up-classification after the fact?

Yes, there was a literal metric F--kton of classified data on Clinton’s email server regardless of who you ask. Furthermore, a significant portion of the data was extremely f'ing classified and among the most important secrets the United States maintains – including signals and human intelligence our operatives no doubt risked their lives to obtain. One such email from inexplicably (and possibly illegally) highly-paid longtime Clinton ghoul Sid Blumethal contained extremely sensitive information from four separate NSA reports including the full transcript of a conversation between foreign leaders in the region and recorded only twenty-four hours before!

:panic:

User avatar
Shockandawe
Lux Vigilante
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:33 am
Location: In orbit around Kerbin.

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Shockandawe » Thu Jul 14, 2016 8:11 pm

If there's one thing the Bernie supporters have been good at....

it's been making rabid Trump supporters seem rational.

User avatar
camaro
Lux Demon
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:33 pm
Location: WV, United States
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by camaro » Thu Jul 14, 2016 9:56 pm

yea god damn those people in france for being white... plane crazy thing those white bastards got what they deserved... how dare any one be WHITE>>>>@!!!!!!!

User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:37 am

FBI Agents sign strange NDA for Clinton "investigation"

Yes because actually examining the facts and evidence is so illogical and absurd S&A. Where there is smoke there is fire, frankly not only are her pants on fire & at this point her nose is now longer than Pinocchio's ever was! Why do diehard democrats not add up the facts and see her for the political power hungry monster that she is? How many laws does she break before she or her infamous husband are held to any sort of account? 0? 100 more? It must be nice that all the people in charge of the "Investigations" have connections to the Clinton's going back for years... How about a jury of their peers instead?
FBI agents involved in the probe of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails were required to sign unusually-extensive nondisclosure agreements — forcing them into silence unless they’re called to testify in the matter. FBI insiders surmised there may have been an ‘inside deal.’

“This is very, very unusual,” said an unnamed, retired FBI chief, cited by the New York Post. “I’ve never signed one, never circulated one to others.”

According to the Post’s anonymous ‘sources,’ these “Case Briefing Acknowledgement” forms went beyond the nondisclosure agreements agents initially sign in order to gain security clearance.

“I have never heard of such a form,” an FBI agent currently on the job told the Post. “Sounds strange.”

But suspicions didn’t stop there.

“FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting,” said another unnamed, unverified source

That meeting between the Attorney General and former President took place at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor International Airport on board a private plane parked on the tarmac. Though both Bill and Hillary Clinton scoffed at the immediate controversy over the meeting — downplaying rendezvous as nothing more than a cordial get-together — grumblings over a virtually undeniable conflict of interest have persisted.

A gas bomb further ignited flames of contention, when just days after the meeting, Department of Justice officials announced a not-at-all suspicious 27-month delay in the release of another batch of emails from Hillary’s private server.

That dubious postponement conveniently pushed the release date to October 2018 — nearly halfway through a theoretical Clinton first term in the White House.

Further, a nation already highly suspicious of Hillary’s foxlike ability to continue her bid for the presidency while under federal investigation for several areas of possible criminal activity hardened into cynicism when FBI Director James Comey announced the agency wouldn’t recommend charges.

In that statement, Comey — intentionally or not — ran through a laundry list of actual crimes Clinton committed, essentially rewriting federal law based on ‘intent’ in order to grant her de facto immunity from prosecution.

Centered around Section 793 of the U.S. legal code, the FBI ostensibly investigated whether or not classified information had been transmitted over the unclassified, non-secure personal server in place in the Clinton private residence.

Though Comey admitted during the announcement that even top secret information had been exchanged in this way, his argument against prosecution centered on what the FBI surmised as carelessness, instead of criminal intent — despite the law’s disregard for motivation dictating criminality.

“But Comey’s assertion, that a lack of intent creates a situation that doesn’t rise to criminal behavior, is patently false, as the statute itself criminalizes gross negligence,” The Free Thought Project’s Jay Syrmopoulos previously reported. “In essence, the FBI rewrote the law specifically for this case — deviating substantially from the intent of the law passed by Congress.”

Further still, Comey’s detailed explanation included no less than three instances directly contradicting Clinton’s sworn testimony before Congress during the inquiry on Benghazi — meaning, the mendacious former secretary of state committed perjury. Though legal repercussions of perjuring oneself before Congress might be debatable, a top presidential candidate’s veritable inability to keep multiple outright lies hidden from the public should effectively disqualify her from office.

Clinton’s Houdini-like escape from prosecution despite Comey’s damning announcement infuriated politicians, particularly in the Republican Party.

During a Congressional inquiry of Comey, another controversial revelation came to light: Clinton had not been under oath during FBI questioning — and, worse, no transcript or other recording was made.

User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Thu Jul 21, 2016 7:08 pm

Widespread allegations of election fraud and voter suppression across the United States during the 2016 Democratic Primary has sparked the interest of several academic researchers and what they discovered in their research is disturbing.

The researchers each performed independent studies in which a few different statistical was applied to analyze various subsets of vote data and of the studies came to the same conclusion.

Namely that Hillary’s win was could have only been possible a result of widespread election fraud.

In fact, one of the statistical models applied by Stanford University researcher Rodolfo Cortes Barragan to a subset of the data found that the probability of the “huge discrepancies” of which “nearly all are in favor of Hillary Clinton by a huge margin” was “statistically impossible” and that “the probability of this this happening was is 1 in 77 billion”.

Furthermore, the researchers found that the election fraud only occurred in places where the voting machines were hackable and that did not keep an paper trail of the ballots.

In these locations Hillary won by massive margins.

On the other hand, in locations that were not hackable and did keep paper trails of the ballots Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton.

Analysis also showed repeatedly irregularities and statistically impossible reverses in reported live votes in several locations across the country.

In commenting on the research, Barragan stated that some of the models are rock solid and 59 years old and the results seen here have never been witnessed in non-fraudelent election during that time period.

To summarize, at least four different independent studies were conducted with various statistical models applied.

The researchers applied the different statistical models to:

Actual vote counts as they were reported
Discrepancies in polling data verse actual counts.
Various subsets of demographic polling data verse actual vote counts

The results of each study corroborated the with the results of the others and some of the researchers have review the work of the others’ and go onto to confirm the findings in those studies.

It will take months for the studies to undergo peer review.

However, all of their research statistically proved there there must of been widespread fraud to create the discrepancies in the vote counts that exist in all 3 subsets of the data analyzed.

The research of Barragan, done collaboratively with Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands.

That research corroborates independent mathematical research conducted by Richard Charnin.

Further independent research was conducted by Beth Clarkson of Berkeley who also not only corroborated the two previous studies but reviewed them and after her research was done and confirmed their results.
1 in 77 Billion chance Clinton won without widespread fraud

User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:50 am

I know Naraku has thrown a lot of crap against the wall hoping some of it would stick but here's a REAL scandal in the Democratic Primary. http://time.com/4420912/bernie-sanders- ... n-schultz/

User avatar
Shockandawe
Lux Vigilante
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:33 am
Location: In orbit around Kerbin.

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Shockandawe » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:34 pm

Shockandawe wrote:I'm not so sure the Democratic party is as stable you thought n00.
From back in May....

The Republican Party is downright rock solid right now.

User avatar
sasquatch
Semiholy Beast
Posts: 2860
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:35 pm
Location: mountainous & wooded areas
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by sasquatch » Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:22 pm

International celebrations spontaneously erupt as Hillary Clinton becomes the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party...



:)

User avatar
Dangerous Beans
oO0-0Oo-oO0-0Oo
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: SLEEPY (MICRO NATION OF)
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Dangerous Beans » Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:37 am

:panic:

User avatar
AquaRegia
Lux Ambassador
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:20 am
Location: Lounging once more at the mods' retirement villa
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by AquaRegia » Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:25 am

sasquatch wrote:Technically, this should be "meteorite," but it still expresses the feelings of many voters...

Image
It's called a meteor while it's traversing the atmosphere, so there's nothing wrong with that IMO. I think it's reasonable - while it's no longer technically a "meteor" after it hits the ground, it makes for a more concise and compelling bumper sticker that way.

Also I want one of those.

For the record, while I'm not a huge Hillary fan (I voted Bernie in my primary), I will HAPPILY vote Hillary rather than live through "President Trump". 3rd and 4th party candidates may be wonderful people... but so was Ralph Nader, and look what HE got us.

User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:35 am

Unsafe at any speed....

User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:41 am

AquaRegia wrote:
For the record, while I'm not a huge Hillary fan (I voted Bernie in my primary), I will HAPPILY vote Hillary rather than live through "President Trump". 3rd and 4th party candidates may be wonderful people... but so was Ralph Nader, and look what HE got us.
Again with this delusional bs that Nader gave Bush the presidency; when in fact a large number of registered DEMOCRATS in FL voted for Bush not Gore. But let's blame the wise old man who was trying to express himself or otherwise help the US (again). Has your seat-belt ever saved your life or that of someone you know?

inconvenient FACTS that just don't fit into some people's worldviews/lives... :panic:
"Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush"

If one percent of these Democrats had stuck with their own candidate, Al Gore would easily have won Florida and become president. In addition, half of all registered Democrats did not even bother going to the polls and voting.

User avatar
AquaRegia
Lux Ambassador
Posts: 3721
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:20 am
Location: Lounging once more at the mods' retirement villa
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by AquaRegia » Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:42 am

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion - but I'll put more weight behind the peer-reviewed, research-based conclusions published by a group of unbiased professional university political science researchers, thanks:

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/facu ... eform9.pdf
In an election that turned on ... 537 votes in the state of Florida, the conclusion that the 97,488 Floridians who opted for liberal crusader Nader would have in his absence broken in sufficient numbers for Gore so as to reverse the election in Florida, and thus in the nation, borders on logical deduction.

We find that this common belief is justified, but our results show clearly that Nader spoiled Gore’s presidency only because the 2000 presidential race in Florida was unusually tight.
Your "inconvenient facts" about Democrats who voted for Bush are irrelevant. In an election WITHOUT Nader on the ballot, I'm sure those 200,000 people STILL would have voted for Bush. It's a specious argument - "if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle." The VARIABLE in this situation is not "disillusioned Democrats" or "Al Gore's incompetence"... it's "Nader on the ballot in November". Take Nader out of the equation, and the majority of 97,000 Nader voters break for Gore and he wins by 20,000. The statistical analysis agrees - they estimate 60% of Nader voters would have voted Gore, but in Florida in 2000, 51% would have been more than enough. Even Nader himself was quoted saying
In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all.
Result? A net 12,000+ vote advantage for Gore over Bush, and President Gore is sworn in in January.

It's a very unusual case, of course, because the margin was so razor-thin in Florida. But it illustrates a fundamental axiom about the two-party US system: if YOUR party fragments, you make your opponents' party more powerful... and the closer the election is, the bigger this effect will be. I think any real 3rd-party efforts are doomed to failure; the more voters they attract, the more likely they are to hand elections to their ideological rivals.

I'm not saying I like it - I'm just saying it seems to be the case. Writing in Bernie this year, or voting Green, is - BEST case - throwing your vote away. Nader (the 2nd most high-profile 3rd-party candidate in our lifetime, behind only Ross Perot) got 2.7% of the popular vote and zero EC votes. WORST case, of course: you usher in President Trump. HAS happened, CAN happen. Please choose wisely.

User avatar
Symbiosis
Lux Solicitor
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Boston

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Symbiosis » Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:10 am

Most of the people who would write in Bernie wouldn't vote Democrat anyway, they are mostly part of the ~40% of the US electorate that doesn't vote.

User avatar
Naraku
Lux Demon
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Naraku » Sat Aug 06, 2016 9:35 pm

I would still rather vote for someone or something that I can believe in and not get it than waste my vote on evil or someone who doesn't deserve the office they are running for!
Vote good if you want to End the endless wars that are mostly undeclared but still going boom on the otherside of the planet.

p.s. I voted for Nader in 2000 and I felt good about it then and I feel great about it now. I voted my conscience and voted for someone who would've been the BEST qualified to sit in the White House, IMHO. :smt109 :llama :lincoln:

User avatar
Llama LluxaLlot
Llux Lliaison
Posts: 5810
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:23 pm
Location: Well...here!

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Llama LluxaLlot » Mon Aug 08, 2016 6:40 pm

The current political system is like a game of Dungeons and Dragons. The Dungeon Master's job is to create a world where every nuance serves to make the world seem realistic. He or She then provides and adventure where players feel like they are making decisions and producing outcomes with autonomy. The underlying structure is made out of rules. Dice provided statistical probabilities of success and failure. Choices players make feel real.
But a good dungeon master won't let a game get too far out of control just because of rules and probability. Or, Hera forbid, bad choices by players. Narrative is still the most important aspect. Engagement and belief are supported over hard number. The Dungeon Master rules the rules.
Who is our real DungeonMaster?


Ask the Llamas. They know.

:llama :globe :smt109

User avatar
Symbiosis
Lux Solicitor
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Boston

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Symbiosis » Mon Aug 08, 2016 9:27 pm

Well, oil companies, investment banks, and the CIA are all staffed by the same rich fucks from prep school and ivy league universities, so you can start there.

User avatar
Llama LluxaLlot
Llux Lliaison
Posts: 5810
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:23 pm
Location: Well...here!

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Llama LluxaLlot » Tue Aug 09, 2016 1:40 am

Word. :torch: :torch: :torch:

User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:04 am

As an Ivy League graduate, where do i apply to get my oil-company and investment bank?? :panic: :roll: :twisted:

User avatar
Symbiosis
Lux Solicitor
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Boston

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Symbiosis » Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:08 am


User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Tue Aug 09, 2016 11:26 am

Wrong Skull and Bones. That's some Penn State rubbish. Yale's was founded in 1832.

*leaves the room*

User avatar
Symbiosis
Lux Solicitor
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Boston

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Symbiosis » Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:05 pm

I figured the real one wouldn't have a fucking web site :lol:

User avatar
Llama LluxaLlot
Llux Lliaison
Posts: 5810
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:23 pm
Location: Well...here!

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Llama LluxaLlot » Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:07 pm


User avatar
Symbiosis
Lux Solicitor
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:14 pm
Location: Boston

Re: USA Election '16

Post by Symbiosis » Wed Aug 10, 2016 8:38 am

Image

User avatar
sasquatch
Semiholy Beast
Posts: 2860
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:35 pm
Location: mountainous & wooded areas
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by sasquatch » Thu Aug 11, 2016 12:08 pm


User avatar
n00less cluebie
Lux Cantor
Posts: 8375
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
Contact:

Re: USA Election '16

Post by n00less cluebie » Wed Aug 17, 2016 4:36 pm


Post Reply