[AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Can we talk about politics yet? :P
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > Can we talk about politics yet? :P >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the > first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an > amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's > uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with > one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other > stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have > four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the > CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds > wrote: > >> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >> > > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you have a problem. Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy /sarcasm Gesendet: Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 An: af@afmug.com Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy mailto:jeremysmi...@gmail.com> > wrote: I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com> > wrote: Can we talk about politics yet? :P -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: > Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult > to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased > even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, > too. > > E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it > was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable > here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and > would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion > away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. > > Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is > minor at best but was discussed the whole time. > > I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if > media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem > than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 > reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. > > > > > > Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you > have a problem. > > > > > > > > *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy > /sarcasm > *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 > *An:* af@afmug.com > *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > > > Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively > shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. > Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live > streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press > really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more > in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current > mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of > the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither > really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report > whatever their preconceived response was either way. > > > > Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? > > > > Answer: Yes > > > > CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS > fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who > would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the > transition of power. > > > > Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day > before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous > time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. > > > > Had the same attack been authorized today: > > > > CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military > officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were > no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges > possible? > > > > Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 > ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS > surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > > I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the > first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an > amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's > uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with > one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other > stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have > four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the > CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds > wrote: > > Can we talk about politics yet? :P > > > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: > there is this gem now > http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ > 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: > >> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult >> to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased >> even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, >> too. >> >> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable >> here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and >> would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion >> away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. >> >> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is >> minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >> >> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem >> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >> >> >> >> >> >> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you >> have a problem. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy >> /sarcasm >> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >> *An:* af@afmug.com >> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> >> >> >> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively >> shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. >> Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live >> streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press >> really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more >> in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current >> mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of >> the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither >> really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report >> whatever their preconceived response was either way. >> >> >> >> Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? >> >> >> >> Answer: Yes >> >> >> >> CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS >> fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who >> would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the >> transition of power. >> >> >> >> Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day >> before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous >> time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. >> >> >> >> Had the same attack been authorized today: >> >> >> >> CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top >> military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify >> there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime >> charges possible? >> >> >> >> Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 >> ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS >> surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: >> >> I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the >> first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an >> amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's >> uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with >> one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other >> stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have >> four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the >> CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds >> wrote: >> >> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> > > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: > Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The > bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended > inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let > me Trumpspeak... So sad. > > On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < > thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> there is this gem now >> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: >> >>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult >>> to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased >>> even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, >>> too. >>> >>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >>> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable >>> here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and >>> would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion >>> away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. >>> >>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>> >>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem >>> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >>> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you >>> have a problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy >>> /sarcasm >>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>> *An:* af@afmug.com >>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>> >>> >>> >>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>> information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up >>> and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of >>> militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism >>> from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, >>> theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. >>> >>> >>> >>> Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? >>> >>> >>> >>> Answer: Yes >>> >>> >>> >>> CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS >>> fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who >>> would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the >>> transition of power. >>> >>> >>> >>> Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day >>> before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous >>> time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. >>> >>> >>> >>> Had the same attack been authorized today: >>> >>> >>> >>> CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top >>> military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify >>> there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime >>> charges possible? >>> >>> >>> >>> Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 >>> ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS >>> surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operative
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I'm amazed at the new white house press secretary flat out fucking lying about how many people were at the inauguration. What fucking balls! LOL. There is time lapse video from several sources.. pictures from previous events, etc. That said, this transition is fucking terrifying. Very few nuclear and security positions filled... That's a problem. There will be gaps of 6 months to a year before people will ever show up to work after having their names thrown in, let alone get up to speed. A lot of the people he wants confirmed it seems have _serious_ ethics issues. I actually want to give Trump a chance. I think it's the right thing to do. So far, he's breaking all of his campaign promises and not draining the swamp but making it far, far worse. The only people that have been submitted for consideration besides ole Mad Dog (great pick btw) are business associates, other billionaires and super-millionaires, etc... People that have him a lot of money for his campaign, were in business deals with him, etc. "Obama founded ISIS. He's the founder." Talks about how the policy against ISIS is terrible, he knows exactly how to handle it, etc. Then keeps the Obama strategy architect against ISIS with no plan on how to replace him. "We're going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it." American people will now be paying for said wall. "From day one, no more amnesty, we'll be rounding them up and shipping them out " (Paraphrased) No action there... "On day one we'll be cancelling Executive Orders for X" (Nothing yet...) Lock her up! Lock her up! (No going to do it...) "I'll release my tax returns" (Nope... And it may be because of the IRS, I'll give him that..) "I'll be removing myself from my business involvement" (Not quite... He's turning some functions over to his kids and then having them involved in policy mettings...) The irony of this, and how messed up it all is would be hilarious if it wasn't so terrifying. I feel like this campaign was ran on WWE style promos and done as a business decision. He's still getting settled in, but things sure aren't looking good... On Jan 22, 2017 8:43 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: > Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. > https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm. > huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 > > On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" > wrote: > >> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The >> bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> there is this gem now >>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be >>>> very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in >>>> USA is biased, too. >>>> >>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >>>> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable >>>> here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and >>>> would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion >>>> away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. >>>> >>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>> >>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem >>>> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >>>> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>> you have a problem. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Drone strikes hit today in Yemen... Just FYI :P On Jan 22, 2017 12:05 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: > Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively > shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. > Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live > streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press > really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more > in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current > mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of > the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither > really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report > whatever their preconceived response was either way. > > Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? > > Answer: Yes > > CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS > fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who > would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the > transition of power. > > Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day > before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous > time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. > > Had the same attack been authorized today: > > CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military > officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were > no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges > possible? > > Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 > ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS > surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > >> I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the >> first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an >> amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's >> uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with >> one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other >> stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have >> four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the >> CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds >> wrote: >> >>> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >>> >> >> > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. -- Original Message -- From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" To: "af@afmug.com" Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Can we talk about politics yet? :P -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Do some fact checking and research on that site :) On Jan 22, 2017 12:22 PM, "Adam Moffett" wrote: > I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ > Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" > To: "af@afmug.com" > Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively > shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. > Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live > streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press > really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more > in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current > mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of > the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither > really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report > whatever their preconceived response was either way. > > Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? > > Answer: Yes > > CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS > fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who > would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the > transition of power. > > Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day > before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous > time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. > > Had the same attack been authorized today: > > CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military > officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were > no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges > possible? > > Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 > ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS > surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > >> I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the >> first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an >> amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's >> uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with >> one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other >> stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have >> four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the >> CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds >> wrote: >> >>> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >>> >> >> > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: > Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. > https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm. > huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 > > On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" > wrote: > >> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The >> bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> there is this gem now >>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be >>>> very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in >>>> USA is biased, too. >>>> >>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >>>> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable >>>> here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and >>>> would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion >>>> away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. >>>> >>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>> >>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem >>>> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >>>> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>> you have a problem. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy >>>> /sarcasm >>>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>>> *An:* af@afmug.com >>>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>>> information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up >>>> and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of >>>> militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism >>>> from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, >>>> theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Answer: Yes >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 >>>> ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those >>>> who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the >>>> transition of power. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day >>>> before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous >>>> time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Had the same attack been authorized today: >>
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
It amazes me that an adult at the top of the political pyramid is so immature to get butt hurt over the size of crowd that showed up. Pretty sure D.C. is something like 80% black folk. Having the first black president is surely something to get stoked about if you are black, and if you live there, why not make the effort to go see the show. I wonder if there are crowd size records for all the inaugurations. I watched the young pope first two episodes. This reminds me of the second episode where the pope gets pissed because someone hit in a laser pointer. From: Adam Moffett Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:22 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. -- Original Message -- From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" To: "af@afmug.com" Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Can we talk about politics yet? :P -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
There are not official records for inaugurations for crowd sizes. They have to look at other sources of data and make best guesses. That said, each area of the National Mall is pretty well known to hold a certain number of people. It's easier when you can count the lawn squares. President Trump's inaguration crowd was absent in a lot of squares, which either means the previous inaguration counts were way too low, or that this count was estimated far too high. Either way, it's still a blatant lie that more people were there. It's not a big deal that less people were there, it's a big deal that there is irrefutable evidence that dumps the white house press secretary's narrative on its face. This is a sign of things to come, and it is terrifying. On Jan 22, 2017 12:36 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: > It amazes me that an adult at the top of the political pyramid is so > immature to get butt hurt over the size of crowd that showed up. > > Pretty sure D.C. is something like 80% black folk. Having the first black > president is surely something to get stoked about if you are black, and if > you live there, why not make the effort to go see the show. I wonder if > there are crowd size records for all the inaugurations. > > I watched the young pope first two episodes. This reminds me of the > second episode where the pope gets pissed because someone hit in a laser > pointer. > > *From:* Adam Moffett > *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:22 AM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ > Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" > To: "af@afmug.com" > Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > > Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively > shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. > Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live > streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press > really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more > in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current > mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of > the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither > really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report > whatever their preconceived response was either way. > > Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? > > Answer: Yes > > CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS > fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who > would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the > transition of power. > > Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day > before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous > time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. > > Had the same attack been authorized today: > > CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military > officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were > no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges > possible? > > Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 > ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS > surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > >> I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the >> first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an >> amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's >> uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with >> one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other >> stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have >> four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the >> CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. >> >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds >> wrote: >> >>> Can we talk about politics yet? :P >>> >> >> > > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Yeah. In the old days, you would get obfuscation. Now we will just get bald face lies. bp On 1/22/2017 10:59 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: There are not official records for inaugurations for crowd sizes. They have to look at other sources of data and make best guesses. That said, each area of the National Mall is pretty well known to hold a certain number of people. It's easier when you can count the lawn squares. President Trump's inaguration crowd was absent in a lot of squares, which either means the previous inaguration counts were way too low, or that this count was estimated far too high. Either way, it's still a blatant lie that more people were there. It's not a big deal that less people were there, it's a big deal that there is irrefutable evidence that dumps the white house press secretary's narrative on its face. This is a sign of things to come, and it is terrifying. On Jan 22, 2017 12:36 PM, "Chuck McCown" <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote: It amazes me that an adult at the top of the political pyramid is so immature to get butt hurt over the size of crowd that showed up. Pretty sure D.C. is something like 80% black folk. Having the first black president is surely something to get stoked about if you are black, and if you live there, why not make the effort to go see the show. I wonder if there are crowd size records for all the inaugurations. I watched the young pope first two episodes. This reminds me of the second episode where the pope gets pissed because someone hit in a laser pointer. *From:* Adam Moffett *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:22 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. -- Original Message -- From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" To: "af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>" Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Can we talk about politics yet? :P -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I can't see why anyone cares how many showed up. Most of the coast is liberal. I would be shocked if anyone who was not a democrat got any crowd of any size. It is amusing that he gets upset about reporters focusing on the negative. Get over it. Most media is liberal, so what. You slap them around for a year and a half and you expect them to focus on anything good? If anything will hasten his self destruction it is his manic focus on what anyone says about him. On Sun, Jan 22, 2017, 1:01 PM Bill Prince wrote: > Yeah. In the old days, you would get obfuscation. Now we will just get > bald face lies. > > > bp > > > > On 1/22/2017 10:59 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > There are not official records for inaugurations for crowd sizes. They > have to look at other sources of data and make best guesses. > > That said, each area of the National Mall is pretty well known to hold a > certain number of people. It's easier when you can count the lawn squares. > > President Trump's inaguration crowd was absent in a lot of squares, which > either means the previous inaguration counts were way too low, or that this > count was estimated far too high. Either way, it's still a blatant lie that > more people were there. > > It's not a big deal that less people were there, it's a big deal that > there is irrefutable evidence that dumps the white house press secretary's > narrative on its face. > > This is a sign of things to come, and it is terrifying. > > > > On Jan 22, 2017 12:36 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: > > It amazes me that an adult at the top of the political pyramid is so > immature to get butt hurt over the size of crowd that showed up. > > Pretty sure D.C. is something like 80% black folk. Having the first black > president is surely something to get stoked about if you are black, and if > you live there, why not make the effort to go see the show. I wonder if > there are crowd size records for all the inaugurations. > > I watched the young pope first two episodes. This reminds me of the > second episode where the pope gets pissed because someone hit in a laser > pointer. > > *From:* Adam Moffett > *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:22 AM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ > Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" > To: "af@afmug.com" > Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > > Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively > shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. > Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live > streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press > really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more > in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current > mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of > the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither > really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report > whatever their preconceived response was either way. > > Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? > > Answer: Yes > > CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS > fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who > would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the > transition of power. > > Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day > before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous > time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. > > Had the same attack been authorized today: > > CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military > officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were > no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges > possible? > > Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 > ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS > surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: > > I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the > first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an > amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's > uncle or something who did too muc
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > https://streamable.com/md28v > > I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not > some kind of joke taken too far... > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > >> Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. >> https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo >> st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" >> wrote: >> >>> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. >>> The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >>> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >>> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> there is this gem now >>>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be >>>>> very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in >>>>> USA is biased, too. >>>>> >>>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where >>>>> it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is >>>>> unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the >>>>> discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move >>>>> the >>>>> discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him >>>>> votable. >>>>> >>>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>>>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>>> >>>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>>>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a >>>>> problem >>>>> than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 >>>>> reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>>> you have a problem. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One Guy >>>>> /sarcasm >>>>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>>>> *An:* af@afmug.com >>>>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>>>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>>>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>>>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>>>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>>>> information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package >>>>> up >>>>> and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of >>>>> militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism >>>>> from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, >>>>> theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either >>>>> way. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Answer: Yes >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. > On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: > > Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting > for right time to do it comrades > >> On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >> https://streamable.com/md28v >> >> I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some >> kind of joke taken too far... >> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza >>> wrote: >>> Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. >>> https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: >>>> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The >>>> bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >>>> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >>>> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" >>>>> wrote: >>>>> there is this gem now >>>>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>>>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult >>>>>> to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very >>>>>> biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA >>>>>> is biased, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it >>>>>> was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is >>>>>> unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the >>>>>> discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move >>>>>> the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make >>>>>> him votable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>>>>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>>>>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a >>>>>> problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would >>>>>> find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics >>>>>> to report. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you >>>>>> have a problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy >>>>>> /sarcasm >>>>>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>>>>> An: af@afmug.com >>>>>> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>>>>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>>>>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>>>>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>>>>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>>>>> information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package >>>>>> up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is >>>>>> that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero >>>>>> professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the >&
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
On 1/22/2017 11:09 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote: can't see why anyone cares how many showed up. Most of the coast is liberal. I would be shocked if anyone who was not a democrat got any crowd of any size. Only really he cares. And there are at least two or three reasons why the crowd was so much smaller. The coast(s) may be liberal, but it also is common knowledge that a liberal in Texas would be called a conservative on either coast. It is amusing that he gets upset about reporters focusing on the negative. Get over it. Most media is liberal, so what. You slap them around for a year and a half and you expect them to focus on anything good? It also depends (a lot) on what you define as "media". For every alleged liberal media outlet, you can pretty much find another conservative one. But I'm not arguing about that. One of the pieces of advice he got from Obama was "You better have a thick skin". He's living in a bubble of entirely different dimensions than what he used to control. It's out of his control, and he's either going to get used to it or he's going to auger in. If anything will hasten his self destruction it is his manic focus on what anyone says about him. No argument from me on that one. bp
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your > looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > > Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now > Waiting for right time to do it comrades > > On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > >> https://streamable.com/md28v >> >> I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not >> some kind of joke taken too far... >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza > > wrote: >> >>> Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. >>> https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo >>> st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. >>>> The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >>>> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >>>> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >>>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> there is this gem now >>>>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>>>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be >>>>>> very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in >>>>>> USA is biased, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where >>>>>> it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is >>>>>> unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the >>>>>> discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move >>>>>> the >>>>>> discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him >>>>>> votable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic >>>>>> which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected >>>>>> if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a >>>>>> problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would >>>>>> find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics >>>>>> to >>>>>> report. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>>>> you have a problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Von:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *Im Auftrag von *That One >>>>>> Guy /sarcasm >>>>>> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 22. Januar 2017 07:05 >>>>>> *An:* af@afmug.com >>>>>> *Betreff:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to >>>>>> effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current >>>>>> environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA >>>>>> responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and >>>>>> yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting >>>>>> information. We know more in real time then the pre
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. > On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often > happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. > >> On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: >> Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your >> looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. >> >> Jon Langeler >> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >> >> >>> On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza >>> wrote: >>> >>> Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now >>> Waiting for right time to do it comrades >>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >>>> https://streamable.com/md28v >>>> >>>> I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not >>>> some kind of joke taken too far... >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza >>>>> wrote: >>>>> Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. >>>>> https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. >>>>>> The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >>>>>> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. >>>>>> Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> there is this gem now >>>>>>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>>>>>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>>>>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to >>>>>>>> be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ >>>>>>>> media in USA is biased, too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where >>>>>>>> it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is >>>>>>>> unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the >>>>>>>> discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to >>>>>>>> move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to >>>>>>>> make him votable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which >>>>>>>> is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if >>>>>>>> media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a >>>>>>>> problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart >>>>>>>> would find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other >>>>>>>> topics to report. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>>>>>> you have a problem. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy >>>>>>>> /sarcasm >
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. > Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly > 'spenders' > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often > happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. > > On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > >> Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your >> looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. >> >> Jon Langeler >> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza >> wrote: >> >> Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now >> Waiting for right time to do it comrades >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >> >>> https://streamable.com/md28v >>> >>> I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not >>> some kind of joke taken too far... >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza < >>> losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. >>>> https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo >>>> st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 >>>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. >>>>> The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended >>>>> inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let >>>>> me Trumpspeak... So sad. >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> there is this gem now >>>>>> http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ >>>>>> 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very >>>>>>> difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be >>>>>>> very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in >>>>>>> USA is biased, too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where >>>>>>> it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is >>>>>>> unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the >>>>>>> discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him >>>>>>> votable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic >>>>>>> which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected >>>>>>> if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a >>>>>>> problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would >>>>>>> find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> report. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure >>>>>>> you have a problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100 reasons why this person has to die and would find other topics to report. Good and neutral media are the base of a working democracy. For sure you have a problem. Von: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] Im Auftrag von That One Guy /sarcasm Gesendet: Sonntag,
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Witnesses? One? That many hit jobs would have a leak. Somewhere. None exist. bp On 1/22/2017 2:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@genias.net wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
They’re really really good at it. From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:46 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Witnesses? One? That many hit jobs would have a leak. Somewhere. None exist. bp On 1/22/2017 2:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white ho
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm. huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guilty to make him votable. Another example is the Hillary Email discussion. This is a topic which is minor at best but was discussed the whole time. I guess it is possible Trump kills a person in TV and get reelected if media helps him. Unthinkable? But killing one person is much less a problem than starting a war where thousands are killed. Breitbart would find 100
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
All claptrap (not my description). http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp bp On 1/22/2017 2:49 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: They’re really really good at it. *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:46 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Witnesses? One? That many hit jobs would have a leak. Somewhere. None exist. bp On 1/22/2017 2:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain. But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@genias.net wrote: Today we’ve great possibi
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Clintons had JFK knocked off too... On a more serious note, Bill was very effective in suppressing and containing his bimbo eruption of rapes etc. Does anyone doubt he did those things too? Who has raped more women? Bill Cosby Bill Clinton Donald Trump If we throw some kind of standard of morality at a president then it better be applied equally to all of them. I seriously doubt Jimmy Carter cheated on his wife. How about JFK? I have a standard I apply to business associates: you cheat on our spouse you will cheat me too. From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:50 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan En
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war based on wrong information. This is unthinkable here. It would be the one point which would dominate the discussion and would make him unvotable here. Your media seemed to move the discussion away from this fact and relativated his guil
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Just pick a few at random and look them up. They all died. They all had ties to Clintons. Many of the deaths are unusal and unnatural. All of them had harmed or could have harmed the Clintons. Those assertions are inarguable. Whether or not they are related and caused or directed is what is up for argument. From: Jaime Solorza Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:57 PM To: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguratio
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I only use Snopes when it supports my position. From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:54 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? All claptrap (not my description). http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp bp On 1/22/2017 2:49 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: They’re really really good at it. From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:46 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Witnesses? One? That many hit jobs would have a leak. Somewhere. None exist. bp On 1/22/2017 2:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea tha
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Me too. Then I go to Breitbart for the real poop. Err Crap. bp On 1/22/2017 3:03 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: I only use Snopes when it supports my position. *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:54 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? All claptrap (not my description). http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp bp On 1/22/2017 2:49 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: They’re really really good at it. *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:46 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Witnesses? One? That many hit jobs would have a leak. Somewhere. None exist. bp On 1/22/2017 2:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That O
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Trump cheated on his first wife for what became his second. On Jan 22, 2017 4:57 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: > Clintons had JFK knocked off too... > > On a more serious note, Bill was very effective in suppressing and > containing his bimbo eruption of rapes etc. > Does anyone doubt he did those things too? > > Who has raped more women? > Bill Cosby > Bill Clinton > Donald Trump > > If we throw some kind of standard of morality at a president then it > better be applied equally to all of them. I seriously doubt Jimmy Carter > cheated on his wife. How about JFK? > > I have a standard I apply to business associates: you cheat on our spouse > you will cheat me too. > > *From:* Josh Reynolds > *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:50 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in > some way with the JFK assassination? > > On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: > > One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as > dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the > Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. > > So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard > of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. > >1. Susan Coleman: >2. Larry Guerrin: >3. Kevin Ives >4. Don Henry: >5. Keith Coney: >6. Keith McKaskle: >7. Gregory Collins: >8. Jeff Rhodes: >9. James Milam: >10. Richard Winters: >11. Jordan Kettleson: >12. Alan Standorf: >13. Dennis Eisman: . >14. Danny Casalaro: >15. Victor Raiser: >16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >17. Paul Tully: >18. Ian Spiro: >19. Paula Gober: >20. Jim Wilhite: >21. Steve Willis, >22. Robert Williams, >23. Todd McKeahan >24. Conway LeBleu: >25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >27. Maj. William Barkley, >28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >29. John Crawford: >30. John Wilson: >31. Paul Wilcher: >32. Vincent Foster: >33. Jon Parnell Walker: >34. Stanley Heard >35. Steven Dickson: >36. Jerry Luther Parks: >37. Ed Willey: >38. Gandy Baugh: >39. Herschell Friday: >40. Ronald Rogers: >41. Kathy Furguson: >42. Bill Shelton: >43. Stanley Huggins: >44. Paul Olson: >45. Calvin Walraven: >46. Alan G. Whicher: >47. Duane Garrett: >48. Ron Brown:. >49. Charles Meissner: >50. William Colby: >51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >52. Lance Herndon: >53. Neil Moody: >54. Barbara Wise: >55. Doug Adams: >56. Mary C. Mahoney: > 57. Ronald Miller: >58. Sandy Hume: >59. Jim McDougal: >60. Johnny Lawhon: >61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >63. Tony Moser: > > > From: Josh Reynolds > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some > were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your > right. I do not. > > On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > > He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. > Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly > 'spenders' > > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > > Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often > happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. > > On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > > Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your > looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. > > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > > > Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now > Waiting for right time to do it comrades > > On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > > https://streamable.com/md28v > > I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not > some kind of joke taken too far... > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > > Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. > https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo > st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
No doubt. So that makes him equivalent to JFK and Clinton, right? From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 5:32 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Trump cheated on his first wife for what became his second. On Jan 22, 2017 4:57 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: Clintons had JFK knocked off too... On a more serious note, Bill was very effective in suppressing and containing his bimbo eruption of rapes etc. Does anyone doubt he did those things too? Who has raped more women? Bill Cosby Bill Clinton Donald Trump If we throw some kind of standard of morality at a president then it better be applied equally to all of them. I seriously doubt Jimmy Carter cheated on his wife. How about JFK? I have a standard I apply to business associates: you cheat on our spouse you will cheat me too. From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:50 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, &qu
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
JFK, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton. That's 4 out of the last 10 presidents. I guess 5 out of 11 since we can count Trump now. Estimates of infidelity in the general population range from 20-70%. Huge variance because the data is necessarily based on surveys. I'm not sure how you'd build a double blind experiment on this. Might be fun to figure out a way :) Assuming the real number is in the middle, then presidents who've cheated on their wife isn't much different from the general population. It is not a statistic we can be proud of as a nation, but it is what it is. I'd be more interested in whether they have the decency to feel bad about it. On a more serious note, Bill was very effective in suppressing and containing his bimbo eruption of rapes etc. Does anyone doubt he did those things too? Who has raped more women? Bill Cosby Bill Clinton Donald Trump If we throw some kind of standard of morality at a president then it better be applied equally to all of them. I seriously doubt Jimmy Carter cheated on his wife. How about JFK? I have a standard I apply to business associates: you cheat on our spouse you will cheat me too. From:Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:50 PM To:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. Susan Coleman: Larry Guerrin: Kevin Ives Don Henry: Keith Coney: Keith McKaskle: Gregory Collins: Jeff Rhodes: James Milam: Richard Winters: Jordan Kettleson: Alan Standorf: Dennis Eisman: . Danny Casalaro: Victor Raiser: R. Montgomery Raiser: Paul Tully: Ian Spiro: Paula Gober: Jim Wilhite: Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Todd McKeahan Conway LeBleu: Sgt. Brian Haney, Sgt. Tim Sabel, Maj. William Barkley, Capt. Scott Reynolds: John Crawford: John Wilson: Paul Wilcher: Vincent Foster: Jon Parnell Walker: Stanley Heard Steven Dickson: Jerry Luther Parks: Ed Willey: Gandy Baugh: Herschell Friday: Ronald Rogers: Kathy Furguson: Bill Shelton: Stanley Huggins: Paul Olson: Calvin Walraven: Alan G. Whicher: Duane Garrett: Ron Brown:. Charles Meissner: William Colby: Admiral Jeremy Boorda: Lance Herndon: Neil Moody: Barbara Wise: Doug Adams: Mary C. Mahoney: Ronald Miller: Sandy Hume: Jim McDougal: Johnny Lawhon: Charles Wilbourne Miller: Carlos Ghigliotti: Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 <https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751> On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: the
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
And about 1/2 the presidents since 1900. bp On 1/22/2017 4:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: No doubt. So that makes him equivalent to JFK and Clinton, right? *From:* Josh Reynolds *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 5:32 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Trump cheated on his first wife for what became his second. On Jan 22, 2017 4:57 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: Clintons had JFK knocked off too... On a more serious note, Bill was very effective in suppressing and containing his bimbo eruption of rapes etc. Does anyone doubt he did those things too? Who has raped more women? Bill Cosby Bill Clinton Donald Trump If we throw some kind of standard of morality at a president then it better be applied equally to all of them. I seriously doubt Jimmy Carter cheated on his wife. How about JFK? I have a standard I apply to business associates: you cheat on our spouse you will cheat me too. *From:* Josh Reynolds *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:50 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidenc
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
http://www.gocomics.com/candorville/2017/01/22 <http://www.gocomics.com/candorville/2017/01/22> bp On 1/22/2017 10:36 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: It amazes me that an adult at the top of the political pyramid is so immature to get butt hurt over the size of crowd that showed up. Pretty sure D.C. is something like 80% black folk. Having the first black president is surely something to get stoked about if you are black, and if you live there, why not make the effort to go see the show. I wonder if there are crowd size records for all the inaugurations. I watched the young pope first two episodes. This reminds me of the second episode where the pope gets pissed because someone hit in a laser pointer. *From:* Adam Moffett *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:22 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I started reading this: http://www.justfacts.com/ Some of the statistics really rocked my socks. -- Original Message -- From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" To: "af@afmug.com" Sent: 1/22/2017 1:05:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Im pretty confident the next few days is setting the stage to effectively shutting down "media access". Im all for it in the current environment. Between press releases, Publicly accessible data, FOIA responses, live streamed events, and one on one interviews (and yes...twitter) the press really is the dialup internet method of getting information. We know more in real time then the press could ever package up and present. The current mindset of media in press conferences is that of militants (both sides of the media isle) and there is zero professionalism from either one. Neither really gives a damn what the answer is anyway, theyre going to report whatever their preconceived response was either way. Question: Did we send B52 Bombers to hit an ISIS target? Answer: Yes CNN under Obama: Obama authorizes successful airstrike removing 100 ISIS fighters in final days of his presidency. This act ensures that those who would commit terror will be addressed accordingly, even during the transition of power. Breitbart under Obama: Obama, the snake furthers military conflict day before leaving office, leaving all Americans at risk during a tumultuous time of transition. Kills 100, ensuring a retaliatory response. Had the same attack been authorized today: CNN under Trump: MILITARY FIASCO: Trump bombs random targets. Top military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, refuse to verify there were no civilian casualties, at least 100 confirmed dead. War crime charges possible? Breitbart under Trump: God Emperor Trump authorized the removal of 100 ISIS top leaders in his first act as Commander in Chief. Rumors of ISIS surrender. Barack Obama potentially one of the dead operatives. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Jeremy wrote: I'm all for it. I think that everyone is probably just impressed by the first white house press briefing and the remarks at Langley. What an amazing public speaker this one is. Have you ever had a friend or friend's uncle or something who did too much meth? You know how they start out with one sentence and then before you know it they have told fifteen other stories before they ever get to the point...if they ever do??? We have four years of that to look forward to. Just watch the full speech at the CIA, you will see what I mean. Or don'tsave yourself the pain. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Can we talk about politics yet? :P -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: > I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... > > I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I > will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... > I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... > > On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > > Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in > some way with the JFK assassination? > > On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: > > One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as > dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the > Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. > > So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard > of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. > >1. Susan Coleman: >2. Larry Guerrin: >3. Kevin Ives >4. Don Henry: >5. Keith Coney: >6. Keith McKaskle: >7. Gregory Collins: >8. Jeff Rhodes: >9. James Milam: >10. Richard Winters: >11. Jordan Kettleson: >12. Alan Standorf: >13. Dennis Eisman: . >14. Danny Casalaro: >15. Victor Raiser: >16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >17. Paul Tully: >18. Ian Spiro: >19. Paula Gober: >20. Jim Wilhite: >21. Steve Willis, >22. Robert Williams, >23. Todd McKeahan >24. Conway LeBleu: >25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >27. Maj. William Barkley, >28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >29. John Crawford: >30. John Wilson: >31. Paul Wilcher: >32. Vincent Foster: >33. Jon Parnell Walker: >34. Stanley Heard >35. Steven Dickson: >36. Jerry Luther Parks: >37. Ed Willey: >38. Gandy Baugh: >39. Herschell Friday: >40. Ronald Rogers: >41. Kathy Furguson: >42. Bill Shelton: >43. Stanley Huggins: >44. Paul Olson: >45. Calvin Walraven: >46. Alan G. Whicher: >47. Duane Garrett: >48. Ron Brown:. >49. Charles Meissner: >50. William Colby: >51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >52. Lance Herndon: >53. Neil Moody: >54. Barbara Wise: >55. Doug Adams: >56. Mary C. Mahoney: >57. Ronald Miller: >58. Sandy Hume: >59. Jim McDougal: >60. Johnny Lawhon: >61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >63. Tony Moser: > > > From: Josh Reynolds > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some > were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your > right. I do not. > > On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > > He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. > Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly > 'spenders' > > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > > Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often > happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. > > On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: > > Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your > looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. > > > Jon Langeler > Michwave Technologies, Inc. > > > On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > > > Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now > Waiting for right time to do it comrades > > On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > > https://streamable.com/md28v > > I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not > some kind of joke taken too far... > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > > Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. > https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpo > st.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 > > On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" > wrote: > > Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The > bullshit is going to get worse...no m
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I honestly cannot believe at all why any human being would think that at this point. I feel like we don't live not only in the same country, but on a completely different planet. And this is coming from someone who has never lived on either coast, and has spent time in the military as well as living a mostly rural life in Kentucky, Indiana, Arizona, Alaska, and Missouri. On Jan 22, 2017 8:47 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" wrote: > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going > home > > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely > tasty looking crow anyway :-) > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > >> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... >> >> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I >> will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... >> I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >> >> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in >> some way with the JFK assassination? >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: >> >> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are >> as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the >> Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. >> >> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard >> of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >> >>1. Susan Coleman: >>2. Larry Guerrin: >>3. Kevin Ives >>4. Don Henry: >>5. Keith Coney: >>6. Keith McKaskle: >>7. Gregory Collins: >>8. Jeff Rhodes: >>9. James Milam: >>10. Richard Winters: >>11. Jordan Kettleson: >>12. Alan Standorf: >>13. Dennis Eisman: . >>14. Danny Casalaro: >>15. Victor Raiser: >>16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >>17. Paul Tully: >>18. Ian Spiro: >>19. Paula Gober: >>20. Jim Wilhite: >>21. Steve Willis, >>22. Robert Williams, >>23. Todd McKeahan >>24. Conway LeBleu: >>25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >>26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >>27. Maj. William Barkley, >>28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >>29. John Crawford: >>30. John Wilson: >>31. Paul Wilcher: >>32. Vincent Foster: >>33. Jon Parnell Walker: >>34. Stanley Heard >>35. Steven Dickson: >>36. Jerry Luther Parks: >>37. Ed Willey: >>38. Gandy Baugh: >>39. Herschell Friday: >>40. Ronald Rogers: >>41. Kathy Furguson: >>42. Bill Shelton: >>43. Stanley Huggins: >>44. Paul Olson: >>45. Calvin Walraven: >>46. Alan G. Whicher: >>47. Duane Garrett: >>48. Ron Brown:. >> 49. Charles Meissner: >>50. William Colby: >>51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >>52. Lance Herndon: >>53. Neil Moody: >>54. Barbara Wise: >>55. Doug Adams: >>56. Mary C. Mahoney: >>57. Ronald Miller: >>58. Sandy Hume: >>59. Jim McDougal: >>60. Johnny Lawhon: >>61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >>62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >>63. Tony Moser: >> >> >> From: Josh Reynolds >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM >> To: af@afmug.com >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> >> He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some >> were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your >> right. I do not. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" >> wrote: >> >> He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. >> Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly >> 'spenders' >> >> >> Jon Langeler >> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >> >> >> Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often >> happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" >> wrote: >> >> Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your >> looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible.
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
but really, guys, you have to periodically check this http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ right now theres some guy making dying duck noises or something On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > I honestly cannot believe at all why any human being would think that at > this point. I feel like we don't live not only in the same country, but on > a completely different planet. And this is coming from someone who has > never lived on either coast, and has spent time in the military as well as > living a mostly rural life in Kentucky, Indiana, Arizona, Alaska, and > Missouri. > > On Jan 22, 2017 8:47 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < > thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going >> home >> >> in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some >> insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza > > wrote: >> >>> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... >>> >>> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I >>> will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... >>> I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >>> >>> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in >>> some way with the JFK assassination? >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: >>> >>> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are >>> as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the >>> Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. >>> >>> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard >>> of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >>> >>>1. Susan Coleman: >>>2. Larry Guerrin: >>>3. Kevin Ives >>>4. Don Henry: >>>5. Keith Coney: >>>6. Keith McKaskle: >>>7. Gregory Collins: >>>8. Jeff Rhodes: >>>9. James Milam: >>>10. Richard Winters: >>>11. Jordan Kettleson: >>>12. Alan Standorf: >>>13. Dennis Eisman: . >>>14. Danny Casalaro: >>>15. Victor Raiser: >>>16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >>>17. Paul Tully: >>>18. Ian Spiro: >>>19. Paula Gober: >>>20. Jim Wilhite: >>>21. Steve Willis, >>>22. Robert Williams, >>>23. Todd McKeahan >>>24. Conway LeBleu: >>>25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >>>26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >>>27. Maj. William Barkley, >>>28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >>>29. John Crawford: >>>30. John Wilson: >>>31. Paul Wilcher: >>>32. Vincent Foster: >>>33. Jon Parnell Walker: >>>34. Stanley Heard >>>35. Steven Dickson: >>>36. Jerry Luther Parks: >>>37. Ed Willey: >>>38. Gandy Baugh: >>>39. Herschell Friday: >>>40. Ronald Rogers: >>>41. Kathy Furguson: >>> 42. Bill Shelton: >>>43. Stanley Huggins: >>>44. Paul Olson: >>>45. Calvin Walraven: >>>46. Alan G. Whicher: >>>47. Duane Garrett: >>>48. Ron Brown:. >>>49. Charles Meissner: >>>50. William Colby: >>>51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >>>52. Lance Herndon: >>>53. Neil Moody: >>>54. Barbara Wise: >>>55. Doug Adams: >>>56. Mary C. Mahoney: >>>57. Ronald Miller: >>>58. Sandy Hume: >>>59. Jim McDougal: >>>60. Johnny Lawhon: >>>61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >>>62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >>>63. Tony Moser: >>> >>> >>> From: Josh Reynolds >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM >>> To: af@afmug.com >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>> >>> He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some >>> were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your >>> right. I do not. >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" >>> wrote: >>> >>> He had money, knew to hire the ri
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go there. From: That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime So
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I think he was referring to another type of "knocked off" On Jan 23, 2017 11:14 AM, wrote: > I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at > times. Insulted. But never knocked off. > > Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either > side of an argument at will for fun. > > With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself > go there. > > *From:* That One Guy /sarcasm > *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going > home > > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely > tasty looking crow anyway :-) > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza > wrote: > >> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... >> >> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I >> will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... >> I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >> >> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in >> some way with the JFK assassination? >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: >> >> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are >> as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the >> Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. >> >> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard >> of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >> >>1. Susan Coleman: >>2. Larry Guerrin: >>3. Kevin Ives >>4. Don Henry: >>5. Keith Coney: >>6. Keith McKaskle: >>7. Gregory Collins: >>8. Jeff Rhodes: >>9. James Milam: >>10. Richard Winters: >>11. Jordan Kettleson: >>12. Alan Standorf: >>13. Dennis Eisman: . >>14. Danny Casalaro: >>15. Victor Raiser: >>16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >>17. Paul Tully: >>18. Ian Spiro: >>19. Paula Gober: >>20. Jim Wilhite: >>21. Steve Willis, >>22. Robert Williams, >>23. Todd McKeahan >>24. Conway LeBleu: >>25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >>26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >>27. Maj. William Barkley, >>28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >>29. John Crawford: >>30. John Wilson: >>31. Paul Wilcher: >>32. Vincent Foster: >>33. Jon Parnell Walker: >>34. Stanley Heard >>35. Steven Dickson: >>36. Jerry Luther Parks: >>37. Ed Willey: >>38. Gandy Baugh: >>39. Herschell Friday: >>40. Ronald Rogers: >>41. Kathy Furguson: >>42. Bill Shelton: >>43. Stanley Huggins: >>44. Paul Olson: >>45. Calvin Walraven: >>46. Alan G. Whicher: >>47. Duane Garrett: >> 48. Ron Brown:. >>49. Charles Meissner: >>50. William Colby: >>51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >>52. Lance Herndon: >>53. Neil Moody: >>54. Barbara Wise: >>55. Doug Adams: >>56. Mary C. Mahoney: >>57. Ronald Miller: >>58. Sandy Hume: >>59. Jim McDougal: >>60. Johnny Lawhon: >>61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >>62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >>63. Tony Moser: >> >> >> From: Josh Reynolds >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM >> To: af@afmug.com >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> >> He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some >> were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your >> right. I do not. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" >> wrote: >> >> He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. >> Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly >> 'spenders' >> >> >> Jon Langeler >> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >> >> >> Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often >> happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. >> >> On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" >> wrote
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
well that escalate quickly On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > I think he was referring to another type of "knocked off" > > On Jan 23, 2017 11:14 AM, wrote: > >> I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at >> times. Insulted. But never knocked off. >> >> Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either >> side of an argument at will for fun. >> >> With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself >> go there. >> >> *From:* That One Guy /sarcasm >> *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM >> *To:* af@afmug.com >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> >> just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going >> home >> >> in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some >> insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza > > wrote: >> >>> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 >>> list... >>> >>> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I >>> will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... >>> I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: >>> >>> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in >>> some way with the JFK assassination? >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: >>> >>> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are >>> as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the >>> Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. >>> >>> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard >>> of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >>> >>>1. Susan Coleman: >>>2. Larry Guerrin: >>>3. Kevin Ives >>>4. Don Henry: >>>5. Keith Coney: >>>6. Keith McKaskle: >>>7. Gregory Collins: >>>8. Jeff Rhodes: >>>9. James Milam: >>>10. Richard Winters: >>>11. Jordan Kettleson: >>>12. Alan Standorf: >>>13. Dennis Eisman: . >>>14. Danny Casalaro: >>>15. Victor Raiser: >>>16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >>>17. Paul Tully: >>>18. Ian Spiro: >>>19. Paula Gober: >>>20. Jim Wilhite: >>>21. Steve Willis, >>>22. Robert Williams, >>>23. Todd McKeahan >>>24. Conway LeBleu: >>>25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >>>26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >>>27. Maj. William Barkley, >>>28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >>>29. John Crawford: >>>30. John Wilson: >>>31. Paul Wilcher: >>>32. Vincent Foster: >>>33. Jon Parnell Walker: >>>34. Stanley Heard >>>35. Steven Dickson: >>>36. Jerry Luther Parks: >>>37. Ed Willey: >>>38. Gandy Baugh: >>>39. Herschell Friday: >>>40. Ronald Rogers: >>>41. Kathy Furguson: >>>42. Bill Shelton: >>>43. Stanley Huggins: >>>44. Paul Olson: >>>45. Calvin Walraven: >>>46. Alan G. Whicher: >>>47. Duane Garrett: >>>48. Ron Brown:. >>>49. Charles Meissner: >>>50. William Colby: >>>51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >>>52. Lance Herndon: >>>53. Neil Moody: >>>54. Barbara Wise: >>>55. Doug Adams: >>>56. Mary C. Mahoney: >>>57. Ronald Miller: >>>58. Sandy Hume: >>>59. Jim McDougal: >>>60. Johnny Lawhon: >>>61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >>>62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >>>63. Tony Moser: >>> >>> >>> From: Josh Reynolds >>> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM >>> To: af@afmug.com >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>> >>> He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some >>> were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your >>> right. I do not. >>> >>> On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" >>> wrote: >>&
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
>Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of >an argument at will for fun. Are you a Gemini by any chance ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at > times. > Insulted. But never knocked off. > Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of > an > argument at will for fun. > With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go > there. > From: That One Guy /sarcasm > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely > tasty > looking crow anyway :-) > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza < losguyswirel...@gmail.com > > wrote: >> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... >> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will >> not >> change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have >> always >> remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" < j...@kyneticwifi.com > wrote: >>> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some >>> way >>> with the JFK assassination? >>> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" < ch...@wbmfg.com > wrote: >>>> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as >>>> dead >>>> as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or >>>> had >>>> information that could harm the Clintons. >>>> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of >>>> anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >>>> 1. Susan Coleman: >>>> 2. Larry Guerrin: >>>> 3. Kevin Ives >>>> 4. Don Henry: >>>> 5. Keith Coney: >>>> 6. Keith McKaskle: >>>> 7. Gregory Collins: >>>> 8. Jeff Rhodes: >>>> 9. James Milam: >>>> 10. Richard Winters: >>>> 11. Jordan Kettleson: >>>> 12. Alan Standorf: >>>> 13. Dennis Eisman: . >>>> 14. Danny Casalaro: >>>> 15. Victor Raiser: >>>> 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: >>>> 17. Paul Tully: >>>> 18. Ian Spiro: >>>> 19. Paula Gober: >>>> 20. Jim Wilhite: >>>> 21. Steve Willis, >>>> 22. Robert Williams, >>>> 23. Todd McKeahan >>>> 24. Conway LeBleu: >>>> 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, >>>> 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, >>>> 27. Maj. William Barkley, >>>> 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: >>>> 29. John Crawford: >>>> 30. John Wilson: >>>> 31. Paul Wilcher: >>>> 32. Vincent Foster: >>>> 33. Jon Parnell Walker: >>>> 34. Stanley Heard >>>> 35. Steven Dickson: >>>> 36. Jerry Luther Parks: >>>> 37. Ed Willey: >>>> 38. Gandy Baugh: >>>> 39. Herschell Friday: >>>> 40. Ronald Rogers: >>>> 41. Kathy Furguson: >>>> 42. Bill Shelton: >>>> 43. Stanley Huggins: >>>> 44. Paul Olson: >>>> 45. Calvin Walraven: >>>> 46. Alan G. Whicher: >>>> 47. Duane Garrett: >>>> 48. Ron Brown:. >>>> 49. Charles Meissner: >>>> 50. William Colby: >>>> 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: >>>> 52. Lance Herndon: >>>> 53. Neil Moody: >>>> 54. Barbara Wise: >>>> 55. Doug Adams: >>>> 56. Mary C. Mahoney: >>>> 57. Ronald Miller: >>>> 58. Sandy Hume: >>>> 59. Jim McDougal: >>>> 60. Johnny Lawhon: >>>> 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: >>>> 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: >>>> 63. Tony Moser: >>>
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Well June 21 Perhaps From: Faisal Imtiaz Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of >an argument at will for fun. Are you a Gemini by any chance ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go there. From: That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettleson: 12.. Alan Standorf: 13.. Dennis Eisman: . 14.. Danny Casalaro: 15.. Victor Raiser: 16.. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17.. Paul Tully: 18.. Ian Spiro: 19.. Paula Gober: 20.. Jim Wilhite: 21.. Steve Willis, 22.. Robert Williams, 23.. Todd McKeahan 24.. Conway LeBleu: 25.. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26.. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27.. Maj. William Barkley, 28.. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29.. John Crawford: 30.. John Wilson: 31.. Paul Wilcher: 32.. Vincent Foster: 33.. Jon Parnell Walker: 34.. Stanley Heard 35.. Steven Dickson: 36.. Jerry Luther Parks: 37.. Ed Willey: 38.. Gandy Baugh: 39.. Herschell Friday: 40.. Ronald Rogers: 41.. Kathy Furguson: 42.. Bill Shelton: 43.. Stanley Huggins: 44.. Paul Olson: 45.. Calvin Walraven: 46.. Alan G. Whicher: 47.. Duane Garrett: 48.. Ron Brown:. 49.. Charles Meissner: 50.. William Colby: 51.. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52.. Lance Herndon: 53.. Neil Moody: 54.. Barbara Wise: 55.. Doug Adams: 56.. Mary C. Mahoney: 57.. Ronald Miller: 58.. Sandy Hume: 59.. Jim McDougal: 60.. Johnny Lawhon: 61.. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62.. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63.. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
>From Wikipedia... I think it is fairly accurate ! :) --- Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts , philosophy , history and the natural sciences . They do not like boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high intelligence to counter anything that upsets them == Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > Well June 21 > Perhaps > From: Faisal Imtiaz > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >>Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of >>an > >argument at will for fun. > Are you a Gemini by any chance ? > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >> From: ch...@wbmfg.com >> To: af@afmug.com >> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at >> times. >> Insulted. But never knocked off. >> Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side >> of an >> argument at will for fun. >> With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go >> there. >> From: That One Guy /sarcasm >> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM >> To: af@afmug.com >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >> just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home >> in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely >> tasty >> looking crow anyway :-) >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza < losguyswirel...@gmail.com > >> wrote: >>> I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... >>> I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I >>> will not >>> change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have >>> always >>> remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... >>> On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" < j...@kyneticwifi.com > wrote: >>>> Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in >>>> some way >>>> with the JFK assassination? >>>> On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" < ch...@wbmfg.com > wrote: >>>>> One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are >>>>> as dead >>>>> as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons >>>>> or had >>>>> information that could harm the Clintons. >>>>> So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard >>>>> of >>>>> anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. >>>>> 1. Susan Coleman: >>>>> 2. Larry Guerrin: >>>>> 3. Kevin Ives >>>>> 4. Don Henry: >>>>> 5. Keith Coney: >>>>> 6. Keith McKaskle: >>>>> 7. Gregory Collins: >>>>> 8. Jeff Rhodes: >>>>> 9. James Milam: >&
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. bp On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: From Wikipedia... I think it is fairly accurate ! :) --- Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arts>, philosophy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy>, history <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History> and the natural sciences <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_sciences>. They do not like boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs due to their dual personality expressed by the twins <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twins> of their sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high intelligence to counter anything that upsets them == Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net *From: *ch...@wbmfg.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Well June 21 Perhaps *From:* Faisal Imtiaz *Sent:* Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. Are you a Gemini by any chance ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net *From: *ch...@wbmfg.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go there. *From:* That One Guy /sarcasm *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Su
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that From: Bill Prince Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. bp On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: From Wikipedia... I think it is fairly accurate ! :) --- Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts, philosophy, history and the natural sciences. They do not like boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high intelligence to counter anything that upsets them == Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net -- From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Well June 21 Perhaps From: Faisal Imtiaz Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. Are you a Gemini by any chance ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go there. From: That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Coleman: 2.. Larry Guerrin: 3.. Kevin Ives 4.. Don Henry: 5.. Keith Coney: 6.. Keith McKaskle: 7.. Gregory Collins: 8.. Jeff Rhodes: 9.. James Milam: 10.. Richard Winters: 11.. Jordan Kettles
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
What's the astrological sign for a**hole? (written in good humor of course) -- Christopher Tyler MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE Total Highspeed Internet Services 417.851.1107 - Original Message - From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:47:13 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that From: Bill Prince Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. bp On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: From Wikipedia... I think it is fairly accurate ! :) --- Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts, philosophy, history and the natural sciences. They do not like boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high intelligence to counter anything that upsets them == Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net -- From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Well June 21 Perhaps From: Faisal Imtiaz Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. Are you a Gemini by any chance ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net From: ch...@wbmfg.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either side of an argument at will for fun. With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make myself go there. From: That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going home in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 list... I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our country... I will not change my mind. If you want to knock me off list... It's cool... I have always remained true to my beliefs. My last post on this one... On Jan 22, 2017 3:50 PM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: Have you ever looked at the list of people killed who were involved in some way with the JFK assassination? On Jan 22, 2017 4:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1.. Susan Colema
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
better be capricorn On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Christopher Tyler < ch...@totalhighspeed.net> wrote: > What's the astrological sign for a**hole? > (written in good humor of course) > > -- > Christopher Tyler > MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE > Total Highspeed Internet Services > 417.851.1107 > > - Original Message - > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:47:13 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that > > From: Bill Prince > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. > > > > bp > > > On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > > From Wikipedia... > > > I think it is fairly accurate ! > > > :) > > > > --- > > Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their > strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows > them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. > Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative > abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent > individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts, philosophy, > history and the natural sciences. They do not like boring people or routine > procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They > are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and > where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. > Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and > disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs > due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their sign. Because > of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and > therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high > degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite > philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high > intelligence to counter anything that upsets them > == > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > > -- > > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > Well June 21 > Perhaps > > From: Faisal Imtiaz > > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM > To: af@afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to > either side of an argument at will for fun. > > > Are you a Gemini by any chance ? > > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > > > > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted > down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. > > Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to > either side of an argument at will for fun. > > With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make > myself go there. > > From: That One Guy /sarcasm > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM > To: af@afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and > going home > > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some > insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza < > losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 > list... > > I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is bad for our > country... I will not
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Cancer. In Chinese zodiac, it's the "cock". Source: am cancer/cock On Jan 23, 2017 12:56 PM, "Christopher Tyler" wrote: > What's the astrological sign for a**hole? > (written in good humor of course) > > -- > Christopher Tyler > MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE > Total Highspeed Internet Services > 417.851.1107 > > - Original Message - > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:47:13 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that > > From: Bill Prince > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. > > > > bp > > > On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > > From Wikipedia... > > > I think it is fairly accurate ! > > > :) > > > > --- > > Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their > strength however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows > them to learn a little about everything and develop skills in many areas. > Geminis are considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative > abilities unlike other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent > individuals, they have a wide appreciation for the arts, philosophy, > history and the natural sciences. They do not like boring people or routine > procedures and therefore struggle to deal with authoritative figures. They > are enlightened to talk about any subject which they find interesting and > where they can stimulate their naturally intellectual personalities. > Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet very responsible and > disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood of all signs > due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their sign. Because > of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different moods and > therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their high > degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite > philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high > intelligence to counter anything that upsets them > == > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > > -- > > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > Well June 21 > Perhaps > > From: Faisal Imtiaz > > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM > To: af@afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > >Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to > either side of an argument at will for fun. > > > Are you a Gemini by any chance ? > > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > > > > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted > down at times. Insulted. But never knocked off. > > Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to > either side of an argument at will for fun. > > With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make > myself go there. > > From: That One Guy /sarcasm > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM > To: af@afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and > going home > > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of tecate and some > insanely tasty looking crow anyway :-) > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jaime Solorza < > losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't buy that... Respect your opinion but I don't buy that 63 > list... > > I have no confidence in Trump... I think he is
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
Vince Foster...isn't he the guy who committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head three times? On 1/22/2017 4:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@genias.net wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to be very biased even here over the ocean. But it seems the „normal“ media in USA is biased, too. E.g. we never understood how Bush jun. got his second election where it was clear he started a war b
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
No. That was me. I shot myself in the back of the head three times, and in the per-frontal cortex four more times (after I read this thread). bp On 1/23/2017 11:38 AM, Sam Morris wrote: Vince Foster...isn't he the guy who committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head three times? On 1/22/2017 4:44 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: Fact Bill, they are dead and they all had harmed or could have harmed Bill or Hillary. Just go through the list one by one. Some of it related to Waco. Many related to Whitewater or Monica. Remember Vince Foster? One or three could be a coincidence. 10 perhaps just a series of unfortunate and unrelated events, but 63 of them? Just happenstance? *From:* Bill Prince *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:38 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? Give. Me. A. Break. bp On 1/22/2017 2:34 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: One thing is for certain, absolute inarguable fact, these 63 people are as dead as you can get and all of them either spilled the beans on the Clintons or had information that could harm the Clintons. So, if you want to talk ethics and morals of Trump, I have not yet heard of anyone he had whacked. Maybe he is just better at doing it. 1. Susan Coleman: 2. Larry Guerrin: 3. Kevin Ives 4. Don Henry: 5. Keith Coney: 6. Keith McKaskle: 7. Gregory Collins: 8. Jeff Rhodes: 9. James Milam: 10. Richard Winters: 11. Jordan Kettleson: 12. Alan Standorf: 13. Dennis Eisman: . 14. Danny Casalaro: 15. Victor Raiser: 16. R. Montgomery Raiser: 17. Paul Tully: 18. Ian Spiro: 19. Paula Gober: 20. Jim Wilhite: 21. Steve Willis, 22. Robert Williams, 23. Todd McKeahan 24. Conway LeBleu: 25. Sgt. Brian Haney, 26. Sgt. Tim Sabel, 27. Maj. William Barkley, 28. Capt. Scott Reynolds: 29. John Crawford: 30. John Wilson: 31. Paul Wilcher: 32. Vincent Foster: 33. Jon Parnell Walker: 34. Stanley Heard 35. Steven Dickson: 36. Jerry Luther Parks: 37. Ed Willey: 38. Gandy Baugh: 39. Herschell Friday: 40. Ronald Rogers: 41. Kathy Furguson: 42. Bill Shelton: 43. Stanley Huggins: 44. Paul Olson: 45. Calvin Walraven: 46. Alan G. Whicher: 47. Duane Garrett: 48. Ron Brown:. 49. Charles Meissner: 50. William Colby: 51. Admiral Jeremy Boorda: 52. Lance Herndon: 53. Neil Moody: 54. Barbara Wise: 55. Doug Adams: 56. Mary C. Mahoney: 57. Ronald Miller: 58. Sandy Hume: 59. Jim McDougal: 60. Johnny Lawhon: 61. Charles Wilbourne Miller: 62. Carlos Ghigliotti: 63. Tony Moser: From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 2:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? He also ran a lot of less than ethical schemes to make his money. Some were legal, some were not. You may consider that smart, and that's your right. I do not. On Jan 22, 2017 2:53 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: He had money, knew to hire the right people, and made good decisions. Historically that's not been common in politics. It's always been mostly 'spenders' Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: Net worth is in no way an indicator of intelligence. In fact, it often happens by accident, or in spite of intelligence. On Jan 22, 2017 2:00 PM, "Jon Langeler" mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net wrote: Considering his net worth he might he smarter than any of us. But if your looking for miracles you might be better off reading the bible. Jon Langeler Michwave Technologies, Inc. On Jan 22, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Empty promises just like his brain.But it's okay to grope now Waiting for right time to do it comrades On Jan 22, 2017 10:38 AM, "Josh Reynolds" mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: https://streamable.com/md28v I still cannot settle down with the idea that a Trump presidency is not some kind of joke taken too far... On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Jaime Solorza mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Waiting on Tweets Trump or Trumps Tweet response to this.. https://news.google.com/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fm.huffpost.com%2Fus%2Fentry%2Fus_5884a06be4b096b4a2325818%2Famp#pt0-568751 On Jan 22, 2017 7:40 AM, "Jaime Solorza" mailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Hey but you can buy Melanias jewelry line on new white house website. The bullshit is going to get worse...no million and half attended inauguration Women's March had a lot more... His ego is bruised. Let me Trumpspeak... So sad. On Jan 22, 2017 12:47 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: there is this gem now http://www.hewillnotdivide.us/ 24x7 real time stream of people being idiots ala transformers guy On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Englhardt mailto:s...@genias.net wrote: Today we’ve great possibilities to spread news. But it is very difficult to get the real information unbiased. Breitbart is known to
Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we?
That my friend would be the Astrological Zodiac sign Uranus ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Christopher Tyler" > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:56:38 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > What's the astrological sign for a**hole? > (written in good humor of course) > > -- > Christopher Tyler > MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE > Total Highspeed Internet Services > 417.851.1107 > > - Original Message - > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:47:13 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > It has to look like a hot chick, that’s all I’m sayin’ about that > > From: Bill Prince > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:35 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I've also heard tell that Geminis are bisexual. > > > > bp > > > On 1/23/2017 10:30 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > > From Wikipedia... > > > I think it is fairly accurate ! > > > :) > > > > --- > > Astrologers believe Geminis have a volatile temperament, that their strength > however is their versatility, and that their versatility allows them to > learn a > little about everything and develop skills in many areas. Geminis are > considered to hold mysteriously unique artistic and creative abilities unlike > other signs. Often considered to be very intelligent individuals, they have a > wide appreciation for the arts, philosophy, history and the natural sciences. > They do not like boring people or routine procedures and therefore struggle > to > deal with authoritative figures. They are enlightened to talk about any > subject > which they find interesting and where they can stimulate their naturally > intellectual personalities. Geminis are noted to be drastic and hasty yet > very > responsible and disciplined. They are considered to be the most misunderstood > of all signs due to their dual personality expressed by the twins of their > sign. Because of this, don't be surprised to often find Geminis in different > moods and therefore mood swings can occur often for Geminis because of their > high degree of mental processing and thinking. This makes them quite > philosophical people. Geminis are sensitive as well but use their high > intelligence to counter anything that upsets them > == > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > -- > >From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com >Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:18:16 PM >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > >Well June 21 >Perhaps > >From: Faisal Imtiaz > >Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 AM >To: af@afmug.com > >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > >>Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either > side of >>an argument at will for fun. > > >Are you a Gemini by any chance ? > > > >Faisal Imtiaz >Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street >Miami, FL 33155 >Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > >Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > > > > From: ch...@wbmfg.com > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:14:54 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > I don’t think anyone has ever been knocked off the list. Shouted down > at times. > Insulted. But never knocked off. > > Sometimes when I am trolling, I touch a nerve. I can switch to either > side of > an argument at will for fun. > > With the exception of being a Clinton supporter. Just cannot make > myself go > there. > > From: That One Guy /sarcasm > > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:47 PM > To: af@afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [OT: Politics] Can we? > > just fyi if jaime gets knocked off the list, im taking my toys and going > home > > in 4 years hes going to be showing us pictures of te