4um: Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller calls Hillary Clinton a 'c***' on Twitter

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
History
See other History Articles
Title: Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller calls Hillary Clinton a 'c***' on Twitter
Source: Daily Mail
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... Hillary-Clinton-c-Twitter.html
Published: Nov 2, 2016
Author: Chris Spargo
Post Date: 2016-11-02 15:17:34 by noone222
Keywords: None
Views: 599
Comments: 38

A Texas official has come under fire after he called Hillary Clinton a 'c***' on Twitter, and then tried to claim it was because his account was hacked.
Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller posted the offensive comment on Tuesday, tweeting out a Pennsylvania poll that claimed Donald Trump was set to receive 44 per cent of the vote while Clinton was at 43 per cent.
Instead of Clinton's name next to her number however, it said the word 'c***.'
Soon after claiming his account was hacked, Miller told a different story, claiming that it was a retweet and he was unaware of the offensive language.
This explanation was also problematic as the comment was posted directly on his account and not a retweet of another Twitter user's post.

Poster Comment:
Go Texas ... no defamation here ... she is a cunt !(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897160/Texas-Agriculture-Commissioner-Sid-Miller-calls-Hillary-Clinton-c-Twitter.html
More info at above URL

The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 15:20:58 ET (1 image) Reply Trace Private Reply
#2. To: noone222 (#0)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." -- Thomas Jefferson
ghostdogtxn posted on 2016-11-02 15:27:29 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#3. To: ghostdogtxn (#2)
I thought olde Sid was being overly polite and kind?

Cynicom posted on 2016-11-02 15:42:03 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#4. To: Cynicom, ghostdogtxn (#3)
C_ an't
U_ nderstand
N_ ormal
T_ hinking
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 17:21:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#5. To: noone222 (#0)
Go Texas ... no defamation here

Also from Texas, and the Austin liberals are "sounding off" in comments:
Rep. McCaul talks of impeaching Hillary Clinton
www.statesman.com/news/rep-mccaul-talks-impeaching-hillary-clinton/GcHIUhfRXfVniymVTH6c7H/

CadetD posted on 2016-11-02 17:31:08 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#6. To: noone222 (#0)
Go Texas ... no defamation here ... she is a cunt !(

And the hits just keep on rolling in from Texas state capitol:
Several Texas Democratic women have denounced the Texas agriculture commissioner as well as Republican Party leadership for staying mum a day after the commissioner’s Twitter account posted a message calling Hillary Clinton a misogynist profanity.
www.statesman.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/texas-democratic-women-denounce-sid-miller-word-tweet/nv8QkdDGhKJxPmU0AcB8KK/

CadetD posted on 2016-11-02 17:37:50 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#7. To: CadetD (#6)
Several Texas Democratic women

If it waddles like a duck, owns a Bill, quacks like a duck, relieves itself in public, then it is a damned DUCK.

Cynicom posted on 2016-11-02 17:49:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#8. To: CadetD (#5)
I think she's dead in the water no matter what happens on election day.
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 18:01:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#9. To: noone222 (#8)
I think she's dead in the water no matter what happens on election day.

I agree, and am finding all this very amusing--however, I can't help wondering "why now with this, Donald?".

CadetD posted on 2016-11-02 18:05:57 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#10. To: CadetD (#6)
I also think the losing side will protest the vote and demand recounts.
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 18:22:01 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#11. To: noone222 (#10)
I also think the losing side will protest the vote and demand recounts.

FReepers storming Florida courthouse in 2000 will look like a picnic compared to what is going to happen in Philly, Detroit, etc if Trump wins.
" As a citizen, I would hesitate to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology. However, if it is proven that an organization is an agent of foreign power, or in any way not a legitimate political party -- and I think the government is capable of proving that -- then that is another matter." - Ronald Reagan to House Un-American Activities Committee, October 23, 1947
Dakmar posted on 2016-11-02 18:39:32 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#12. To: Dakmar (#11)
The "gimmedats" will be frantic !
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 19:55:59 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#13. To: noone222 (#12)
We spell it "gibsmedats" in my household, but aren't looking for an argument.
" As a citizen, I would hesitate to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology. However, if it is proven that an organization is an agent of foreign power, or in any way not a legitimate political party -- and I think the government is capable of proving that -- then that is another matter." - Ronald Reagan to House Un-American Activities Committee, October 23, 1947
Dakmar posted on 2016-11-02 20:04:57 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#14. To: Dakmar (#13)
We spell it "gibsmedats" in my household, but aren't looking for an argument.

Ebonically speaking you are correct !
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-02 20:18:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#15. To: noone222 (#10)
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen.
(Actually, the constitution applies to non citizens, too.)
He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way.
(Sure, try opening a waste hauling business in a municipality that provides it to residents and businesses.)
His power to contract is unlimited.
(Oh, really? So, Murder, Inc. may contract assassination services with impunity?)
He owes no duty to the state...
(Unless he imports goods that are subject to "duties, imposts and excises" the only "duty" that is "owed" is a tax, not to be confused with "He has no obligation...")
...or to his neighbors (?)
(Obviously, it would require some really abstract machinations for "him" to "owe" am import tax to neighbors, but did this really need to be said? A solution in search of a problem or, simply pompous twaddle?)
...or to his neighbors (?)
(to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to (in)criminate (sic) him.
(Too silly to respond to point by point. Was this drafted in crayon?)
He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing there from,
(Unless he's a govt contractor)
beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
(Jesus! A regular Adam Smith)
Whoever drafted this needs to rest, for surely he is babbling gibberish.

HOUNDDAWG posted on 2016-11-02 20:39:39 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#16. To: CadetD (#6)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." -- Thomas Jefferson
ghostdogtxn posted on 2016-11-02 23:11:46 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#17. To: ghostdogtxn (#16)
not that ... whatever you said.

Haha--I was just quoting the Austin fembots paraphrasing of the plain old cuss word. As always, those gals come unglued with no sense of humor.

CadetD posted on 2016-11-02 23:25:33 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#18. To: CadetD, ghostdogtxn (#17)
Guys, with respect, Hillary's evil neither requires nor avoids a gender.
But some guys reflexively call women the "c" word as if their existence as women is the single source of the defect. And it would be classic doublethink to assume this while automatically making exceptions for our mothers, wives and daughters. The exception of course is if we're somehow duty bound to agree with any men who label our loved ones for the crime of disagreeing with The Man.
If women retaliated by calling all stupid, insensitive or unpopular men "cheese dicks" it would be equally inflammatory without identifying specific defects or reasons why we should all reject such a person in general, or candidate in particular.
Those of us who actually like and respect women try to avoid the broad brush of an insulting object of ridicule.

HOUNDDAWG posted on 2016-11-03 4:50:04 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#19. To: HOUNDDAWG (#15) (Edited)
Whoever drafted this needs to rest, for surely he is babbling gibberish.
caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/201/43.html

United States Supreme Court
HALE v. HENKEL, (1906)
No. 340
Argued: Decided: March 12, 1906

Supreme Court ruling Hale vs. Henkel
If, whenever an officer or employee of a corporation were summoned before
a grand jury as a witness he could refuse to produce the books and documents of
such corporation, upon the ground that they would incriminate the corporation
itself, it would result in the failure of a large number of cases where the
illegal combination was determinable only upon the examination of such papers.
Conceding that the witness was an officer of the corporation under
investigation, and that he was entitled to assert the rights of corporation
with respect to the production of its books and papers, we are of the opinion
that there is a clear distinction in this particular between an individual and
a corporation, and that the latter has no right to refuse to submit its books
and papers for an examination at the suit of the state. The individual may
stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on
his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He
owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to
open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He
owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the
protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law
of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be
taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution.
Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of
himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the
law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their
rights.
Mr. Justice Brown, delivered the opinion of the court. This ruling was from a case in 1906 so the Judge is likely Resting In Peace.
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-03 5:03:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#20. To: HOUNDDAWG (#18)
Those of us who actually like and respect women try to avoid the broad brush of an insulting object of ridicule.

Sid Miller was very specific in his use of a word that may have wider (broad brush) application. (Gloria Allred, Madonna, Miley Cyrus, and etc., etc.
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-03 5:20:03 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#21. To: noone222 (#19) (Edited)
Thank you for an intelligent and well intentioned response.
In a recent post I explained in detail the difference between the absolute right not to be a witness against oneself whether or not the info is incriminating (which is unassailable,) and the privilege against self incrimination which the courts can override by granting the witness immunity against prosecution.
If you are the target of a criminal trial you cannot be forced to even take the stand and give your name. This is the absolute right protected by the 5th amendment.
If, however you are a yet to be identified co-conspirator and you're subpoenaed as a witness because the prosecutor needs your testimony to convict the ring leader you could be asked a question that directly implicates you. The court can then grant you limited immunity and force you to testify against Mr Big. In this instance your invocation of the much lower privilege against self incrimination is not absolute, and can be defeated. Okay so far?
You cannot refuse to be an innocent witness against another, but you can refuse to give self-incriminating statements in the course of that testimony. (which the courts had no prior knowledge of. Which is why you received a witness subpoena instead of a criminal indictment and a summons, or a goon squad, dog killing take down arrest team).
When summoned to appear to answer for a crime with which you are charged you may invoke the right not to be a self witness. ("Your honor, I do not claim to be the defendant, Horst Schmidt. I wish for the court to subpoena his wife, mother, school teachers, etc to testify and prove that I am indeed the defendant named in this indictment." In the absence of fingerprints or DNA on file you could bust their ovaries this way if you are determined that "No self witness, period!")

But if you take the stand and answer a single question you have walked through the looking glass and there is no turning back to the umbrella of the absolute right. But if the state and court agree to immunize you for any self incriminating testimony, you can then be compelled to testify under penalty of imprisonment.
Your argument was further distorted with the case of a corporate officer and his company records.
You're not entirely responsible because resources (such as Wikipedia) have mislabeled the privilege as a "right" against self incrimination. And at present corporations have been granted limited corporate personhood which is silly because a corporation cannot be jailed but only fined for actual mala in se crimes. This is one of the reasons why future supreme court appointments give so many on both sides serious red asses. Please read the entry about the efforts to reverse court rulings supporting corporate personhood, and a constitutional amendment banning such mischief forever.
Corporate officers hang together when sharing profits and bonuses, so let them hang together for corporate crimes.
There is no dispute about the original intent by the drafters of our beloved constitution. And I understand the legal minutia because of years of study, particularly about how the IRS tricks people into granting jurisdiction and thus volunteering to weave their own nooses. One could just as easily dispute your cited example with this:"A bookkeeper is offered an immediate vice presidency to take over the books for a corporation, and as soon as he inspects them he reports hidden manipulations that conceal white collar criminal activity.
Because he was in no way involved in the crime he can readily testify against the corporation. He would neither need nor ask for immunity nor would he REFUSE TO TESTIFY. And if a company (such as UNION CARBIDE) had through reckless disregard for human life caused the deaths of hundreds, their corporate officers should be jailed. Simply subtracting from the obscenely bulging bottom line of a fictitious corporate person is not justice, but a miscarriage.
By mis-labeling an absolute right of refusal to testify as "self incrimination" instead of "self witness" it wrongfully implies that someone has something to hide. The founders in their wisdom intended to state that, "If you have a case then make it with no help from me. It simply doesn't benefit me to assist you in your wrongful prosecution of an innocent man."
If America ever retraces her footsteps and turns away from corporate fascism, then this ghastly chapter of our history will take its place along side slavery, and the involuntary experimentation upon and forced sterilization of countless victims.

HOUNDDAWG posted on 2016-11-04 3:28:59 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#22. To: noone222 (#20)
Sid Miller was very specific in his use of a word that may have wider (broad brush) application. (Gloria Allred, Madonna, Miley Cyrus, and etc., etc.

After several weasel-like attempts to avoid responsibility for the Tweet, I respectfully submit that it would be a simple matter to label Sid with equally unflattering invectives.
Now make no mistake, I despise Hillary and I believe that she's a truly evil, rotten broad. But, that's not the same as saying, "Yeah, she's a real broad" as if the word alone encompasses her serious character flaws.
A broad woman can be a delight to behold, and the word at issue here is an ugly way to refer to what I consider a juicy pastime to which I've devoted my most affectionate years. And when slung carelessly about by presumably straight men with no regard for our sisters here, well, it's just not worth it to reduce Hillary if it implies that other women in general and our Sister 4nicators in particular are, because of their anatomy suspect until men magnanimously bestow a clean bill upon them.

HOUNDDAWG posted on 2016-11-04 4:33:05 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#23. To: HOUNDDAWG (#21)
Limited corporate personhood is a huge fraud that pollutes the legal system and allows criminals within them protection from prosecution. Truth be told, our entire system is usurped by commercial law, commercial paper (fiat money and credit). That ruling from 1906 means nothing in our current system. The words of that ruling were pertinent in 1906 but meaningless once constitutional money was eliminated and a new monetary system incorporated. In effect we were drawn into the Banking System and out of the Constitutional one.
"We were opposed to the Aldrich plan for a central bank. The men who rule the Democratic Party then promised the people that if they were returned to power there would be no central bank established here while they held the reigns of government. Thirteen months later that promise was broken, and the Wilson administration, under the tutelage of those sinister Wall Street figures who stood behind Colonel House, established here in our free Country the worm-eaten monarchical institution of the "King's Bank" to control us from the top downward, and from the cradle to the grave." Louis McFadden former banker and congressman
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-04 5:35:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#24. To: noone222 (#23)
Limited corporate personhood is a huge fraud that pollutes the legal system and allows criminals within them protection from prosecution. Truth be told, our entire system is usurped by commercial law, commercial paper (fiat money and credit). That ruling from 1906 means nothing in our current system. The words of that ruling were pertinent in 1906 but meaningless once constitutional money was eliminated and a new monetary system incorporated. In effect we were drawn into the Banking System and out of the Constitutional one.

Yeah, buddy!
Common law courts were replaced with equity jurisdiction and with the fifty states adopting their own Uniform Commercial Codes.
My state is arguably the incorporation capital of the world because of our business friendly Chancery Court, (properly trained by The Dupont Company) and low corporate fees.
Equity in Delaware Before 1792
The first sentence of Article VI, Section 14 of the Second Delaware Constitution adopted in 1792, provides:
The equity jurisdiction heretofore exercised by the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas, shall be separated from the common law jurisdiction, and vested in a Chancellor, who shall hold Courts of Chancery in the several counties of this State.

HOUNDDAWG posted on 2016-11-07 17:01:01 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#25. To: HOUNDDAWG (#24)
The first sentence of Article VI, Section 14 of the Second Delaware Constitution adopted in 1792, provides:
The equity jurisdiction heretofore exercised by the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas, shall be separated from the common law jurisdiction, and vested in a Chancellor, who shall hold Courts of Chancery in the several counties of this State.

Sorry about the belated response. I've been out of town and without my computer. It is very hard for people in general to accept the facts related to our legal system simply because they're intentionally misinformed or blissfully uninformed.
Thanks for your reply !
The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property .... He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.
noone222 posted on 2016-11-28 16:05:28 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#26. To: noone222 (#25)
Uninformed

I was sitting in the courtroom in Ozark with a buddy. The prosecutor wanted to arraign a guy that was not there. The Judge said, "Mr. B, can we arraign this gentleman if he is not here?"
I said, "No Sir, he has to be here in order to arraign him."
That prosecutor got egg on his face. LOL
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 16:38:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#27. To: Cynicom (#7) (Edited)
Relieves itself in public

When I lived in Chicago, I was out with a few friends and a chick in our party had to pee. She walked up a gangway several feet, dropped her panties and crouched to relieve herself. I guess she would have wet herself if she waited.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 16:48:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#28. To: noone222 (#23)
You are correct about everything you said. The fiat funny money Federal Reserve has taken us all for a ride on the "B" train.
I did some business with a man from Delaware and I paid him in the form of totally blank postal money orders. This way there was no paper trail in the banking system for anyone to follow.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 17:17:25 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#29. To: noone222 (#0)
At least the old boy did not mince his words. LOL
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 17:31:14 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#30. To: noone222 (#10)
I also think the losing side will protest the vote and demand recounts.

Most prescient! good job.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
Lod posted on 2016-11-28 17:43:35 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#31. To: noone222 (#10)
In Michigan Trump won by 10,700 votes. I'm not too sure how many votes would switch on a recount. But it may not be many. And there is possibility that Trump may widen his lead.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 18:11:05 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#32. To: noone222 (#10)
George Sores wants Hillary to demand recounts in several of the closest state races.
I think he is whistling in the wind.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 18:39:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#33. To: noone222 (#4)
The Clinton Foundation is entirely corrupt and several of its foreign donors have started to back out of previous commitments.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 18:43:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#34. To: noone222 (#23)
Depending on which website you look at the Dollar has lost 92% to 98% of its value since the inception of the FED.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-28 18:57:43 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#35. To: BTP Holdings (#32)
I think he is whistling in the wind.

Michigan certified its results today. Pennsylvania has denied Jill "Gimme" Stein her recount in that state, and Wisconsin is refusing her the hand recount she's demanding.
Sucks to be Gyorgi Sore-ass and friends.
evahthang go' be aw-rite
randge posted on 2016-11-28 19:23:39 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#36. To: randge (#35)
It sucks alright. Those recounts are very costly and you better have a very good reason to put the State thru that expense.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-29 5:32:20 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#37. To: CadetD (#5)
This is a moot point now since Trump is President-elect.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-29 8:19:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#38. To: noone222 (#10) (Edited)
The recount in Wisconsin has been denied and it seems there are no others.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BTP Holdings posted on 2016-11-29 18:01:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um