Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Boomerang Lib Comments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Boomerang Lib Comments

    As the liberal hate machine turns up the rhetoric idiotic commentary has grown exponentially. There have been so many recent examples of intended Trump critique that actually solidifies the points he has made. Some hilarious in nature. Who can forget Jim Acosta standing at the border wall saying, "What do you need this wall for - there is nobody here?" demonstrating the effectiveness of border walls.

    Now we have tennis great Martina Navratilova - who was yesterday forced to remove her 'IMPEACH' hat at Wimbledon - recently tweeting an intended smear on Trump supporters:

    So I drove across central Florida all day yesterday, with my IMPEACH hat on and it got me wondering. Why at trump rallies most people wear the MAGA hats but I never see them in “public”. Are they all in the closet except for when they are in the majority, full of themselves?


    Oh, Martina. You of all people should understand exactly why Trump supporters are not wearing their MAGA hats in public. Why did you, Martina, not reveal your true sexuality until after you had already won 11 Grand Slam titles? Why did you strategically come out just a few weeks after Billy Jean King publicly divulged her secret? Is it because you are full of yourself - or maybe because you feared being shunned by your peers? Were you afraid of being mocked by the public mob?

    Is it not ironic that now YOU have become one of the bullies? Congratulation Martina, you have transformed from a ridiculed minority forced to hide your true identity to a leadership role among the ignorant masses intolerant of other peoples choices. Good job.

  • #2
    You gave her attention that she does not deserve. She has no relevance until you give her some.

    ​​ha ha

    îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


    • #3
      But speaking of idiotic commentary coming from the mouths ( and pens ) of liberals, how long ... I think it's already been done actually ... do we think it will be for all of the liberal pedophiles, ...

      .....Clinton, Epstein, the rest of the bunch who are still hiding in the closet, .... to start saying Donald Trump was on every plane trip with the rest of them on the Lolita Express flights ??

      They're going to start trying to turn attention away from themselves by saying it WAS ALL TRUMPS IDEA !!

      You watch ! It's their M.O.

      Just a start....

      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Democratic strategist Christine Pelosi now advises fellow liberals in the wake of billionaire and high-flying political financier Jeffrey Epstein’s child sex trafficking indictment this week. Some of “our faves” could be implicated in the long-festering scandal, the Pelosi daughter warned, so it’s time to “let the chips fall where they may.”

      Too bad Ms. Pelosi’s mommy hasn’t adopted that same attitude of accountability.


      While serving as the highest-ranking elected woman in America for decades, San Fran Nan has chronically downplayed, whitewashed or excused the sleazy habits and alleged sexual improprieties of a long parade of Dem pervs – from former San Diego Mayor Bob Filner to former New York Reps. Eric Massa and Anthony Wiener to former Oregon Rep. David Wu to former Michigan Rep. John Conyers and current presidential candidate Joe Biden.

      Since the woke-ty woke Democrats are now gung-ho on undoing special treatment of wealthy liberal sex creeps, perhaps they will soon be revisiting the matter of two of their other “faves,” Oregon real estate mogul and deep-pocketed left-wing White House donor Terry Bean and West Hollywood Clinton pal Ed Buck.

      Here, let me help.

      Terry Bean is the prominent gay-rights activist who co-founded the influential Human Rights Campaign organization.

      He is also a veteran member of the board of the HRC Foundation, which disseminates Common Core-aligned “anti-bullying” material to children’s schools nationwide.

      Like Epstein, Bean had a penchant for rubbing elbows and riding on planes with the powerful. Upon doling out more than $500,000 for President Barack Obama and the Democrats in 2012, he was rewarded with a much-publicized exclusive Air Force One ride with Obama. His Flickr account boasted glitzy pics with Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton.

      Like Epstein, Bean also had a thing for young minors.

      In 2014, a grand jury charged him with horrifying sexual abuse allegations involving multiple victims – including a 15-year-old boy. After a sweeping investigation led by the Portland police department’s sex crime units and two county district attorney’s offices, authorities charged Bean with two felony counts of third-degree sodomy and one misdemeanor count of third-degree sex abuse. His 20-something boyfriend, Kiah Lawson, was indicted on third-degree sodomy and third-degree sexual abuse.

      Allegations of Bean’s lurid sexual trysts with young men, which Lawson says the Democratic donor secretly videotaped, first surfaced in the local Willamette Week newspaper five years ago. Police say the pair enticed a 15-year-old boy to a hotel in Eugene, Oregon, after meeting him through the iPhone app Grinder, which helps men locate “local gay, bi and curious guys for dating.”

      Bean wriggled out of prosecution by publicly dangling $220,000 as a cash “compromise” with the alleged victim, who then suddenly refused to testify against him. A judge in the county where the politically influential Bean family reigned promptly dismissed the charges. Case closed? Not so fast.

      In January, government investigators filed new charges against Bean and Lawson after the alleged underage victim, now an adult, revealed that he had been ripped off by his attorney, who reportedly never delivered Bean’s payoff. The criminal trial is scheduled to begin in August. In May, a second alleged juvenile victim of Bean’s came forward with a civil lawsuit alleging the Dem donor sexually abused him three times when he was 17. The state Democratic Party and several federal officials who have received donations from Bean have declined to return the money.

      Then there’s Ed Buck, another Democratic gay rights leader and moneyman whose West Hollywood den was the scene of not one, but two overdose deaths of black men he allegedly paid for sex and drugs. An independent journalist/blogger, Jasmyne Cannick, who has investigated Buck’s sordid activities for several years, warned authorities that the influential campaign contributor was a “predator” who lured vulnerable minority men into his filthy orbit. This week, the mother of one of the dead men alleged Buck violated federal human trafficking laws and “knowingly utilized interstate commerce” to entice the victim to California “for the purpose of engaging in commercial sex acts.” Family members will mark the two-year anniversary of the death of one of the victims, Gemmel Moore, at the end of this month.

      Buck has donated more than a half-million dollars to top California Democrats including current Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Gov. Jerry Brown, L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti, and L.A. District Attorney Jackie Lacey.

      That’s a lot of chips falling in the coffers of the party that claims to care most about sex assault and human trafficking victims.

      Will Pelosi “follow the facts,” like her daughter recommends, or continue to cover up?


      https://www.wnd.com/2019/07/epstein-...ex-creep-club/



      îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


      • #4
        Old Bill, he does like his young women

        That's a problem for democrats though

        So, the accusations that this was actually Donald Trump will soon begin

        For now, some facts our pedophile friends in D.C. will want to hide...

        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        One can almost see Bill Clinton stepping up to the microphone in full dudgeon to say something like, "I did not have sex with any underage sex slaves on that man's, Mr. Epstein's, island on the 26 occasions I didn't fly with him." His spokespeople quickly responded to any suggestions Bill Clinton, poster child for celibacy, partook of any of accused billionaire pedophile, more salacious offerings of in-flight and ground-level entertainment.

        As Fox News reported, Team Clinton released a statement denying any involvement with Epsteins' sex-capades:



        "In 2002 and 2003, President Clinton took a total of four trips on Jeffrey Epstein's airplane: one to Europe, one to Asia, and two to Africa, which included stops in connection with the work of the Clinton Foundation," the statement said. "Staff, supporters of the foundation, and his Secret Service detail traveled on every leg of every trip. He had one meeting with Epstein in his Harlem office in 2002, and around the same time made one brief visit to Epstein's New York apartment with a staff member and his security detail. He's not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade, and he has never been to Little St. James Island, Epstein's ranch in New Mexico, or his residence in Florida."



        Not so fast or slick, Willy. Experts that have looked into the records say you are lying and have seen the flight logs that prove it. Again, as Fox News has reported:


        Investigative journalist Conchita Sarnoff said Monday that former President Bill Clinton isn't telling the truth when he says he "knows nothing" of the alleged crimes of Jeffrey Epstein.

        Sarnoff, who's the executive director of Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking and the author of her book "TrafficKing," appeared on Fox News @ Night after an indictment alleging sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy was unsealed Monday morning against Epstein, while Clinton's spokesman issued a statement denying knowledge of Epstein's alleged behavior.

        But Sarnoff, who first broke the Epstein story back in 2010, says the figure isn't accurate, claiming that Clinton was a guest on Epstein's planes many more times over a longer period.

        "I know from the pilot logs and these are pilot logs that you know were written by different pilots and at different times that Clinton went, he was a guest of Epstein's 27 times," she said, adding that "many of those times Clinton had his Secret Service with him and many times he did not."

        "I have read too much information and I have spoken to too many people on the inside," Sarnoff said. "I actually attempted to interview Clinton but he did not agree to do so and I know from the pilot logs and these are pilot logs that you know were written by different pilots and at different times, that Clinton went, he was a guest of Epstein's 27 times."

        "Many of those times Clinton had his Secret Service with him and many times he did not," Sarnoff continued. "Almost every time that Clinton's name is on the pilot logs there are underage girls there are initials and there are names of many many girls on that private plane."

        Bream pressed Sarnoff, noting that Clinton's statement did not match up with what she was saying.

        "Are you saying the former president is not telling the truth?" Bream asked Sarnoff.

        "Yes, I'm saying, sadly, that he is not telling the truth," Sarnoff responded.

        Wouldn't be the first time, would it? Clinton was later forced to admit his Monica Lewinsky lies in a televised and carefully parsed mea culpa to the nation, as reported by the New YorkDaily News:

        ....

        https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ight_logs.html

        îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?

        Working...
        X