Where is the Joe Biden in there? If you don't think a payment to his son's company is direct enough, I don't know what to tell you. So the money was paid to a company his son co-owned. And the article headline is "Joe Biden 'Personally Paid $900,000 By Burisma' According To Ukrainian MP In Bombshell Admission". If you're going to use that logic then all income that Eric or Don Jr. get paid, and any money the company their running gets paid is all being paid directly to Donald Trump. And that would be illegal. Obviously that's not the case. This is just zerohedge being zerohedge. |
|
|
|
Did h4ns withraw his 6 pending cases after his brain substantiated September 3rd that Game Protect is a scam / show? However, as time passed with no updates from either the foundation or the lawyer and nothing beyond those "some things are in process"-statements from GP I started to consider that all this was possibly a show and the scam accusations were right. So he had 7 cases total, first one submitted in July 2018? Was anything accomplished that you can prove in the last 15 months?' I don't think you did shit. |
|
|
|
hello, maybe do you have a signature for me? Thank you
First one is free.  |
|
|
|
Have you checked the numbers this article is claiming? Something seems off, I'm not an expert in PACs, but I think they are separate from the actual company. ("Planned Parenthood Votes" is a PAC) |
|
|
|
Our whitepaper was contracted to a whitepaper writing agency
One of the dumbest defenses I've ever seen. You should stop trying to run scams like this. You aren't smart enough. And if you're not a scammer (which is impossible), you should stop trying to run projects like this. You aren't smart enough. |
|
|
|
|
Was one of the first players on PocketRockets back when they had Chinese Poker. (6 years ago maybe?) Dean always seemed like a good guy to me. Sad to see the crap he's pulled in the last year.
|
|
|
|
Earths Team is currently part of the Hatch Team. Hatch Team has been known to everyone since last year Hatch doesn't even work. In this topic, the Earths platform has been announced. If you don’t have a Hatch Core wallet that is used only for a HATCH coin, you need to contact HATCH support. You are Hatch Support.  See? I only brought it up because you used it to defend remaining anonymous while requiring users to send you personal information. To reduce risks, the entire Earths Team is completely private.
Reduce risk of what? Being held responsible for your actions? If you don’t know or pretend you don’t know what risk is, including bank risk, use Google. I know what risk is. What specific risks you are reducing by remaining anonymous while requiring users to hand over personal information? Earths Team will remain private and will continue to issue money only after passing verification. What specific risks you are reducing by remaining anonymous? Waves has no problem putting their real names and photos on their project, why do you? |
|
|
|
To reduce risks, the entire Earths Team is completely private.
Reduce risk of what? Being held responsible for your actions? If you don’t know or pretend you don’t know what risk is, including bank risk, use Google. I know what risk is. What specific risks you are reducing by remaining anonymous while requiring users to hand over personal information? Earths Team will remain private and will continue to issue money only after passing verification. What specific risks you are reducing by remaining anonymous? Waves has no problem putting their real names and photos on their project, why do you? Earths Team is currently part of the Hatch Team. Hatch Team has been known to everyone since last year Hatch doesn't even work.  |
|
|
|
So I went through the github for Earths. It's a fork of Waves. https://github.com/wavesplatform/Waveshttps://github.com/earthspay/EarthsPretty much all the commits since they forked it, except 1, are just replacing any mention of "Wave" with "Earths". Every variable, filename, directory, documentation etc. There was one commit called "fix" that caught my eye: https://github.com/earthspay/Earths/commit/4aaca912c9da5424b76499e8f957baec4e76c6fd So the only real technical change they made to the project was in this file: src/main/scala/com/earthspay/settings/Constants.scala The original file looked like this: package com.wavesplatform.settings
import com.wavesplatform.Version
import com.wavesplatform.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "waves"
val AgentName = s"Waves v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInWave = 100000000L
val TotalWaves = 100000000L
} They deleted that file, and replaced it with this one (notice the change in TotalEarths goes way up):
package com.earthspay.settings
import com.earthspay.Version
import com.earthspay.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "earths"
val AgentName = s"Earths v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInEarth = 100000000L
val TotalEarths = 9223300000000000000L
} Then they changed only the TotalEarths, deleting a few zeros:
package com.earthspay.settings
import com.earthspay.Version
import com.earthspay.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "earths"
val AgentName = s"Earths v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInEarth = 100000000L
val TotalEarths = 92233000000L
} So it looks like the only thing they were interested in changing was TotalEarths. My guess is that first they added too many zeroes and got an error, so they reduced it a bit with a new commit. I'm not familiar with the waves platform so I'll let someone else determine if this actually could be part of their scam. |
|
|
|
To reduce risks, the entire Earths Team is completely private.
Reduce risk of what? Being held responsible for your actions? If you don’t know or pretend you don’t know what risk is, including bank risk, use Google. I know what risk is. What specific risks you are reducing by remaining anonymous while requiring users to hand over personal information? |
|
|
|
Companies incorporated in Curaçao need to provide financial statements to its investors!
Did investors receive the accounting?
How do you explain you are the least trusted member out of 2,677,333 bitcointalk members? The trust of who did I breach and how?
|
|
|
|
Talk about moving the goal post. I never said the NRA and PP were the same. I only brought up the NRA in response to TECSHARE who said: I don't care if it is $1, there is an inherent conflict of interest in an entity recieving federal support spending that money on political campaigns and lobbying. So I pointed out a bunch of examples of entities receiving federal funding, including the NRA and you said: First. Please tell me where You're going with this 'NRA training law enforcement' thing. I cant wait for this one. I am law enforcement, range instructor, and armorer. Just waiting to see how the NRA, who doesnt use tax payer money is equated to PP. So I gave you proof that the NRA does receive tax payer money and you respond: Apples to oranges buddy. But good try with the google. Any govt money going to the NRA is for firearms courses and trading, of which they are the expert. And its a drop in the bucket. Less than 5% of their income iirc. That money doesnt just "fund the nra". It pays for the rentals of the gun ranges, cost of supplies and targets, and pays the instructors. Range fees and instructor pay is the majority of that money. And the instructors are cops or other LE agents. The NRA facilitates the law enforcement people training themselves, not just free handouts to anyone who shows up. I mean wtf? Wtf? The wtf is you dont get it, and dont ever give it a second thought to try see see the difference. Probably shouldn't even bother wasting the keystrokes. But, I'll try to explain this in easy terms. Lets say you are the boss of a law enforce the agency. You have a budget. You have to spend money on training. The cheapest option for the firearms training is an NRA sponsored class. The instructors are FBI agents certified by the NRA, or other local offers certifies by the NRA. The NRA is the premier expert in the field, and offers the best price for a required activity. The fee you pay "to the NRA", the NRA uses to pay range rental, pay the instructors, etc... the NRA doesn't pocket the money... it goes in a circle back to training officers that need training. NRA organizes the circle. The costs to train the LE agencies actually exceeds the fee they charge. They use voluntary donations to make up the difference and fill the gap. But thats probably over your head Can we get back to free cigarettes? I want the taxpayer to cover my voluntary poor decisions. Maybe pay my independent informed decision to attend college too. I never said the NRA and PP are the same. I agree with you. They are different. PP obviously depends on federal money and the NRA obviously doesn't. I only posted those links because you said the NRA doesn't use taxpayer money. They do. Under TECSHAREs idea (any entity that receives even $1), this would prevent the NRA from donating to or lobbying politicians. (a long with a lot of other individuals, businesses and associations) I didn't say TECSHAREs idea was a bad one either, I don't think it necessarily is, it's an idea I haven't considered before. I just listed some pros and cons I thought of. Just trying to have a discussion. |
|
|
|
Talk about moving the goal post. I never said the NRA and PP were the same. I only brought up the NRA in response to TECSHARE who said: I don't care if it is $1, there is an inherent conflict of interest in an entity recieving federal support spending that money on political campaigns and lobbying. So I pointed out a bunch of examples of entities receiving federal funding, including the NRA and you said: First. Please tell me where You're going with this 'NRA training law enforcement' thing. I cant wait for this one. I am law enforcement, range instructor, and armorer. Just waiting to see how the NRA, who doesnt use tax payer money is equated to PP. So I gave you proof that the NRA does receive tax payer money and you respond: Apples to oranges buddy. But good try with the google. Any govt money going to the NRA is for firearms courses and trading, of which they are the expert. And its a drop in the bucket. Less than 5% of their income iirc. That money doesnt just "fund the nra". It pays for the rentals of the gun ranges, cost of supplies and targets, and pays the instructors. Range fees and instructor pay is the majority of that money. And the instructors are cops or other LE agents. The NRA facilitates the law enforcement people training themselves, not just free handouts to anyone who shows up. I mean wtf? |
|
|
|
First. Please tell me where You're going with this 'NRA training law enforcement' thing. I cant wait for this one. I am law enforcement, range instructor, and armorer. Just waiting to see how the NRA, who doesnt use tax payer money is equated to PP.
Here's a few. I'm sure there are lots more. https://www.usaspending.gov/#/award/23767473https://www.usaspending.gov/#/award/9520472https://www.usaspending.gov/#/award/9520780Next one that piques my interest every time I hear it...."restricting access to birth control". I beg your pardon kind sir. Access is not restricted at all. Access is still available. The "access' would just not be funded by those who work for a living and actually contribute to society. They can still buy pills, condoms, and learn alternate methods. Of course I was being a raunchy smart ass when I said pull-out, swallow ,etc... but those are free methods, as is abstinence. The local church does not charge a fee to teach abstinence. Poverty has nothing to do with this at all. If we don't allow doctors to write prescriptions for birth control to people on Medicaid, their access to birth control will be restricted. They're on medicaid because they make less than $17k a year and don't have health insurance. You really think they will pay a couple hundred bucks a month (or every 3 months) to visit a doctor without insurance and then go pay full price at the pharmacy? This is all besides the fact that birth control is prescribed for lots of reasons other than preventing pregnancy. |
|
|
|
Now back to reality, Planned Parenthood also receives $50 to $60 million dollars a year under Title X grants, which is far different than Medicaid reimbursements. Speaking of Medicaid reimbursements, The Hyde Amendment only restricts federal funds for being directly used for abortions. States are still using taxpayer dollars to fund abortions under Medicaid. Furthermore, the federal funds, tho restricted from being used directly for abortions also frees up money that is indirectly used for abortions or to advocate for abortion for example in the form of payroll, facilities, lobbying, and campaign contributions.
Yeah. I basically already said all this. Although I think they get closer to $100 mil for title X. Actually, I think barring anyone receiving federal funds from contributing to campaigns or lobbying would be great for this country.
That's a fair argument. This would result in a lot less money going towards campaign donations and reduce taxes overall. But it would also increase government spending and lower the quality/value of things they spend their money on since their market would be reduced. For example, the NRA would probably just turn down offers to train law enforcement so they could continue to spend money on campaigns and lobbying. So the government would have to find someone else that, I assume, wouldn't provide the same quality and/or price. It would also be very complicated and difficult to enforce. If a small business owner wants to make a campaign donation, whose responsibility would it be to make sure that no government employee claims any of their sales on an expense report? Regarding PopoJeff, why is this a ridiculous argument? A refutation without substantiation is a very low form of debate. People object to taxpayer funds being used to subsidize people's bad life choices, and rightfully so. How is this argument flawed?
I get that their "Federal Funding" is mostly Medicaid. But it's still taxpayer money used to correct an issue that so bribe created themselves.
Oh, you can't afford birth control pills? Then don't screw. Make him pull out. Or take it in the butt.
Gee, how'd you get that STD?
Not my problem. Taking away access to birth control for women on medicaid would result in more unwanted pregnancies. Even if you teach them "Then don't screw. Make him pull out. Or take it in the butt." This has been proven over history. Unwanted pregnancies make it exponentially harder to get out of poverty and a child born into poverty is much more likely to live their life in poverty, contribute less to society, pay less taxes, commit more crimes, etc. It's a vicious cycle. |
|
|
|
Asking for passport scans while insisting on remaining anonymous. Not shady at all  We want to be sure that we give money once a month to one person. In order to exclude the receipt of money by one person several times a month. To reduce risks, the entire Earths Team is completely private. Reduce risk of what? Being held responsible for your actions? You can easily buy and sell passports on the dark net markets. Why should we trust you won't sell the ones you collect, or use them in other fraudulent ways? |
|
|
|
I can see that there are many people right here who are against Kurds.
But you probably have short memory and you forget that Kurds where protected Syria from ISIS and they had captured around 1k terrorists in their region (which are now free thanks to Trump and Erdogan of course).
The kurds deserve most of the credit in seizing Mosul from Isis a couple years ago and were also a big help in overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Trump is now saying the Kurds might be intentionally freeing isis prisoners. I doubt this is true, but we can expect the US to accept no responsibility in all the Isis prisoners that were freed.  |
|
|
|
I don't care if it is $1, there is an inherent conflict of interest in an entity recieving federal support spending that money on political campaigns and lobbying.
Tons of businesses, and individuals receive money from the federal government. You think they should have to wave their right to contribute to a political campaign or lobby congress? Should CVS, Walgreens, and every other pharmacy all be forbidden from spending money on lobbying because they accept Medicaid to fill prescriptions? Should the NRA be forbidden because they are paid by the government to train law enforcement officers, rent out shooting ranges to federal agencies, and have a 10 year $40k/year grant from Fish and Wild Life Services? What about any hotel, Restaurant, or store where a federal employee spends money for their job and uses government money? What about a student that receives a federal grant for tuition? Should they be allowed to donate $1 to a campaign? How the heck do you get that from what I said. No they shouldn't be doing more abortions. I'm amazed that 27% of their expenses are spent on helping people shirk their personal responsibly, and enabling reckless behavior, or a non-necessity.
Teach them to swallow, and PP can cut 27% of their bottom line
I get that their "Federal Funding" is mostly Medicaid. But it's still taxpayer money used to correct an issue that so bribe created themselves.
Oh, you can't afford birth control pills? Then don't screw. Make him pull out. Or take it in the butt.
Gee, how'd you get that STD?
Not my problem.
I think this is a ridiculous argument. We'll have to agree to disagree. |
|
|
|
27% contraception.
There are free ways. Our parent taught us, or school taught us.
lol. And that doesn't even included the bucket of free condoms in the lobby. Yeah. They should be doing more abortions and prescribing less birth control. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
