Because no one else on the planet is stupid enough to think that the lies the republicans spread, and the Bernie Bots jumped on and spread even further, are true. Because no one else on theplanet is stupid enough to think that a Republican President, even if he is only one in name, will further the goals of Progressives and Democrats. because no one else ont he planet is stupid enough not to look at Hillary's platform, and see that it is mostly what bernie stood for, and that if she gets a Democratic House and Senate, this will be the most progressive government since FDR.
>>696832581 There isn't an argument. Trump has NO political history; the only argument against him is what he's currently saying. But it's easy to rationalize the autistic shit he's saying by realizing that Republican voters generally want autistic shit so really he's just pandering to them.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton's political history 180's her current platform. She fucked up, time and again, the most important political decisions of her career yet she pretends like her "experience" means something. She always chose the most violent courses of action in every scenario. Nobody has a single reason to believe any of her platform, if they've looked at where her money is coming from and what countries she brokered arms deals with as Secretary of State and which countries also happened to donate to her foundation (yeah, Saudia Arabia just loves donating to 1st world humanitarian efforts)
she's basically the devil, and there's technically no constructive argument you can make against a guy with no political history
>>696833376 what if now, this might sound crazy but what if i'd rather vote on an individuals traits as a politician rather than the party that they're apart of. the 2 party system in America is trash anyways.
>>696833504 then you are choosing short attention span narcissist with no regard to the truth, rule of law, constitution or human rights, with sharklike business behaviour, who sues for no reason as a nusance to silence opposition - what would he do if he the FBI and IRS as his toys? - who has never done anything for anyone other than himself, and who has no idea how to act in office, over a person with forty years of public service, who has been the most watched and investigated person on the planet, and who has made mistakes, in public, but has time and again also made good choices and tried to further the welfare of all Americans.
there is a Big Lie going, that Hillary is a liar and corrupt - but there is no evidence of this. meanwhile, trump, who spreads this lie, can barely say a word of truth, and the only reason we cannot say he is corrupt is that he has never had to take a bribe - he just steals, cheats and sues people, refuses to pay for work done, renages on deals and is now so mistrusted by every bank in America that he has to get all his money from overseas - much of it from friends of Putin, whose ass he keeps licking. you want to talk about traits? trump is not fit for office of any kind.
>>696833989 ah, duh, you do know how a platform is produced - you do know the purpose pf the primaries is to debate and refine poilicy - that every candidate will moderate their platform as the debate goes on and accept good points made by opponents - because that is what a party does - it debates and goes forward together. (except Trump, who had nothing to do with his party platform except to soften it on Ukraine to satisfy his Putin puppet master)
this is what bernie Bros fail to understand - jsut because their man did not get the majority of popular votes does not mean that the policies of their man, which were supported by a large numebr of people, are junked entirely - the platform is a consensus fo the party ideas. So hillary will be putting Bernies ideas forward. Just as he would have taken on some of her ideas, if he had got another couple of million votes and actually earned the nomination.
>>696834260 ah, so she is guilty of something because someone illegally hacker her account? I think the leaker at wikileaks is the criminal here. Unless you have a specific email of hers that is criminal? please, since I am sure you have read them all (and if you have, you must have noticed what a hard working and caring person she is) can you tell us what criminal act she has done?
>>696834011 Kek Hillary will bring no change whatsoever. Her platform will always be to say what would most likely get her elected. She has not had stable views in forever. Her biggest benefactors are the mainstream media and giant corporations, and Shea had the DNC sabatoge beanies campaign. She's fucking bullshit as a candidate. I'd rather not have Hillary or Trump
>>696834051 Well if you listened to FBI before they said the whole "no reasonable attorney" bit, they literally said she broke the law; she did something that any other person on planet earth would've instantly lost their clearance and job over but because of her status she's homefree
ALSO, wikileaks dumbass, though it doesn't make her guilty of anything other than being a dirty fucking cunt; she was aware that the DNC was favoring her over Bernie when the DNC has to be objective for obvious reasons
now, because you're an autist, all you probably read here was "i support bernie sanders". i don't, and never have
>>696834320 sorry, I am just someone who actually gives enogh of a fuck about politics to be well informed. I am not being paid, not a shill, and not trolling - I genuinely think that this whole Big Lie of Trump's is damaging our democracy - he is playing emotion not policy, and is a very dangerous person. Hillary on the other hand has been a hardworking progressive getting things done and helping people for forty years - from health care reform to more money for Veterans, to gun control to economic stimulus - she has actually worked hard for the American People. All Trump has done is steal, lie and go bankrupt, and now sell his country to the Russians.
>>696834597 Trump by a country mile. He has no policy, no skills, no attention span, he is a demagogue with no respect for the law, the judiciary, the constitution - and his vague ideas are all fantasy. America is great, and Trumps politics of doom and fear is sickening.
>>696834481 Yes but she never actually compromised; she just pretended like her platform was about what it was about all along. Please show me where she acknowledges that her platform is literally off the back of Bernie Sanders.
Not to mention, her current platform is in DIRECT contrast to her political history. When politicians make platform compromises, rationally a mistake would be admitted and a compromise would be made. However, when she pretends to be environmentally friendly yet she supports fracking and so on; being very good friends with notable fossil fuel lobbyists; helping along the Keystone Pipeline XL; getting money from fossil fuel lobbyists and a small bit directly from the fossil fuel industry etc etc
In order for her not to be a dirty lying cunt, a mistake has to be admit otherwise there's literally no reason to believe anything she's fucking saying
>>696835032 "no policy, no skills" then we literally have nothing to fear
nazi germany checks and balances; they didn't have a judicial system, that, regardless of party alignment, is going to shut down anything directly unconstitutional because they can't have their pay docked by the senate
>>696834777 I think you will find that it isn't. but make up your own laws if you like.
also fewer than a dozen out of thousands of emails sent to her contained classified information. some of them were not classified at the time they were sent. for it to be a crime they would have to be knowingly sent as classified - they were not.
>>696835032 but like the dude earlier in the thread pointed out, hillary has shown herself to be untrustworthy as a politician. she's going to do whatever goldman-sachs wants her to do once she's in office, and she's not going to work for the people. Trump can at least run a business, and while he is a loudmouth with some shitty ideas, he'll be less harmful in the long run.
>>696834678 yeah, she never has had a law passed that helped anyone has she? (oh, we won't mention Obamacare helping millions. Or the Veterans thing. or the education stuff. or the housing thing, or the economic stimulus projects when she was a senator, or the campaigns for women's rights, environmental protections or...
you really have never looked at her record of achievement have you?
>>696833376 No, he's not. Only stupid people would vote for Hillary. She will not be good for anyone, but herself. I would vote for Bernie, but he backed out like a coward. I will never vote for a Clinton. Voting for Hillary is the equivalent of fucking a dead baby.
>>696834687 actually, the DNC is a private organisation, and Bernie was never a member of the Democratic party. why they let him run is a mystery, but even though the did, the members of the DNC are individuals with private political opinions. I think you will find that the wikileaks emails (those ones that were not re-written by the Russian secret service) contained discussions between a few memebrs sho did not favour Bernie - which is their constiutional right to do. so fucking what. The fact is she got a few million more votes that bernie, so she got selected - too fucking bad, but thats democracy for you.
honestly, i can see what will happen with either of them being elected
>Hillary she'll constantly pander to the public, assuring them that she'll make change, while secretly passing laws to benefit big businesses, you know, the ones that funded her whole campaign, behind the backs of the people.
>trump he'll yell and shout, probably about immigration and liberals, and try to get a bunch of really stupid, unworkable laws passed, and just have them fail as soon as they get to the supreme court.
trump can run a business? yeah, how many bankrupt? how many actually making money?
lets see his tax returns. Let us see if he really was entitled to the New York City payout for people earning less than $100,000 dollars for businesses after the twin towers - which he claimed.
menawhile, Clinton has run a business, and been a senator, and in cabinet level position, and never gone bankrupt. and runs a charity - and has served her country, while Donnie can't even get a cheque out for the Veterans unil Clinton challenged him.
yeah, great businessman - sues everyone, welshes on deals and no bank will lend to him now - except his pal Putin.
>>696834260 Didn't you watch the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing with FBI Director James Comey?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ai1Z8OtEjU
From the video >Clinton was told she had to submit her e-mails because of the law. >She hired a company to recover her e-mails and told them that all government related e-mails had to be stored so they could be submitted to the government. >After they recovered her e-mails they asked her about keeping her personal e-mails as well. She responded saying she had no use for them and the company deleted them. These are the e-mails everyone is freaking out about. There is no evidence that they were anything but private e-mails, no evidence that Clinton went out of her way to have them deleted, etc.. >Later the FBI was able to recover some of those personal e-mails as well. According to the FBI the e-mail server software had been uninstalled but a large number of e-mails remained as assorted files (they had never been deleted, but uninstalling the server software removed the meta-data on the files so they had to be manually sorted). >As it turned out a small number of these recovered e-mails identified as personal apparently contained some confidential information (some of it having been made confidential after the fact).
The argument for her being in trouble is that she shouldn't have discarded her personal e-mails either and should have submitted them to the government, at the very least the claim is that it was her responsibility to know this.
As someone who is familiar with the technology involved it actually makes sense why she did what she did. I don't like Hillary for many other reasons but this one isn't actually very legit.
>>696835577 well it is you who seems ignorant of the law. No, to break the law you need mens rea - a guilty mind - an intention to break the law. if i send you something secret, but it is not marked as secret, and you have it on your computer, you are not breaking the law - you did not know it was secret. even if you send it to the russians.
however if you ask a foreign power to hack the emails of a former Secretary of State, you are breaking the law - which is what Trump has just done...
>>696837157 I don't know who posted the idiot kid photo - not me. No I have been an atheist for many years, and I used to teach philosophy of religion, when I was a University lecturer (although my PhD was on medical ethics - the problem of organ donation and brain death). so I am pretty well settled on the irrationality of religion.
and she hasn't done well in ANY political position she was given. not to mention her husband fucked the us with his shit trade agreement which led to job outsourcing and america losing a good majority of its manufacturing positions.
>>696837836 yeah, the golf club in Scotland which was going to provide 2000 jobs - you know the one that employs fifty people? yeah great success. and he destroyed a site of special scientific interest and a world heritage site to make it.
Trump University? Trump Mortgages? Chinese made ties? Steaks?
Here is man that no bank in America will lend money - you really think he is that successful? let's see the tax returns...
>>696838447 you think that banks would not lend money to a good financial partner just because they have paid another candidate a few thousand to hear her speak? what kind of deluded are you? They won't lend Don the money because he loses it, or refuses to pay it back, or squanders it and asks for more and more to make up for his bad business decisions. You think that if they thought they could make money on this guy that they would say "oh no we won't make millions by doing business with you, because you are being mean to that girl we had to speak to us a few years ago."?
>>696837006 She wasn't investigated for gross negligence she was investigated for mishandling classified information. Whenever such a case is investigated the main thing they focus on is whether or not the individual knowingly mishandled classified information.
In this case all evidence points to Clinton just making dumb but honest mistakes. Hence why the FBI aren't seeking charges.
>>696834896 >I am just someone who actually gives enogh of a fuck about politics to be well informed.
Supports Hillary come hell or high water. Doesn't care she's a liar. Thinks Benghazi was a pillow fight. Hillary never helped a child rapist go free and laugh about it. She never tried to ruin the lives of the women Bill fucked and raped. Whitewater is bullshit. Haiti gold mines are bullshit. America to Russia uranium is bullshit. And the Clinton Foundation is clean.
>>696839476 Ya. It seems like they are in full damage control now here and other social media sites. I've never seen anything but full blown Bernie supporters here and suddenly there tons of Hillary supporters who are extremely well informed trying to drum up support? At least when the Bernie socialists were here it was fun to argue with them. The hillshills are just weird and awkward and arguing all the accusations with the same copypastas
I would rather have trump over Hillary because his presidency would be a change vs her status quo.
Would Trump's change be good? VERY DOUBTFUL. But the country is in such a sick state that I think the train wreck of a presidency that trump would bring would destroy enough shit to become a true catalyst for change. There would be a rebuilding of sorts after four years of that mania.
With Hillary, just expect another 8 years limping along with the same disease.
>>696839958 Haha, he's only 1.1 above her today. You do realize that he was 7.4 above her yesterday don't you?
Hillary is reclaiming the lead, and this is what you're seeing. By the end of the convention, she will likely have a comfortable double-digit lead which is what she's had all along until the past week when Trump got his convention bump.
Trump's bump is ending, so we'll see what you have to say this time next week dumb fuck.
>>696839409 >Supports Hillary come hell or high water. no, but in contrast to Trump? hell yes.
Doesn't care she's a liar. This is a lie. show one case of her lying. (I am sure she has said things that are not true - and even lied once in a while - so do i, so do you, but show me one case of a lie that is important.)
Thinks Benghazi was a pillow fight. No, but the invesitgation was a Republican mud slinging tactic.
Hillary never helped a child rapist go free and laugh about it. No she didn't - the video is of her laughing about the fact that the bastard passed a lie detector, adn she has never trusted lie detectors since. she was assigned the case, and did her legal duty, and the bastard go a plea bargain which he took - and she has said it was less than he deserved.
She never tried to ruin the lives of the women Bill fucked and raped. Evidence?
Whitewater is bullshit. Yep, agree - nothing in it, another republican lie
Haiti gold mines are bullshit. America to Russia uranium is bullshit. yep - the sale required approval by CIFUS - see business insider "Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor are non-voting members, and CFIUS's work is also observed by representatives of other agencies like the National Security Council and the Office of Management and Budget. The idea that Clinton could have convinced all those officials and all those departments to change their position on the sale, even if she had wanted to, borders on the absurd."
>>696832402 Literally every Sanders supporter with a brain. You guys got raped, there were felonies committed against you, you were conspired against by her. Just cuz she has the same letter next to her name....
>>696840091 oldfag - I am also oldfag, and I am the one they are accusing of being a shill.
the Bernies are history - what matters is nevertrump - and the lies being told by Donnie and the repblicans. and they are lies. lies on lies. I don't mind people criticising Hillary - do it on real issues. but these constant lies are getting on my goat. which on this board usually means something else...
it's not that i have any illusions about a trump presidency being better than a clinton one from a policy standpoint, i just can't stand hillary supporters ( or trump supporters for that matter ) and want to see them get their comeuppance. The only problem with this of course ( other than the terrible policy outcomes) will be that they'll find a way to blame bernie for clinton losing.
tl:dr i wanted bernie and now i hope that both clinton and trump lose
ps 3rd parties are for goofies dont even start that shit with me
>>696840830 Fuck off with this shit. Hillary doesn't lie. The Clinton Foundation is clean. The fact that the DNC had to fight for her against Sanders is enough to say "fuck her." Then Schultz leaves and is hired by Hillary. Nothing going on there. Nope. Nobody hear is buying your shit. Suck start a shotgun.
>>696840687 ah, sanders supporter with brain - well, now you have a small number to deal with... but I think you will find those that are rational will support a Democrat, not a guy so nutty that even the repubs find him repellant
except for the crippling income inequality, systemic racism, endless wars, chronic underemployment, the totally fucked housing market, unfettered crony capitalism, arbitrary deportation of illegal aliens, ineffective police oversight, regulatory capture, the military industrial complex, for-profit prisons, oligarchic control of the government, the militarisation of police forces, extra-judicial drone murder, an illegal gulag in cuba, cia torture black sites, broad based NSA spying with zero judicial oversight, crippling levels of obesity, veterans being left to fend for themselves upon return to the US,
>>696835447 it was never about bernie, it was about the movement.
i dont see how he did it to "save his career" he's pretty secure in terms of how popular he is in vermont, I dont see him accepting some job in the administration.
Bernie has been to the left of American mainstream politics for decades, he understands better than anyone that you can't always get what you want. So he understands that while lesser-evil voting is a bitter pill to swallow, if you believe that the role of the government is to improve the material conditions of it's citizens, then "oatmeal beat no-meal"
apart from republican Big Lie talking points and repeated failed \|Republican smear campaigns? you really have no idea what she is like at all. the fact she has lived her life in public under intense scrutiny for decades and no one can find any real evidence against her says a lot.
>>696832402 No, but only because she's a woman and I aint got a snowball's chance in hell of having child support ease up on how much they expect from me if she's sitting in the oval office. Not that I'd expect anything on that level to directly affect me anyways, I just wanna see that psycho win out of spite that way all of us spics are fucked all together as opposed to just me and a few others.
>>696841180 Not saying she has never lied - just looking for you to tell me one case where she has lied - not some bullshit she didn't get the facts right when asked about something someone else did five years ago so she is a liar - a real lie. a great big whopping lie. one that matters.
>>696832402 They're both horrible, to be honest, all the choices this election were horrid, though it's like this every 4 years. Rubio, Bush,Clinton, Sanders and Trump just all of them, fuckin horrible
1) she fucking loves war 2) she subscribes to a bullshit bourgeois brand of feminism 3) she ran to the right of obama who she derided as dangerously unqualified 4) she would have absolutely ran to the right of where she she is now in 2016 were it not for sanders, this has been confirmed many times by sources within the clinton camp 5) she talks about how "america is already great" which is the sort of nonsense you could only belive if you're a rich idiot whose money insulates them from the actual problems in society. 6) she promotes herself as an ally of women, gays, liberty etc. while her personal foundation accepts millions of dollars from some of the most repressive governments in the world. Governments to whom, i might add, the us sold all sorts of arms to while she was SoS. 7) She was until very recently opposed to gay marriage, but now pretends as if she was "woke all along. Ditto illegal immigration, "scheduling of marijuana 8) She accepts millions of dollars in "speaking fees" aka Bribes from some of the worst actors in the 2008 financial crisis and then tries to tell people she will be "tought" on the big banks
Anyone who's not a total hillary shill with an iq above room temperature sees her for what she is.
so, are you saying that you would rather vote for Trump because there is a 100% chance he will do the horrible shit that you are worried Hillary has a 50% chance of doing?
I firmly believe that this "Bernie voters for Trump" nonsense is a false flag. In fact, if there is a true Sanders supporter who is actually going to vote for Trump then I believe that they were probably going to vote for Trump anyways. The thing is, sure Hillary has a history of doing shady political things but literally no politician has ever been squeaky clean. If anything, Hillary only looks so bad because she has been subjected to a level of scrutiny that rarely gets seen in other races. Don't get me wrong, I think this is a good thing. We need more transparency. But what I don't understand is why you think Trump, who doesn't plan on supporting any progressive legislation, is a better alternative to Hillary (assuming you were a Bernie supporter.) I mean, even if Hillary ends up being a Dem Nixon, do you really think she wont advance any Democratic agendas in 4 years? Do you really think she will do shit like repeal Obama Care? Do you really think that when she gets in office, she wont cooperate with her party on any platform that she ran on?
When a president takes office, they only ever deliever on SOME of the things they promise. If Hillary only comes through with one or two things, it will be a lot better for this nation than if Trump goes through with everything he promises.
>>696842204 why don't you go read your constitution? try the ammendments. not jus tthe second one (although you might like to read that - especially the bit about the well regulated militia part, adn think on why that gives you a right to own a machine gun without doing any real service to your country while you are at it)
>>696843095 She emailed Chelsea while it was happening (proven while she was under oath) and told her that we're 'under terrorist attack in Benghazi'.
Then she proceeded to tell the public that it was a spontaneous protest due to a youtube video. All of this to protect Obama's election because he was out rallying, and saying that ISIS was the JV team, and that they were 'on the run'.
These are facts, all stated while people were under oath at the congressional hearings.
>>696843324 We'll both Trump and Bernie were/are anti-establishment vs Hillary who will be Obama 2.0. Bernie sold out on his movement and Trump not having political experience could be seen as a good thing. He also beat all of his opponents so far, whom were all experienced politicians. He seems to be picking it up pretty fast
Trump and the RNC don't? Funny how you can still find a way to blame the Dems for a war that the Republicans started. I'm a registered Democrat, and even I thought the wars in Afghanistan were a good idea.
>she subcribes to a bullshit bourgeois brand of feminism
Trump and the RNC subscribe to bullshit bourgeois brand of misogyny and racism. So I guess you just get to pick which flavor of bourgeois ideology you like more.
>she ran to the right of Obama and she derided as dangerously unqualified
Like it or not, she did serve as Secretary of State. Trump is a private business man with a history of fraud, debt, and bankruptcy. Even if you don't think Hillary did a good job, she still is more qualified than Trump because she has a history working for the government she is trying to lead.
>) she would have absolutely ran to the right of where she she is now in 2016 were it not for sanders, this has been confirmed many times by sources within the clinton camp
So? If you are a conservative what's the problem? Don't you want a right winger in office? Make up your mind.
>she talks about how "america is already great" which is the sort of nonsense you could only belive if you're a rich idiot whose money insulates them from the actual problems in society.
So, unless we have 0% unemployment, you think the country is totally shit? I'm sorry you got laid off from your Mc'job, but deporting the Mexicans wont magically give you an education and skill.
>>696832402 No. I'd actually vote for trump if he didn't pick such a fucktarded running mate. At the same time I don't want to vote for hillary either. It's a quandary. >>696833179 It's really more about damage control, given a short list of options you pick the one that does the least harm. Trump is surely a buffoon but I worry about Hillary and corruption in high office. Trump might have a lewinsky 2.0, if anything.
>>696842460 America used to be great - when? when was the aaverage standard of living better? when was the average level of education, health care or violent crime (outside the big cities -and in most cases within them) better? now tell me why. Do you think that Trump has helped. or will help, or has any fucking clue how to help?
>>696842972 I don't hate black people, one of my best friends is black. I hate dindus, Niggers, an SJW white guilt cultist. They are the ones creating a dangerous political climate based on a false narrative.
>>696842910 >baited.... if you mean by the best and most well informed trolls ive ever seen on 4chan, talking point after talking point. so good they practically put /pol/ to shame in their relentless bullshit then yeah, I agree
never said I was a right winger. You mistook me for one because of a genetic defect in the democractic mindset: The comfortable "liberals" who make up the spine of the democratic party have no idea that people to the left of them exist and when they discover such people it throws their paradigm into chaos.
They have no idea what to do when subjected to left wing criticisms of democratic policies. To them all that being "left" means is a sort of moral high ground they automatically occupy when arguing with right wingers. It allows them to dismiss people like trump out of hand and set themselves up for failure by marginalzing his supporters as small groups of the mentally weak, instead of seeing them for what they truly are, a significant portion of the american population whose lives have been traumatized by neo-liberal policies of the kind that the Clintons LOVE
In this, the democrat reveals his true purpose: a corporate bulwark against genuine left wing agitation.
you typed out all that bullshit, but you're essentially making the only argument one CAN make for voting democrat:
they're not republicans
The longer version of which is, " we're a bunch of lanyard-dicked rich idiots who've never left new york or washington, who love war and money almost as much as the republicans, but we ascribe to vague notions of tolerance"
by all means vote democrat (although why you would be proud of that remains a mystery) but don't pretend you're some sort of left-wing hero for doing so
>>696845339 Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
In a 2005 60 Minutes interview, Rock said: "By the way, I've never done that joke again, ever, and I probably never will. 'Cos some people that were racist thought they had license to say nigger. So, I'm done with that routine."
Typical right-wingers pretending that racism isn't real by trying to say blacks and niggers are different.
They know damn well that they use the second term as a derogatory term for all blacks.
Their police have two sets of standards, one for blacks and another for everyone else. Arrest records prove this. Police brutality and who it's perpetrated against, proves this.
But trump fags will continue to turn a blind eye and pretend that nothing's going on.
Hillary is right. White people need to at least try to put themselves in blacks places when they run their mouths and enjoy their privilege. They need to choose their words wisely, and be aware of the harm that they cause to the black community each day.
>>696846525 There is a clear difference in the two. Trying to cover that up is only adding to the problem and is in itself racist, because it's saying that they're all the same when in fact they are not.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.