American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 24th August 2016
quotequote all
unrepentant said:
Bearing in mind that most of what you think you know isn't true what do you think she's done that's "crooked"?

She used an email server that she now accepts she shouldn't have. She used it for convenience and for personal security but she's accepted it was a mistake and she's held her hands up to it. There was no illegality or suggestion of malice.

She's accused of being secretive. Well, she's been in the public eye and hounded and reviled by the right for 30 years. She's used to them dissecting every detail of her life to try and find something to beat her with so yes, she's a little paranoid about keeping her private life private. On the other hand she's released 30 years of tax returns and we know more about her and her family than anyone else in America.

Her husband has a "foundation". Well, so do lots of ex presidents. The difference here is that Bill left office a relatively young man and has devoted huge amounts of time to doing good works around the world. The Clinton foundation is a charity, supported by the great and the good of the world, and has done an incredible amount to help the under privileged. Did they get some donations from people that we would consider undesirable? Maybe, so did every other charity on earth.

People who met her gave money to the foundation. So what? It's a charity and if they were impressed by her and wanted to help they donated. Good job, charities need all they can get. People who gave money subsequently met her. So what? There is no evidence of anyone receiving a favor because of a donation to the foundation.

She gave some speeches to Goldman Sachs for which she was very well paid. So what? If Blair or Cameron or any senior politician gives a private speech they get paid. The more famous, the more in demand, the bigger the fee. They wanted to pay $250k for a speech from her then she's hardly going to turn it down. Trump owes ten of millions to Goldman Sachs. Who do you think GS have the biggest hold over - someone who owes them tens of millions of dollars or someone who they paid a few hundred grand to for some speeches? (Trump is massively in debt to Wall St and perhaps more ominously to Chinese state owned banks to whom he is personally in hock for huge sums).

Trump on the other hand is responsible for the biggest Ponzi scheme since Madoff, a fraud perpetrated on thousands of ordinary Americans many of whom were wiped out by it. He shows no remorse about it whatsoever but lies and blusters and continues to fabricate while racially abusing the judge who is standing up to him. He's a serial bankrupt who has left a trail of debt and ruined small businessmen in his wake. Both of those things should alone disqualify him from any public office. But there's much, much more. He's a narcissistic misogynist with a history of racism going back to the 1970's and continuing to this day. Again, a disqualifier. He's a man who openly boasts about paying "as little tax as possible" and probably pays none or next to none which is why he refuses to publish his returns. He's lied about his charitable giving and compares his attempts at avoiding syphilis with the sacrifice made by servicemen in Vietnam. Like that other bullying crook, Robert Maxwell, he threatens and sues anyone who crosses him and has used the law to tie up small businessmen who he owes money to in court until they run out of cash or the will to go on. He is a disgusting excuse for a human being and I honestly cannot understand how anyone with any kind of moral compass could vote for him.
Bigger ponzi scheme than Stanford or Rothstein? Seems highly unlikely. Do you really need to make stuff up? It makes the fawning over Hillary all the more, well, creepy.

unrepentant

21,212 posts

255 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Crazy right wing harridan Ann Coulter tonight getting very upset because Trump is walking back his stance on deporting 11 million immigrants. Ann has previously expressed something close to love for Trump as he has been her wet dream of a racist candidate with his Muslim bans, deportations and walls. This is too funny, having alienated most of America Trump is now pissing off the morons who actually liked him. rofl

unrepentant

21,212 posts

255 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
We all know that Trump gives very little to charity, even when he promises to do so on live tv....

It now turns out that he gave one very generous charitable donation prior to this year. $100,000 to........
























Clinton foundation.. rofl

You seriously cannot make this 5hit up. The ineptitude is unreal.

amusingduck

9,396 posts

135 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
unrepentant said:
Bearing in mind that most of what you think you know isn't true what do you think she's done that's "crooked"?

She used an email server that she now accepts she shouldn't have. She used it for convenience and for personal security but she's accepted it was a mistake and she's held her hands up to it. There was no illegality or suggestion of malice.

She's accused of being secretive. Well, she's been in the public eye and hounded and reviled by the right for 30 years. She's used to them dissecting every detail of her life to try and find something to beat her with so yes, she's a little paranoid about keeping her private life private. On the other hand she's released 30 years of tax returns and we know more about her and her family than anyone else in America.

Her husband has a "foundation". Well, so do lots of ex presidents. The difference here is that Bill left office a relatively young man and has devoted huge amounts of time to doing good works around the world. The Clinton foundation is a charity, supported by the great and the good of the world, and has done an incredible amount to help the under privileged. Did they get some donations from people that we would consider undesirable? Maybe, so did every other charity on earth.

People who met her gave money to the foundation. So what? It's a charity and if they were impressed by her and wanted to help they donated. Good job, charities need all they can get. People who gave money subsequently met her. So what? There is no evidence of anyone receiving a favor because of a donation to the foundation.

She gave some speeches to Goldman Sachs for which she was very well paid. So what? If Blair or Cameron or any senior politician gives a private speech they get paid. The more famous, the more in demand, the bigger the fee. They wanted to pay $250k for a speech from her then she's hardly going to turn it down. Trump owes ten of millions to Goldman Sachs. Who do you think GS have the biggest hold over - someone who owes them tens of millions of dollars or someone who they paid a few hundred grand to for some speeches? (Trump is massively in debt to Wall St and perhaps more ominously to Chinese state owned banks to whom he is personally in hock for huge sums).
laugh

This guff has been thoroughly disproven over the course of this thread. Every time you get proven wrong, you disappear for a while rofl

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
laugh

This guff has been thoroughly disproven over the course of this thread. Every time you get proven wrong, you disappear for a while rofl
At one point, it was a full on flounce.


Countdown

39,691 posts

195 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
laugh

This guff has been thoroughly disproven over the course of this thread. Every time you get proven wrong, you disappear for a while rofl
Could you show me how it's been disproven? Im genuinely interested.

Preferably without links to Breitbart and Infowars and references to Epi pens wink

amusingduck

9,396 posts

135 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Countdown said:
amusingduck said:
laugh

This guff has been thoroughly disproven over the course of this thread. Every time you get proven wrong, you disappear for a while rofl
Could you show me how it's been disproven? Im genuinely interested.

Preferably without links to Breitbart and Infowars and references to Epi pens wink
Which parts, specifically? That her email server was for "convenience"? That "there was no illegality"? Laughable. People have been severely punished for much less significant mishandling of classified information.

I suggest you start with the Clinton Cash documentary - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM

Bonus reading: HRC, with no experience in investments whatsoever, made $100,000 from a $1,000 investment in Cattle Futures. Economists would later conclude that the odds of it happening were "at best, 1 in 31 trillion"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattl...

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Countdown said:
Im genuinely interested.
You aren't, as it has all been posted before, but there is a nice run-down of the Clinton scandals here. Nothing (IMO) to disprove from Unrep's post, as it consists of opinion and conjecture.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/0...


Of course the above leaves out one of the most massive breachs of trust of all, that being the secret rigging of the primary process and hiring the disgraced ex-DNC chair (thanks Wikileaks).

Transparency and openess. Or perhaps just another hustler like Trumpo? Fire up the white noise machine, and watch for incoming sniper fire!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/7/1512350/-Cl...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI


Edited by scherzkeks on Thursday 25th August 10:43

rscott

14,691 posts

190 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Serious question - what's the big fuss over use of a white noise generator to keep a private meeting ... private?

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
rscott said:
Serious question - what's the big fuss over use of a white noise generator to keep a private meeting ... private?
I admit it, I laughed. 7/10 points?

rohrl

8,712 posts

144 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
scherzkeks said:
rscott said:
Serious question - what's the big fuss over use of a white noise generator to keep a private meeting ... private?
I admit it, I laughed. 7/10 points?
Isn't it a fair enough question?

If a meeting is private then what is wrong with trying to discourage eavesdropping? Is it wrong to sweep the area for electronic bugs? How about closing doors and windows, is that wrong? What is so uniquely wrong about using a white noise generator?

Halb

Original Poster:

53,012 posts

182 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Racist?

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
rohrl said:
Isn't it a fair enough question?

If a meeting is private then what is wrong with trying to discourage eavesdropping? Is it wrong to sweep the area for electronic bugs? How about closing doors and windows, is that wrong? What is so uniquely wrong about using a white noise generator?
Well for starters it isn't the issue I was addressing. But you are free to keep going.

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Halb said:
Racist?
Hitleresque, even.

schmunk

4,399 posts

124 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
scherzkeks said:
Halb said:
Racist?
Hitleresque, even.
Black Noise Matters.

rscott

14,691 posts

190 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
scherzkeks said:
rohrl said:
Isn't it a fair enough question?

If a meeting is private then what is wrong with trying to discourage eavesdropping? Is it wrong to sweep the area for electronic bugs? How about closing doors and windows, is that wrong? What is so uniquely wrong about using a white noise generator?
Well for starters it isn't the issue I was addressing. But you are free to keep going.
i'll try again. Serious question. Why shouldn't they take measures to ensure a private meeting remains private?

rscott

14,691 posts

190 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
Oh dear.. Trump spending more than he needed to from campaign funds and coincidentally boosting sales of his book.

http://qz.com/765555/donald-trump-book-crippled-am...

scherzkeks

4,460 posts

133 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
rscott said:
scherzkeks said:
rohrl said:
Isn't it a fair enough question?

If a meeting is private then what is wrong with trying to discourage eavesdropping? Is it wrong to sweep the area for electronic bugs? How about closing doors and windows, is that wrong? What is so uniquely wrong about using a white noise generator?
Well for starters it isn't the issue I was addressing. But you are free to keep going.
i'll try again.
Your attempt to redirect was fully understood the first time.


unrepentant

21,212 posts

255 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
rohrl said:
scherzkeks said:
rscott said:
Serious question - what's the big fuss over use of a white noise generator to keep a private meeting ... private?
I admit it, I laughed. 7/10 points?
Isn't it a fair enough question?

If a meeting is private then what is wrong with trying to discourage eavesdropping? Is it wrong to sweep the area for electronic bugs? How about closing doors and windows, is that wrong? What is so uniquely wrong about using a white noise generator?
It's perfectly reasonable behavior.

You can't debate these issues with people who are blinkered.

The bottom line is she's not everybody's cup of tea but she's been heavily vetted for decades and has been cleared of doing anything illegal. Trump on the other hand is being sued for fraud by 3500 people in a class action law suit over his fraudulent Ponzi scheme, a suit that may open the floodgates. Given his massive debts and businesses that are reported to be struggling who knows if he'll even be solvent in 4 years.

The Clinton's get accused of all sorts for trying to keep private meetings private yet release 30 years of tax returns. Trump will not release a single years returns but the Clinton's are the "secretive" ones! It's a joke.

Glenn Beck turned up on MSNBC last night and said that republicans should under no circumstances vote for Trump. He also played a recording of a Trump supporter calling in to his radio show who effectively said that if Trump reneged on his promise to deport 11 million illegals (he's already reneging on it) they would "deal" with Trump. It was pretty obvious what he meant.. As Trump tries to soften to do something about his sinking numbers he's starting to alienate the only people that have supported him - racist bigots.

In RNC HQ Goldwater is starting to look like a good candidate......

unrepentant

21,212 posts

255 months

Thursday 25th August 2016
quotequote all
rscott said:
Oh dear.. Trump spending more than he needed to from campaign funds and coincidentally boosting sales of his book.

http://qz.com/765555/donald-trump-book-crippled-am...
Also, now that he's raising money from schmucks he's increased the rent he charges his campaign by 500%.

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED