U.S. Presidential Election 2016

[jatiger13]

I do believe he mentioned having more police departments utilize stop and frisk due to its success.

That "success" is nothing by imaginary. Unless you count racially profiling and harassing minorities as a success.

Because that's about all it was actually successful at, believe me.

Edited September 29, 2016 by jatiger13

[Eutyphro]

 

It's really the fact that he has no coherent policy ideas but only prejudices and made up facts to correspond to them is what made it difficult.

 

It's a bit difficult to talk policy when your political opponent and the debate moderator only want to discuss your past.

They asked him about policy ideas, and he comes up with a range of factual inaccuracies and rhetoric. It's also a bit ridiculous if as a Trump supporter you are going to blame his opponents for using the tactic of personally discrediting him. I mean, c'mon, that's all Trump does all day. Trump thinks you are going to bring back manufacturing jobs by further lowering taxes for the wealthy (for himself). That might make them move capital to the US, but if the wages of workers stay the same then the manufacturing will remain offshore. So you see that Trump's anger at issues is a big sham, and he has no actual solutions, only demagoguery.

[Sunrise Driver]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-non-christians-raise-hand_us_57ec9600e4b024a52d2ce788

 

A bit worrying if you are agonistic, atheist, Muslim, Hindu, Jew, Buddhist, Sikh, or even, God forbid, a liberal Christian.

 

And this:

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racism-history

Edited September 29, 2016 by Street Mix

[El Dildo]

racist is as racist does.

 

you know you've got a serious problem when radical Islamic terrorists are actually more rational and are a better judge of character than Trump's own supporters. the Taliban released an official statement regarding Monday's debate...

 

 

"Trump says anything that comes to his tongue, he is a non-serious candidate."

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-taliban-idUSKCN11Y1I0

https://www.yahoo.com/news/taliban-leaders-watched-u-presidential-debate-blast-non-121625097.html

 

/tfw the Taliban is actually on the right side of history

Edited September 29, 2016 by El Diablo

[Clem Fandango]

 

I have to wonder what a racist looks like to you people

Someone who believes that one race is superior to another... a belief that Trump has never seemingly expressed.

Umm, no I'm afraid you don't need to have some scientific racialist world view in order to be racist. Just not liking black people is enough. You lot are upset about being accused of racism even though you remain in the boundaries, except that those boundaries only exists in your head.

 

 

 

Strange. I can recall him saying that he wants to halt illegal immigration and put a temporary ban on immigration from Muslim countries, but never anything about him wanting to ban foreigners from the country!

That is banning foreigners from the country?

 

 

 

Likewise, I don't believe I've ever heard of him wanting to send the military into black neighborhoods... however, I do believe he mentioned having more police departments utilize stop and frisk due to its success.

That is military force?

 

 

 

Seems I haven't listened to enough sound bites!

You can spend all day listening to sound bites but you won't understand the context.

 

Obvious Globalist conspiracy. They probably worked this out at the Globalism HQ while saluting their Globalist flag and debating the intent of the Founding Fathers of Globalism. That's the ideology of the state and its corporate tendrils, right? Globalism?

 

yes and it's a leftist ideology

[dice]

 

"Trump says anything that comes to his tongue, he is a non-serious candidate."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-taliban-idUSKCN11Y1I0

https://www.yahoo.com/news/taliban-leaders-watched-u-presidential-debate-blast-non-121625097.html

 

Their statement doesnt really make any sense. You'd want an incompetent president leading your opposition and not another 4 years of Obama to _hinder_ your domestic progress.

 

Well unless you actually want another 4 years of Obama, with no drastic foreign policy changes

Edited September 30, 2016 by  dice

[make total destroy]

is Trump trying to recommend porno here or what?

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781788223055994880

[Sunrise Driver]

Yep, Conservative Christians should definitely check that sex tape.

[jatiger13]

Lol he bitches about people being "mean" towards him and saying "mean" things about him. Did he already forget what HE has been saying over the past year and even before that?

He's in no position to speak about morals.

[Creed Bratton]

I'd say that Trump is a sore loser but that would be a severe understatement. I can't wait to see his reaction and reaction of his supporters when he loses the election.

[Twang.]

is Trump trying to recommend porno here or what?

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781788223055994880

For anyone who (rightfully) doesn't give a damn about this episode, it should be noted that this alleged sex tape is either a) a look-alike porn star or b) an under-the-covers make-out session on some reality show. He didn't specify which one he was referring to, and I'm sure that was intentional doublespeak.

[X S]

Election aside, because most of the headlines right now are filled with "my mic was broken" and "he called her Ms Piggy", etc., headlines for the 'idicocracy', but I'm more concerned with the recent Judiciary Committee meeting with Director Comey. If Clinton wins the election, and this scandal still has legs and carries on, it could prove to be compromising to her presidency and a display of corruption at the highest levels of government. Essentially, Director Comey was asked about why the FBI granted immunity to Clinton's attorney, Cheryl Mills, and although he answered it was due to an attorney-client privilege, the Judiciary Committee noted that Mills was not her attorney at the time. Further, Mills claimed she had no knowledge of the "server" until it became public knowledge, but Rep. Chaffetz shows an e-mail from Mills to Clinton's personal IT employee, Justin Cooper, asking about the "server", to which Cooper says, "Ur funny. We are on the same server." So Mills had full knowledge of it, which contradicts the statement that Comey made in the report.

 

Regardless of what happens with this, I think it's safe to say that Comey is going to take the fall here, and I'm sure he's already preparing to step down within the next few months. Now Testify.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/jim-comeys-blind-eye-1475191703

 

Rep. Chaffetz questioning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdDfHvLKMx4

 

Rep. Ratcliffe questioning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtmpImqvRwQ

Edited October 1, 2016 by X S

[Svip]

Wait wait, I thought they granted Cheryl Mills immunity to obtain her laptop. And didn't Director Comey say that before doing the interview, they had ruled her out? He did admit it was unusual that Mills was present at the interview with Clinton, but Comey feared that if kicked out her lawyers, Clinton would invoke the Fifth Amendment or something. Although, I have a hard time seeing how Clinton would pull that off.

 

Also considering Cooper's tone in the reply about the server, I wouldn't be surprised if Mills didn't understand the f*ck he was talking about.

[X S]

Wait wait, I thought they granted Cheryl Mills immunity to obtain her laptop. And didn't Director Comey say that before doing the interview, they had ruled her out? He did admit it was unusual that Mills was present at the interview with Clinton, but Comey feared that if kicked out her lawyers, Clinton would invoke the Fifth Amendment or something. Although, I have a hard time seeing how Clinton would pull that off.

 

The problem is that when she was working at the State Department, she was not Clinton's attorney, which means that nothing is privy to the attorney-client privilege in this sort of investigation. She was the Chief of Staff at the time, so there's no need to grant immunity for the laptop. Further, the FBI complied with the attorney-client privilege only because she said she had no knowledge of the server prior to public knowledge, but there's evidence that contradicts that. Aside from the Cooper e-mail, Chaffetz recalls a point in the FBI notes where former IT staffer Bryan Pagliano told Mills that the private server could pose a "federal records retention issue," to which Mills then tells him not to worry about. Mills knew that other secretaries of state had similar setups in the past, including the admitted Colin Powell. Also, Rep. Rattcliffe, a former prosecutor in the Attorney General's office, points out that there is no precedent for ever allowing two witnesses central to an investigation to sit in on the testimony of the subject, and therefore the deposition should have never taken place.

 

I mean, aside from the apparently bad body language when Chaffetz asked him about the BleachBit'd documents as an obstruction of justice, to which Comey looks down at his hands when he can't answer the question, this whole investigation just looks bad from a public perspective, regardless of the truth. Comey was very well respected among Democrats and Republicans, but his overall handling of this just doesn't bode well for him.

[El Dildo]

you know how you know this is bullsh/t?

the presence of Jason Chaffetz.

 

anytime this douchebag is asking questions, it's just political theater kangaroo court. he's only interested in making soundbytes for his constituents, not carrying out a serious investigation.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

Election aside, because most of the headlines right now are filled with "my mic was broken" and "he called her Ms Piggy", etc., headlines for the 'idicocracy', but I'm more concerned with the recent Judiciary Committee meeting with....

 

lol @ Jason Chaffetz evoking serious discussion. Him and congressman Gowdy have taken it upon themselves to disregard all relevant facts while somehow "leading investigations". What a pair of twats.

 

It's unfortunate when people on either side of the isle abuse public resources to create a partisan circle jerk.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Triple Vacuum Seal

[X S]

Let's just untrench ourselves for a moment, because those responses are a perfect example of the cognitive dissonance amongst both camps unwilling to concede the worst of their respective candidates. On one end, you have those who believe that there's a Congressional witch hunt for Clinton, and on the other, a consorted effort to dig up every piece of information up on the "human cheeto" to impeach his credibility. The problem is that the former looks suspect at the hands of Comey, a testimony filled with uncertainties and unprecedented procedures of investigating. So forget that Clinton is even involved for a moment; the FBI is supposed to be the neutral entity, but it carried out the investigation in such an unorthodox manner.

 

For one, the Reddit posts by Combetta look like a conscious effort to destroy sensitive information after he was subpoenaed. How is this not, as Rep. Chaffetz puts, a conscious effort to destroy federal documents? And you won't get anything from Combetta now, you can't even prosecute him because he was given immunity by the FBI.

 

 

 

Comey says that Combetta was trying to erase the names for the sake of privacy, but they're assuming he did this on his own. Why would Combetta just destroy these documents, or why was he actively seeking to remove names from them. Prima facie, the whole thing just reeks of incompetence, but again, this is on Comey, and any reasonable person should be able to see beyond the smoke and mirrors here.

[Not A Nice Person]

Hillary was caught on tape calling Bernie supporters aka yuppies 'BasementDwellers' when in reality she's just exemplifying their predicament.

[make total destroy]

Wait

 

if Sanders supporters are yuppies, what does that make Clinton supporters?

[Eutyphro]

Hillary was caught on tape calling Bernie supporters [...] 'BasementDwellers'.

 

Which was to point out that increasingly people in their twenties live with their parents for a longer time, which is a fact, and not derogatory. She just made it sound a bit derogatory on accident, but the ones making a big deal about it are those who supposedly hate political correctness. Kind of hypocritical for them to desire softer language.

 

She never even said 'dwellers'. She just said "live in their parents basement".

Edited October 1, 2016 by Eutyphro

[Not A Nice Person]

 

Hillary was caught on tape calling Bernie supporters [...] 'BasementDwellers'.

 

Which was to point out that increasingly people in their twenties live with their parents for a longer time, which is a fact, and not derogatory. She just made it sound a bit derogatory on accident, but the ones making a big deal about it are those who supposedly hate political correctness. Kind of hypocritical for them to desire softer language.

 

She never even said 'dwellers'. She just said "live in their parents basement".

I know that, I'm just following the Twitter hashtag, always reply on them to skew a situation.

 

She has bad wording though, people expect her to be a uniformed candidate. I would've said parents house instead of a single room.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Mion

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

Prima facie, the whole thing just reeks of incompetence, but again, this is on Comey, and any reasonable person should be able to see beyond the smoke and mirrors here.

 

And at a certain point, you have to ask just how much public resources are going to be squandered in a smear effort just to execute the political will of a shrinking minority...the Republicans and their sympathizers? There are a number of private entities that are doing the exact same thing...not to mention the routine opposition research efforts in both camps.

 

 

All we have to show for it is more questions and evermore wild conspiracy theories. No smoking gun. What's new? At worst, HRC is just another crafty, shifty, and perhaps dishonest politician. The Clintons have always been smoke and mirrors w/ little to no fire. Like two former law firm partners w/God Tier connections don't know how to cover their tracks. Republicans are really chasing their tails on this one.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Triple Vacuum Seal

[X S]

I just know this, J. Edgar Hoover is turning in his grave right about now. The FBI of the hey-days was ruthless in weeding out corruption from even the highest of offices, and although it was incredibly controversial, it kept dirty politicians on their toes. This is an issue with the FBI of today, a supposedly neutral entity, and unfortunately this will carry into the next administration of whoever becomes president.

 

FBI directors are appointed, so let's see if Comey stays on. I doubt it.

[Saggy]

I just know this, J. Edgar Hoover is turning in his grave right about now. The FBI of the hey-days was ruthless in weeding out corruption from even the highest of offices, and although it was incredibly controversial, it kept dirty politicians on their toes. This is an issue with the FBI of today, a supposedly neutral entity, and unfortunately this will carry into the next administration of whoever becomes president.

 

FBI directors are appointed, so let's see if Comey stays on. I doubt it.

I am going to guess you haven't read much about J. Edgar Hoover's relationship with MLK if you really picture him as some bastion of incorruptible justice. "Incredibly controversial" doesn't really scratch the surface.

 

The thing is that charges just weren't merited in this investigation, and in truth an investigation itself wasn't even merited. The only reason any wheels turned on this was because the Republican establishment wanted this to be the show stopper, they and it was a win-win for them to pursue charges. On the one hand, if charges were pressed, they would win the election; on the other hand, if doubt was raised, they had a better chance at winning too. Comey is smart enough to see this transparency, and isn't looking to for his career to be hallmarked by handing over an election based on trumped up ( no pun intended ) charges that would have never stuck or have even been entertained in open court if it weren't for the person and timing involved. When we're talking about how much of a crime Hilary really committed here, people are kind of overlooking some pretty obscene moments of corruption that were far and beyond that scope of criminal behavior. Watergate, Iran-Contra, I think the republicans were simply rejoicing that for once they were the ones coming out looking clean.

[X S]

I am going to guess you haven't read much about J. Edgar Hoover

 

Sure, he actively sought to incriminate homosexuals, communists, political dissidents, and anyone that may have simply disagreed with him. He also pissed all over civil liberties by illegally wire-tapping everyone he deemed an enemy. But as some in here already know, I enjoy the inner-workings of political entities and opponents undermining each other, and that's the point I'm making. Politicians, including presidents, feared Hoover.

 

 

Comey is smart enough to see this transparency, and isn't looking to for his career to be hallmarked by handing over an election based on trumped up ( no pun intended ) charges that would have never stuck or have even been entertained in open court if it weren't for the person and timing involved.

 

Right, given the circumstances of the election, Comey did not want to be responsible for incriminating anyone related to Clinton, so I can easily see the motivation for providing immunity to several key witnesses. The problem is that this investigation was given special treatment, period. That's the point of contention, but then again, the FBI is a wing of the DOJ.

 

 

When we're talking about how much of a crime Hilary really committed here, people are kind of overlooking some pretty obscene moments of corruption that were far and beyond that scope of criminal behavior. Watergate, Iran-Contra, I think the republicans were simply rejoicing that for once they were the ones coming out looking clean.

 

It's certainly a case of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Republicans have been hammering away at this, and I've largely ignored it because I understood it was mostly a publicity stunt to impeach Clinton and her staffers, but the recent revelations, and these obvious attempts to destroy e-mails in relation to the Benghazi attacks only three days after the State Department was subpoenaed for Clinton's servers with an order of preservation speaks volumes. Why was Combetta told to delete this information, even after an order of preservation was communicated to him? That was the whole reason we ever learned about the server in the first place, because the Congressional Committee sought out answers to the Benghazi incident. If there was damning evidence in a situation like that, then it would most certainly be comparable to Watergate or Iran-Contra. Combetta proceeded to delete that information a few days following the subpoena.

 

But since we're talking digging up suspect information, I feel like I should turn the tables. I'm being a little tough on Clinton, but that's because we have so many Clinton surrogates here. The NY Times got a hold of some of Trump's tax returns from 1995. The report mentions a loss of $916 million in NY, which means no federal income taxes were paid that year. According to laws, it could have exempted him from paying taxes in subsequent years, but we don't have that information. Gotta love that American tax code.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/01/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

The NY Times got a hold of some of Trump's tax returns from 1995. The report mentions a loss of $916 million in NY, which means no federal income taxes were paid that year. According to laws, it could have exempted him from paying taxes in subsequent years, but we don't have that information. Gotta love that American tax code.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/01/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

 

Pretty sh*tty 'loop hole' indeed. Though the recognition of a Net Operating Loss is not a loop hole per se, what's troubling is how it was being treated. My tax accounting is a little shabby nowadays. But basically, DJT's relationship to the Trump Organization was legally structured in a way that allowed him to file personal income taxes with some of the business' losses being treated as personal capital losses (and in this case can be carried forward 15 years as well). These losses cancel out his personal taxable income even though he is not necessarily personally liable for those losses...as he generated millions of $ in personal income.

 

We should also keep in mind that the Trump Organization is not a publicly-traded company. So it's not required by the SEC to report it's financial statements using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Even if DJT made the organization's financial statements public, there could be all sorts of shady reporting practices.

 

 

 

Fun Fact: Trump cheerleader/"activist investor" Carl Icahn was the largest non-institutional shareholder of TTWO (owner of R* Games) around the time of GTAV's release. He probably made a killing too.

Edited October 2, 2016 by Triple Vacuum Seal

[Twilight Sky]

You know something is wrong with an upcoming election when a bunch of people on a forum who aren't even politicians, are talking politics more than the two presidential candidates ever had within the last couple of weeks. And are actually having better debates without trying to dig up old sh*t from 20 years ago or trying to re-open old wounds that got nothing to do with politics.

[Reformed Squid]

The presidential debates are pointless this year. If I wanted to listen to petulant children lie and bicker for two hours, I'd just go play Call of Duty

[Clem Fandango]

You know something is wrong with an upcoming election when a bunch of people on a forum who aren't even politicians, are talking politics more than the two presidential candidates ever had within the last couple of weeks. And are actually having better debates without trying to dig up old sh*t from 20 years ago or trying to re-open old wounds that got nothing to do with politics.

The population is generally much more educated than the elite. Hence, revolution.

[El Dildo]

Hence, revolution.

yeah, it'd be nice if it worked that way.

at present the "population" is still too comfortable...