Trump runs for POTUS/ Trumped Up! Part VII

[Foolmewunz]

That's the "everybody does it" defense. But there really is no evidence that everybody does do it. Clinton's position is unique in that she helps run a multi-billion-dollar family foundation and was soliciting contributions for it from the same international sources that she dealt with officially as SecState, and at the same time that her former president hubby was soliciting tens of millions of dollars in payments for personal services. At times, her closest advisors at State were also on the foundation payroll. The lines between her official business, foundation business, hubby's personal business and her personal business are vague and gray -- when they can be discerned at all.

Clinton is better than Trump. Clinton will always be better than Trump. But that doesn't mean that her conduct has been above reproach, or that legitimate questions can't be raised.

He was not making a populist tu quoque argument... "everybody does it". He was expressing the same sentiments I've expressed. Congress is immune to FOIA requests. How would Gowdy's emails and appointment log look over the past 18 months? We'll never know, I guess. But you're generally a political realist. Don't you think there are probably a few (thousand) emails from the RNC to various Congressional leaders talking about how and what to do to make the DNC, POTUS and Nominee-in-Waiting look bad? I'd also love to see ALL Congress/Senate communications with their financiers and with lobbyists.... ALL. Both parties.

 

[acbytesla]

That's the "everybody does it" defense. But there really is no evidence that everybody does do it. Clinton's position is unique in that she helps run a multi-billion-dollar family foundation and was soliciting contributions for it from the same international sources that she dealt with officially as SecState, and at the same time that her former president hubby was soliciting tens of millions of dollars in payments for personal services. At times, her closest advisors at State were also on the foundation payroll. The lines between her official business, foundation business, hubby's personal business and her personal business are vague and gray -- when they can be discerned at all.

Clinton is better than Trump. Clinton will always be better than Trump. But that doesn't mean that her conduct has been above reproach, or that legitimate questions can't be raised.

Do what? What exactly has Hillary done? What I have learned about Hillary from all these emails is that she is calculating and presents different faces to different constituencies and she knows it. Show me a politician or a successful business person who doesn't.

Her husband is a private citizen and not a public servant and there isn't a god damn thing wrong with him raising money for charity AND HIMSELF! You can't show a single Quid Pro Quo from Secretary Clinton.. And so what that some of her advisors were also interested in charity. What the hell is wrong with that?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Do what? What exactly has Hillary done? What I have learned about Hillary from all these emails is that she is calculating and presents different faces to different constituencies and she knows it. Show me a politician or a successful business person who doesn't.

Her husband is a private citizen and not a public servant and there isn't a god damn thing wrong with him raising money for charity AND HIMSELF! You can't show a single Quid Pro Quo from Secretary Clinton.. And so what that some of her advisors were also interested in charity. What the hell is wrong with that?

This ^

 

[Firestone]

Trump is right about one thing: "the polls are rigged".

A Des Moines woman has been charged with Election Misconduct, a Class D felony, after allegedly voting twice for GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump. Terri Rote says she was afraid her first ballot for Trump would be changed to a vote for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

"I wasn't planning on doing it twice, it was spur of the moment," says Rote. "The polls are rigged."

http://iowapublicradio.org/post/des...twice-trump-because-polls-are-rigged#stream/0

 

[Belz...]

It is not well-informed speculation.

Irrelevant to my point.

We don't know much about Trump's relationship with his daughter, aside (of course) from his very creepy comments.

Repeated comments.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

There isn't anything known to be damning on these new emails, only that they are new.

Unless you've seen them all, that assuredly assumes a fact not in evidence.

As an aside, they do not have to be from or to Hillary, or even from her server, to have probative value.

 

[Darat]

So are the only really good hackers Russian? I want to see Trump's tax return leaked. But no matter what that did to Donald, it would also make the Democrats look bad because it would show that the government can't keep information secure.

I'm sure it isn't only stored on government hardware, there will be copies on Trump's own hardware and we know the security is crap on a lot of that. Seems strange that the hackers haven't hacked Trump's systems doesn't it...

 

[phiwum]

Unless you've seen them all, that assuredly assumes a fact not in evidence.

As an aside, they do not have to be from or to Hillary, or even from her server, to have probative value.

I don't understand why the discovery of new emails might prompt you to abstain.

Here's what I think I know: the FBI discovered emails on a laptop used by Huma, and these emails may have something to do with the previous investigation. Hence, it is reasonable to think that this includes emails to and from Hillary.

That's it. There are some more emails. There might be something damning in there, but we don't know that there is.

So, why consider abstaining instead of voting for Hillary on the basis that there are more emails?

 

[BobTheCoward]

That's the "everybody does it" defense. But there really is no evidence that everybody does do it. Clinton's position is unique in that she helps run a multi-billion-dollar family foundation and was soliciting contributions for it from the same international sources that she dealt with officially as SecState, and at the same time that her former president hubby was soliciting tens of millions of dollars in payments for personal services. At times, her closest advisors at State were also on the foundation payroll. The lines between her official business, foundation business, hubby's personal business and her personal business are vague and gray -- when they can be discerned at all.

Clinton is better than Trump. Clinton will always be better than Trump. But that doesn't mean that her conduct has been above reproach, or that legitimate questions can't be raised.

But there is also no evidence lines were crossed, correct?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

And he still managed to reach the best Syrian policy (don't kill syroansz. Don't stop them from immigrating).

I think that makes him the smartest candidate.

Don't be stupid. That he aligns with you on a single issue does not make him "the smartest candidate". He has serious gaps in his knowledge of current world events and U.S. history.

That he's completely ignorant of Aleppo would mean that he has failed to incorporate potentially useful information into his "Syrian policy". Your simplified explanation of that policy is almost uselessly generic.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Don't be stupid. That he aligns with you on a single issue does not make him "the smartest candidate". He has serious gaps in his knowledge of current world events and U.S. history.

That he's completely ignorant of Aleppo would mean that he has failed to incorporate potentially useful information into his "Syrian policy". Your simplified explanation of that policy is almost uselessly generic.

We don't just align on a single issue. We align on nearly issue.

The policy is simple....take no action.

 

[Stacko]

Trump is right about one thing: "the polls are rigged".

They let African Americans vote and I think Terri doesn't like that.

 

[quadraginta]

Trump is right about one thing: "the polls are rigged".

She appears to have Trump Lip.




I wonder if that's from voting for him twice, or just from voting for him at all.

 

[Ladewig]

Trump is right about one thing: "the polls are rigged".

I wasn't planning on doing it twice, it was spur of the moment,"​

She cast her ballot at one early-voting location and then at a later time, drove to another early voting location to cast a second ballot. How is that spur of the moment?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

She cast her ballot at one early-voting location and then at a later time, drove to another early voting location to cast a second ballot. How is that spur of the moment?

"Spur of the moment" is gulty-ese for "I guess I didn't think that through."

 

[acbytesla]

Unless you've seen them all, that assuredly assumes a fact not in evidence.

As an aside, they do not have to be from or to Hillary, or even from her server, to have probative value.

But it also doesn't mean it's not benign or exculpatory. All it is is new data. Comey himself warned about reading something into it. That it gives you pause or makes you hesitant now to vote for her means that you are.

 

[newyorkguy]

...But that doesn't mean that [Clinton's] conduct has been above reproach, or that legitimate questions can't be raised.

Agree, and if that was all we were seeing very few people would have a problem with it. But that's not what we're seeing. We're seeing a witch hunt, we're seeing people who are determined to get her anyway they can, and if they can't find something solid they'll manufacture something and pretend it's solid. The hell with the country, the hell with the rest of us. It's all about them and what they think, what they want. The best interests of the U.S.A and the American people are a distant second. Example: yesterday GOP Chairman Reince Priebus called on Hillary Clinton to withdraw from the race. Priebus says if what the FBI has found is so damaging -- despite the Director's clear statement they haven't even looked at the emails yet -- they had to make an announcement eleven days before the election then Clinton is clearly not qualified to be president.

We know what Trump is saying. Never seen this level of criminal conduct before. She must go to prison.

It becomes depressing.

 

[steve s]

She cast her ballot at one early-voting location and then at a later time, drove to another early voting location to cast a second ballot. How is that spur of the moment?

And if she believed that one of her ballots might be changed for Hillary, why would she think that the other one wouldn't also be changed? Maybe the other polling place was in a "good" neighborhood.

Steve S

 

[newyorkguy]

Never seen this level of criminal conduct before.

And his buddy Putin has had political opponents thrown in prison on bogus charges, has had people murdered -- Senator McCain said he "knew some of them" -- but that's not the "same level of criminal conduct" he sees in Hillary Clinton. The same Hillary Clinton that Trump said in 2008 would make "a great president."

To people around the world it looks like Americans are losing their collective minds. Very sad.

 

[TragicMonkey]

All talk of damning emails that nobody knows what the contents are, but whatever they are it's super evil, reminds me of another politician, one who said he had in his hand a list of State Department employees who were communists (shock gasp reaction). Of course he actually didn't, he was holding a blank sheet of paper, but enough people fell for it that it caused a lot of fuss and enormous damage to the entire country.