12
   

Trump in a nutshell

 
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 02:26 pm
@parados,
Quote:
Should we set the same standard for you that you are setting for Clinton?

Hasn't that been already done? I mean anyone who has been on a2k long enough has heard this situation thrown about many times. It seems to be a fall back strategy to quiet him.

Wait, is this a different person this has been done to? Isn't the same type of game played with either Oralloy or BillRM?
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 06:57 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
Trump: "They will stop, they will frisk, and they will take the gun away and they won't have anything to shoot with."


Stop and Frisk will just give a nut job cop (not all of them are nut jobs, just a lot of cops who cover up and defend nut jobs) a reason to claim the big black man wasn't following orders and shoot him dead after which they will find no gun on him at all.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 07:14 am
Why Donald Trump Should Not Be President

Excerpt
Quote:

Here’s how Mr. Trump is selling himself and why he can’t be believed.
A financial wizard who can bring executive magic to government?
Despite his towering properties, Mr. Trump has a record rife with bankruptcies and sketchy ventures like Trump University, which authorities are investigating after numerous complaints of fraud. His name has been chiseled off his failed casinos in Atlantic City.

Mr. Trump’s brazen refusal to disclose his tax returns — as Mrs. Clinton and other nominees for decades have done — should sharpen voter wariness of his business and charitable operations. Disclosure would undoubtedly raise numerous red flags; the public record already indicates that in at least some years he made full use of available loopholes and paid no taxes.

Mr. Trump has been opaque about his questionable global investments in Russia and elsewhere, which could present conflicts of interest as president, particularly if his business interests are left in the hands of his children, as he intends. Investigations have found self-dealing. He notably tapped $258,000 in donors’ money from his charitable foundation to settle lawsuits involving his for-profit businesses, according to The Washington Post.

A straight talker who tells it like it is?

Mr. Trump, who has no experience in national security, declares that he has a plan to soundly defeat the Islamic State militants in Syria, but won’t reveal it, bobbing and weaving about whether he would commit ground troops. Voters cannot judge whether he has any idea what he’s talking about without an outline of his plan, yet Mr. Trump ludicrously insists he must not tip off the enemy.

Another of his cornerstone proposals — his campaign pledge of a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslim newcomers plus the deportation of 11 million undocumented immigrants across a border wall paid for by Mexico — has been subjected to endless qualifications as he zigs and zags in pursuit of middle-ground voters.

Whatever his gyrations, Mr. Trump always does make clear where his heart lies — with the anti-immigrant, nativist and racist signals that he scurrilously employed to build his base.

He used the shameful “birther” campaign against President Obama’s legitimacy as a wedge for his candidacy. But then he opportunistically denied his own record, trolling for undecided voters by conceding that Mr. Obama was a born American. In the process he tried to smear Mrs. Clinton as the instigator of the birther canard and then fled reporters’ questions.

Since his campaign began, NBC News has tabulated that Mr. Trump has made 117 distinct policy shifts on 20 major issues, including three contradictory views on abortion in one eight-hour stretch. As reporters try to pin down his contradictions, Mr. Trump has mocked them at his rallies. He said he would “loosen” libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations that displease him.

An expert negotiator who can fix government and overpower other world leaders?

His plan for cutting the national debt was far from a confidence builder: He said he might try to persuade creditors to accept less than the government owed. This fanciful notion, imported from Mr. Trump’s debt-steeped real estate world, would undermine faith in the government and the stability of global financial markets. His tax-cut plan has been no less alarming. It was initially estimated to cost $10 trillion in tax revenue, then, after revisions, maybe $3 trillion, by one adviser’s estimate. There is no credible indication of how this would be paid for — only assurances that those in the upper brackets will be favored.

If Mr. Trump were to become president, his open doubts about the value of NATO would present a major diplomatic and security challenge, as would his repeated denunciations of trade deals and relations with China. Mr. Trump promises to renegotiate the Iran nuclear control agreement, as if it were an air-rights deal on Broadway. Numerous experts on national defense and international affairs have recoiled at the thought of his commanding the nuclear arsenal. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell privately called Mr. Trump “an international pariah.” Mr. Trump has repeatedly denounced global warming as a “hoax,” although a golf course he owns in Ireland is citing global warming in seeking to build a protective wall against a rising sea.

In expressing admiration for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, Mr. Trump implies acceptance of Mr. Putin’s dictatorial abuse of critics and dissenters, some of whom have turned up murdered, and Mr. Putin’s vicious crackdown on the press. Even worse was Mr. Trump’s urging Russia to meddle in the presidential campaign by hacking the email of former Secretary of State Clinton. Voters should consider what sort of deals Mr. Putin might obtain if Mr. Trump, his admirer, wins the White House.


There is more at the source, really worth reading IMO. I do not see how anyone can vote Trump no matter how much they hate Hillary. In the past when folks used words like, "it's un-American if you do this or that" it has been sheer hyperbole. I am not sure in-American even applies in this case, not sure it is enough. Whatever the term, voting for Trump and getting him one vote closer to the WH is dangerous to the US and the by extension the world.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 10:47 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
Oh, you don't have credible evidence of someone breaking the law? STFU, then. We've got better things to do than indulge in your masturbatory fantasies about your chosen candidate's opponent miraculously resigning.


Mrs. Clinton told the House Select Committee on Benghazi, for instance, that she had turned over all her “work-related” emails to the State Department and that “nothing” in the more than 60,000 emails routed through her private server “was marked classified at the time I sent or received it.”

The F.B.I. investigation found that, in fact, there were “thousands” of work-related emails that her lawyers did not turn over, and that a handful of emails were marked classified at the time — although the State Department now says they should not have been.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/us/politics/gop-seeks-criminal-inquiry-of-hillary-clintons-testimony-to-congress.html?_r=0

Gowdy: “Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private email. Was that true?”

Comey: “Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.”

Gowdy: “So it was not true?”

Comey: “That's what I said.”
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/clintons-sworn-testimony-congress-contradicts-fbi-directors-testimony

Way too easy Daddy. Now, you wanna make me STFU tough guy?
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:10 am
@woiyo,
Misstatements or mistakes or being misinformed are not necessarily lies and you know this.

If Sec. Clinton told her lawyers to send all work related emails to the State Department and those lawyers told her "Ok, we did that. All done and you're in the clear boss" it would not be a lie.
woiyo
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:13 am
@maporsche,
Oh, of course. It the lawyers who lied.

Then you must use the same threshold for Trump.
Quote:
Misstatements or mistakes or being misinformed are not necessarily lies


Agree?
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:15 am
@woiyo,
You know that it was her lawyers who did the collecting, deleting, and transferring the emails to the statement department right? It sure as !@#$ wasn't Hillary herself doing that work.


Show me something Trump has said and we can determine it's truthfullness or not.
DrewDad
 
  4  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:16 am
@woiyo,
Try reading it again, fool.

Clinton: not marked classified.

Comey: Classified information sent.

Also:

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/revisiting-clinton-and-classified-information/
Quote:
Comey said three emails had “portion markings” on them indicating that they were classified, but they were not properly marked and therefore could have been missed by Clinton. He said the emails were marked as classified with the letter “C” in the body of the email.

Kirby said the State Department believes that at least two of the emails were mistakenly marked as confidential. He could not speak to the third email, saying ​the department didn’t have​ “all of the records and documents that the FBI used in their investigation.”



Cartwright, July 7: So, if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what’s classified and what’s not classified and we’re following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.


As I said, STFU, because all you're doing is echoing debunked information.
woiyo
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:16 am
@maporsche,
So let's assume you are correct. You are suggesting that her lawyers lied to her. Is that what you are saying?
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:19 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
Cartwright, July 7: So, if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what’s classified and what’s not classified and we’re following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.


Then according to Comely, she should have known. That makes her stupid or a liar. At least not an "expert" which she portrays herself to be.

You really amaze me.

Try again??
maporsche
 
  4  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:20 am
@woiyo,
You don't have to assume I'm correct. It's a known fact that her lawyers did the diligence on the 60,000 emails.


I'm saying that the lawyers could have thought they sent over everything to the state department and they could have simply been mistaken.

No one has to have lied to anyone. Mistakes happen.
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:21 am
@maporsche,
Shocked
She seems to make many mistakes
maporsche
 
  5  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:21 am
@woiyo,
Or she made a mistake (or more likely a member of her staff did).

You expect people to be perfect 100% of the time woiyo? She sent 60,000 emails and THREE of them had this marking. That's a pretty damn high success rate for any human being.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:22 am
@woiyo,
Well, she's only human...
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  5  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 11:27 am
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:

Quote:
Cartwright, July 7: So, if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what’s classified and what’s not classified and we’re following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.


Then according to Comely, she should have known. That makes her stupid or a liar. At least not an "expert" which she portrays herself to be.

You really amaze me.

Try again??


And you totally misread this Comey quote...again.

He's saying that it would be a reasonable inference that Clinton COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN that those 3 documents were classified.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  4  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 01:06 pm
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:

Quote:
Cartwright, July 7: So, if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what’s classified and what’s not classified and we’re following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.


Then according to Comely, she should have known. That makes her stupid or a liar. At least not an "expert" which she portrays herself to be.

You really amaze me.

Try again??

Yeah, I think you ought to try again. The portion you quoted directly contradicts your conclusion. Assuming you meant "Comely" to mean "Comey."

That makes you stupid or a liar, or, most likely, both.
woiyo
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 01:18 pm
@DrewDad,
Well I guess Clinton thought C meant something else. Why would a Sec of State with all her experience and sound judgement think a C meant Classified? It can't be Clintons fault. It had to be the person who sent the e-mails fault.
It cant be Clintons fault. It's her staffs fault.
I guess I expect to much from leaders.
maporsche
 
  4  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 01:23 pm
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:

Well I guess Clinton thought C meant something else. Why would a Sec of State with all her experience and sound judgement think a C meant Classified? It can't be Clintons fault. It had to be the person who sent the e-mails fault.
It cant be Clintons fault. It's her staffs fault.
I guess I expect to much from leaders.


Hard to keep up with these moving goal posts.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 02:53 pm
@woiyo,
Since at least two of the three instances were marked incorrectly, it's possible that no one is at fault at all.
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2016 04:54 pm
@DrewDad,
And honestly, who cares? The emails weren't hacked. Powell's emails were. Maybe he should have kept his personal server.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/14/2024 at 02:44:46