2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Because how can 13-20 million illegals be in the US and survive? Many steal ID’s or use phony ID’s to get jobs, welfare and other social benefits. Voting is a simple process when you have a stolen or phony ID. And since they can not be deported or jailed under Obama, they have nothing to lose by voting illegally.

http://immigrationreform.com/2016/03/09/irs-encourages-illegal-immigrants-to-commit-identity-theft-and-refuses-to-inform-victims/
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/illegals-border-fake-id/2015/01/08/id/617256/

"Voter ID laws keep illegals from voting"

"Illegals have stolen or phony IDs"

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Bonus: deportations under Obama

https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story%3Fid%3D41715661?client=safari

Hank Scorpio

"An obscure private firm hired by the State Department over internal objections to protect U.S. diplomats in Benghazi just months before the American ambassador and three others were killed was staffed with hastily recruited locals with terror ties who helped carry out the attack, multiple sources told Fox News."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/11/07/benghazi-guards-turned-on-us-diplomats-in-2012-attack-sources-say.html

Pretty big claim here, putting their neck on the line.

Amerika

First Up wrote: »

Correct. The notion that an illegal would risk detection by being challenged at a polling station is absurd.
The illegals (Irish among them) will spend tomorrow working at their low paid jobs and hoping sanity prevails.

In 2008 it has been reported that 6.4% of 11 million illegal immigrants voted, as I have already provided the info. It has also been reported 11% of illegals in California vote.

Christy42

B0jangles wrote: »

What is this word salad supposed to mean?

Computers can't figure out exact context (ignoring that they just used the computers to cut down on the number of emails they had to sift through but however).

Rabble, rabble rabble, sticking Kill into the candidates name for reasons.

I believe that is a rough translation. It does not appear to add much to the discussion.

Sofa Spud

First Up wrote: »

Correct. The notion that an illegal would risk detection by being challenged at a polling station is absurd.
The illegals (Irish among them) will spend tomorrow working at their low paid jobs and hoping sanity prevails.

Yeah, agreed First Up, but I think the absurdity of it does not come into it, or logic for that matter. Inside the bubble of uninformed, populist scare mongering, illegals are capable of anything and to blame for everything.

I watched Trump last night give a speech in Minnesota after the newest Comey letter came out - I linked to it in this thread. I kept watching and he started to talk about Somali refugees coming to Minnesota and referenced a stabbing that had happened in a mall somewhere in the state. The clear message was that refugees equate to crime and terrorism.

For the record, Minnesota has the highest Somali population in the States, and they have been there for quite a while - I can remember watching a programme - I think it might have been one of Anthony Bourdain's travel/food shows, where he visited 'Little Mogadishu'. This was a community of refugees, fleeing from the sh!tstorm in Somalia and trying to make a better life for themselves and their families, and now the presidential candidate is whipping up irrational fear and hatred against them.

When you hear guff like that from a candidate, that reflects and fuels the irrational and fact free BS that fills the echo chambers on the net and then see posts about illegals voting, when it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, you have to wonder how this level of bile and bias will evolve. Trump may lose, but what has been created, and it's not all down to him alone, will not disappear after his Twitter meltdown runs out of energy. There is a massive section of the US that are so disillusioned, have lost so much and have little hope, that they are liable to believe anything that gives them a target to funnel their hatred and frustration towards, and once Trump sallies off into the sunset on his golf buggy, someone else will step in to fill the unthinking demagogue hole he leaves behind him...

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

"An obscure private firm hired by the State Department over internal objections to protect U.S. diplomats in Benghazi just months before the American ambassador and three others were killed was staffed with hastily recruited locals with terror ties who helped carry out the attack, multiple sources told Fox News."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/11/07/benghazi-guards-turned-on-us-diplomats-in-2012-attack-sources-say.amp.html?client=safari

Pretty big claim here, putting their neck on the line.

last clutch at straws before Tuesday?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

"Voter ID laws keep illegals from voting"

"Illegals have stolen or phony IDs"

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You seem to always leave out the word 'valid.' McMullin would not be happy knowing that.

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

last clutch at straws before Tuesday?

Bit more than straws imo.

"One former guard who witnessed the attack, Weeam Mohamed, confirmed in an email sent to the Citizens Commission on Benghazi and obtained by Fox News, that at least four of the guards hired by Blue Mountain took part in the attack after opening doors to allow their confederates in."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/11/07/benghazi-guards-turned-on-us-diplomats-in-2012-attack-sources-say.html (fixed link)

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

You seem to always leave out the word 'valid.' McMullin would not be happy knowing that.

Is your viewpoint that weak? Shame.

Sofa Spud

Amerika wrote: »

In 2008 it has been reported that 6.4% of 11 million illegal immigrants voted, as I have already provided the info. It has also been reported 11% of illegals in California vote.

Once again, I'll bite - show us links to back up your claims, please.

Jan_de_Bakker

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Once again, I'll bite - show us links to back up your claims, please.

Alex Jones is all over it right now on his show!

But seriously, they are taking it out of context from some interview OBama did.

K-9

A new poster was site banned there by the admins so their posts and replies to them will be missing.

Sofa Spud

Jan_de_Bakker wrote: »

Alex Jones is all over it right now on his show!

But seriously, they are taking it out of context from some interview OBama did.

I can imagine AJ would love that!
What gets me is that people are willing to believe that over 700,000 illegal immigrants would risk presenting themselves at a polling station!
So, they are willing to risk being caught for being an illegal, for ID theft (which I'm guessing is a felony) and for illegal voting?
I found the report that I assume was being referenced and it's hilarious - and there's more articles about it being debunked than referencing it.

Hank Scorpio

In relation to my previous link

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Blue Mountain used local newspaper ads to assemble a team of 20 guards, many of whom had terror ties, after securing a $9.2 million annual contract.
"Many of the local Libyans who attacked the consulate on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, were the actual guards that the State Department under Hillary Clinton hired to protect the Consulate in Benghazi,” Tiegen told Fox News.

This is shocking if true.

Overheal

Indeed but still firmly places the entire campaign against Hillary on "...but Benghazi!"

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

Indeed but still firmly places the entire campaign against Hillary on "...but Benghazi!"

Yeah, sure what's a few dead soldiers. Anything people attack her on, emails, Benghazi etc were her own doing, nobody elses.

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Yeah, sure what's a few dead soldiers.

There always are. I'm sure General Eisenhower got sworn in on a perfect record of no dead men under his command too.

TheDoctor

As the only US embassy every attacked by terrorist this is indeed shocking.

I hear that she interviewed the guards personally too.

Sofa Spud

Overheal wrote: »

Indeed but still firmly places the entire campaign against Hillary on "...but Benghazi!"

It also raises the question of where does culpability begin? Can she be held responsible, as Secretary of Sate, for the hiring practices, in one instance, of a security contractor in one specific location?

Should she held responsible for food poisoning by a food contractor in one office location? Or a cleaning company that hired people that turned out to be stealing from staff?

If she signed off on it, or one of her direct reports where they were following a direct instruction from her, then fine, but it would still be tenuous at best.

But your right, it still boils down to '..but Benghazi'.

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

There always are. I'm sure General Eisenhower got sworn in on a perfect record of no dead men under his command too.

There is nothing that can come out about her that will stop you defending her. And that's fine you're entitled to do that, I just can't understand it.

Sofa Spud

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

There is nothing that can come out about her that will stop you defending her. And that's fine you're entitled to do that, I just can't understand it.

That's not really the issue - my guess is that most folks on this thread would not be wholeheartedly supporting Hillary, they just have a problem with attacks on her that are based on little or no fact, or have already been investigated (often numerous times) and nothing has come of it.

Reagan sent the Marines into Beirut, 248 were killed in an attack and he promptly took them out again, when he said he wouldn't - did he face years of wasteful congressional hearings over that?

Or is it that the echo chamber media and internet didn't exist at the time to sensationalise the story and attack their favourite bogeywoman and, instead, people felt that, horrific as it was, bad things happen in bad places and it was left alone for the families to morn their dead.

First Up

Amerika wrote:

In 2008 it has been reported that 6.4% of 11 million illegal immigrants voted, as I have already provided the info. It has also been reported 11% of illegals in California vote.

You are confusing non citizens who are legally entitled to vote with illegal immigrants who are not - and who would be nuts to try.

TheDoctor

9 Republican lead investigations also couldn't get her on Benghazi. Maybe no.10 will do the job.

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

There is nothing that can come out about her that will stop you defending her. And that's fine you're entitled to do that, I just can't understand it.

Because I won't hold her to a standard that quite simply doesn't exist. There have been deaths in every administration. Every single one. Many avoidable or preventable. Under Obama the military leveled a Doctors Without Borders hospital, Bushs military killed hundreds of thousands, irradiated half of Iraq with depleted uranium shells, mutated an entire generation of kids. First gulf war the Vietnam war Korea bay of pigs The Bomb - no president walked away with clean hands. Not one (that served any real length of time, like a full term). Nor did many in their cabinets.

No, I don't think someone who held a cabinet position in a White House should shock anyone in the least if they had a hand in preventable death. In fact you would have to be completely naive to think they won't happen under the next administration or the next after that or that. For that matter I certainly can't imagine someone with no political experience to assume the office and do it without making grave mistakes along the way. So no, it's again not a question of defending her, but simply applying the same rational standard to everyone.

Akrasia

The entire Trump campaign was either vague 'make America great again' or 'my opponent is the worst of the worst'

It worked during the primaries, Its working in the General election, but only with 40% of the electorate.

sReq | uTeK

Hi guys pardon my ignorance, I've not read the thread. I have no faith in Hilary Clinton, but I do feel that she is the lesser of the two evils.

I can't imagine an America with Trump in charge, I can stomach one with Clinton.

BonnieSituation

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

By all means, yes. Both parties' establishments are utterly rotten to their cores, which is why I was and remain a Sanders advocate. Although I fear he'll be too old to contemplate going through this again, I hold on to some hope that he might challenge whoever wins this election for 2020, or that one of his endorsed candidates might.

Elizabeth Warren would make an incredible president, but she seems - understandably - to fear what will happen to congress with one less progressive voice there, if she were to win the presidency.

You'd have thought so but her hawkish and unwavering support for Israel is off-putting. It's been said that Netanyahu hasn't a patch on her.

Shame that.

Sparks43

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Hi guys pardon my ignorance, I've not read the thread. I have no faith in Hilary Clinton, but I do feel that she is the lesser of the two evils.

I can't imagine an America with Trump in charge, I can stomach one with Clinton.

It was put to me a while back that on the choice between Trump and Clinton.

Say you needed an operation. Who would you prefer to do it? The surgeon with a couple of malpractice suits ot the burger chef at McDonald's :eek:

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

There have been deaths in every administration. Every single one.

Why didn't they send help though? 3 times or something it wasn't sent I've forgotten the finer details. I agree with the above but I don't think it applies to this circumstance. If what Fox news is saying is true, and call me crude, if she didn't send help because they wanted to cover this thing up and let people die that is wrong and she should be severely punished. Alot of IF's but clearly that's what the article in implying.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Why didn't they send help though? 3 times or something it wasn't sent I've forgotten the finer details. I agree with the above but I don't think it applies to this circumstance. If what Fox news is saying is true, and call me crude, if she didn't send help because they wanted to cover this thing up and let people die that is wrong and she should be punished. Alot of IF's but clearly that's the article in implying.

They are implying because they know they can'take say anything outright. If, if, if, maybe, Imagine. At some someone needs something more than that to convict her. If we apply that standard of proof then I will go back to Trump and the 13 year old. It can be backed up about as much as this can.

How many hearings did we have on this from Republicans who were very obviously not biased in Hillary's favour? Ifs, buts and maybes don'the make a conviction. Especially when people are quite happy to give other administrations free passes but keep trying to take one person down because of their surname.

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

They are implying because they know they can'take say anything outright. If, if, if, maybe, Imagine. At some someone needs something more than that to convict her. If we apply that standard of proof then I will go back to Trump and the 13 year old. It can be backed up about as much as this can.

How many hearings did we have on this from Republicans who were very obviously not biased in Hillary's favour? Ifs, buts and maybes don'the make a conviction. Especially when people are quite happy to give other administrations free passes but keep trying to take one person down because of their surname.

I agree obviously, the anonymous sources (if ) they exist, need to come forward for this to go anywhere. They did obtain an email from Weeam Mohamed which was sent to the Citizens Commission on Benghazi with the same story.

Will be interesting to see what happens from here.

vetinari

Fox news really aren't trustworthy when it comes to "secret sources"
It's only been less than a week since Bret Baier was saying Hillary was likely to be indicted.

As for Amerika's assertion that illegals would risk trying to vote in large numbers???!!!
Where do you come up with this stuff??
I came to the US legally on a work visa, I'm currently on a green card.
NO ONE of sound body and mind (whether legal or illegal) wants to draw USCIS on them.
The risk reward ratio for an illegal immigrant attempting to vote is nowhere near worth it!

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Why didn't they send help though? 3 times or something it wasn't sent I've forgotten the finer details. I agree with the above but I don't think it applies to this circumstance. If what Fox news is saying is true, and call me crude, if she didn't send help because they wanted to cover this thing up and let people die that is wrong and she should be severely punished. Alot of IF's but clearly that's what the article in implying.

That's the thing: it's all innuendo. Just like the Comey letter. The letter didn't say anything of substance just "hey we found emails on a device we're investigating" the media reporting was all innuendo: "the 33,000 missing emails*???*" "finally the proof to indict her*???*" it's the same dog and pony show with "She let people die *??!*"

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

That's the thing: it's all innuendo. Just like the Comey letter. The letter didn't say anything of substance just "hey we found emails on a device we're investigating" the media reporting was all innuendo: "the 33,000 missing emails*???*" "finally the proof to indict her*???*" it's the same dog and pony show with "She let people die *??!*"

It's not just pure innuendo, both John Tiegan and Weeam Mohamed who witnessed the event confirmed it.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I agree obviously, the anonymous sources (if ) they exist, need to come forward for this to go anywhere. They did obtain an email from Weeam Mohamed which was sent to the Citizens Commission on Benghazi with the same story.

Will be interesting to see what happens from here.

No it won't. We have had a full summer of next week you'll see a smoking gun against Hillary and nothing. Nada, zip, 0. Every time Assange or someone just goes we will have stuff next time we swear and Trump supporters flock to it saying we can't support Hillary till this that or the other is released and nothing of note gets released. Can you not see the ridiculous theme that has been running for months of we have evidence she is crooked so you should call her crooked before we release it and we are withholding it for reasons.

When something finally comes from it then talk but till then it is just the Republicans who cried Wolf 100 .

RobertKK

So the Democrats were advising CNN on what questions to ask Trump and Cruz.

Nothing surprises at this stage.

hatrickpatrick

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You'd have thought so but her hawkish and unwavering support for Israel is off-putting. It's been said that Netanyahu hasn't a patch on her.

Shame that.

Agreed, but unfortunately just about every politician in the US is - Clinton being no exception. Sanders was a very rare ray of light on that front (rather laughable how some commentators tried to label him anti semitic, clearly unaware that he's Jewish himself)

Overheal

Christy42 wrote: »

No it won't. We have had a full summer of next week you'll see a smoking gun against Hillary and nothing. Nada, zip, 0. Every time Assange or someone just goes we will have stuff next time we swear and Trump supporters flock to it saying we can't support Hillary till this that or the other is released and nothing of note gets released. Can you not see the ridiculous theme that has been running for months of we have evidence she is crooked so you should call her crooked before we release it and we are withholding it for reasons.

When something finally comes from it then talk but till then it is just the Republicans who cried Wolf 100 .

It will be the same for most of her presidency "oh we can't work with a president who might finally be outed by an Australian next month" - march 2019

constitutionus

RobertKK wrote: »

So the Democrats were advising CNN on what questions to ask Trump and Cruz.

Nothing surprises at this stage.

remarkably no one talking about it on CNN.

lottsa hillary pimping though !

Igotadose

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It's not just pure innuendo, both John Tiegan and Weeam Mohamed who witnessed the event confirmed it.

Oh please. There's nothing there.

How many hundreds millions more do you want spent on this nonsense? Hasn't there been enough time and energy wasted on this Benghazi investigation stuff?

http://benghazicommittee.com/benghazi-by-the-numbers/

As a US taxpayer, I'm more than fed up with this endless badgering that basically never amounts to anything, other than soundbites for otherwise useless pols like Trey Gowdy and Chaffetz of Utah (who at least had enough self respect to denounce Trump after the p**sy grabbing tape went live.)

Be nice if instead Congress passed a jobs bill of some shape, got back to work on trade agreements and the Senate confirmed some justices.

But no, as long as sheeple bleat 'Benghazi!' in response to their entertainment channel Faux news prodding, it'll more interminable waste of the taxpayer dollars.

I have to say, the line about 'if Fox news is telling the truth' made me spit my coffee. Ever look at mediamatters.org? You can answer that question readily yourself, instead of posting it to this forum.

Oh, the answer is, "mostly no."

MadYaker

She'll probably clinch the election but she's going to be hard pressed to get anything done during her presidency. The whole thing is so depressing. I wonder how dysfunctional will the political system have to get before the American people finally say enough is enough?

Hank Scorpio

Two soldiers witnessed what happened in Benghazi, Hillary lied to the families, the feds and to the public, and walked free. No repercussions for having her Maid print out classified information, no repercussions for destroying 33,000 emails after receiving a congressional subpoena. No repercussions for lying over and over again about the emails and putting national security as risk. No repercussions for receiving Qatar money without notifying Government officials or her daughter spending millions of fancy weddings among other things. No repercussions for Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik colluding with the her on the initial email investigation.

I only started following this election 2 months ago and had no preference for either candidate, but after watching it transpire it's clear to me she's gotten away with many things, not because of what she did, but because of who she is. Back to my tin foil hat.

aloyisious

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

"An obscure private firm hired by the State Department over internal objections to protect U.S. diplomats in Benghazi just months before the American ambassador and three others were killed was staffed with hastily recruited locals with terror ties who helped carry out the attack, multiple sources told Fox News."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/11/07/benghazi-guards-turned-on-us-diplomats-in-2012-attack-sources-say.html

Pretty big claim here, putting their neck on the line.

You're probably thinking "not him again" but there's one part of the report in the Fox News link has me asking politely what was going on. It's this part: Many were members of the Libyan government-financed February 17th Martyrs Brigade, an Islamist militia that had previously guarded Americans before being replaced by Blue Mountain.

Is there any info on whom the guarded Americans were, as the 17th Martyrs Bde Pers were replaced by Green Mountain, indicating the Bde were guarding the State Dept people and building. If the Bde were doing that job before Green Mountain surely they were vetted for the job. The report says members of the Bde were hired by Green Mountain when it got the contract.

Was there no degree of control at a local level within the embassy people over whom could be vetted and employed as security there, like a state dept security officer who did the vetting/liaised with the Libyans on whom was safe to employ as security,

Hank Scorpio

Igotadose wrote: »

Oh please. There's nothing there.

How many hundreds millions more do you want spent on this nonsense? Hasn't there been enough time and energy wasted on this Benghazi investigation stuff?

No. People died unnecessarily and families were lied to. She went on national TV calling the families liars. It's not good enough imo. How long did Liverpool FC campaign for Hillsborough Justice, I don't see how it's any different.

vetinari

Please, you're only still interested in it because it's about Hillary Clinton.
You have as much outrage about embassy attacks during the Bush administration?

Nabber

Igotadose wrote: »

How many hundreds millions more do you want spent on this nonsense? Hasn't there been enough time and energy wasted on this Benghazi investigation stuff?

As a US taxpayer, I'm more than fed up with this endless badgering that basically never amounts to anything,

I don't pay tax in the USA, but I guess the families of the deceased would like the truth and justice servered where necessary.

It be a shame to think Justice had a cut off point in costs. It's like paying ransom to hostage takers.

aloyisious

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

No. People died unnecessarily and families were lied to. She went on national TV calling the families liars. It's not good enough imo. How long did Liverpool FC campaign for Hillsborough Justice, I don't see how it's any different.

Have to agree with you that when it comes to people on the ground. The buck stops with the boss. You are responsible for the actions of the people under your employ, whether or not you knew of their actions.

Overheal

aloyisious wrote: »

Have to agree with you that when it comes to people on the ground. The buck stops with the boss. You are responsible for the actions of the people under your employ, whether or not you knew of their actions.

If it really applied so many heads should have rolled under bush that never did

aloyisious

BBC 1 TV news giving an electoral college voting explanation now.

gosplan

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Why didn't they send help though? 3 times or something it wasn't sent I've forgotten the finer details. I agree with the above but I don't think it applies to this circumstance. If what Fox news is saying is true, and call me crude, if she didn't send help because they wanted to cover this thing up and let people die that is wrong and she should be severely punished. Alot of IF's but clearly that's what the article in implying.

Absolute horse manure.

9 investigations into Benghazi. 9!!!

10s of millions spent and the best that can be done is 'the reason Hillary gave for the violence kicking off msybe wasn't the real reason'

But now with a day to go to the election, new people have come forward ...but only to Fox ... and only anomously ... A to say the state department hired AL-QAEDA!!!

Have some self respect and stop reproducing rubbish you know to be false.