2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Amerika

Regardless who wins, is their impeachment inevitable? From tax audits and allegations of fraudulent business practices for Trump. And for Clinton there’s security violations involving classified and top secret information, wrongful destruction of government documents, receiving financial rewards funneled through the Clinton Foundation in exchange for government favors, and making false statements in federal investigators, under oath, to Congress.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Brian? wrote: »

Hilary Clinton did not sell arms to anyone. That's a Department of Defence matter. She may have influenced the decisions. How many genocidal dictatorships were supplied?

You throw this stuff at Hilary as a reason she shouldn't be president, yet you place Ronald Reagan on a pedestal. If she involved in selling arms, she may have been, at least it was to allies, not enemies like Iran.

Reagan sold arms to Iran and funnelled the money into far right groups to overthrow democratic elected governments, he's a hero and one of the greatest presidents ever.

Clinton may have used her influence to grease the wheels and sell arms to allies, she's not fit to be president and should be in jail.

The double standard here would be comical if it wasn't so upsetting.

Reagan took full responsibility for the actions Iran/Contra deal. Several independent investigations took place by Congress and the Tower Commission. None found any evidence that Reagan knew of the extent of the programs. What has Hillary taken responsibility for... Heck, not even wiping her server clean with a cloth? I m was not a fan of the Iran/Contra deal when it publicly came to light, and have never supported it.

Also, how did Reagan personally benefit from the Iran/Contra deal, and where are the Congressional and independent investigations into Hillary s connection between donations to the Clinton Foundation and her role as Secretary of State including the obscene money paid to Bill for his speeches?

Sorry, but no double standard here, and no need to get upset.

So you're fine with selling arms to enemies as long as no one personally profits?

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

So you're fine with selling arms to enemies as long as no one personally profits?

Color me confused. What part of 'I m(sic) was not a fan of the Iran/Contra deal when it publicly came to light, and have never supported it' was unclear?

I do agree that personally profiting from it is far, far, far worse, but that is another discussion.

And at least with Reagan it didn't involve turning a large majority of the control of Uranium (you know... the stuff to make nuclear bombs) over to an enemy.

Overheal

Brian? wrote: »

So you're fine with selling arms to enemies as long as no one personally profits?

"We're a nonprofit warmonger"

Count Dooku

Back to (non-existing according to Hillary supporters) health issues

"However, in December of 2012, Clinton suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot (in her head). Based on her doctor’s advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received," the report said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN11829I

CMOTDibbler

Count Dooku wrote: »

Back to (non-existing according to Hillary supporters) health issues

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN11829I

Read back the thread. You'll find that people do know about it. It's four years ago y'know. News gets around that quick. :rolleyes:

Count Dooku

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Read back the thread. You'll find that people do know about it. It's four years ago y'know. News gets around that quick. :rolleyes:

So when we can see her medical report?
Especially after the fact that she has a concussion

Overheal

Count Dooku wrote: »

So when we can see her medical report?
Especially after the fact that she has a concussion

Probably about as fast as you'll see a Donald Trump tax return

RobertKK

So Hillary lied to the public about wanting only one phone to use for her emails when she had over a dozen phones.
This does nothing to help her with her honesty figures in the gutter.

B0jangles

Trump's VP pick, Mile Pence wrote an article urging employers not to hire gay people:

http://www.out.com/news-opinion/2016/9/01/mike-pence-wrote-article-urging-employers-not-hire-gay-people

"Homosexuals are not as a group able-bodied. They are known to carry extremely high rates of disease brought on because of the nature of their sexual practices and the promiscuity which is a hallmark of their lifestyle."

bbbut Hillary's blaaaaackberries.....

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Color me confused. What part of 'I m(sic) was not a fan of the Iran/Contra deal when it publicly came to light, and have never supported it' was unclear?

So Reagan knew the arms were being sold to Iran. He also knew this money was being funnelled to the Contras. You agree this was wrong. Yet Reagan is a hero.

This is the double standard in action.

I do agree that personally profiting from it is far, far, far worse, but that is another discussion.

And at least with Reagan it didn't involve turning a large majority of the control of Uranium (you know... the stuff to make nuclear bombs) over to an enemy.

You're going to have to flesh that one out for me. Some Russian company owns some Uranium mines,correct? I thought you were a believer in the free market.

FYI, Russia has more Uranium that you could shake a stick at. It would never need American Uranium to build weapons. Not that Nuclear bombs are made with a Uranium.

Amerika

RobertKK wrote: »

So Hillary lied to the public about wanting only one phone to use for her emails when she had over a dozen phones.
This does nothing to help her with her honesty figures in the gutter.

The biggest question everybody should be asking is why Clinton demanded to have a private server in the first place. It wasn’t for convenience as she attested. It was for concealment of Clinton Foundation business from scrutiny. As more of her deleted emails are coming out it’s obvious that access and influence were sold to donors. What will we be finding out in the next few months that she’s been hiding as more are released?

It’s a real sad state of affairs in today's world that Judicial Watch now has to do the job our journalists did... before political ideology trumped integrity.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

So Reagan knew the arms were being sold to Iran. He also knew this money was being funnelled to the Contras. You agree this was wrong. Yet Reagan is a hero.

This is the double standard in action.

Reagan was not aware of the diversion scheme. I was against his giving arms to Iran. My uncle almost lost his life in 1979 in Iran right before the embassy was taken over. His bank account was nationalized and he was firebombed while driving in his car. I remember the call he made to us to say goodbye. Luckily though, he got out on the last flight.

You're going to have to flesh that one out for me. Some Russian company owns some Uranium mines,correct? I thought you were a believer in the free market.

FYI, Russia has more Uranium that you could shake a stick at. It would never need American Uranium to build weapons. Not that Nuclear bombs are made with a Uranium.

Russia controls that company. I guess once could call one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the US ‘some’... If they wanted to mislead, that is. National security trumps the free market. That thinking doesn't make me Satan.

Count Dooku

Overheal wrote: »

Probably about as fast as you'll see a Donald Trump tax return

So the choice for who will get keys to nuclear red button is between tax evader and mentally ill old lady
I will safer under tax evader

Black Swan

Black Swan wrote: »

The only national poll listed by RCP that has shown Trump ahead of Clinton since 26 July 2016 was the unique LA Times/USC tracking poll that varies daily.

Amerika wrote: »

Not so fast kemosabe. To quote Bob Dylan (which I hate doing as I have a personal grudge with him) ‘the times they are a changin’. Rasmussen Reports latest poll has Trump at 40% to Clinton's 39%.

My post used RCP's list at the time of my post, and Rasmussen Reports had not been listed by RCP since 27 July 2016 when Clinton led by 1 point. And since we are now referencing Rasmussen Reports, they were the poll that predicted a Mitt Romney win in 2012. Furthermore, there have been 44 national polls listed by RCP since 26 July 2016, and only LA Times/USC, which varies daily has been the only poll that has shown Trump at a tie or ahead of Clinton since that date. At this moment in time, Rasmussen's 1 September 2016 poll results have not been included in the RCP list.

K-9

Count Dooku wrote: »

So when we can see her medical report?
Especially after the fact that she has a concussion

She released one last year, linked earlier in the thread.

KingBrian2

Just to show that Trump has been obeying the rules. He paid the penalty owed to the IRS.

https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Trump-Pays-IRS-Penalty-for/237680?cid=cpfd_home

Suryavarman

Count Dooku wrote: »

So the choice for who will get keys to nuclear red button is between tax evader and mentally ill old lady
I will safer under tax evader

She isn't mentally ill. Trump on the other hand clearly suffers from narcissistic personality disorder.

Black Swan

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Just to show that Trump has been obeying the rules. He paid the penalty owed to the IRS.

Typically presidential nominees have released many years of past tax returns. Hillary Clinton has released all her tax returns occurring from 2000 through 2015 for a total of 16 returns. Not all of Donald Trump's tax returns are currently being audited by the IRS, so why does he not release his earlier returns that are not a part of the current IRS audit? Why?

To not release past tax returns raises many questions about Donald Trump and if he is hiding something (e.g., the net worth he claims; what foreign financial commitments he may have that may influence his presidency if elected; the profits he makes from globalised investments, and to what extent he is profiting from manufacturing the Trump collections not Made in America (when he condemns Ford and Apple for doing the same thing).

And lastly, Warren Buffet made a joke of Donald Trump using the IRS tax audit as a flimsy excuse not to share his tax returns (Buffet is also currently being IRS audited), and challenged Donald Trump to a tax duel, which would allow Americans to ask both Trump and Buffet questions about their returns.

Pro Hoc Vice

This is scary. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/02/trump-changed-immigration-policy-speech-after-mexican-presidents-tweet.html

CMOTDibbler

Count Dooku wrote: »

So when we can see her medical report?
Especially after the fact that she has a concussion

You do know that a concussion is a transient event? Like a bruise or a sprain.

It's not a mental illness, or if it is, we have a lot of mentally ill rugby players. I think they'd take exception to that. If you're not sure, pop down to Lansdowne or even have a pint in Kielys in Donnybrook and make that announcement. I'm sure any rugby players there will be happy to demonstrate their mental acuity and reflexes.

Black Swan

Count Dooku wrote: »

So when we can see her medical report?
Especially after the fact that she has a concussion

Hillary Clinton's real medical report letter was released 25 July 2015 (it's much, much longer than Trump's letter that was released 4 December 2015). Of course there have been many fake medical reports transmitted by Trump supporters and other opponents of Clinton that question her health, etc.
during this presidential campaign.

Pro Hoc Vice

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Just to show that Trump has been obeying the rules. He paid the penalty owed to the IRS.

https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Trump-Pays-IRS-Penalty-for/237680?cid=cpfd_home

Like the rule to tell your doctor what to write if he did not the doctor went to the same speaking club. http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/08/bornstein-trump-linguistics/497840/

marienbad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Just to show that Trump has been obeying the rules. He paid the penalty owed to the IRS.

https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Trump-Pays-IRS-Penalty-for/237680?cid=cpfd_home

So let me get this right , in your opinion by being fined for breaking the rules that shows he is playing by the rules ?

PopePalpatine

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

This is scary. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/02/trump-changed-immigration-policy-speech-after-mexican-presidents-tweet.html

I guess he really CAN be "baited by a tweet". :rolleyes:

InTheTrees

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Like the rule to tell your doctor what to write if he did not the doctor went to the same speaking club.

All his test results came back positive.

Thats a classic isnt it?

:pac:

KingBrian2

marienbad wrote: »

So let me get this right , in your opinion by being fined for breaking the rules that shows he is playing by the rules ?

He shows he is paying his dues to society. A great many Americans are very upset at the present level of tax burden they all have to pay. Their is a gross level of inequality in America. Here is Trump on this topic.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/sep/28/donald-trump-simplify-us-tax-code-video

Pro Hoc Vice

InTheTrees wrote: »

All his test results came back positive.

Thats a classic isnt it?

:pac:

Once the test was not for HIV. Which would make a lie of his personal war claim.

Pro Hoc Vice

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He shows he is paying his dues to society. A great many Americans are very upset at the present level of tax burden they all have to pay. Their is a gross level of inequality in America. Here is Trump on this topic.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/sep/28/donald-trump-simplify-us-tax-code-video

all would benifit him. But we don't known because he won't tell us what his taxes are.

AbusesToilets

Fairly deafening silence re: the FBI's email dump today

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-02/clinton-left-politically-exposed-by-fbi-report-on-e-mail-habits

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-releases-hillary-clinton-email-investigation-documents/2016/09/02/21bd3682-704c-11e6-8365-b19e428a975e_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonfbi-115pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/sep/02/clinton-trump-national-security-drug-prices-election-live

Call Me Jimmy

What's tha?

RobertKK

B0jangles wrote: »

Trump's VP pick, Mile Pence wrote an article urging employers not to hire gay people:

http://www.out.com/news-opinion/2016/9/01/mike-pence-wrote-article-urging-employers-not-hire-gay-people



bbbut Hillary's blaaaaackberries.....

Your last comment dismissed a real issue.
Hillary had confidential information about drone strikes on her unsecured servers that could have been hacked.
She was told not to use a private email server, but then claims she couldn't remember being told.
She said she just wanted to use one phone, she instead used 13 phones.
This is the trust issue the war queen has, her lies are being found out.

CMOTDibbler

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Fairly deafening silence re: the FBI's email dump today

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-02/clinton-left-politically-exposed-by-fbi-report-on-e-mail-habits

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-releases-hillary-clinton-email-investigation-documents/2016/09/02/21bd3682-704c-11e6-8365-b19e428a975e_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonfbi-115pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/sep/02/clinton-trump-national-security-drug-prices-election-live

Looks like the purpose was to avoid freedom of information requests.

B0jangles

RobertKK wrote: »

Your last comment dismissed a real issue.
Hillary had confidential information about drone strikes on her unsecured servers that could have been hacked.
She was told not to use a private email server, but then claims she couldn't remember being told.
She said she just wanted to use one phone, she instead used 13 phones.
This is the trust issue the war queen has, her lies are being found out.

They've been desperately trying to find something in those emails for around 13 months now - 13 months.

What's come out? a couple of low-level breaches of protocol/cutting corners, a bunch of deleted emails and some broken phones.

Whoopee.

In the mean time Trump has insulted almost every minority group in America (I don't think he's had a go at the Amish yet, but there's still time!), effectively called a foreign head of state a liar hours after meeting him and spun around on every issue so fast he's basically a blur at this point.

It's like comparing the Towering Inferno to A burnt-out match.

Akrasia

But in every one of those deleted emails was a different murder confession....

Clinton's emails show that at the very least she is a liar and they could come back to bite her later, but her email scandal in no way matches the sheer scale Trumps problems.

RobertKK

B0jangles wrote: »

They've been desperately trying to find something in those emails for around 13 months now - 13 months.

What's come out? a couple of low-level breaches of protocol/cutting corners, a bunch of deleted emails and some broken phones.

Whoopee.

In the mean time Trump has insulted almost every minority group in America (I don't think he's had a go at the Amish yet, but there's still time!), effectively called a foreign head of state a liar hours after meeting him and spun around on every issue so fast he's basically a blur at this point.

It's like comparing the Towering Inferno to A burnt-out match.

If you were told something several times about cyber security for the company you worked for and then years later it was found you did not follow what you were told to do, and then you say you can't remember and you had company secrets on a private unsecured server, a server not belonging to the company and you claim you couldn't remember being told several times about security protocols.
Would you be in serious trouble?
If you lied and said you only wanted to use one phone for all your emails, but then found to have more than a dozen phones.
She then put the blame on others by saying she relied on the judgement of others when it came to classified material.
But sure then she couldn't remember...

There are serious issues with what Hillary Clinton did. There would be serious issues if

B0jangles

I think your obvious loathing for Clinton is seriously clouding your judgement if you think the dreaded emails/private server narrative is in any way on a par with Trump's endless lurching from one controversy to another. You previously posted a very obviously looped and edited video of her turning her head and claimed it showed her having a seizure; I honestly think you should step back a bit and try to look dispassionately at the two candidates at this stage.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

The biggest question everybody should be asking is why Clinton demanded to have a private server in the first place. It wasn’t for convenience as she attested. It was for concealment of Clinton Foundation business from scrutiny.

Makes you wonder why

Jeb Bush
Chris Christie
Rick Perry
Scott Walker
Sarah Palin
Mitt Romney
Karl Rove
Andrew Cuomo
Marco Rubio

All used private email to conduct the public's business, deleted said emails while conducting that business or under investigation, or in the case of Jeb Bush, also set up a personal domain for public business correspondence.

The double standard is alive and well.

Akrasia wrote: »

But in every one of those deleted emails was a different murder confession....

Clinton's emails show that at the very least she is a liar and they could come back to bite her later, but her email scandal in no way matches the sheer scale Trumps problems.

Right, it's like "I know she's hiding something/stuff because she's a snake, but I could at least sleep at night knowing she won't start thermonuclear winter on a dare."

AbusesToilets

B0jangles wrote: »

They've been desperately trying to find something in those emails for around 13 months now - 13 months.

What's come out? a couple of low-level breaches of protocol/cutting corners, a bunch of deleted emails and some broken phones.

Whoopee.

In the mean time Trump has insulted almost every minority group in America (I don't think he's had a go at the Amish yet, but there's still time!), effectively called a foreign head of state a liar hours after meeting him and spun around on every issue so fast he's basically a blur at this point.

It's like comparing the Towering Inferno to A burnt-out match.

Repeated, willful violations of the law surrounding the handling and dissemination of classified materials pales in comparison to hurt feelings.

oscarBravo

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Repeated, willful violations of the law surrounding the handling and dissemination of classified materials pales in comparison to hurt feelings.

We're not talking about hurt feelings; we're talking about someone who's pathologically incapable of diplomacy other than in brief, short-lived spurts.

I get that people don't like Hillary, but how does that dislike translate into the sort of self-deception required to pretend that Trump wouldn't be the worst president in history by several orders of magnitude?

Hell, I don't like Hillary. That doesn't mean that I'm getting busy convincing myself that a narcissistic man-child with a goldfish attention span and hair-trigger temper is somehow going to do anything other than lurch from one self-created crisis to another if elected.

Sure, Hillary will probably face several crises also, but at least those will in large part be engineered by her political enemies who would rather watch their country burn than let it be run by a Democrat - or, worse, a woman.

AbusesToilets

oscarBravo wrote: »

We're not talking about hurt feelings; we're talking about someone who's pathologically incapable of diplomacy other than in brief, short-lived spurts.

I get that people don't like Hillary, but how does that dislike translate into the sort of self-deception required to pretend that Trump wouldn't be the worst president in history by several orders of magnitude?

Hell, I don't like Hillary. That doesn't mean that I'm getting busy convincing myself that a narcissistic man-child with a goldfish attention span and hair-trigger temper is somehow going to do anything other than lurch from one self-created crisis to another if elected.

Sure, Hillary will probably face several crises also, but at least those will in large part be engineered by her political enemies who would rather watch their country burn than let it be run by a Democrat - or, worse, a woman.

The poster was referring to Clinton, who has been shown to have repeated broken the law and then lied about it. That the putative next President has demonstrated a studied disregard for laws that she finds inconvenient.

To them, that is less serious than the rantings of a man who will never be elected.

CMOTDibbler

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The poster was referring to Clinton, who has been shown to have repeated broken the law and then lied about it. That the putative next President has demonstrated a studied disregard for laws that she finds inconvenient.

To them, that is less serious than the rantings of a man who will never be elected.

Have the FBI not said that there's no case to answer? Or words to that effect, it's a while since I saw the press conference.

oscarBravo

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The poster was referring to Clinton, who has been shown to have repeated broken the law and then lied about it. That the putative next President has demonstrated a studied disregard for laws that she finds inconvenient.

To them, that is less serious than the rantings of a man who will never be elected.

Trust me: if he stepped down and handed the election to Clinton, I'd be a lot more critical of her. But this is democracy - worse, this is American democracy - and we can't write off the possibility just yet that they'll elect that gibbering buffoon.

And that's exactly why the GOP are making such a huge deal over every single thing she's ever done wrong while pretending that Trump isn't a walking catastrophe: they still want him elected, because he may be the worst president in history, but (a) he's their worst president in history, and (b) he's a white male. It's hard to say which is more important to them.

AbusesToilets

oscarBravo wrote: »

Trust me: if he stepped down and handed the election to Clinton, I'd be a lot more critical of her. But this is democracy - worse, this is American democracy - and we can't write off the possibility just yet that they'll elect that gibbering buffoon.

And that's exactly why the GOP are making such a huge deal over every single thing she's ever done wrong while pretending that Trump isn't a walking catastrophe: they still want him elected, because he may be the worst president in history, but (a) he's their worst president in history, and (b) he's a white male. It's hard to say which is more important to them.

I could give a toss about the GOP and their motivations, they are irrelevant to the larger issue. The fact is, Clinton (and her staff) have been shown to have committed crimes and lied about it. Regardless of her future employment, this is deserving of punishment and she is getting off scott free. That is just completely unacceptable and a worrying development given her likely election in a few months.

AbusesToilets

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Have the FBI not said that there's no case to answer? Or words to that effect, it's a while since I saw the press conference.

The Justice Department declined to prosecute. That's wholly different ball game.

Pro Hoc Vice

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The Justice Department declined to prosecute. That's wholly different ball game.

Yes based on the decision of the FBI

The move came the day after Mr Comey surprised legal experts by publicly issuing a harsh verdict on the way Mrs Clinton handled secret information over email, but then announced that he would not push for a prosecution because there was no evidence that the former secretary of state “intended to violate laws”.

Seems no mens rea. https://www.ft.com/content/0f5e607c-42c7-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1

CMOTDibbler

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The Justice Department declined to prosecute. That's wholly different ball game.

Am I wrong thinking the FBI had said they weren't recommending prosecution?

B0jangles

Short analysis of the FBI report here:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/14-excerpts-fbis-report-hillary-clintons-email

AbusesToilets

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Yes based on the decision of the FBI

The move came the day after Mr Comey surprised legal experts by publicly issuing a harsh verdict on the way Mrs Clinton handled secret information over email, but then announced that he would not push for a prosecution because there was no evidence that the former secretary of state “intended to violate laws”.

Seems no mens rea. https://www.ft.com/content/0f5e607c-42c7-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1

Oh, that's grand so. I'll go knock over a bank but as long as I say I didn't intend to commit a crime, everything's kosher.

Pro Hoc Vice

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Oh, that's grand so. I'll go knock over a bank but as long as I say I didn't intend to commit a crime, everything's kosher.

No that's not what they said, I used the term mens rea for a reason. Also in evidence the FBI said that there was only 3 e-mails out of 30,000 plus and also accepts that the 3 e-mails where incorrectly marked as classified in that they should have been headed classified but instead had at the bottom "(c)".