2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

"Retired senior US military pilots are increasingly alarmed that Hillary Clinton’s proposal for “no-fly zones” in Syria could lead to a military confrontation with Russia that could escalate to levels that were previously unthinkable in the post-cold war world."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war#img-1

And significant parts of the Security officials are considering resigning over Trump telling to to perform illegal acts of torture along with 50 National security and foreign policy officials from GOP administrations declares Trump would become the most reckless president in USA's history inc. the head of CIA, NSA etc. So unlike your link of pilots this is his own party and actual department heads of the CIA, NSA etc. along with people who're actually have to perform the activities telling you that he's not fit.

First Up

Hank Scorpio wrote:

I believe he can significantly improve economic growth by implementing strategies like he's talked about e.g. lowering corporate tax and imposing tariffs on incoming trade, renegotiating failed deals like NAFTA.

How has NAFTA failed?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

Remember a few short weeks ago when the Left was lecturing us about Trump’s slogan ‘Make America Great Again,' and that America was already great? Remember a few short weeks ago then the Left was warning us that Trump’s supporters would riot in the streets, commit arson, and engage in violent assaults if he lost? Remember when Left was complaining of Trump’s comments on a rigged elections and how that view was counter to our faith in democracy?

So, what happened in a few short weeks?

(Oh, yeah, the mainstream media and polls were all wrong a few short weeks ago.)

Hank Scorpio

Nody wrote: »

And significant parts of the Security officials are considering resigning over Trump telling to to perform illegal acts of torture along with 50 National security and foreign policy officials from GOP administrations declares Trump would become the most reckless president in USA's history inc. the head of CIA, NSA etc. So unlike your link of pilots this is his own party and actual department heads of the CIA, NSA etc. along with people who're actually have to perform the activities telling you that he's not fit.

If people think torture to gain information isn't happening or hasn't happened in previous administrations I think those people aren't telling the truth or are naive. He was stupid to say something like that publicly and obviously I won't condone what he said. I don't condone torture either but the circumstances of war dictate the tactics used.

The GOP have been against Trump from day one long before he got the nomination. The US have made a complete mess of their own doing in the middle east, especially so under the previous Republican administration so I don't think anyone connected to the Bush era should be overly proud about the lies told, the mass failure abroad and the negligence of their homeland security. Failures which have continued into the Obama administration and to the present day. Mistakes have been made constantly with foreign policy and to expect Trump to be perfect is imo somewhat hypocritical.

Those fears for the most part I can agree are genuine, he is clearly inexperienced with the day to day operations he'll have to undertake as POTUS regarding issues such as foreign policy. My hope is that he surrounds himself with highly experienced generals and advisers to help ease that transition.

First Up

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

And are you happy with the only outcome that matters - the result?

Hank Scorpio

First Up wrote: »

How has NAFTA failed?

There's a full report on it's failings here

http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA-at-20.pdf

Additional information here, which is somewhat easier to follow and understand

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/nafta-at-20-one-million-u_b_4550207.html

First Up

Amerika wrote:

Remember a few short weeks ago when the Left was lecturing us about Trump’s slogan ‘Make America Great Again,' and that America was already great?

A slogan isn't a plan. We'll see if it is any more or any less great in four year's time.

Of course we would also have to agree on what constitutes greatness.

Billy86

Amerika wrote: »

Remember a few short weeks ago when the Left was lecturing us about Trump’s slogan ‘Make America Great Again,' and that America was already great? Remember a few short weeks ago then the Left was warning us that Trump’s supporters would riot in the streets, commit arson, and engage in violent assaults if he lost? Remember when Left was complaining of Trump’s comments on a rigged elections and how that view was counter to our faith in democracy?

So, what happened in a few short weeks?

(Oh, yeah, the mainstream media and polls were all wrong a few short weeks ago.)

Remember a few weeks ago when this poster was telling us that Obamacare was a complete failure on every level? Remember when this poster was telling us about pointing out positives in it that, "you can put lipstick on pig, but it’s still a pig."? Remember when this poster was saying it was 'just "our horrible VA system on steroids"? Remember when this poster was saying "a single-payer healthcare will fail in the US just as badly as ObamaCare"? Remember when this poster was saying "anyone with any common sense would have know it couldn’t work for the rest of the nation"?

Well something must have changed because...

Amerika wrote: »

20Cent wrote: »

He's already backing down on policies. He's keeping Obamacare. A week ago ye hated it and it was the worst thing ever. Lol.

There are a very few good aspects to it like not being turned down or having your insurance cancelled. If Trump can't amend it and overhaul it to something good he will repeal and replace it.

So, what happened in a few short weeks?

(Oh, yeah, someone with an R beside their name is not getting rid of it. This is what happens when you put value a political party more than you value your own country).

Mod edit:

Billy86 banned for 24 hours for trolling. You've been warned repeatedly to attack the post not the poster. And the point you wish to make about Trump's potential volte face on Obamacare could easily have been made civilly, instead of the way you did it here, which is just trolling.

Jawgap

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

If people think torture to gain information isn't happening or hasn't happened in previous administrations I think those people aren't telling the truth or are naive. He was stupid to say something like that publicly and obviously I won't condone what he said. I don't condone torture either but the circumstances of war dictate the tactics used.

The GOP have been against Trump from day one long before he got the nomination. The US have made a complete mess of their own doing in the middle east, especially so under the previous Republican administration so I don't think anyone connected to the Bush era should be overly proud about the lies told, the mass failure abroad and the negligence of their homeland security. Failures which have continued into the Obama administration and to the present day. Mistakes have been made constantly with foreign policy and to expect Trump to be perfect is imo somewhat hypocritical.

Those fears for the most part I can agree are genuine, he is clearly inexperienced with the day to day operations he'll have to undertake as POTUS regarding issues such as foreign policy. My hope is that he surrounds himself with highly experienced generals and advisers to help ease that transition.

The indicators are that 'harsh methods' weren't nearly as successful as people though they would be - it may be viscerally satisfying to see an enemy tortured but as a means of extracting information, intelligence etc it's pretty useless as the person being tortured will say whatever is required to get the torture to stop.....

......but don't take my word for it, the best FBI interrogators will tell you that the most powerful instrument for getting someone to talk is a cold can of Coke.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hank Scorpio

Jawgap wrote: »

The indicators are that 'harsh methods' weren't nearly as successful as people though they would be - it may be viscerally satisfying to see an enemy tortured but as a means of extracting information, intelligence etc it's pretty useless as the person being tortured will say whatever is required to get the torture to stop.....

......but don't take my word for it, the best FBI interrogators will tell you that the most powerful instrument for getting someone to talk is a cold can of Coke.

I didn't say it was better one way or another. Every interrogation is situational.

It was a stupid thing for him to say publicly. He has said many things that were stupid which have contributed badly to his public image.

The smartest thing he could have done was hire Kellyanne Conway much earlier because it was only in the last few months when she came on board that he started to get his act together.

Clearly as a public figure running for office he didn't conduct himself properly, that may or may not have helped in the end given he won the election but his image remains tarnished.

Billy86

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I believe he can significantly improve economic growth by implementing strategies like he's talked about e.g. lowering corporate tax and imposing tariffs on incoming trade, renegotiating failed deals like NAFTA.

On the illegal immigrants side I think he will immediately deport all illegals who've committed crimes or are short term illegals, and allow families who've been in the country for a long period of time and haven't committed crimes to stay and get registered legally. This will work out for everyone once the border is secured. It's worked reducing immigrants by 95% in other countries with a combination of a wall, fences and added border security staff.

Most of all I want to see corruption removed from office, and the law of the land applied to everyone equally. I can't check right if more cabinet positions have been filled but Trey Gowdy has been pouted as AG and I think it would be a great choice. I want to see him implement an ID system to prevent voter fraud.

I'd like see how he's mentions every Rally the veterans taken care of. The figure of 20+ vets killing themselves everyday is disgusting. One of the biggest question marks hanging over him is what is he going to do about ISIS. Nobody knows the answer to that, whether he'll work with Russia in some capacity or not. Either way it's going to be dirty and ultimately he may
well be judged on it.

The problem there is that protectionist policies do not support growth at all though, as China for example have been quick to point out that they will simply respond in kind. On one hand, the US has more bargaining power but on the other, China doesn't need to worry so much about things like unhappy voters and legitimate opposition. Likewise, lowering corporate tax doesn't necessarily lead to growth if not handled correctly and can have the opposite effect - companies have a history of just pocketing the extra money, and in conjunction with the protectionist policies if it were to happen and receive the backlash, they (the multinationals etc) would likely not want to get involved in any such trade war in any way.

It also means less money passing through government, which while something a lot of people may like also means that there would be less resources available to implement things like the wall, task forces for illegal immigrants (both deporting them and registering those without criminal records - 11mn is a huge number to sift through), etc.

In terms of corruption moving from office, his move to immediately place in corporate lobbyists and blatant nepotism should surely be seen as a bit of a slap in the face then, no? Voter fraud has been shown to be an almost nonexistent issue, and diverting funds to that again creates a bigger problem of where the money comes from when it could be going on something more worthwhile in an 'either/or' situation.

I do agree that the veterans situation is truly sad, but saying that it is dreadful does not offer a solution - hopefully he would put efforts towards it, but I don't recall him outlining any sort of a plan. And agreed that the ISIS situation always was, and always is going to be sticky. That said, given his remarks about Obama/Clinton and ISIS, he has not left himself much of any room for sympathy there.

Credit to you for answering by the way.

First Up

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

There's a full report on it's failings here

http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA-at-20.pdf

Additional information here, which is somewhat easier to follow and understand

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/nafta-at-20-one-million-u_b_4550207.html

A more balanced assessment here

http://www.cfr.org/trade/naftas-economic-impact/p15790

oscarBravo

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It was a stupid thing for him to say publicly.

Basically, what you're saying is that he should have public and private positions on some things?

First Up

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

If you didn't care which of them became president, then a wasted vote on Johnson is no big deal. However in the real world people have to make choices that usually don't include the ideal as an option.

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It was a stupid thing for him to say publicly. He has said many things that were stupid which have contributed badly to his public image.

Or more accurately, they contributed to most people recognising his actual stupidity.

Snickers Man

Why are Nige and Donny so friendly, being photographed together wearing cheesy grins in Donny's sumptuous residence and patting each other on the back as being fellow travellers in the great global surge against "the politically correct establishment"?

After all, their views clash on many things. Trump is an America Firster, one who claims not to care what happens to American trade overseas as long as American industry stays at home. The corollary of that is that he will build up American businesses behind tariff walls, protect wages, protect margins and keep out "globalised" imports.

Farage, on the other hand, is an internationalist who doesn't want anything to do with the relatively protectionist European single market. He wants to expand British trade further afield than Europe. Any version of Brexit that requires continued membership of the Single Market would be opposed by him.

So neither like right-on newspaper or TV journalists, neither like immigrants, neither like being told to mind their language when discussing people of other ethinic or religisious backgrounds. There's still quite a lot of fundamental dischord it would seem to me.

Could it all end in tears?

First Up

Snickers Man wrote: »

Could it all end in tears?

Marriages of convenience often do.

TheOven

I notice a lot of people's concerns about a president Trump are being pushed aside.

Isn't this meant to be what his supporters claimed happened to them?

Hank Scorpio

oscarBravo wrote: »

Basically, what you're saying is that he should have public and private positions on some things?

If Trump blurts out something he shouldn't have said I have no problem calling it stupid.

Lying about a past event for sympathy votes continuously over time is different, and something much more sinister. I'll give you a few examples


HRC lying for years about being under sniper fire in Bosnia after her plane landed.

HRC lying to families of Benghazi, then calling them liars on national TV.

Your point about public and private positions doesn't fall into Trump blurting out something stupid now and again, it ties in more with political correctness and his lack of training and aptness of being a public political figure.

osmiumartist

oscarBravo wrote: »

Basically, what you're saying is that he should have public and private positions on some things?

You mean like Clinton is on record as saying she has... oh I see what you did there! (though most of those thanking you don't I reckon)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

First Up

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

To vote for whichever of the two possible presidents you would prefer to win.

alastair

osmiumartist wrote: »

You mean like Clinton is on record as saying she has... oh I see what you did there! (though most of those thanking you don't I reckon)

I suspect most people got it just fine.

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

If Trump blurts out something he shouldn't have said I have no problem calling it stupid.

Lying about a past event for sympathy votes continuously over time is different, and something much more sinister. I'll give you a few examples


HRC lying for years about being under sniper fire in Bosnia after her plane landed.

HRC lying to families of Benghazi, then calling them liars on national TV.

Your point about public and private positions doesn't fall into Trump blurting out something stupid now and again, it ties in more with political correctness and his lack of training and aptness of being a public political figure.

Trump doesn't do it 'now and again'. It's pretty much a constant. Against a backdrop of two (count 'em) porkies you can point to from Hillary over the course of how many years? The scales are a bit off balance there.

RobbingBandit

alastair wrote: »

Scrapings of the barrel there tbh. Rudy used up his 9/11 credit a long time back, and Palin never had any to begin with. If he does go that route it'll give SNL a nice boost for four years all the same.

Alec Baldwin was good as Trump pity he didn't do it again and probably won't now.

First Up

RobbingBandit wrote:

Alec Baldwin was good as Trump pity he didn't do it again and probably won't now.

Oh yes he will.

26000 Elephants

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

If Trump blurts out something he shouldn't have said I have no problem calling it stupid.

.

Well at least we agree on that. Whatever about the 'stupidity' or otherwise of the things he says, the most dangerous aspect of Trumps personality is his flip-flopping on issues of importance.

When he is up against the likes of Putin, he will simply cave. Obama turned him after a 90 minute talk. Can you imagine what Putin will do to him?

Hank Scorpio

alastair wrote: »

Trump doesn't do it 'now and again'. It's pretty much a constant. Against a backdrop of two (count 'em) porkies you can point to from Hillary over the course of how many years? The scales are a bit off balance there.

The list is so long that the writing has gotten so small I can't read it anymore.

Anyway lies are lies. Words are said, sometimes over and over.

I'm more concerned with people like George Soros, and what his backlash will be now that Hillary is out of the picture, a huge donator to the democratic party, who has told HRC what to do in places like Albania and other foreign countries in the past.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-soros-trump-231313

This man. Can't put anything past him.

Suryavarman

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

But this is how you end up with someone unlikeable in power. If you only vote for them to keep out someone worse, you just end up with poor candidates and policies. I wouldn't have voted for Johnson in the end, I'd have cast my hypothetical ballot for Clinton.

Manic Moran wrote: »

There are two reasons I went third party.

Firstly, I actually preferred one of the third party candidates over the two main parties. I will give my vote to the person who best deserves it. I did not believe Clinton or a Trump did. I don't think there is any moral or political problem with this attitude.

Secondly, if I vote for Trump or Clinton to keep the other out of office, what message are the powers that are going to take from it in four years? "People support him. Candidates like this are what we should be sending forward. It gets us votes". Personally, I am willing to sacrifice four years so that we don't end up with this deftness again.

This wasn't a normal election with two middle of the road candidates. There's never been a candidate as bad as Trump, advocating policies that would be as damaging to American society or the wider planet as Trump was advocating.

The damage Trump's policies would do to America would cause an irreversible decline in America's international standing. The damage would be felt for far longer than 4 years.

Hank Scorpio

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Well at least we agree on that. Whatever about the 'stupidity' or otherwise of the things he says, the most dangerous aspect of Trumps personality is his flip-flopping on issues of importance.

When he is up against the likes of Putin, he will simply cave. Obama turned him after a 90 minute talk. Can you imagine what Putin will do to him?

He's not the only one who has flipped flopped on important issues. HRC has done that and so have many others. By saying Obama turned him after 90 minutes is a bit disingenuous. He's hardly going to come out and say they disagreed on things in their first formal meeting.

Trump needs to get his agenda down and stick to it, something he has been doing much better after hiring Kellyanne Conway. When he was up there on stage in rallies he was half entertainer ( taking down the prompters etc ). He has improved on this and needs to keep improving.

20Cent

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He's not the only one who has flipped flopped on important issues. HRC has done that and so have many others. By saying Obama turned him after 90 minutes is a bit disingenuous. He's hardly going to come out and say they disagreed on things in their first formal meeting.

Obama talked him into changing his headline policy in 90 minutes. God know what Putin is going to talk him into. Randomers on twitter have baited him into arguments.

Hank Scorpio

We'll only know what his true policies are once he gets into office.

Yes he has been silly on twitter in the past.

Suryavarman

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The libertarian platform is one long list of policies that would predominantly benefit middle and high income white males. You were only too happy to remind us during the campaign that welfare reform under the Clinton's increased poverty. The libertarian platform would have resulted in the American welfare state becoming stingier and harder to access. The libertarian platform would trap enormous amounts of minorities in a lifetime of grinding poverty. The libertarian movement often fights to reduce freedom for minority groups by defending racist or homophobic business owners' right to deny services to non-white or homosexuals. There's also a strong anti-feminism element to the libertarian movement. These things perhaps explain why so few minorities or females are involved in libertarian politics.

You might not have voted to advance white male privilege but you did vote for a bunch of policies that would benefit middle and high income white males at the expense of everyone else. And at the end of the day results matter more than intentions.

26000 Elephants

Yeah, he was a 14 year old boy. 14. A Hungarian Jew trying to do whatever he could to save his life against an extreme right regime.

He felt 'no guilt' because he could not grasp the totality of what was going on.

This is an especially sinister twist to this debate, Hank. Quality post.

26000 Elephants

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He's not the only one who has flipped flopped on important issues. HRC has done that and so have many others.

HRC is not President elect.

Hank Scorpio

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Yeah, he was a 14 year old boy. 14. A Hungarian Jew trying to do whatever he could to save his life against an extreme right regime.

He felt 'no guilt' because he could not grasp the totality of what was going on.

This is an especially sinister twist to this debate, Hank. Quality post.

What do you make of his comments here @ 2.30 ?

"I am there to make money, I cannot and do not look at the social consequences"

Or his involvement in Black Wednesday in the UK, among many other currency crashes he profited from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday

Jawgap

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He's not the only one who has flipped flopped on important issues. HRC has done that and so have many others. By saying Obama turned him after 90 minutes is a bit disingenuous. He's hardly going to come out and say they disagreed on things in their first formal meeting.

Trump needs to get his agenda down and stick to it, something he has been doing much better after hiring Kellyanne Conway. When he was up there on stage in rallies he was half entertainer ( taking down the prompters etc ). He has improved on this and needs to keep improving.

Hang on, Clinton flipped flopped plenty as did the other politicians.....I thought Trump's schtick was that he wasn't like all the others....that he wasn't your typical swamp living, establishment perpetuating professional politician.....wasn't he supposed to be a business person of ability and decisiveness?

Now his defenders seem to be using the fact that politicians flip flop to justify Trump's flipping and flopping - does that mean he's just a politician and he's not different in nature to other politicians?

Hank Scorpio

Jawgap wrote: »

Hang on, Clinton flipped flopped plenty as did the other politicians.....I thought Trump's schtick was that he wasn't like all the others....that he wasn't your typical swamp living, establishment perpetuating professional politician.....wasn't he supposed to be a business person of ability and decisiveness?

Now his defenders seem to be using the fact that politicians flip flop to justify Trump's flipping and flopping - does that mean he's just a politician and he's not different in nature to other politicians?

I'm not justifying anything. Believe me I don't need to sit here and be a "defender" of Trump with the tables stacked 5 to 1, I can hop onto different boards and avoid it entirely. Trump's "thing" in not being a typical politician was that the media didn't know what to do because he turned the tide so many times in interviews or press conferences. Now he has to learn to be more diplomatic in those scenarios.

I have openly admitted time and time again he's made mistakes with his prologue, something which the media ended up exaggerating tenfold to gain retribution and or/ because of special interests whilst often dismissing or ignoring blatant corruption on the other side. Whenever I try or tried argue in the opposite direction via wikileaks or things like project veritas they tend to get dismissed or ignored completely.

26000 Elephants

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

What do you make of his comments here @ 2.30 ?

Are you trying to suggest that the comment you quoted was in connection with his experience at 14 years of age having to confiscate the property of his landesmen?

You are deliberately trying to misrepresent the truth.

Please, answer my question. Are you going to condemn the actions of a frightened 14 year old boy in doing what he is told to do?

Or do you just not care about the sinister, dark twist put on his words by that video?

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I'm not justifying anything. Believe me I don't need to sit here and be a "defender" of Trump with the tables stacked 5 to 1, I can hop onto different boards and avoid it entirely. Trump's "thing" in not being a typical politician was that the media didn't know what to do because he turned the tide so many times in interviews or press conferences. Now he has to learn to be more diplomatic in those scenarios.

I have openly admitted time and time again he's made mistakes with his prologue, something which the media ended up exaggerating tenfold to gain retribution and or/ because of special interests whilst often dismissing or ignoring blatant corruption on the other side. Whenever I try or tried argue in the opposite direction via wikileaks or things like project veritas they tend to get dismissed or ignored completely.

While you're under no obligation to post here at all, it's pretty standard to actually support a contention with some manner of evidence. Project Veritas made a bunch of claims on the back of precisely zilch evidence. If you're going to claim a trump isn't a serial liar, then you'll need to provide some manner of explanation for that series of lies he's been responsible for. No amount of George Soros deflection is really going to cut it. The conspiracy theory forum never runs out of willing recipients for that manner of schtick.

Hank Scorpio

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Are you trying to suggest that the comment you quoted was in connection with his experience at 14 years of age having to confiscate the property of his landesmen?

You are deliberately trying to misrepresent the truth.

Please, answer my question. Are you going to condemn the actions of a frightened 14 year old boy in doing what he is told to do?

Or do you just not care about the sinister, dark twist put on his words by that video?

I'm condemning what he said about the Nazi regime, not what he was forced to do as a kid.

"Well actually was probably the happiest year of my life. That year of German occupation. For me it was a very positive experience."

Regardless of it making him "tougher" it is an incredibly insensitive and offensive thing to say after millions of people and Jew's died.

For someone who takes pleasure in gaining money without worrying about economic or social consequences, I think it's fair to call him out on idiotic comments.

Hank Scorpio

alastair wrote: »

While you're under no obligation to post here at all, it's pretty standard to actually support a contention with some manner of evidence. Project Veritas made a bunch of claims on the back of precisely zilch evidence. If you're going to claim a trump isn't a serial liar, then you'll need to provide some manner of explanation for that series of lies he's been responsible for. No amount of George Soros deflection is really going to cut it. The conspiracy theory forum never runs out of willing recipients for that manner of schtick.

For someone who will not accept wrongdoing has been done until somebody is persecuted or in jail, even when high level members of congress come out and say crimes have been committed and have pointed towards corruption and protection, no level of implied wikileaks evidence or any evidence will ever change your mind.

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I'm condemning what he said about the Nazi regime, not what he was forced to do as a kid.

"Well actually was probably the happiest year of my life. That year of German occupation. For me it was a very positive experience."

Regardless of it making him "tougher" it is an incredibly insensitive and offensive thing to say after millions of people and Jew's died.

For someone who takes pleasure in gaining money without worrying about economic or social consequences, I think it's fair to call him out on idiotic comments.

People and Jews eh?

If it was a happy year for him, then it's not idiotic to say so. It would be idiotic to say otherwise. I think he's better placed to empathise with the victims of the Shoah than you are, and to make his own call as to what's offensive.

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

For someone who will not accept wrongdoing has been done until somebody is persecuted or in jail, even when high level members of congress come out and say crimes have been committed and have pointed towards corruption and protection, no level of implied wikileaks evidence or any evidence will ever change your mind.

I'm not exactly alone in respecting the notion of a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with core civil rights? Hillary has been investigated multiple times, and no criminality has ever been found. Your penchant for misrepresenting the titbits you get from the Wikileaks emails are evidence of nothing.

Hank Scorpio

alastair wrote: »

I'm not exactly alone in respecting the notion of a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with core civil rights? Hillary has been investigated multiple times, and no criminality has ever been found. Your penchant for misrepresenting the titbits you get from the Wikileaks emails are evidence of nothing.

I'm glad there's many people in congress who don't view her particular case's so black and white.

alastair

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I'm glad there's many people in congress who don't view her particular case's so black and white.

Oh, you mean her political opponents, who benefit from casting aspersions, and don't actually need to substantiate them with proof? Seems like that's well into the grey territory alright. Many investigations - no criminality.

26000 Elephants

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I'm condemning what he said about the Nazi regime, not what he was forced to do as a kid.

"Well actually was probably the happiest year of my life. That year of German occupation. For me it was a very positive experience."

Non sequitur. Where in the line you quoted does he say anything about the nazi regime?

I have no doubt what your underlying subtext is here, but If I voice it my post will be deleted.

Billy86 has a wonderfully adroit piece of satire deleted, yet your post above, and your varying efforts to defend it remain unchallenged.

oscarBravo

osmiumartist wrote: »

You mean like Clinton is on record as saying she has... oh I see what you did there! (though most of those thanking you don't I reckon)

Oh, they do. She was pilloried for it; and the same people who castigated her for it don't have a problem with Trump doing it. That's precisely the double standard I was highlighting. Thanks for noticing.