Extremist rhetoric on Trump threads

ancapailldorcha

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've reported all the posts.

I'll message you with the links.

Much obliged. I'm going through that thread now.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You make a thread giving out about people jumping to rash generalisations and what do you do? Make a rash generalisation.

Can't say I expected much more from you though, you have a habit of making condescending posts and only choosing to discuss with people who you think you can one-up.

I've said many times I'll discuss anything with anyone, no matter what they believe in, as long as they're respectful and informed. Unfortunately, the people who support Trump on this site are anything but. Still, I discuss with them, make continued arguments with them until they go silent, change the subject and/or tell blatant lies.

26000 Elephants

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've asked your for evidence of this before and you never cited an instance of being labelled a racist.

He was labelled a bigot, not a racist. For reasons he stated.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mark Hamill

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I respectfully disagree, that's not what's been going on at all. Things were for the most part jovial right up until he won the election and then it changed. In my recent case I was labeled a bigot because I expressed the view mass immigration from certain regions causes social problems.

Where you called a bigot? Or was it pointed out that your opinion was bigoted after it was contradicted with evidence by multiple posters? Because that's what it looks like happened in this thread (I assume the thread you reference?)

I do not agree with posters just calling each others names, be it bigot, racist, facist etc.
But debating someone's opinion, with evidence and logic, and then pointing out that the opinion is bigoted, racist etc is not calling names. It falls under the same logic as what makes something libel or not - it's not libel if it can be shown to be true.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You've done it several times. We both make points that disagree, I then show evidence which completely refutes your point, you then make a condescending comment, attack only a small part of my point which you think can 'win' or else just refuse to respond. I'll admit you're one of the better posters who comes from 'the other side' but discussing issues with you is incredibly frustrating I'll admit.

To be honest, I thank posts regularly enough so I can't think of any of examples, but I'm willing to be proven wrong here. Still I judge posters more on what they say, than what they thank on here.

In other words, you're happy to come out and call all Trump supporters on the site disrespectful and uninformed, while simultaneously complaining about people making generalizations. Again, a clear double standard.

Yeah and that's not a rash generalisation as there's not many of them who post in the threads regularly and all of them have been consistently caught lying, ducking and diving points or just posting trash. I stand by what I said.

I'm not saying anyone who agrees with some aspects of what Trump does, is part of that group, but there are some who've said 'I support X, but still don't support him in general'. That's not to say anyone who supports him is bad, it's just the people on here who say they do, also happen to be some of the worst posters imo.

The posters on these threads deriding their opponents as fascists, racists, and bigots appear to be able to dish out the insults, but then take offense when people retaliate. You can't have it both ways.

I hear examples all over this thread like 'I was called a nazi' but where's the evidence? I can't see anything like this coming from anyone who posts regularly in these threads. I'm not saying insults don't come from both sides, they do, but serious allegations such as Nazism, do not get bandied about by any respectable poster on 'the anti-Trump side'.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Cabaal

frostyjacks wrote: »

You prefer discussions with people who share the same opinion as yourself?

I believe society in general is moving towards the right, not just this site.

Since you're a poster who openly follows neo nazi linked websites I think I'll take your comment with about 2 tonne of salt.

Your posting record shows a love for neo nazi linked websites (you've linked to them yourself) and you constantly spout hate against numerous groups.

There's having a different opinion and then there's just spouting hate like you have a record of doing.

Mark Hamill

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Didn't you start this thread to complain about the anti-Trump posters being the worst?

mcmoustache

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've reported all the posts.

I'll message you with the links.

I saw at least two posts from the same person calling you a bigot. The posts are probably still there.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Don't believe me? This is from a thread a few weeks back, granted not a Trump thread, but a similar enough topic on capitalism and socialism, with the same posters on pretty much the same side.

I made a point, to which you disagreed, provided some examples, which included attacking the DDR and referred to an athlete who was "was pumped so full of male hormones by government officials (without her knowledge) that she subsequently decided to have a sex change". I then made a response which included my own personal experiences of living in the former DDR this year, and actually knowing a gold medal winning athlete which completely proved your point to be full of ****. Your response? A cheap 10 word reply with a picture, which did nothing to benefit the discussion.

I'm not looking for you to reply to every single post I make instantly, but you have a habit of making cheap replies when you know you're wrong.

Yet again, I'm not on any "other side." I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat; I'm a registered Libertarian who voted for Gary Johnson in the general election. I have been critical of both Clinton and Trump. But this is a classic example of "If you're not with us, you're against us" logic. As I noted earlier, anyone not manning the barricades and branding the "other side" racists and fascists is suspected of harboring covert Trump sympathies.

I'm neither a Hillary or Donald supporter either. Still it doesn't mean I can't criticise the hell out of someone who is guilty of doing bad things imo.
You still haven't shown any example of somebody on here being branded a nazi by a regular poster in these threads. It's yet another 'Bowling Green Massacre - style' claim.

What a happy coincidence for you that the pro-Trump posters also happen to be the worst posters. No partisanship going on here, no sirree Bob.

There are plenty of bad posters on the 'Anti-Trump' brigade aswell. But I stand by what I said, the people on the 'Pro-Trump' side are some of the worst posters in the politics forum.

demfad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They are 'snowflakes' perhaps?

gallag

Nody wrote: »

How many times have we had the "Sweden has 50 no go zones due to immigration" been repeated which has also been proven wrong over and over again? How about the latest claim that the alleged facebook rape were immigrants (no, they were born in Sweden making them Swedes by birthright no matter their parents nationality or skin colour).

I think what's needed is a much stricter requirements on actually quoting sources in the posts to back up the claims in said posts. That in turn will force people to stop repeating hear say

WOW, the Swedish police openly admit they have 55 no go areas in Sweden, it's actually big news at the minute, and I assume there is new info on the face book rape? It was reported in all media as African immigrants?!?!

I note you drop two very consensus points and then with no hint of irony complain about people doing that without posting links.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2709224/two-afghan-migrants-revealed-as-those-arrested-over-horrific-three-hour-rape-streamed-on-facebook-live-in-sweden/


http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/26/afghan-migrants-arrested-over-horrific-3-hour-rape-streamed-facebook-live-sweden

http://nypost.com/2017/01/26/afghan-immigrants-busted-for-live-streamed-gang-rape/

As to the "no go zones" The best any site comes to debunking this is at best an exercise in pedantry focusing on the literal dictionary definition of "no go zone" is to mean.

This is the most referenced source liberals use to "debunk" this.

https://debunkingdenialism.com/2017/01/20/debunking-the-myth-of-no-go-zones-in-sweden/


Their argument is this.

"Let us look at what the term “no-go zone” actually means. Not what it means on social media or among ideologues, but what the dictionary definition of the term is. The Free Dictionary provides the following definition (and many other dictionaries provide similar definitions):

no-go area
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a district in a town that is barricaded off, usually by a paramilitary organization, within which the police, army, etc, can only enter by force
2. an area that is barred to certain individuals, groups, etc

So for something to be a “no-go zone”, it must be blocked off by a paramilitary or insurgency group that prevents the police from entering or an area that is blocked off to certain people. Basically, the police or military has completely lost power or control over the area and the government cannot assert their sovereignty. Language evolves over time and definitions changes, but we must be clear with what the words we use actually mean."


They go on to admit there are 55 areas where crime is rife and police and emergency services will come under attack if they enter as per the official police report.


"In Sweden, there are currently 55 geographical areas where local criminal networks are considered to have a negative effect on the local community. The areas are distributed over 22 cities – from large cities to smaller towns and are considered to be socioeconomically vulnerable. The large criminal impact on the local community appears to be tied to the social context in the area rather than a will among the criminals to take power and control over the local community. […] The development in the areas has made it difficult to investigate crime. The police has also in other respects had difficulty working in these areas, among other reasons because the surrounding reacts against the police during arrests or by attacking police vehicles.

So what is the issues they highlight in this report? They present a little over 50 geographical areas that are socioeconomically vulnerable and where local criminal gangs has a substantial negative effect. This makes it hard for the police to investigate crime, they are sometimes attacked when arresting people and sometimes their police vehicles are attacked by people that e. g. throw stones or smash windshields of police cars."


So there it is, there are 55 odd areas in Sweden where the police cannot freely operate without facing attack and are controlled by gangs, things have even got worse from the date this report was made, the only argument is if you want to be pedantic you can argue they are not dictionary defined "no go zones" if it makes people feel better we can use the official term i.e "there are 55 EXPOSED areas in Sweden!"

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

JRant

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Don't believe me? This is from a thread a few weeks back, granted not a Trump thread, but a similar enough topic on capitalism and socialism, with the same posters on pretty much the same side.

I made a point, to which you disagreed, provided some examples, which included attacking the DDR and referred to an athlete who was "was pumped so full of male hormones by government officials (without her knowledge) that she subsequently decided to have a sex change". I then made a response which included my own personal experiences of living in the former DDR this year, and actually knowing a gold medal winning athlete which completely proved your point to be full of ****. Your response? A cheap 10 word reply with a picture, which did nothing to benefit the discussion.

I'm not looking for you to reply to every single post I make instantly, but you have a habit of making cheap replies when you know you're wrong.



I'm neither a Hillary or Donald supporter either. Still it doesn't mean I can't criticise the hell out of someone who is guilty of doing bad things imo.
You still haven't shown any example of somebody on here being branded a nazi by a regular poster in these threads. It's yet another 'Bowling Green Massacre - style' claim.



There are plenty of bad posters on the 'Anti-Trump' brigade aswell. But I stand by what I said, the people on the 'Pro-Trump' side are some of the worst posters in the politics forum.

I must be missing something here because I can't actually see what you are referring to about Permabear in your post. They are not cheap shots at all, rather they are well documented facts about East Germans doping programs. They kept almost meticulous records of what they did to their athletes.

So in the interest of fairness I don't think it is accurate to portrait Perma in such a manner.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm not willing to debate the matter further here, though I would elsewhere, as it's definitely the wrong forum to do so.

My point was that this was the type of reply I'd hope to get from people on this site, not the one you gave a number of weeks back.

MightyMandarin

JRant wrote: »

I must be missing something here because I can't actually see what you are referring to about Permabear in your post. They are not cheap shots at all, rather they are well documented facts about East Germans doping programs. They kept almost meticulous records of what they did to their athletes.

So in the interest of fairness I don't think it is accurate to portrait Perma in such a manner.

Like I said above, this is not the place to continue the discussion.

I think it was fair as the reply I got in that thread was in no way beneficial to the discussion. The issue was not the content of the reply, as it barely even amounted to one.

Nody

gallag wrote: »

WOW, the Swedish police openly admit they have 55 no go areas in Sweden, it's actually big news at the minute, and I assume there is new info on the face book rape? It was reported in all media as African immigrants?!?!

No, the definition of a no go zone was created by a journalist in an article over a year later and not by the police. What the police highlighted were 55 areas were they faced challenges due to local level criminal networks which stopped them from using their normal method of working due to the local criminal gangs using spotters when police cars where entering the area etc. The original document is here and has no mentions of no go zones. In fact the definition is:

Page 9 The police authorities have identified 55 areas where they experience problem with the local criminal network having a negative effect on the local area. The areas are split over 22 cities and can mainly be found in the south and middle parts of Sweden.

That is the definition for the 55 areas you declare as no go zones as per the Swedish Police authority as part of their report requested to give a status update on problems with "territorial gangs".

As part of the problems experienced the police highlights as per page 15:

It is difficult to do civil monitoring unobserved as new comers are quickly noticed. In certain areas there are guards placed to keep an eye out and warning if the police or other criminal gangs enter the area.

And going on to page 18 and the summary:

In the directive of the report it was asked to clarify in the terms the Police can use to describe the problem areas. During the creation of this report it has become clear that the problem is complex and hard to grasp. The picture that has grown is of local criminal gangs with clear geographical connection which has some effect on the local community. The effect to the community appears to be tied to the social context in the exposed areas, rather than a plan by the criminals to take power and control the local community. Currently there is nothing showing that the there are any gangs organised with such a strategy. In the exposed areas it rather appears the criminals have a low strategic capability and are part of a loosely woven network with a wide connection to the youth environment. This means the older criminals in the organized crime ties together with the local youth environment.

In the criminal environment there is always a certain level of parallel community with their own rules and norms and ways to resolve disputes. This follows due to the legal society's law enforcement is not available to them. This is also how the situation looks like in these exposed areas. As previously mentioned there is no reason to conclude that there is a parallel society in any wider sense of the word in these areas. The criminal members however have other ways to get influence on the local community.

So there it is from the horses mouth; the actual report that got distorted five ways to Sunday to make a nice headline but since I can fully understand that your Swedish may not be fluent there's also an excellent summary on how the whole thing came about here in English which do include quotes directly from the Swedish police in English.

Now the second dispute:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2709224/two-afghan-migrants-revealed-as-those-arrested-over-horrific-three-hour-rape-streamed-on-facebook-live-in-sweden/

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/26/afghan-migrants-arrested-over-horrific-3-hour-rape-streamed-facebook-live-sweden

http://nypost.com/2017/01/26/afghan-immigrants-busted-for-live-streamed-gang-rape/

For starters this is what the police has actually released as a statement here which has no information on their nationality but not that has stopped the speculation to run wild. However and this will blow your mind I'm sure but the Alt Right movement in Sweden have already identified the people on the movie but only gone out with one name so far. Now the link I gave you is Breitbart level of arguing inc. that there where no holocaust etc. However it serves the purpose to show you the name and nationalities (even if they get a bit confused claiming they are Arabian for people from Armenia and then coming from Iran) and the personal ID. Now to get a personal ID you need to become a Swedish citizen. Oh and they were Christians, not Muslims since that matters these days to clarify. This claim is from Tomas Hultin who was one of the people reporting it to the police.

I hope to never hear any of the claims again from you since you've now been informed on why they are wrong with the appropriate links to back them up with the actual information directly from the respective source for the original claim. Oh and as a reference I do wish the Facebook rapist were immigrants so they could be kicked out but that does not change the fact that they are Swedish citizens by all accounts so far.

*Edit* You said two out of three and linked the above two claims; to complete the claims for the Obama "did not ban refugees" as well see this and this post. Simply to make sure all my claims are factual and with clear links to the source material after all.

gallag

Nody wrote: »

No, the definition of a no go zone was created by a journalist in an article over a year later and not by the police. What the police highlighted were 55 areas were they faced challenges due to local level criminal networks which stopped them from using their normal method of working due to the local criminal gangs using spotters when police cars where entering the area etc. The original document is here and has no mentions of no go zones. In fact the definition is:
That is the definition for the 55 areas you declare as no go zones as per the Swedish Police authority as part of their report requested to give a status update on problems with "territorial gangs".

As part of the problems experienced the police highlights as per page 15:


And going on to page 18 and the summary:


So there it is from the horses mouth; the actual report that got distorted five ways to Sunday to make a nice headline but since I can fully understand that your Swedish may not be fluent there's also an excellent summary on how the whole thing came about here in English which do include quotes directly from the Swedish police in English.

Now the second dispute:
For starters this is what the police has actually released as a statement here which has no information on their nationality but not that has stopped the speculation to run wild. However and this will blow your mind I'm sure but the Alt Right movement in Sweden have already identified the people on the movie but only gone out with one name so far. Now the link I gave you is Breitbart level of arguing inc. that there where no holocaust etc. However it serves the purpose to show you the name and nationalities (even if they get a bit confused claiming they are Arabian for people from Armenia and then coming from Iran) and the personal ID. Now to get a personal ID you need to become a Swedish citizen. Oh and they were Christians, not Muslims since that matters these days to clarify. This claim is from Tomas Hultin who was one of the people reporting it to the police.

I hope to never hear any of the claims again from you since you've now been informed on why they are wrong with the appropriate links to back them up with the actual information directly from the respective source for the original claim. Oh and as a reference I do wish the Facebook rapist were immigrants so they could be kicked out but that does not change the fact that they are Swedish citizens by all accounts so far.

*Edit* You said two out of three and linked the above two claims; to complete the claims for the Obama "did not ban refugees" as well see this and this post. Simply to make sure all my claims are factual and with clear links to the source material after all.

So we are in agreement, Sweden has 55 areas where law and order is broken and emergency services come under constant attack, i agree these areas don't fit the dictionary definition of "no go zone". I give acual links to actual news sites showing that the Facebook rapists were immigrants and you counter with a obscure far right source that I am sure you would laugh at if someone used on you! Laughable.

Nody

gallag wrote: »

So we are in agreement, Sweden has 55 areas where law and order is broken and emergency services come under constant attack, i agree these areas don't fit the dictionary definition of "no go zone". I give acual links to actual news sites showing that the Facebook rapists were immigrants and you counter with a obscure far right source that I am sure you would laugh at if someone used on you! Laughable.

I linked you the actual police report inc. the Swedish police statement that there are no "no go" zones. However as epr definition used by the Swedish police would also apply to all of Sicily and great parts of Italy where the Mafia rules or areas in Dublin under gang control. So if accept those areas in Dublin, Belfast (IRA/RIRA etc.) etc. are covered by the same definition for sure there are areas where there are issues. The biggest driver however is not so much immigration but lack of work; the statistic shows if your family lives on social welfare you're six times as likely to have a police record compared to a family living on salary (being an immigrant has a factor between 1.5 to 2.5 depending on your definition of immigrant as reference).

In regards to the Facebook rapists; I linked you the police press release from the Swedish Police which has no account of their nationalities and by official records there are no nationalities mentioned so you can't claim that they are immigrants as a truth based on articles from other countries who're making it up. However what I did show you was the information available by comparing the images from the video AND by a witness of the rape states that they are Christian born Swedes and not immigrants so as it currently stands the hard facts is unknown the soft facts shown them as Christian born Swedes.

blackwhite

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Don't believe me? This is from a thread a few weeks back, granted not a Trump thread, but a similar enough topic on capitalism and socialism, with the same posters on pretty much the same side.

I made a point, to which you disagreed, provided some examples, which included attacking the DDR and referred to an athlete who was "was pumped so full of male hormones by government officials (without her knowledge) that she subsequently decided to have a sex change". I then made a response which included my own personal experiences of living in the former DDR this year, and actually knowing a gold medal winning athlete which completely proved your point to be full of ****. Your response? A cheap 10 word reply with a picture, which did nothing to benefit the discussion.

I'm not looking for you to reply to every single post I make instantly, but you have a habit of making cheap replies when you know you're wrong.



I'm neither a Hillary or Donald supporter either. Still it doesn't mean I can't criticise the hell out of someone who is guilty of doing bad things imo.
You still haven't shown any example of somebody on here being branded a nazi by a regular poster in these threads. It's yet another 'Bowling Green Massacre - style' claim.



There are plenty of bad posters on the 'Anti-Trump' brigade aswell. But I stand by what I said, the people on the 'Pro-Trump' side are some of the worst posters in the politics forum.

Are you seriously complaining that someone responded to "let's stop this whitewashing of life in the east as some sort of prison camp" with a picture of the barbed-wire lined walls that the DDR Government erected to stop their populace from fleeing to the West?

TBH - if your point is so weak that it can be debunked by a picture, then that's not something you can try and blame on someone else.


Some of the posts on this thread reek of you and a few others looking to smear Permabear as some Alt-right acolyte simply because he doesn't agree blindly with whatever consensus you are trying to build.

Earthhorse

What a strange little thread this is. Permabear asserts that there is a specific problem with bile being spewed toward Trump, his administration and his supporters and in the same breath he informs us he hasn't reported any of the "thousands" of such posts that exist and so not to ask him to do so, which is actually the bear minimum we have always expected of someone bringing an issue to Feedback. And his reasoning behind this? It's not, as you might expect, the fact that there aren't many of these posts, or that they are borderline in nature but in fact quite the opposite. There are so many and they are so over the top that he can't report a single one. This, of course, makes zero sense.

Like others, I am suspicious of this call for a general clampdown on uncivil criticism of Trump et al. The truth is the right, and make no mistake that that is where Permabear's political allegiances lie, having been the supposed voice of dissent, despite having majorities in both houses, in American politics (which is what we're discussing the discussion of) over the last few years are now refusing to cede that role to the left. Whether it's silencing of Elizabeth Warren on the senate floor, talk of outlawing civil protest in major cities or calls for clampdowns on boards the truth is they want to hold office and hold court as the supposedly suppressed at the same time.

I have no idea whether a bias toward the left exists on boards in terms of allowing bile and neither does anyone else. If you ask people on the left they'll claim it's the right who get away with murder and vice versa. What I do know is that if we accept the narrative presented in this thread without asking for it to be evidenced then we are accepting the bias of those who made the case and additionally creating a new bias where uncivil comments towards Trump et al will be specifically looked out for by moderators.

The right love to talk about personal responsibility. But here in this thread they refuse their responsibility to help moderators keep debate civil by reporting transgressive posts whilst at the same time expecting the right to civil debate (which I support) to somehow be maintained. A better solution to the supposed problem would be for those who spot such posts to report the most egregious examples to help establish with moderators where the line is, rather than asking the mods (who presumably haven't spotted any such problem and therefore will be half guessing as to which posts are offensive) to engage in some general clampdown.

MightyMandarin

blackwhite wrote: »

Are you seriously complaining that someone responded to "let's stop this whitewashing of life in the east as some sort of prison camp" with a picture of the barbed-wire lined walls that the DDR Government erected to stop their populace from fleeing to the West?

TBH - if your point is so weak that it can be debunked by a picture, then that's not something you can try and blame on someone else.


Some of the posts on this thread reek of you and a few others looking to smear Permabear as some Alt-right acolyte simply because he doesn't agree blindly with whatever consensus you are trying to build.

I expected a more thorough response than a picture and ten words, particularly as I had raised other points which he ignored.

It wasn't debunked at all imo. It was a weak response.

Care to show any examples of Permabear being portrayed as a member of the alt-right? Yet again more spurious claims in this thread of 'oh we're being called nazi's and racists left, right and centre' and yet....not a single shred of proof to back that claim.

I don't see why anyone would portray him as an alt-right acolyte anyway. He's a libertarian and said it many times.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You know, you come across as sensible and reasoned, and I agree with you on calls for reasoned debate and less mud-slinging. Then you go ahead and post this:

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Can you see why I take issue with you being the person to make that call?

Even then, you and others in this thread go on, and on, and on about 'People call us Nazi's on boards' and yet having been asked time after time, not a single example is resurrected showing that is indeed happening.

I'll welcome any call for calm and respect on these threads, but don't try and take to your highhorse and act like you're above it all. You're just as bad as anyone for dragging down these threads.

kunst nugget

At this stage, is this thread doing anything beyond the pointless bickering about minutiae that plagues those Trump threads and stops any rational debate or discussion? It seems people will argue about anything and the only important thing seems to be who can get the last word in.

demfad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

When you claim that Clinton and Obama are just as 'fascist' as Donald Trump and Stephen Bannon then you are part of the problem. Where is the integrity in this sentiment?

If a people support a 'politician' whose campaign promises and policies are far right white nationalist then they should not be suprised if many people assume they believe in those policies. Trump has shown enough of his hand for this to be a reasonable assumption. Same would go for FF supporters, Conservatives etc.
If they believe Trump is being unfairly misrepresented then they are free to argue the point. If they are wont to claim that they think it's fair to ignore his racism/misogyny/fascism etc in lieau of his economic plans then they should argue that also. It would be a weak argument.

Edit:
It must also be remembered that there is an FBI led investigation (with 4 other agencies) into the Trump campaign and Russian links. Both houses are also investigating same. There is a DOJ investigation into the FBI leak of the 2nd investigation. Apart from that there was conformed subbstantial Russian interference in the election. Even though the media spent 4 times more investigating Clinton emails than Trump money, evidence showed a history of dodgy Russian connections and probable money laundering back to the late 1980s. There have been several accusations against this man of sexual harassment rape, and child molestation. Trump is not a normal president.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

demfad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You claimed that one could equally argue that any of teh above was a fascist which is not the case.

demfad

Definition of kleptocracy:

: government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed; also : a particular government of this kind.

https://therealdeal.com/2011/06/17/vornado-realty-trust-seeks-piece-of-kushner-companies-666-fifth-avenue/

Steven Roth bails Kushner out (for 420 million) of his height of boom 1.8 billion purchase of 666 Fifth avenue with a 1.2 billion loan cutoff approaching.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160420/BLOGS02/160429992/why-vornados-steven-roth-was-at-donald-trumps-victory-speech-last-night

Steven Roth bails Trump out of his 'White elephant' Trump city to avert disaster. Roth has a controlling holding of 30% in 2 of the 3 properties that Trump actually owns. Trump still owes 500 million on these properties.


Guess who, like Trump and Kushner is in huge debt to China.


And wait for it.....

http://www.curbed.com/2017/1/17/14301754/trump-infrastructure-nyc-lefrak-vornado



Oh Look!

Guess who Trump awards the 1.1 TRILLION $$ contract to for his great infrastructure project?....You guessed it...Steven Roth.

Don't question the fact that Roth has no intrastructure construction experience, only luxury high rise condos....and if you question why no transportation planners, policy analysts, urban designers, social workers seem to be on Roths list of contractors...well youre missing the point?