2016 Presidential Race

Status
Not open for further replies.
partisan fueled witch hunts

Umm, you really don't actually pay attention to things, do you...

What has Trump been convicted of? Does he have controversy on multiple aspects of him? Sure he does. Anyone stepping into the political arena, especially for the presidential office, never mind having a known literal net worth well above the vast majority of currently elected officials (who funnel all their funding through PAC's and shit so they sure as fuck ARE rich, even if on paper they aren't), is going to have skeletons in their closet. Generally speaking, you will never get RICH in this world without pissing some people off. Either your competition or those that never actually competed but are simply jealous of what you can, or have, accomplished.

Trump is a wild card running under the Republican ticket, whereas the Clinton dynasty has already laid enough hands on this nations past, present, and forseeable future. The Executive branch as well as the other branches of government have quite a lot of work to do to pail water, patch holes, and get the sails back up from what this administration has "accomplished", with a Clinton having worked IN that administration.

Given her total disregard for conduct, security, and overall level of "no fucks given unless you sweeten my pot" when put in one of the arguably most influential positions with regards to this nation and it's interactions with the other 96% of the fucking PLANET; there is no valid way that anyone with a sober and coherent thought process would support her, let alone actually vote for her. The "Dynasty" needs to end, now.
 
@Red Flag 1, you are correct sir! My biggest problem with this whole situation is the fact that we are having to have these types of discussions for our top two candidates for President of the United States.

I can't elaborate enough how sad I think this whole situation is.

Honestly, I will be glad once it's over so I can see what we -- as a nation -- have to deal with and then drive on.

With all the dirt in this election, the first thing I do after voting, will be to go home and take a shower.
 
Donnie is suing the pants off * all of his sexual assault accusers, so no use arguing about it. We will see if his actions met the definition in time.

Unless he's being his usual wild and crazy self and lying about that. We will see how that works out in time, too.


* A totally intentional pun .
 
What has Hillary been convicted of, if that is the standard?

If you actually read any of the emails and gained insight into the operational methods and mindset of a Clinton operated establishment, you wouldn't need a conviction to rule Hillary out.

I have zero faith in the Justice Department anyway as there are tens of thousands of cases where people literally broke the law (Quick example: 4473's with felons and otherwise ineligible individuals attempting to purchase weapons) yet never are prosecuted. Just because you didn't get prosecuted doesn't mean you didn't break the law, and there's proof of having done so for Hillary, in a governmental position... unlike Trump, which has allegations of decades old incidents and to the best of my knowledge has never had a dedicated task force from the FBI dumping his shit.

Plus, her legislative performance was shit for her tenure as a Senator, although she did do better there in terms of actually at least voting on shit than Obama.
 
Trump Saying he "grabbed them by the pussy" implies he grabbed them by the pussy, which when not consensual is sexual assault by even conservative definitions.
Grabbed whom? Where is the report? The complainant? The victim? Here is an expert from the transcript,

Trump: "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."

Who exactly is them? I'm not excusing his comments, I'm asking within a legal context.

Additionally, as mentioned previously, the definitions of sexual assault vary. In Florida, there is no crime labled sexual assault, however, the act of grabbing genitalia is simple battery (intentional and unwanted touch or strike). If there is penetration, or union with other genitalia, then the crime becomes sexual battery.
 
She was convicted though? That is the standard being applied to Trump.

Ongoing CRIMINAL investigations > Ongoing CIVIL allegations bud, big f'ing difference, especially if you actually consider the truth of fact regarding the CRIMINAL investigations being for conduct in governmental office (which is the major crux of the matter, as she's hunting for a bigger office) versus CIVIL allegations of personal behavior.

This whole "Conviction" blather comes from:

His claim to fame is being a businessman. Has anyone actually bothered to take a look at that stellar business record? I see quite a bit of talk about the Clinton foundation and the APPEARANCE of impropriety yet no mention of the fact that the Trump foundation has actually been suspended. I mean the Clintons do bring heat on themselves by skirting the line, but even partisan fueled witch hunts still can't pin anything on her. Trump on the other hand has been convicted over and over yet gets a complete pass from his voting base.

Large businesses, which Trump runs, conduct legal operations all the time. This is not news. I'd bet that the Democratic base would turn a blind eye if Steve Jobs raised from the grave to run for President, as just one example on par.
 
Grabbed whom? Where is the report? The complainant? The victim? Here is an expert from the transcript,



Who exactly is them? I'm not excusing his comments, I'm asking within a legal context.

Additionally, as mentioned previously, the definitions of sexual assault vary. In Florida, there is no crime labled sexual assault, however, the act of grabbing genitalia is simple battery (intentional and unwanted touch or strike). If there is penetration, or union with other genitalia, then the crime becomes sexual battery.

His comments taken in context with the 10 women accusing him of similar actions.
 
When all of this is over with I hope the American people remember a few things.

- The DNC is essentially organized crime. At best they are morally and ethically bankrupt. HRC and staff committed multiple felonies, destroyed evidence, misled investigators, and whatever else I'm forgetting. The DNC colluded to rig the Democratic nomination...self-inflicted "crime."

- On the other side, the RNC is impotent, devoid of leadership, and increasingly out of touch with Americans. 3 presidential election cycles and they trot out McCain (viable until he went with Palin and the wheels fell off), Romney, and then had their party hijacked by a businessman turned reality TV star. This year something like 200-300 Republican sought the nomination and lost it to a guy like Trump. The RNC couldn't groom one or two viable candidates over the last 12 years?

We desperately need a third party, if only to remind the other two their house are broken, utterly broken. This election is truly coming down to who the people hate less. Does anyone remember policy discussions? The last month was "crooked Hillary" and "grab 'em by the pussy" instead of "Here's what we will do for America."

Democrat or Republican, if you're happy with the state of your party, I just don't even know what to say.
 
Later classified...that means it was not classified when it was sent. If someone sends me unclassified information, unmarked, and I send it to someone else - then later someone decides they'd like that information to be classified - I do not go to jail. In fact, very few people go to jail for NDCIs - nobody in my experience as an S2 at almost every level.

I believe I understand, even if I don't agree, feelings that HRC is a criminal, security risk/spy/traitor, and corrupt. However, I think some level of perspective is also warranted. If you're on the warpath for this kind of routine bullshit I hope you'll be marching on RNC HQ with torches blazing when parts of the NIE are leaked, CIA identities are disclosed, Congressional collusion with Israeli intelligence is caught on tape and suppressed, or any of the other BS that happened in the Bush administration and is likely to happen again.

One thing I think I've learned in this election cycle, as someone who has supported HRC from the beginning - and voted for her, not against DT - is that perspective is very important. Seeing DT has made me re-look many of my past opinions on the Bush administration (both of them) and especially GOV Romney's candidacy.

Regardless of the outcome of this election, and I still believe HRC will win by 4%+ and break 300 in the EC, we're all still going to have to live here - and live with the knowledge that pretty close to half of Americans voted the opposite way we did. I think if we've decided those on the other side are all idiots who hate America, love Hitler/ISIS/Child Rape/Pokémon Go, and have zero judgment then we are even more fucked. That's why, even though I am likely voting your way @benrolliver I didn't like or agree with your last several posts. I don't like it when people post shit about what an idiot I am with no morals because of the way I vote so I try to avoid posting or supporting things that say that about them. Hopefully there's some room to understand other people see things differently than we do.

Or, maybe not.
 
Ongoing CRIMINAL investigations > Ongoing CIVIL allegations bud, big f'ing difference, especially if you actually consider the truth of fact regarding the CRIMINAL investigations being for conduct in governmental office (which is the major crux of the matter, as she's hunting for a bigger office) versus CIVIL allegations of personal behavior.

This whole "Conviction" blather comes from:



Large businesses, which Trump runs, conduct legal operations all the time. This is not news. I'd bet that the Democratic base would turn a blind eye if Steve Jobs raised from the grave to run for President, as just one example on par.

Yes setting up a fake University and defrauding students is just "allegations of personal behavior".

Also, tell me again how many times Hillary has been indicted on criminal charges, let alone convicted? Please I would love to know.

Call it blather all you want, but it seems pretty clear to me. As for the comment about Steve Jobs. Have you bothered to google anything the "liberal media" has written about him? Yawn I am done with this.

Apple factories accused of exploiting Chinese workers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top