yimyammer

Quality Starter
Messages
8,972
Reaction score
2,641
On another note, it's so ridiculous how Hillary and the left now want to make high-income, successful people the devil... but then she turns right around and accuses him of not being as rich as he claims. In her world that would be a good thing, no?

Now???

Its always been like that, demonize the rich and attract the vote of the poor.

People are so fucking stupid, did they not learn anything from how horrific it is to live under socialist and communist rules and their policies?
 

Hoofbite

Draft Pick
Messages
4,231
Reaction score
0
He already addressed the birther nonsense a couple weeks ago, he should have just repeated what he said then.

I thought he got too defensive on the income tax stuff but I do like that he got in the barb about releasing his income taxes when she releases the emails.

With all the stuff going on in the US and all over the world, somebody's stance on this birther stuff and whether someone releases his income taxes (after filling out a 100+ page financial disclosure already) don't seem like "issues" we need to be hearing about in the first Presidential debate to me. I don't remember the total amount of time they spent on these two things but 10 seconds would have been too long.

Like I said, Lester Holt did a good job with his marching orders from HRC campaign.

The birth certificate bullshit wasn't ever worth discussing, but since Trump was leading the charge on the issue why would anyone expect that he not have to address such ridiculousness?

As for his tax returns, the only reason anyone is even interested in them is because his only claim to anything in life has been how great of a businessman he is. If he didn't have that what else would he have to justify any sort of elected position? Everything about the man is built on the idea that he has such a great business mind.

Generally speaking, of course nobody really cares about tax returns during elections. In this case, when they can substantiate your only claim to office it's not unreasonable to expect to see them.
 
Messages
2,278
Reaction score
53
The birth certificate bullshit wasn't ever worth discussing, but since Trump was leading the charge on the issue why would anyone expect that he not have to address such ridiculousness?

As for his tax returns, the only reason anyone is even interested in them is because his only claim to anything in life has been how great of a businessman he is. If he didn't have that what else would he have to justify any sort of elected position? Everything about the man is built on the idea that he has such a great business mind.

Generally speaking, of course nobody really cares about tax returns during elections. In this case, when they can substantiate your only claim to office it's not unreasonable to expect to see them.

The birth certificate was a laughable forgery. You know it as does every leftist, but since your first instincts are to lie your ass off you will deny reality. You are also knowingly lying about who started this whole birther controversy. It was not even Hillary that started it though she definitely ran with it before Trump ever did. Obama himself claimed he was born in Kenya on his biography. You guys can't memory hole that one so you try to deny abject reality. It does not fool anybody, not even yourselves.

All of that is besides the fact that you are ok with felonious corruption as we now know with Hillary and what has been revealed in her emails. She should be serving time in prison, but because the left is more corrupt than the Mafia could ever hope to have been, and because the modern Republican party is so spineless, she skates because she is above the law, and you have no problem with that. How does that make you feel? How do you square that with yourself when you look in the mirror?
 

VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,500
Reaction score
325
Now???

Its always been like that, demonize the rich and attract the vote of the poor.

People are so fucking stupid, did they not learn anything from how horrific it is to live under socialist and communist rules and their policies?

And there was yet another perfect opportunity to squash that bullshit, during the debate that Trump passed up.
Here's this woman, claiming humble beginnings and a relatable cause with the middle class, yet is a multi-millionaire without a product. She gets paid to talk. Not build things and create jobs. Talk. Take 'donations' and wag her finger at Wall Street and other business men.

Bad candidates indeed; a real candidate would have known this.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,848
Reaction score
6,109
And there was yet another perfect opportunity to squash that bullshit, during the debate that Trump passed up.
Here's this woman, claiming humble beginnings and a relatable cause with the middle class, yet is a multi-millionaire without a product. She gets paid to talk. Not build things and create jobs. Talk. Take 'donations' and wag her finger at Wall Street and other business men.

Bad candidates indeed; a real candidate would have known this.

I still think the bigger problem here is the moderators. As long as they continue to use extremely biased people who are in the tank for one particular party, its always going to be this way regardless of who the candidate is or what they try to do.
 

yimyammer

Quality Starter
Messages
8,972
Reaction score
2,641
As for his tax returns, the only reason anyone is even interested in them is because his only claim to anything in life has been how great of a businessman he is. If he didn't have that what else would he have to justify any sort of elected position? Everything about the man is built on the idea that he has such a great business mind.

he's not great at the business of real estate but he is great at building the Trump brand. The only reason he wasn't wiped out is because the lenders felt it was more important to keep his name associated with all the properties so he was kept on and given a salary while they attempted to clean up his mess.

I don't believe he even owns much property any more, he gets paid to have his name on buildings and in some cases to manage properties (which isn't a bad gig if you can pull it off)

I think the tax returns would reveal he's not worth near as much nor does he make as much as he claims.

He's basically full of shit and people have been lapping it up for years.

He's like an old fart Kardashian at this point.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
2,091
The birth certificate bullshit wasn't ever worth discussing, but since Trump was leading the charge on the issue why would anyone expect that he not have to address such ridiculousness?

Clinton's campaign, via Sidney Blumenthal, first floated the theory to various media outlets eight years ago. one newspaper actually sent reporters to Kenya to check it out. therefore, Hillary should have been forced to answer for this too, but Holt let her skate. imagine that.
 

junk

UDFA
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
Didn't watch it. Glad I didn't since apparently the highlights were birth certificates and tax returns.

Would have been nice to discuss something that matters like economic or foreign policy.

But that's politics these days. Distract the masses with trivial bullshit

Idiocracy 2016
 

yimyammer

Quality Starter
Messages
8,972
Reaction score
2,641
I had never heard this....really?

I don't believe that's accurate.

A literary agent wrote a blurb about Obama stating he was born in Kenya (& later said it was his/her mistake) but as far as I can ascertain, this was not said in his biography which would be easy to quote if true. Plus the birth certificate has been made public but this wont matter because this topic has gone the way of aliens, 911 conspiracies, etc and people will just believe what they want to believe and easily dismiss it as a fake.

bookbio.jpg
 

Sheik

All-Pro
Messages
24,809
Reaction score
5
Did I read it right that more people believe in Bigfoot than believe Hillary is honest?
 

Hoofbite

Draft Pick
Messages
4,231
Reaction score
0
The birth certificate was a laughable forgery. You know it as does every leftist, but since your first instincts are to lie your ass off you will deny reality. You are also knowingly lying about who started this whole birther controversy. It was not even Hillary that started it though she definitely ran with it before Trump ever did. Obama himself claimed he was born in Kenya on his biography. You guys can't memory hole that one so you try to deny abject reality. It does not fool anybody, not even yourselves.

All of that is besides the fact that you are ok with felonious corruption as we now know with Hillary and what has been revealed in her emails. She should be serving time in prison, but because the left is more corrupt than the Mafia could ever hope to have been, and because the modern Republican party is so spineless, she skates because she is above the law, and you have no problem with that. How does that make you feel? How do you square that with yourself when you look in the mirror?

Couple posts back I said I hope both would die in a car fire and here you are asking me to justify support fo Hillary?

I could try to explain how I don't care for her....again, but I think I'll just say, "go fuck yourself". If you're going to operate in the world of make believe, leave me out of it.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
Hillary’s Debate Lies

With her comments about crime, policing, and race, the candidate helps push a false—and dangerous—narrative.

Heather Mac Donald
September 27, 2016
Politics and law


Hillary Clinton repeated her incessant lie last night that the criminal justice system is infected with “systemic racism.” Race “determines” how people are “treated in the criminal justice system,” she said. Blacks are “more likely [than whites] to be arrested, charged, convicted and incarcerated” for “doing the same thing.” Such a dangerous falsehood, should Clinton act on it as president, would result not just in misguided policies but in the continued delegitimation of the criminal justice system. That delegitimation, with its attendant hostility and aggression toward police officers, has already produced the largest one-year surge in homicides in urban areas in nearly a half-century.

Criminologists have tried for decades to prove that the overrepresentation of blacks in prison is due to criminal-justice racism. They have always come up short. They have been forced to the same conclusion as Michael Tonry in his book, Malign Neglect: “Racial differences in patterns of offending, not racial bias by police and other officials, are the principal reason that such greater proportions of blacks than whites are arrested, prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned,” Tonry wrote. In 1997, criminologists Robert Sampson and Janet Lauritsen reviewed the massive literature on charging and sentencing. They found overwhelming evidence establishing that “large racial differences in criminal offending,” not racism, explained why more blacks were in prison proportionately than whites and for longer terms.

To say, as Clinton did last night, that blacks are more likely to be incarcerated for doing the same thing as whites ignores the relevance of a defendant’s criminal history in determining his sentence, among other crucial sentencing factors. Just last week, an analysis of Delaware’s prison population presented to the Delaware Access to Justice Commission’s Committee on Fairness in the Criminal Justice System revealed that when juvenile and adult criminal records are taken into account, along with arrest charges and age, racial disparities in sentencing decisions are negligible to nonexistent.

Clinton also complained that “too many young African-American and Latino men end . . . up in jail for non-violent offenses.” In fact, the majority of prisoners in the U.S. are serving time for violent felonies. The enforcement of low-level public order offenses in New York City during the mayoralties of Rudolph Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg actually lowered New York State’s prison population by intervening in criminal behavior early, before it ripened into a serious felony. Even as misdemeanor arrests increased in the city, felony arrests and felony incarcerations dropped. The number of jail inmates and convicts under parole and probation supervision in New York City dropped as well. Hillary Clinton may think that low-level public-order enforcement (otherwise known as “broken windows” policing) is racist, but law-abiding residents of high-crime communities beg the police to enforce public-order laws because they know that out of street disorder erupts gun violence and other forms of predation.

Clinton reiterated her call for “implicit-bias” training for officers. The premise of such training is that police officers are shooting black males out of such bias. Yet, four studies have come out this year alone that demolish this charge. They show that if there is bias among police officers in their shooting decisions, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. “Implicit-bias” training, based on a lie, is a grotesque waste of resources at a time when officers are desperate for more hands-on tactical training that will help them make those crucial shoot/don’t shoot decisions in the field, or avoid being put into such an excruciating situation in the first place.

Clinton claimed that “stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional.” No federal judge would have the power to declare pedestrian stops unconstitutional, because the Supreme Court put its constitutional imprimatur on the practice in 1965. Stop-and-frisk remains a lawful and essential police tactic. Criminologist David Weisburd examined the practice in New York City and found that it reduced crime in shooting hot spots. Federal district court judge Shira Scheindlin did rule that the New York Police Department’s practice of stops was racially biased, but her ruling applied only to the New York Police Department. That ruling was wholly unjustified and would likely have been reversed on appeal, had newly elected New York City mayor Bill de Blasio not dropped the appeal. Judge Scheindlin used a population benchmark for measuring the lawfulness of police actions: if police stops didn’t match population ratios, they were unconstitutional, in Scheindlin’s view. Such a methodology ignores the massive disparities in criminal offending in New York City. Blacks commit over three-quarters of all shootings, though they are 23 percent of the city’s population. Add Hispanic shootings to black shootings and you account for 98 percent of all shootings in New York City. Whites are 34 percent of the city’s population; they commit less than 2 percent of all shootings. Such disparities in gun violence mean that virtually every time the police are called out on a gun run—meaning that someone has been shot—they are called to minority neighborhoods on behalf of minority victims, and, if any witness or victim is cooperating with the police, being given a description of a minority suspect. The reality of crime, not phantom police racism, determines the incidence of police activity, including pedestrian stops.

Clinton claimed that stop-and-frisk was “ineffective” and “did not do what it needed to do.” Felony crime dropped 85 percent from the early 1990s to the mid-2010s in New York City; more than 10,000 minority males were spared the violent death that they would have experienced had homicides remained at their early 1990s levels. Stop-and-frisk was a crucial part of that crime drop, the longest and steepest on record; it’s hard to imagine anything more effective than New York’s proactive policing revolution. Stop-and-frisk deterred criminals from carrying guns. Equally importantly, it intervened in a range of other criminal behaviors. If an officer saw someone casing a store on a boulevard plagued with burglaries, or saw someone walking quickly behind an elderly lady in a neighborhood plagued with robberies, he would stop that person and ask a few questions. That stop may not have resulted in an arrest, but it could have averted the commission of a crime.

Homicides and shootings in New York City rose 20 percent in the first half of 2015, thanks to the Scheindlin-induced drop in pedestrian stops. Then-police commissioner William Bratton responded with a massive deployment of overtime manpower to high-crime corners; officers used “command presence”—i.e., their mere presence on the street—to deter criminal behavior. This roll-out of manpower resources quelled the shooting spike and New York City ended 2015 with a 6 percent homicide increase. Other departments do not have the personnel available to them to make up for a drop in proactive policing.

Donald Trump is right to warn about depolicing and what I have called the Ferguson Effect. “Right now, our police, in many cases, are afraid to do anything,” he said. The result is a massive loss of black lives in places like Chicago and Baltimore. Law and order are breaking down in inner cities; officers are surrounded by hostile, jeering crowds when they get out of their squad cars to conduct an investigation. Resistance to arrest is up, increasing the chances of an officer’s own use of force. And race riots are returning to American cities. The current mendacious narrative about policing and race has to change or we can expect to see further violent-crime increases and further racial violence. It is clear, however, that Hillary Clinton will continue to enflame racial tensions through a set of lies about the criminal-justice system.

Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of the New York Times bestseller The War on Cops.
 

Sheik

All-Pro
Messages
24,809
Reaction score
5
Comey grilled again, yesterday I think?

Poor guy. Someone definitely got to him. Trey Gowdy, Darrell Issa, Jason Caffetz, Jim Jordan, and one other Dude who I can't remember, they pretty much laid it all out for Comey and IMO, really made him show his ass to the world.

:lol

In like 35 minutes combined, those 5 guys put the fact pattern out for the world to see. The whole scandal is wrapped in a big bow made out of intent, yet Comey refuses to call it like it is.

Wasn't his whole basis of prosecuting Martha Stuart because she lied to the FBI? Every last person questioned by the FBI, including Hillary, they all lied at some point. Hell, Pagliano lied before and after his immunity agreement.

cluster. fuck.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,848
Reaction score
6,109
Comey grilled again, yesterday I think?

Poor guy. Someone definitely got to him. Trey Gowdy, Darrell Issa, Jason Caffetz, Jim Jordan, and one other Dude who I can't remember, they pretty much laid it all out for Comey and IMO, really made him show his ass to the world.

:lol

In like 35 minutes combined, those 5 guys put the fact pattern out for the world to see. The whole scandal is wrapped in a big bow made out of intent, yet Comey refuses to call it like it is.

Wasn't his whole basis of prosecuting Martha Stuart because she lied to the FBI? Every last person questioned by the FBI, including Hillary, they all lied at some point. Hell, Pagliano lied before and after his immunity agreement.

cluster. fuck.

Yeah he 100% deserved it too. Another Obummu/Clinton payoff. Long list of those now.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,007
Reaction score
2,091
Hi bbgun,

We wanted to let you know that a comment of yours has been removed from theguardian.com:

So the Left can call Trump "Hitler, bigot, racist, sexist, xenophobic, and Islamophobic" but "piggie" is beyond the pale? Drop dead.

because it was flagged by the moderation team as:

*Personal abuse*

:lol
 
Top Bottom