2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

AbusesToilets · 19-09-2016 03:24PM

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

One simple word "knowingly" a crime to be proven in court requires the proof of the actus rea, and the mens rea. It has been stated by the prosecutors they do not have the proof of all the ingredients required for the crime. If you do not understand the basics of criminal law don't blame me.

We could also have to get into willfully but as the prosecution falls at the issue of knowingly then there is no need to even get into wilfully. But you know all that it just does not help your cause.

Ah yes, the "Clinton is so incompetent as to not know the contents of her correspondence" defense. Yet, how would that cover her providing said emails to her defense team, who lacked clearances, once the FBI began its investigation? Seems a pretty willful act to me.

Again, you claimed that I lied. Provide proof or withdraw your comment.

Mr.Micro · 19-09-2016 04:11PM

It's a sad state of affairs when the two candidates running for the presidency of the US are both unfit, health wise, mental integrity, jaded and bigoted, murky dealings and much more. If I was voting in the election, I would not choose either. Clinton is no better than Trump, the same brand, Republican, though the former pretends to be Democrat. For once I do not care who wins, as its bad either way.

KingBrian2 · 19-09-2016 04:54PM

alastair wrote: »

Dictatorship apologism is very much in vogue I see. If you find yourself in this ideological territory, you should really be asking questions of yourself.

The Morsi government in Egypt was not a terrorist one, and the Muslim Brotherhood are still not considered a terrorist group by the U.S. or the EU. Far more people have been murdered by, or under the watch of, the current military junta than by the Morsi government, and lastly, the Morsi government did not seek Sharia law. The constitution they drafted, and which was voted for by the Egyptian people has about as much reference to Sharia as the current, military drafted, constitution. So yes, it was perfectly reasonable for Clinton to support the notion of a democratically elected parliamentary system over a military junta who lodged themselves into power by means of a coup. Not really a shocker.

The Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Sadat who signed a peace treaty with Israel and they also provided the bulk of followers for OBL Al Qaeda movement.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 04:56PM

RobertKK wrote: »

There is a reason why sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

Which makes it puzzling why you are supporting Donald Trump.

And again, it's lovely of you to use hindsight to criticize the administration on foreign policy. Were you against the interventions when protestors were being gunned down in the streets?

Amerika · 19-09-2016 05:03PM

The RCP polling average today has Clinton at 44.9 and Trump at 44.0.

In 2012, on this date, the RCP polling average had Obama a 48.2 and Romney at 45.3.

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 05:12PM

Overheal wrote: »

Which makes it puzzling why you are supporting Donald Trump.

And again, it's lovely of you to use hindsight to criticize the administration on foreign policy. Were you against the interventions when protestors were being gunned down in the streets?

Trump has been described as being isolationist, he said he is against regime change via use of military and prefers sanctions.
Clinton despite all her disasters still supports regime change using the military.

It is not like replacing Obama with ISIS/MB/other terrorist groups which is Clinton's regime change policies even if unintentional. Her projections of where things would go could not be more wrong.

If Trump is as he says he is - against 'stupid wars' and has learned from hindsight then he is infinitely much better than Clinton who wants to continue her failed policies which Obama disavowed with Syria.
It makes Obama sound so silly when he endorses Hillary with the 'most qualified person ever' for the job, when he ignored her over Syria which was one of the best things Obama did in his presidency, while Hillary cries 'we should have attacked Assad'.

If anything it looks like Trump is closer to Obama than Hillary is when it comes to the use of the military.
Hillary has learned zero from her mistakes which is most worrying.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 05:24PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump has been described as being isolationist, he said he is against regime change via use of military and prefers sanctions.
Clinton despite all her disasters still supports regime change using the military.

It is not like replacing Obama with ISIS/MB/other terrorist groups which is Clinton's regime change policies even if unintentional. Her projections of where things would go could not be more wrong.

If Trump is as he says he is - against 'stupid wars' and has learned from hindsight then he is infinitely much better than Clinton who wants to continue her failed policies which Obama disavowed with Syria.
It makes Obama sound so silly when he endorses Hillary with the 'most qualified person ever' for the job, when he ignored her over Syria which was one of the best things Obama did in his presidency, while Hillary cries 'we should have attacked Assad'.

If anything it looks like Trump is closer to Obama than Hillary is when it comes to the use of the military.
Hillary has learned zero from her mistakes which is most worrying.

Real isolationist here

Bombing infrastructure and sending US private interests in to rebuild it and then repatriate oil. Oh there is change we can believe in. There is a man - sh!t - THERE is a man who really has a pulse on this anti-war stance of his. Really displays how much more he knows than those generals too. Who knew you could just blow up an oil field and rebuild it with impunity or inside an imaginary Trump-Bubble immune from far reaching complications? Of course, that kind of action would never result in the creation of yet more reactionary terror organizations because they will be too afraid of Trump and his business skills to take him on. CLEARLY the man demonstrates a thorough, almost doctoral understanding through hindsight of the consequences of military action. So he must be better than Clinton.

Please. His supporters need to turn off the blinders and actually think about what they're saying. Everything you and others say about what you like about your candidate keeps being proven to be demonstrably untrue.

alastair · 19-09-2016 05:28PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Sadat who signed a peace treaty with Israel and they also provided the bulk of followers for OBL Al Qaeda movement.

Nonsense. Sadat was assassinated by Egyptian Islamic Jihad - an actual proscribed terrorist group - unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, who are not.

alastair · 19-09-2016 05:30PM

Amerika wrote: »

The RCP polling average today has Clinton at 44.9 and Trump at 44.0.

In 2012, on this date, the RCP polling average had Obama a 48.2 and Romney at 45.3.

Trouble is that Romney could articulate a consistent policy platform in debates. Trump has nowhere to look forward to but the inevitable plummet as his bluster is punctured.

Pro Hoc Vice · 19-09-2016 05:36PM

Amerika wrote: »

The RCP polling average today has Clinton at 44.9 and Trump at 44.0.

In 2012, on this date, the RCP polling average had Obama a 48.2 and Romney at 45.3.

And on September 6th 2012 it was 46.7 each.

KingBrian2 · 19-09-2016 05:37PM

alastair wrote: »

Nonsense. Sadat was assassinated by Egyptian Islamic Jihad - an actual proscribed terrorist group - unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, who are not.

Incorrect the MB played a pivotal role in and provided the ideological underpinning of not only the Egyptian Islamic Jihad but also Al Qaeda itself. Morsi was part of that movement.

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 05:40PM

alastair wrote: »

Dictatorship apologism is very much in vogue I see. If you find yourself in this ideological territory, you should really be asking questions of yourself.

The Morsi government in Egypt was not a terrorist one, and the Muslim Brotherhood are still not considered a terrorist group by the U.S. or the EU. Far more people have been murdered by, or under the watch of, the current military junta than by the Morsi government, and lastly, the Morsi government did not seek Sharia law. The constitution they drafted, and which was voted for by the Egyptian people has about as much reference to Sharia as the current, military drafted, constitution. So yes, it was perfectly reasonable for Clinton to support the notion of a democratically elected parliamentary system over a military junta who lodged themselves into power by means of a coup. Not really a shocker.

ok you added in a bit after I had posted earlier.

The lovely Muslim Brotherhood who you defend...

https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/08/21/egypt-mass-attacks-churches

immediately following the violent dispersal of the Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins in Cairo on August 14, crowds of men attacked at least 42 churches, burning or damaging 37, as well as dozens of other Christian religious institutions in the governorates of Minya, Asyut, Fayum, Giza, Suez, Sohag, Bani Suef, and North Sinai. Human Rights Watch has verified with family members and a lawyer that at least three Coptic Christians and one Muslim were killed as a result of sectarian attacks in Dalga, Minya city, and Cairo. “For weeks, everyone could see these attacks coming, with Muslim Brotherhood members accusing Coptic Christians of a role in Mohammad Morsy’s ouster, but the authorities did little or nothing to prevent them,” said Joe Stork, acting Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Now dozens of churches are smoldering ruins, and Christians throughout the country are hiding in their homes, afraid for their very lives.”

That was three years ago.

Last year:

The prime minister said the review found the Islamist organisation, of which the ousted Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi is a senior member, had had significant influence in groups claiming to speak for British Muslims.
He added that the Brotherhood, which is opposed by some Gulf states, characterised the UK as fundamentally hostile to Muslim faith and identity and had expressed support for terrorist attacks by the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas.

“The main findings of the review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism,” Cameron said in a written ministerial statement to MPs. “Parts of the Muslim Brotherhood have a highly ambiguous relationship with violent extremism.”

The prime minister’s statement went far further than expected, and the report ends by claiming that “aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ... are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/uk-will-not-ban-muslim-brotherhood-david-cameron-says

So that is whom you said Clinton was right to support...

alastair · 19-09-2016 05:46PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Incorrect the MB played a pivotal role in and provided the ideological underpinning of not only the Egyptian Islamic Jihad but also Al Qaeda itself. Morsi was part of that movement.

Rubbish. The Muslim Brotherhood played no role whatsoever in the assassination of Sadat. Nor did it provide any support - ideological, or otherwise to Islamic Jihad. Morsi was indeed part of the Muslim Brotherhood - a fact that the electorate knew very well when they voted him in.

alastair · 19-09-2016 05:50PM

RobertKK wrote: »

So that is whom you said Clinton was right to support...

Correct - and it may have escaped your notice in the rush to cherrypick, but the recommendation of the inquiry into the Muslim Brotherhood was that they are not a terrorist organisation.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/06/08/egypt-year-abuses-under-al-sisi

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 05:59PM

Overheal wrote: »

Real isolationist here

Bombing infrastructure and sending US private interests in to rebuild it and then repatriate oil. Oh there is change we can believe in. There is a man - sh!t - THERE is a man who really has a pulse on this anti-war stance of his. Really displays how much more he knows than those generals too. Who knew you could just blow up an oil field and rebuild it with impunity or inside an imaginary Trump-Bubble immune from far reaching complications? Of course, that kind of action would never result in the creation of yet more reactionary terror organizations because they will be too afraid of Trump and his business skills to take him on. CLEARLY the man demonstrates a thorough, almost doctoral understanding through hindsight of the consequences of military action. So he must be better than Clinton.

Please. His supporters need to turn off the blinders and actually think about what they're saying. Everything you and others say about what you like about your candidate keeps being proven to be demonstrably untrue.

Isn't that what happened anyway?

At the same time, representatives from ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Halliburton, among others, met with Cheney's staff in January 2003 to discuss plans for Iraq's postwar industry. For the next decade, former and current executives of western oil companies acted first as administrators of Iraq's oil ministry and then as "advisers" to the Iraqi government.
Before the invasion, there were just two things standing in the way of Western oil companies operating in Iraq: Saddam Hussein and the nation's legal system. The invasion dealt handily with Hussein. To address the latter problem, some both inside and outside of the Bush administration argued that it should simply change Iraq's oil laws through the U.S.-led coalition government of Iraq, which ran the country from April 2003 to June 2004. Instead the White House waited, choosing to pressure the newly elected Iraqi government to pass new oil legislation itself.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz/

Ever consider that what Trump simply said in public without knowing the truth, actually happened in real life...

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 06:55PM

alastair wrote: »

Correct - and it may have escaped your notice in the rush to cherrypick, but the recommendation of the inquiry into the Muslim Brotherhood was that they are not a terrorist organisation.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/06/08/egypt-year-abuses-under-al-sisi

Extremist elements which are contrary to the UK's national security.

alastair · 19-09-2016 07:15PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Extremist elements which are contrary to the UK's national security.

That's a long way from a terrorist group - hence they're not proscribed. Glad to help.

KingBrian2 · 19-09-2016 07:49PM

alastair wrote: »

Rubbish. The Muslim Brotherhood played no role whatsoever in the assassination of Sadat. Nor did it provide any support - ideological, or otherwise to Islamic Jihad. Morsi was indeed part of the Muslim Brotherhood - a fact that the electorate knew very well when they voted him in.

How can you make that claim when Egyptian Jihad is a breakaway faction of the Muslim Brotherhood. Osama borrowed heavily from this guy and other MB characters. It has been classified as a terrorist organization in Syria and Egypt a long time now for its Islamist ideology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_al-Banna

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 07:54PM

alastair wrote: »

That's a long way from a terrorist group - hence they're not proscribed. Glad to help.

You give yourself too much credit

A number of countries have them as a prescribed terrorist organisation, in time more will follow.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 08:12PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Isn't that what happened anyway?

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz/

Ever consider that what Trump simply said in public without knowing the truth, actually happened in real life...

Doublethinking now?

You claimed Trump was an isolationist, that he didn't want to do [the things he said he wants to do]

Now when presented with [things he said he wants to do] your tune is "sure isn't that happening anyway?"

It appears you've abandoned your whole viewpoint and I'm waiting for you to realize it.

RobertKK · 19-09-2016 08:30PM

Overheal wrote: »

Doublethinking now?

You claimed Trump was an isolationist, that he didn't want to do [the things he said he wants to do]

Now when presented with [things he said he wants to do] your tune is "sure isn't that happening anyway?"

It appears you've abandoned your whole viewpoint and I'm waiting for you to realize it.

He was talking about the past, not what he would do in the future. The Iraq war was a disaster and it cost the US around $2 trillion.
Trump has said this is a waste of money and it is money that should have been spent on US infrastructure inside the US, not on 'stupid wars' on countries that don't like the US.
Yes in the past around 2002/2003 he gave a hesitant 'I guess so' when asked if he supported the war.
For me, Trump has learned from the past 13 years in this area, Hillary has not.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 08:34PM

RobertKK wrote: »

He was talking about the past, not what he would do in the future. The Iraq war was a disaster and it cost the US around $2 trillion.
Trump has said this is a waste of money and it is money that should have been spent on US infrastructure inside the US, not on 'stupid wars' on countries that don't like the US.
Yes in the past around 2002/2003 he gave a hesitant 'I guess so' when asked if he supported the war.
For me, Trump has learned from the past 13 years in this area, Hillary has not.

I'm engaging what YOU said, when you suggested he is against "stupid wars" "isolationist" and "against regime change [through intervention]"

You weren't speaking in the past tense. Where is your gymnastics certificate from?

Trump has been described as being isolationist, he said he is against regime change via use of military and prefers sanctions.
Clinton despite all her disasters still supports regime change using the military.

It is not like replacing Obama with ISIS/MB/other terrorist groups which is Clinton's regime change policies even if unintentional. Her projections of where things would go could not be more wrong.

If Trump is as he says he is - against 'stupid wars' and has learned from hindsight then he is infinitely much better than Clinton who wants to continue her failed policies which Obama disavowed with Syria.
It makes Obama sound so silly when he endorses Hillary with the 'most qualified person ever' for the job, when he ignored her over Syria which was one of the best things Obama did in his presidency, while Hillary cries 'we should have attacked Assad'.

If anything it looks like Trump is closer to Obama than Hillary is when it comes to the use of the military.
Hillary has learned zero from her mistakes which is most worrying.

edit: furthermore, what he does in the future is paramount to his campaign. So you admit he's going to be a warmonger if elected.

alastair · 19-09-2016 09:16PM

RobertKK wrote: »

You give yourself too much credit

A number of countries have them as a prescribed terrorist organisation, in time more will follow.

It's proscribed, and no - very few counties have, and in those cases because they're ideologically opposed - as with Saudi Arabia, or because they're afraid of their own Muslim minorities, like Russia. The Muslim Botherhood is not proscribed as a terrorist group by any western nation, and isn't even designated as a terrorist group by the Israelis.

KingBrian2 · 19-09-2016 09:29PM

alastair wrote: »

It's proscribed, and no - very few counties have, and in those cases because they're ideologically opposed - as with Saudi Arabia, or because they're afraid of their own Muslim minorities, like Russia. The Muslim Botherhood is not proscribed as a terrorist group by any western nation, and isn't even designated as a terrorist group by the Israelis.

If the West calls Hezbollah and the PKK a terrorist organization they should certainly start calling the MB and Talaban terrorist organizations.

Frank Bullitt · 19-09-2016 09:36PM

Trump reading from a teleprompter just doesn't sound right at all. Watching him speak at a Florida rally on Sky, it just sounds weird.

Where is all the racism and xenophobia?

KingBrian2 · 19-09-2016 09:45PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Trump reading from a teleprompter just doesn't sound right at all. Watching him speak at a Florida rally on Sky, it just sounds weird.

Where is all the racism and xenophobia?

The media has a tendency to bring out the worst in people.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 09:52PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

If the West calls Hezbollah and the PKK a terrorist organization they should certainly start calling the MB and Talaban terrorist organizations.

The West denounces Israel

The US defends Israel

Go figure.

Overheal · 19-09-2016 09:53PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The media has a tendency to bring out the worst in people.

Indeed, they just start saying things that are on their minds.

"I’ve got black accountants at the Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. Those are the kind of people I want counting my money. No one else."

“Besides that, I’ve got to tell you something else. I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not something they can control. … Don’t you agree?”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/07/25/did-donald-trump-really-say-those-things/

Frank Bullitt · 19-09-2016 10:21PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The media has a tendency to bring out the worst in people.

I don't think they are making him say the racist/xenophobic/sexist comments.

Akrasia · 19-09-2016 11:34PM

I'll never identify with the mind of someone who thinks the media reporting things someone actually says, is 'bias' against them

I know that the media is perfectly capable of distorting what someone says, but direct quotes or simply linking to speeches that someone has made is not a distortion.

When Sanders supporters claimed that the media was biased against him, it was because they gave him little or no air time, they ignored what he said and accused him of being a communist. It's the opposite with Trump. They give him unlimited access to free publicity, ie, enough rope for him to hang himself.

Unfortunately, Trump supporters are suffering from some kind of cognitive dissonance that allows them to replace the things that Trump actually says, with the voices in their own head that are saying what they wish Trump has said.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments