Reply With Quote
Like the mother's occupation.
Like the mother's occupation.
heh.
FWIW:
When Sam Harris talks about the totality of Trumps commentary, building to a rather inescapable conclusion the list posted here is what he was talking about:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post8728824
He takes a good while to lay out the case, and addresses a lot of pros/cons, including a good bit on the failings of political correctness.
You strike me as someone with the attention span and disposition to appreciate it. I have posted this podcast here a bit, but again, it is worth considering.
Trump Claims Black People Are Worse Off Under Obama Than They Were During Slavery
Donald Trump is now claiming that African-Americans are worse off under Obama than they were at any time in history, which includes slavery.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/...iticus+USA+%29
again, Trash going with standard racist establishment Repug position that slavery wasn't all that bad, while while trashing the hated mulatto in the WH, while deflecting from the Repug/conservative/BigFinance actions that have been extremely hard on blacks.
Evidence? Trash don't need no steenkin evidence, just farts out, in childish, short sentences and vocab (his ignorant supporters require it) whatever crosses his diseased brain
Trump got his tax breaks the old-fashioned way—bribes
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump gave at least $45,000 to the campaign of Alan Hevesi, a New York state comptroller who later went to prison for his role in a pay-to-play bribery scandal, according to a Huffington Post review of campaign finance records.
That contribution resulted in some very serious returns on the Trump side. Trump got a break so big, he bragged about it in one of the books he paid someone to write.
The city reduced the tax assessment for Trump’s newest building by 17 percent and awarded the building a special tax abatement. In exchange, Trump agreed to subsidize 200 units of affordable housing in the Bronx. The settlement saved Trump $97 million in taxes he didn’t have to pay, he later wrote in Trump: How To Get Rich.
A $97 million return on a $45,000 investment is pretty good in anyone’s book.
Not only was this $45,000 among the largest checks Trump ever cut to a politician—along with those dispatched to Pam Bondi and AG-on-the-way-to-governor Greg Abbott—there are some common features between the Hevesi payoff and those in Florida and Texas.
The $45,000 to Hevesi “was very much out of character for Trump at the time,” Barrett told The Huffington Post. “I have no doubt that Trump had some sort of a reason to give, something he wanted.”
The timing of Trump’s lawsuit coincides almost exactly with the donations to Hevesi.
Trump had a lawsuit problem, he made a payment, problem solved.
It worked right up until Trump encountered Eric Schneiderman, where he was forced to try other tactics.The biggest political payment Donald Trump made—illegally—out of his foundation, was to try and beat Schneiderman. It didn’t work. Not only was Schneiderman re-elected, not only is he moving forward on the Trump University lawsuit, he’s also broadening his case.
Donald Trump’s charitable foundation gave $100,000 in 2014 to a conservative activist group that was used to help finance a federal lawsuit against New York state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman — the same public official who was suing the real estate mogul for fraud over the operations of Trump University.
On September 13, Eric Schneiderman, the New York State Attorney who is leading the lawsuit against Trump University, stated that his office is now investigating the Donald J. Trump Foundation.
“We have been concerned that the Trump Foundation many have engaged in some impropriety,” Schneiderman told CNN’s Jake Tapper.
“My interest in this is in my capacity as regulator of non-profits in New York State.”
After the latest revelations about Trump’s foundations, Schneiderman may have to expand his staff.
And of course, like anyone standing up to Trump, Schneiderman faces totally not deplorable feedback.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/0...28Daily+Kos%29
another victim to add to the list
Why So Many Business Leaders Are Tiptoeing Around Donald Trump
In conversations over the last several months with chief executives and other business leaders, the discussion invariably turns to the presidential election. And with few exceptions, at some point, most of the executives say something critical, even derogatory, about Donald Trump — but it is quickly followed by, “I could never say that on the record.”
Almost as quickly, I ask why. The answer is almost universal: fear.
Technology companies are afraid that Mr. Trump might criticize their approach to privacy, as he did with Apple.
Wall Street banks worry he might seek to break them up.
Health care companies are nervous that he might attack them over pricing. Multinationals are worried about trade.
All of these are valid issues on the campaign trail — but with Mr. Trump, unlike other politicians, the criticism seems more personal and vitriolic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/bu...er=rss&emc=rss
what a sorry crew of less chicken s
Trump carries the olds (just not the really old) for sure
https://newrepublic.com/article/1369...e-baby-boomers
I have no idea how Maine works. She's leading in the state itself, but losing District 2. Also winning district 1.
Wierd . Her average is 5 points.
RCP Average 8/4 - 9/17 -- -- 41.5 36.0 10.5 4.3 Clinton +5.5 MPRC (D) 9/15 - 9/17 835 LV 3.4 37 37 11 5 [COLOR= ]Tie [/COLOR] Colby College/SurveyUSA 9/4 - 9/10 779 LV 3.6 42 39 9 5 Clinton +3 Emerson 9/2 - 9/5 800 LV 3.4 44 35 12 2 Clinton +9 Gravis 8/4 - 8/8 2046 RV 2.2 43 33 10 5 Clinton +10
Same as Nebraska, but that's a lock for Trump regardless. 3 EC points automatically go to the overall statewide winner (in Maine's case, HRC). The other 2 EC points are divided equally among the two halves (gerrymandered by population, not land area) and it looks like one half strongly prefers HRC while the other half weakly prefers Trump. Therefore, HRC will win 4 total EC points in Maine, and Trump will win 1.
Nate Silver: Trump surges from 3% to 48% chance of winning
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/na...rticle/2602386
Looks like Johnson and Stein are leeching from HRC much more than from Trump. Likely the hipster millennial vote.
This is why Donald Trump’s tax returns haven’t been leaked
One big obstacle is that leaking confidential tax records is against the law, punishable by a $5,000 fine, up to five years in jail or both.
“The IRS and our employees take our role to protect confidential tax information very seriously,” chief agency spokesman Matthew Leas said, “and we have high standards and tight controls in place for this sensitive data.”
Q. How many people have seen — or could see — the GOP nominee’s returns?
A. According to tax experts and former IRS employees,
tens of thousands of people have access to Trump’s tax information, if not his complete returns.
Revenue agents, customer service staff and employees at walk-in tax assistance centers, plus a smaller number of federal contractors, use a master computer that shows a summary of everyone’s return. Once they enter a name or Social Security number, these employees could go further into the record, much like scanning a bank account.
“It would take ten minutes,” said Richard M. Schickel, who retired from the IRS in 2013 as a senior revenue officer and wrote a book about the agency. The computer is a “museum of tax information,” he said: “Everyone is on it. You, your grandfather, your great uncle.”
Q. So what prevents a curious IRS employee from taking a peek or passing Trump’s return to a reporter?
A. For one thing, it’s a felony to disclose confidential tax information. Federal employees could lose their job, pension, freedom and reputation.
The IRS says its 84,000 employees must attend annual trainings on taxpayer confidentiality. To identify snoopers, IRS computers track the electronic movements of all employees and contractors. Even an employee who legitimately opens the tax return of a neighbor of a high-profile taxpayer like Trump could be flagged, former IRS officials say
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-draw7&wpmm=1
Trash and Trash's trashy staff really do take the world as full of stupid s.
Donald Trash’s absolutely ridiculous response to The Post’s Trump Foundation story
In typical Washington Post fashion, they’ve gotten their facts wrong. It is the Clinton Foundation that is set up to make sure the Clintons personally enrich themselves by selling access and trading political favors. The Trump Foundation has no paid board, no management fees, no rent or overhead, and no family members on its payroll.
There was not, and could not be, any intent or motive for the Trump Foundation to make improper payments.
Miller's response to this latest story about Trump's use of the foundation wouldn't pass the smell test.
Miller starts off by dumping on The Post's journalism with zero evidence to back up his claim that we got our "facts wrong." When? Where? Who?
He quickly segues into a bit of political sleight of hand by insisting that the real story of this campaign is the Clinton Foundation and that the media is ignoring it. But the media isn't ignoring it. Not even close!
A quick Google search of "Washington Post Clinton Foundation" produces a bevy of results, including an op-ed from The Post's editorial board on Aug. 14 headlined: "A porous ethical wall between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department." It reads, in part:
Should Ms. Clinton win in November, she will bring to the Oval Office a web of connections and potential conflicts of interest, developed over decades in private, public and, in the case of her family’s philanthropic work, quasi-public activities. As secretary, she pledged to keep her official world and her family’s foundation separate, and she failed to keep them separate enough. Such sloppiness would not be acceptable in the White House.
That's not exactly taking it easy on Clinton and her family foundation.
In the second paragraph of his statement, Miller asserts that "there was not, and could not be, any intent or motive for the Trump Foundation to make improper payments." Okay. But that's not what The Post's article alleges.
Fahrenthold knows better than to suggest intent or motive; he is simply noting that Trump diverted $258,000 -- money that wasn't his -- given to the foundation to pay for things tied to Trump's businesses. Those are facts. And they simply are not in dispute, not even by Miller. (More on that below.)
As for Miller's claim that Trump has "provided millions of dollars to fund his Foundation and a mul ude of other charitable causes," it's important to remember that Fahrenthold has been asking the Trump campaign and the foundation to do ent some -- any! -- of those personal donations for months now.
They have refused, forcing him to call or email each charity one by one to try to track the donations. If Trump is as generous with his own money as Miller says he is, it would be the easiest thing in the world to release a list of the various charities Trump has given to and the dollar amounts associated with those donations. Right?
(Note: Last year, Trump released a list of $102 million in charitable donations. But the campaign later acknowledged that not a single dollar of that money came from Trump's own pocket.)
Then we get to Miller's final paragraph.
"The Post’s reporting is peppered with inaccuracies and omissions from a biased reporter who is clearly intent on distracting attention away from the corrupt Clinton Foundation," he writes.The problem? Miller goes on to list a total of zero inaccuracies or omissions in either Fahrenthold's latest report or any of his work on the Trump Foundation. If Fahrenthold's work is rife with these errors, why not note one or two just to bolster your point? I think I know the answer. You probably do, too.
And then there is the name-calling -- the assertion that Fahrenthold is a "biased reporter" who is intentionally misleading the public to distract from the problems with the Clinton Foundation. "Bias" is a nasty word tossed around all too often these days about reporters, almost always with too little and, by that I mean no, proof of the claim.
A reporter isn't biased because you don't like the facts he or she has uncovered or because those facts don't comport with your broader vision of this race.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-draw7&wpmm=1
Trump's Giant Conflict of Interest Just Got Bigger
The US government is cracking down on Trump's largest financial backer. What will he do if elected president?
Trump would face a tremendous conflict of interest regarding the hundreds of millions of dollars he owes Deutsche Bank, which is now in the crosshairs of US regulators.
The US government has charged that the German banking giant misled investors into buying bad mortgage-backed securities in the run-up to the financial crisis of 2007 and 2008, and it is demanding that Deutsche Bank pay $14 billion to settle legal claims.
The bank is reported to have planned for a settlement of $2 billion to $3 billion, and negotiations between it and the Department of Justice are likely to be contentious and last for months—possibly well into the next administration.
Should Trump take the White House, what Deutsche Bank ends up paying for its alleged misdeeds might depend on how tough Trump's Justice Department will be with the bank to which he owes so much money.
Trump has borrowed as much as $364 million from Deutsche Bank since 2012, and all four of the outstanding loans will come due before 2024—the end of a potential second Trump presidential term.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-deutsche-bank
RIP Scott Weiland.another victim to add to the list
Grifter-in-Chief news ...
Donald Trump's campaign continues to pay Donald Trump's companies $500,000 per month
There are more ways to make money in a presidential campaign than just stealing money from your own personal "charity" slush fund. You can also suck in other people's money by turning campaign donations into straight profit.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s campaign paid more than $500,000 in August to companies the brash businessman owns, according to campaign finance reports released late Tuesday.
That includes $170,000 a month for unfinished, window-free space in the middle of Trump Tower.
Trump also spent $11 million on his web site last month. That seems steep, but if there’s anything people are talking about in this cycle it’s Trump’s canny use of digital resources and the technical prowess of his campaign.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/0...28Daily+Kos%29
Corruption? Grifting? Improprieties? just the appearance of any of those? G F Y
Marquette Poll: Hillary Lead Dwindling in Wisconsin
Among likely voters, the race is tighter:
Clinton: 44 percent
Trump: 42 percent
No preference: 12 percent
In the last survey taken late last month, Clinton had a 42 percent-37 percent lead over Trump among all registered voters; and a 45 percent-42 percent edge among likely voters.
And? Trump winning Winsconsin is like Hillary winning Georgia. Neither is likely to happen.
van jone (cnn person) said those restbelt states are trump best bet the blue collar whites. he thought trump should just camp in that area. Michigan loves those jobs going to mexico to....
he has put maine in play right now
Trump fans are basically like the Nu-Metal fans of the late 90's. They're so excited that those bands were shouting the same feelings they themselves were afraid to express about popular kids and girls that they showed up in droves to watch Fred Durst rap about breaking stuff and tell girls to show their s.
They took an understandable annoyance with political correctness and drove it to the opposite extreme, and because of them, popular music experienced its worst period in history for 4 years.
Last edited by Spurminator; 09-21-2016 at 08:06 PM.
This is the thinking that I like coming from Trump.
Keep thinking places like Pennsylvania and Michigan are in play when they're not.
Maine is not even close. Trump is leading in one district while Hillary leads the state and CD1.
So please Trump, please stay in those states.
Trump Calls For Racist ‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Policing To Be Implemented Nationally
There is one candidate who acknowledges the reality of systemic racism and another who wants to worsen it.
the Republican nominee praised racist stop-and-frisk policing during a town hall at a black church in Cleveland.The church, if you were wondering, was filled mostly with white people during Trump’s visit.When asked how he would reduce crime in black communities, Trump suggested he would implement stop-and-frisk on a national level.“One of the things I’d do is I would do stop-and-frisk,” Trump said at the town hall set to air on Fox News Wednesday night. “I think you have to. We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive.”
As Slate noted in 2013:
Blacks and Latinos have consistently accounted for around 85 percent of stop-and-frisk selectees; according to 2010 census data, blacks and Latinos make up 52.6 percent of New York City’s total population.
“Even in neighborhoods that are predominantly white, black, and Latino New Yorkers face the disproportionate brunt,” reports the New York Civil Liberties Union.
“For example, in 2011, Black and Latino New Yorkers made up 24 percent of the population in Park Slope, but 79 percent of stops.”
Opponents of Trump and the controversial police tactic were quick to slam the GOP nominee’s plan.According to the New York Times, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said that Trump’s proposal would “alienate the very people who we need to be partners in the fight against crime.” He added that Trump “does not understand how policing works.”
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/...iticus+USA+%29
Trash is one stupid, ignorant off, just your garden-variety racist, bigot, xenophobe.
Being a liar and a racist who hates women are strong points for Trump. Trump stirs passion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
