It Only Gets Worse for Hillary and the DNC

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

23 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

  Monday, someone is getting arrested, and it's not Hillary Clinton. 

Unfortunately true but I hope her time is coming. .

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

13 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

Thank you for your lesson on the EC. It was unecessary. And the assertion may be fatal to whatever meaning you construed in your mind but it wasn't to the conversation with another poster. 

And your assumption that I don't know much about Trump is wrong. I know that he was given a fortune by his father to start his business, which has filed bankruptcy four times.i know that he has had two failed marriages. I know he has been involved in over 3,000 lawsuits. I know he mocked a disabled reporter. I know he has over a dozen claims of sexual assault against him and has openly bragged about being able to commit sexual assault. And I know that he is currently having a meltdown on Twitter. 

Feel free to trash the Clinton's. Fox News and POTUS are doing that too.  Monday, someone is getting arrested, and it's not Hillary Clinton. 

A fortune? His father loaned him $1M for Real Estate startup. You think that's a "fortune" in markets like NYC?

He filed bankruptcy because it was advantageous to his business dealings at the time - completely within the law.

Failed marriages don't necessarily equate to a negative connotation of someone. I'm not positive on the exact number but the statistics of divorce in America overall are pretty high.

Successful businessmen get sued continually. Presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty.

Trump imitated a disabled reporter. I don't condone it.

"Claims" of sexual assault - again... just claims

He didn't "openly brag" about being able to sexually assault women, he was recorded during a private conversation. Truly did resemble locker-room talk, trust me I have been in one. Doesn't mean it's right, but look at it w/ perspective.

 

Now, back to accomplishments, did I mention the Stock Market since he became President?? 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

7 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Unfortunately true but I hope her time is coming. .

I think the media is blowing it out of proportion. Had to counter the revealing of dossier information from early last week. Charges are a distraction. Keep in mind, Uranium One happened while HRC was SOC and Mueller was director of FBI. This is only beginning. 

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

1 hour ago, Proud Tiger said:

Unfortunately true but I hope her time is coming. .

Hold your breath. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 minute ago, GiveEmElle said:

Hold your breath. 

One can only hope.

 

[TexasTiger 12,800]

2 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I think the media is blowing it out of proportion. Had to counter the revealing of dossier information from early last week. Charges are a distraction. Keep in mind, Uranium One happened while HRC was SOC and Mueller was director of FBI. This is only beginning. 

What do you think the U1 deal really means?

[TexasTiger 12,800]

3 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

A fortune? His father loaned him $1M for Real Estate startup. You think that's a "fortune" in markets like NYC?

He filed bankruptcy because it was advantageous to his business dealings at the time - completely within the law.

Failed marriages don't necessarily equate to a negative connotation of someone. I'm not positive on the exact number but the statistics of divorce in America overall are pretty high.

Successful businessmen get sued continually. Presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty.

Trump imitated a disabled reporter. I don't condone it.

"Claims" of sexual assault - again... just claims

He didn't "openly brag" about being able to sexually assault women, he was recorded during a private conversation. Truly did resemble locker-room talk, trust me I have been in one. Doesn't mean it's right, but look at it w/ perspective.

 

Now, back to accomplishments, did I mention the Stock Market since he became President?? 

 

In regard to money, he would have made more with an S&P index fund. Much more than a million:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-first-presidential-debate/fact-check-how-much-help-did-trumps-father-give-his-son/

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

3 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

Thank you for your lesson on the EC. It was unecessary. And the assertion may be fatal to whatever meaning you construed in your mind but it wasn't to the conversation with another poster. 

And your assumption that I don't know much about Trump is wrong. I know that he was given a fortune by his father to start his business, which has filed bankruptcy four times.i know that he has had two failed marriages. I know he has been involved in over 3,000 lawsuits. I know he mocked a disabled reporter. I know he has over a dozen claims of sexual assault against him and has openly bragged about being able to commit sexual assault. And I know that he is currently having a meltdown on Twitter. 

Feel free to trash the Clinton's. Fox News and POTUS are doing that too.  Monday, someone is getting arrested, and it's not Hillary Clinton. 

pretty lightweight for a targeted man of his resources

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

9 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What do you think the U1 deal really means?

Good question Tex. That's what I hope is figured out.

[TexasTiger 12,800]

29 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Good question Tex. That's what I hope is figured out.

Here's some facts:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jayrosen_nyu/status/924738065612099584/video/1

[TexasTiger 12,800]

Just now, TexasTiger said:

Here's some facts:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jayrosen_nyu/status/924738065612099584/video/1

Here's a good written rundown:

https://lawfareblog.com/unpacking-uranium-one-hype-and-law

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

A fortune? His father loaned him $1M for Real Estate startup. You think that's a "fortune" in markets like NYC?

He filed bankruptcy because it was advantageous to his business dealings at the time - completely within the law.

Failed marriages don't necessarily equate to a negative connotation of someone. I'm not positive on the exact number but the statistics of divorce in America overall are pretty high.

Successful businessmen get sued continually. Presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty.

Trump imitated a disabled reporter. I don't condone it.

"Claims" of sexual assault - again... just claims

He didn't "openly brag" about being able to sexually assault women, he was recorded during a private conversation. Truly did resemble locker-room talk, trust me I have been in one. Doesn't mean it's right, but look at it w/ perspective.

 

Now, back to accomplishments, did I mention the Stock Market since he became President?? 

 

I used the adjective small in front of fortune. 

Needing to file bankruptcy to give yourself an advantage suggests you really don't know what the hell your're doing.

Failed marriages because of adultry speak to his character. Or lack thereof. 

Do innocent successful business men pay settlements because they defrauded college students? No.

Using the word imitated doesn't make it any less wrong. Defending him is the same as condoning his actions.

Claims are just claims. But as we've seen recently, claims are more often true. 

He did brag. It wasn't locker room talk. He bragged about being able to touch a woman wherever he wanted. Again, defending him on this is comdoning his behavior. 

As for the stock market, Presidents don't really have Much control over the behaviors of markets. 

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Here's a good written rundown:

https://lawfareblog.com/unpacking-uranium-one-hype-and-law

Thanks Tex of course in the first paragraph

Trump's closeness to Russia,

feel better now. all of us idiots thought it was sent over on ship

It is, however, true, that the mining rights to 20% of American uranium are now held by a Russian state agency. 

 

[TexasTiger 12,800]

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Thanks Tex of course in the first paragraph

Trump's closeness to Russia,

feel better now. all of us idiots thought it was sent over on ship

It is, however, true, that the mining rights to 20% of American uranium are now held by a Russian state agency. 

 

Yep. If they decide not to meet our need we might just have to nationalize 'Em.

[TitanTiger 20,469]

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Failed marriages don't necessarily equate to a negative connotation of someone. I'm not positive on the exact number but the statistics of divorce in America overall are pretty high

When it happens both times because he decided he just wanted a younger, hotter piece of ass, it definitely does equate to a negative connotation of them.  And to make it worse, on at least one of them, he didn't decide he wanted to chase someone else and divorce his current wife before doing so.  He cheated on her, dumped her to marry the mistress.  Don't minimize.

 

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

"Claims" of sexual assault - again... just claims.

Good Lord you can't seriously believe there's nothing to it but claims.  We aren't talking about sentencing the man to prison.  We're talking about obvious character issues that should have disqualified him from being given the most powerful office in the world.  You know - the way we conservatives argued when it was Democrat Bill Clinton cheating on his wife and sexually assaulting women.

 

5 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

He didn't "openly brag" about being able to sexually assault women, he was recorded during a private conversation. Truly did resemble locker-room talk, trust me I have been in one. Doesn't mean it's right, but look at it w/ perspective.

He openly bragged.  If this were a Democrat, there's no way you'd give this benefit of the doubt.

 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

I used the adjective small in front of fortune. 

Needing to file bankruptcy to give yourself an advantage suggests you really don't know what the hell your're doing.

Failed marriages because of adultry speak to his character. Or lack thereof. 

Do innocent successful business men pay settlements because they defrauded college students? No.

Using the word imitated doesn't make it any less wrong. Defending him is the same as condoning his actions.

Claims are just claims. But as we've seen recently, claims are more often true. 

He did brag. It wasn't locker room talk. He bragged about being able to touch a woman wherever he wanted. Again, defending him on this is comdoning his behavior. 

As for the stock market, Presidents don't really have Much control over the behaviors of markets. 

Using loopholes means you don't know what you're doing? Ha!

President doesn't control market, but it does influence optimism of investors, as we've clearly seen since Trump took office. 

He could cure every illness and you'd probably complain because doctors would lose work. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

When it happens both times because he decided he just wanted a younger, hotter piece of ass, it definitely does equate to a negative connotation of them.  And to make it worse, on at least one of them, he didn't decide he wanted to chase someone else and divorce his current wife before doing so.  He cheated on her, dumped her to marry the mistress.  Don't minimize.

 

Good Lord you can't seriously believe there's nothing to it but claims.  We aren't talking about sentencing the man to prison.  We're talking about obvious character issues that should have disqualified him from being given the most powerful office in the world.  You know - the way we conservatives argued when it was Democrat Bill Clinton cheating on his wife and sexually assaulting women.

 

He openly bragged.  If this were a Democrat, there's no way you'd give this benefit of the doubt.

 

 

Well, Bill ACTUALLY did it... in the Oval Office... while he was President. Wasn't "just claims" against Bill. 

And yes, just claims against Trump. Unless of course you think established Constitutional protections are hogwash and the rule of law is irrelevant. 

[TitanTiger 20,469]

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

Well, Bill ACTUALLY did it... in the Oval Office... while he was President. Wasn't "just claims" against Bill. 

You are confusing two separate things.  What he did in the office was not sexual assault.  

What he did in the lead up to being elected was the exact same thing Trump did.  Conservatives hated it then and said he lacked the character to represent this nation in the most powerful office in the free world.  Then they made excuses when it was a Republican.  Like you're doing now.

 

Just now, NolaAuTiger said:

And yes, just claims against Trump. Unless of course you think established Constitutional protections are hogwash and the rule of law is irrelevant. 

Again, we aren't talking about law or convicting him of anything.  We are talking about character and things that are known about a person when you are considering giving them your vote for president.  This isn't a matter of constitutional protections.  It's a matter of conservatives compromising their own character to throw their support behind a man who has none - when they vehemently argued that character counts.  But that's right, that was when it was the other side's guy so all bets are off then.

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

There was zero character in the election on both sides. For anybody to vote for either one swallowed a hefty pill of dissonance. With that said, primary interests are still at stake and it’s no surprise people voted for morally corrupt politicians anyway.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

You are confusing two separate things.  What he did in the office was not sexual assault.  

What he did in the lead up to being elected was the exact same thing Trump did.  Conservatives hated it then and said he lacked the character to represent this nation in the most powerful office in the free world.  Then they made excuses when it was a Republican.  Like you're doing now.

 

Again, we aren't talking about law or convicting him of anything.  We are talking about character and things that are known about a person when you are considering giving them your vote for president.  This isn't a matter of constitutional protections.  It's a matter of conservatives compromising their own character to throw their support behind a man who has none - when they vehemently argued that character counts.  But that's right, that was when it was the other side's guy so all bets are off then.

 

"Assault" is a legal term, therefore the law is relevant to our discussion. 

Conservatives were right about Bill, as evidenced by his impeachment. [He ACTUALLY lied under sworn oath]

 

 

[TitanTiger 20,469]

Just now, aujeff11 said:

There was zero character in the election on both sides. For anybody to vote for either one swallowed a hefty pill of dissonance. With that said, primary interests are still at stake and it’s no surprise people voted for morally corrupt politicians anyway.

Then that is what they should say instead of making flimsy bull**** excuses for him.  Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining and don't tell me you really thought character mattered and you believed the accusers when it was Bill Clinton who was the rapey womanizer, but now we have to forgive and forget and besides these are "just claims" and "he didn't really brag about sexually assaulting women" when it's Trump who's the rapey womanizer.

Just say you don't care about character, you care about your party winning regardless of who it is or how horrible a person they are.  At least that would be honest.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Then that is what they should say instead of making flimsy bull**** excuses for him.  Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining and don't tell me you really thought character mattered and you believed the accusers when it was Bill Clinton who was the rapey womanizer, but now we have to forgive and forget and besides these are "just claims" and "he didn't really brag about sexually assaulting women" when it's Trump who's the rapey womanizer.

Just say you don't care about character, you care about your party winning regardless of who it is or how horrible a person they are.  At least that would be honest.

Someone has definitely gotten tired of the winning.

 

[TitanTiger 20,469]

7 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

"Assault" is a legal term, therefore the law is relevant to our discussion. 

No, it isn't.  I've told you that we aren't talking about bringing charges or convicting him of something in a court of law.  We are talking about deciding who to vote for in a presidential election.  The standards of proof and such are not the same.  Quit dodging.

 

Quote

Conservatives were right about Bill, as evidenced by his impeachment. [He ACTUALLY lied under sworn oath

You keep changing the subject because you know your argument is flimsy.  Try to keep up.

We are talking about what conservatives said about Bill BEFORE he was ever elected.  Based on little more than claims by women who said he'd sexually assaulted them or that he'd carried on affairs with them, conservatives deemed him unfit for office - that he lacked the character to serve in such an position of honor, power and responsibility.  Said if he'll lie to his wife, how could we ever trust him.  This was long before any impeachment stuff was even on the table.  

But the same conservatives fail to apply the same standard of judgment to Trump.  It's utterly hypocritical.

[TexasTiger 12,800]

6 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

One can only hope.

 

The greatest irony will be Mr lock her up, locked up.

[aujeff11 6,243]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Then that is what they should say instead of making flimsy bull**** excuses for him.  Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining and don't tell me you really thought character mattered and you believed the accusers when it was Bill Clinton who was the rapey womanizer, but now we have to forgive and forget and besides these are "just claims" and "he didn't really brag about sexually assaulting women" when it's Trump who's the rapey womanizer.

It seems like you understand that all of these defenses and deflections are nothing more than party lip-service, but yet it seems you’re   ranting. You’re dead on when you say that the conservatives would be in an uproar over  the democratic candidates with numerous sexual assault allegations and that’s all that really matters.