PDA

View Full Version : Trump has REALLY gone over the edge now!



Norman Bernstein
08-09-2016, 04:00 PM
All I can say is... OMFG!


Donald Trump (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/donald-trump/) on Tuesday warned his supporters that if Hillary Clinton (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/hillary-clinton/) is elected president and appoints judges to the Supreme Court, there is nothing anyone can do about it. But then he added that, given the Second Amendment, maybe there is.

“If she gets to pick her judges ― nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcxkkrNSv-4) with a shrug at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. “Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is. I don’t know.”

xflow7
08-09-2016, 04:07 PM
Just. Wow.

TomF
08-09-2016, 04:08 PM
quite amazing. Except my amazer is broken by now.

It's a marketing campaign. Get as much free advertising as you can - there's no such thing as bad press.

McMike
08-09-2016, 04:09 PM
Isn't this illegal?

TomF
08-09-2016, 04:10 PM
Isn't this illegal?Hell, this is America we're talking about. It's free speech.

Walking just this side of incitement.

skuthorp
08-09-2016, 04:10 PM
That's what I think, it should be.
http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?210568-Trump-tips-hat-to-quot-the-2nd-Amendment-people-quot

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 04:15 PM
It will be very, very interesting to see how our tireless Trump defenders handle this.

Step right up, boys! Is it OK to suggest armed violence if one doesn't like the results of an election, or agree with judicial appointments?

Osborne Russell
08-09-2016, 04:16 PM
What a P licking cringing coward he is.

Reynard38
08-09-2016, 04:16 PM
Think he knows he's gonna lose? So why not generate as much of a persona for the reality TV crowd as possible. It's free advertising.
Brilliant in a really distorted way.

Peerie Maa
08-09-2016, 04:17 PM
He was just saying with the strong support of the 2nd amendment there could be a great uprising and million man march. You know, grass roots and all that.

What universe are you from?

TomF
08-09-2016, 04:17 PM
He was just saying with the strong support of the 2nd amendment there could be a great uprising and million man march. You know, grass roots and all that.Nudge nudge, wink, tip of the hat. Of course that's all he was saying.

Bet you shave in the shower, eh Rod? What with not being able to look yourself in the mirror and all.

Norman Bernstein
08-09-2016, 04:18 PM
Well, look at it this way... it would be a boring campaign if he decided to 'reform', and just give dull, insipid teleprompter speeches for the next three months. Going down in flames is infinitely more interesting than slowly sinking into irrelevancy.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 04:21 PM
Here it is. Will there be deaths because of this? How many?


https://youtu.be/EcxkkrNSv-4

TomF
08-09-2016, 04:22 PM
Oh yeah, that's definitely "million man march" stuff. Rod, I dunno how I could have heard it any other way.

TomF
08-09-2016, 04:26 PM
I'm quite comfortable with Trump being president when you look at the choices and the future of this nation with a Hillary presidency.Knowing that doesn't help me sleep at night, BTW.

This is what it looks like "when the terrorists win." You guys won't take the election in November, but you'll all still be there.

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 04:35 PM
I'll be dead by then, but if Hillary wins and if Hillary stacks the Supreme Court with liberals that push the nation further down the progressive road, there will be a revolution sooner or later.

Yep. Bernie's revolution of progress.

Peerie Maa
08-09-2016, 04:39 PM
I'll be dead by then, but if Hillary wins and if Hillary stacks the Supreme Court with liberals that push the nation further down the progressive road, there will be a revolution sooner or later.

What was the date that they predicted for the Rapture?

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 04:40 PM
Well, Rod was fine with Trump attacking Mr. Khan, and now he's OK with Trump suggesting armed insurrection. Remarkable.


18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383)

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

CWSmith
08-09-2016, 04:40 PM
How things have changed! Here is a little piece of presidential debate from The West Wing. At the time, the Reagan-like GOP candidate came off as a bit dim. He seems brilliant compared with today.


https://youtu.be/VyqzPu5pX6U

https://youtu.be/VyqzPu5pX6U

Waddie
08-09-2016, 04:46 PM
Thomas Jefferson recommended a revolution every few years.

regards,
Waddie

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 04:48 PM
Chait again. And don't give us any garbage about how Trump doesn't really threaten democracy; he just did, in his own words. You can watch the recording.


Why Republicans Endorse a President Who Threatens Democracy
By Jonathan Chait

One fact that has grown bracingly clear over the course of the presidential campaign is that the campaign is not about any of the normal issues in American politics, but about democracy. The other elections we all remember have pitted two small-d democrats against each other. This one pits a small-d democrat against a candidate who has repeatedly stated that strong leaders crush their enemies, who warns without evidence that Antonin Scalia was murdered and that the election will be “rigged,” who threatens retaliatory policy crackdowns on owners of newspapers whose coverage displeases him, who has asked Russia’s autocrat to conduct a cyberattack on his opponent, and who, today, exhorted his audience to violent insurrection.

The democracy question has opened a deep schism within the Republican Party. Republicans stand mostly united on ends but divided on means. Trump’s somewhat amorphous promise to negotiate better trade deals aside, the candidate has mostly endorsed traditional Republican policies on taxes, regulation, judicial appointments, and so on. The division lies between the Paul Ryan wing of the party, which is focused on passing regressive debt-financed tax cuts through peaceful electoral means, and the Trump wing, which proposes regressive debt-financed tax cuts through peaceful means if possible, but through the trampling of democratic norms if necessary.

The two wings co-exist uneasily, as one might expect, but the more curious question is how they co-exist at all. Peter Beinart explores the fascination some right-wing intellectuals have with authoritarianism, and finds a psychological attraction to the energy and putative legitimacy of the people as an imagined unified force. Another source of overlap is a distrust of democracy on the libertarian right.

Ayn Rand’s theories have had enormous influence on the conservative movement and on leaders like Paul Ryan. Rand’s theories are a kind of inverted Marxism. Like Marx, she depicts society as riven between a producer class and a parasite class, but she identifies the classes in opposite terms. Rand’s producers are the capitalists, and the parasites who leech off them are the workers. (“The man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him, but gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time. The man at the bottom who, left to himself, would starve in his hopeless ineptitude, contributes nothing to those above him, but receives the bonus of all of their brains.”) But since the virtuous producer class amounts to a small minority, it is helpless before the majority that is able to confiscate their rightful earnings through democratic means. Democracy, by this way of thinking, poses a constant threat of enabling redistribution from the few to the many.

This is the notion that undergirds the otherwise puzzling habit on the right of depicting any discussion of the distributional ramifications of policy as “class warfare.” It is likewise the spirit of a long-standing apocryphal quote, repeated by conservatives like Ronald Reagan, that “a democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasury.”

Peter Thiel, the libertarian investor who spoke for Trump in Cleveland, wrote in the libertarian Cato Institute’s journal in 2009, “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible. … For those of us who are libertarian in 2009, our education culminates with the knowledge that the broader education of the body politic has become a fool’s errand.” The Heritage Foundation’s Stephen Moore, who has advised Trump, has admitted, “Capitalism’s more important than democracy. I’m not even a big believer in democracy. I always say that democracy can be two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner.”

Not all libertarians think this way — most despise Trump, in fact — nor should these statements be taken as a straightforward endorsement of autocracy over democracy. What they show, instead, is an unease about (small-d) democratic economic policy. This helps explain why, of all of the factions in the GOP, the economic right has reconciled itself so easily to its nominee. Ryan’s spokesperson cheered Trump’s Ryan-like economic plan yesterday. Brian Ballard, a former Jeb Bush donor who now serves as Trump’s finance chair in Florida, stated accurately that repeal of the estate tax, which affects only inheritances over $11 million per couple, is “the linchpin of the conservative movement,” and hence a sign of the nominee’s close adherence to party doctrine. It also helps to explain why a clear bright line between virtuous respect for democratic norms and a dangerous willingness to flout them might present itself to the party of Trump and Ryan as something less than a perfectly clarifying choice.

PeterSibley
08-09-2016, 05:01 PM
There will be a revolution or the country will split in two.

It already has.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 05:06 PM
Thomas Jefferson recommended a revolution every few years.On that point, Thomas Jefferson was a dangerous romantic fool.

This is absolutely not normal US politics. Trump has gone over into very, very dangerous territory. The sedition in his statement is not even veiled; it's right out there in the open with only the tiniest bit of plausible deniability.


Trump’s Assassination ‘Joke’ Was Thinly Veiled Sedition
By Ed Kilgore

Donald Trump managed to descend to new depths today by repeating a tedious gun-lobby argument that Hillary Clinton wants to “essentially abolish the Second Amendment” and then turning it into a “joking” suggestion that “Second-Amendment people” might hold the only way to deal with that threat. Nothing like a little assassination humor to liven things up on the campaign trail, eh?

But even as they condemn the shocking utterance, a lot of observers seem to be missing the fact that Trump is adapting a dangerously common right-wing claim. It’s that the most important purpose of the Second Amendment is not to allow people to defend themselves from robbers and muggers and would-be murderers and rapists if the police cannot get the job done, but rather to create a heavily armed populace prepared to undertake revolutionary violence if the government tries to impose “tyranny.” Let’s be clear about this doctrine: It lets the gun-wielders decide for themselves whether high taxes or government surveillance or Obamacare is a sufficient threat to liberty to justify getting out the shooting irons and killing the police officers and armed-services members assigned the responsibility of enforcing the “tyrannical” laws in question. And conservative politicians have often made it clear they understand and are okay with that incredible risk, as when Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle referred cheerfully to “Second-Amendment remedies” for the liberal policies supported by her opponent, Harry Reid. Angle was hardly alone: During the Republican presidential primaries this cycle, Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz both endorsed the idea of gun rights being a safeguard against too much Big Government liberalism. During her successful Senate campaign in 2014, rising GOP star Joni Ernst of Iowa used to happily talk about the “beautiful little Smith & Wesson” she carried with every intention of using it to defend herself and her family from “government, should they decide that my rights are no longer important.”

The most common use of this “right to revolution” argument, however, is to threaten anyone who doesn’t bend the knee to the Second Amendment itself. So it makes even the blandest support for gun-safety legislation self-evident proof of “tyranny” justifying even more stockpiling of lethal weapons to be used against “government.”

In Hillary Clinton’s case, the “tyrannical” threat is apparently that she doesn’t approve of a 5–4 decision reached by the Supreme Court in 2008 (D.C. v. Heller) that first made the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms” a personal instead of collective (i.e., in the sense of authorizing a “well-regulated militia”) constitutional right. I guess that means the four dissenting Justices were tyrants, too, and that Ronald Reagan presided over an era of government tyranny since Heller had not at that point been handed down.

Credit Donald Trump for doing us the service of taking a dubious dog-whistle argument for violence, always discussed abstractly (it’s the “government,” not cops and soldiers, much less presidents, who will become bullet-riddled when “patriots” revolt), and with his characteristic crudeness making it a joke about rubbing out his opponent. Maybe next time some conservative pol makes a similar argument for turning to the gun if politics fails, we’ll all recognize it for the thinly veiled sedition it is.

Chris Coose
08-09-2016, 05:10 PM
The moderates have sought to intervene on Crazy so they don't lose the Senate. How's that working for them?
This is excellent news. I'm not shocked. I'm thrilled.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 05:14 PM
This is excellent news. I'm not shocked. I'm thrilled.If politics proceeds as normal, maybe. If people take him seriously, no. Any bets on how many people will die - even if he loses the election - because Trump can't control his tongue?

John Smith
08-09-2016, 05:16 PM
All I can say is... OMFG!

Aside from the basic lunacy here, isn't he a 2nd amendment person?

John Smith
08-09-2016, 05:19 PM
I'll be dead by then, but if Hillary wins and if Hillary stacks the Supreme Court with liberals that push the nation further down the progressive road, there will be a revolution sooner or later.

Explain please. You have something against equal pay, voting rights, etc.?

WX
08-09-2016, 05:20 PM
I'm quite comfortable with Trump being president when you look at the choices and the future of this nation with a Hillary presidency.

You're happy having a man as president who is hinting that assassination could be a viable option?

Sky Blue
08-09-2016, 05:22 PM
Thomas Jefferson recommended a revolution every few years.

I can see why. Smart man, Jefferson. Anti-federalist, wasn't he? We've become everything he feared, and worse.

PeterSibley
08-09-2016, 05:27 PM
Were's your defense of the OP SB, we're waiting .

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 05:27 PM
I can see why. Smart man, Jefferson. Anti-federalist, wasn't he? We've become everything he feared, and worse.So are you saying that you too are in favor of armed insurrection against the government of the US? Or are you going to wink and dodge and weave?

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 05:31 PM
Its not worth the time explaining anything to you. Look up Heritage Foundation and you might get a clue.

They were the folks who designed Obamacare, right? At the very least the individual mandate was their idea. The idea was even introduced in the Senate by Bob Dole in 1993.

Sky Blue
08-09-2016, 05:35 PM
So are you saying that you too are in favor of armed insurrection against the government of the US? Or are you going to wink and dodge and weave?

I can't ever rule anything out, Keith! Never say never!:D:o;)

Sky Blue
08-09-2016, 05:41 PM
Were's your defense of the OP SB, we're waiting .

Why would I defend it, Peter? I didn't say it.

WX
08-09-2016, 05:49 PM
So are you saying that you too are in favor of armed insurrection against the government of the US? Or are you going to wink and dodge and weave?
That never ends well, you generally end up with someone far far worse than the person you deposed. Anyone who thinks deposing the US government is a viable option is living in some sort of six gun fantasy land.

Gerarddm
08-09-2016, 05:54 PM
As my late mother would have admonished, " not even in jest ".

Fer crissakes, see my signature and vote accordingly. Cathargo delenda est.


Time for Bernie's new organization, Our Revolution.

Canoeyawl
08-09-2016, 05:57 PM
Anyone who thinks deposing the US government is a viable option is living in some sort of six gun fantasy land.

You have never been to Texas...

Chip-skiff
08-09-2016, 05:57 PM
Thomas Jefferson recommended a revolution every few years.

As my Gran once said, "Alright, Mr. Big Boy Pants. Who will you be shooting first?"

skuthorp
08-09-2016, 05:59 PM
Donald better hope that no one takes him seriously, but I'm sure the FBI etc will up the security level.

PeterSibley
08-09-2016, 05:59 PM
Why would I defend it, Peter? I didn't say it.

Because your place in life, up until now at least , has been to defend Trump's idiotic statements.

Donald Trump (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/donald-trump/) on Tuesday warned his supporters that if Hillary Clinton (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/hillary-clinton/) is elected president and appoints judges to the Supreme Court, there is nothing anyone can do about it. But then he added that, given the Second Amendment, maybe there is.

“If she gets to pick her judges ― nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcxkkrNSv-4) with a shrug at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. “Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is. I don’t know.”

Kevin T
08-09-2016, 06:00 PM
As my Gran once said, "Alright, Mr. Big Boy Pants. Who will you be shooting first?"

:-) Wow Chip you must have been some kind of bada$$ as a child. ;-)

Chip-skiff
08-09-2016, 06:01 PM
:-) Wow Chip you must have been some kind of bada$$ as a child. ;-)

She said it not to me, but to my Da.

McMike
08-09-2016, 06:06 PM
There will be a revolution or the country will split in two.

No it won't.

Kevin T
08-09-2016, 06:14 PM
She said it not to me, but to my Da.

I was kidding of course, I mistakenly read it that she was admonishing you when you were a youngster with a pair of cap guns holstered on your hips. My apologies.

WX
08-09-2016, 06:21 PM
You have never been to Texas...


No but I can imagine.:)

C. Ross
08-09-2016, 06:22 PM
NOTHING BURGER... Gimme a break!


I'm curious. As Mr. Trump speaks in favor of his ideas, are there any words or phrases or references that you would find unacceptable or cause you to reconsider your support for him? Is every controversial thing he says a "nothing burger"?

Can you give an example?

I think he was right when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose a supporter. Can you prove me wrong?

C. Ross
08-09-2016, 06:32 PM
Bet you shave in the shower, eh Rod? What with not being able to look yourself in the mirror and all.

I shave in the shower.

The extra humidity makes the shave smooth and close, razor burn free. A guy needs to really KNOW his face to shave this way.

It's zen. Don't diss it until you've tried it.

S/V Laura Ellen
08-09-2016, 06:39 PM
http://newsthump.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Donald-Trump-Ferengi-ears.jpg

The United States Constitution will be modified to include the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition, according to a policy document leaked from the Donald Trump campaign.
The news emerged after it became clear Trump’s campaign website would not allow supporters to cancel reoccurring donations, a move covered under Rule 239 as “Never be afraid to mislabel a product”.
Trump, who believes he is running for the position of ‘Grand Nagus’ of the United States, has a personal motto of “A man is only worth the sum of his possessions”, which is his favourite of the rules.
Others of his favourite rules include ‘war is good for business’ and ‘Employees are rungs on the ladder of success – don’t hesitate to step on them’.
Many supporters of Donald Trump already appear to be using at least the first three of the five stages of acquisition – infatuation, obsession, justification, appropriation and resale – to explain backing their candidate.
Speaking from the plush Ferenginar Casino on the Las Vegas Strip, a spokesman for Trump confirmed that all 285 of the rules would be added to the Constitution as amendments.
“We might shake up the order a bit,” we were told.
“The first two amendments will be ‘Females and finances don’t mix’ and ‘It never hurts to suck up to the boss’.
“Donald was very clear about that for some reason.”
The leak was described as ‘Unsurprising, predictable and weak’ by Trump’s opponent in the race, Hillary Klingon.

Rich Jones
08-09-2016, 06:45 PM
Trump would be banned from the Bilge if he made that comment here.

oznabrag
08-09-2016, 06:51 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.

You keep on with the rude stuff, and you're gonna find out just how wrong you are, mon frére.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 06:53 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.Yeah, sure he did (nudge, wink, nudge). http://forums.liveleak.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Why didn't he say that, then?

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 06:54 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.


Yeah, sure he did (nudge, wink, nudge). http://forums.liveleak.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Why didn't he say that, then?

Because that's not what he wanted his minions to hear.

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 06:59 PM
I agree, he needs to be more fricking careful. Just keeps giving the enemy gifts.

He doesn't know how to be careful. A big part of what makes totally unfit to be president. The GOP has truly jumped the shark with this nomination.

ron ll
08-09-2016, 07:00 PM
Trump would be banned from the Bilge if he made that comment here.

That's okay. He could just change his screen name to something like, oh I don't know, maybe USAfix, then come back and spout the same old vitriol and no one would notice.

Paul Pless
08-09-2016, 07:07 PM
that some few people can celebrate this statement by trump, that many others spin it and defend it; while most of us here thankfully condemn it is telling abput the real divide in our country. . .

Arizona Bay
08-09-2016, 07:10 PM
http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Boatfix http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=4973927#post4973927)
I agree, he needs to be more fricking careful. Just keeps giving the enemy gifts.



That you refer to the opposition party as "the enemy" is telling.

Osborne Russell
08-09-2016, 07:11 PM
I agree, he needs to be more fricking careful. Just keeps giving the enemy gifts.

"Enemy"

Paul Pless
08-09-2016, 07:16 PM
That some people can support Hillary Clinton with her dismal record and incredible level of dishonesty it quite telling about the division in this country. One side is determined to stay in power no matter the cost while the other side simply wants the progressive pox on this nation to stop.
i can't tell you how much it sucks that i have to support hillary due to the fact that your side's candidate is beyond pathetic :D

McMike
08-09-2016, 07:17 PM
I agree, he needs to be more fricking careful. Just keeps giving the enemy gifts.

Do you not acknowledge that his words carry weight, that right now, a handful of crazies will take his words and run with them?

Osborne Russell
08-09-2016, 07:23 PM
i can't tell you how much it sucks that i have to support hillary due to the fact that your side's candidate is beyond pathetic :D

Yep.

The Dems are sellouts on so many things but they are as nothing by comparison.

Paul Pless
08-09-2016, 07:28 PM
it was me developing objectivity that led me to stray from conservatism

sign me - white, christian, male, raised in the south, educated in economics at an extremely conservative southern university, member of an all white all male country club, business owner, land owner, hunter, fisherman, gun enthusiast, redneck, yada, yada. . .

if you lost me, ya done something fer real

Arizona Bay
08-09-2016, 07:30 PM
Since we can't get Bernie, I wish O'bama could run again.

Trumper isn't a populist, he's a con man

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 07:33 PM
He is a populist candidate and not a politician, but he does represent many many of the issues in a way that the "folks" approve of. He hits home and if you libs would develop even a smidgeon of objectivity you might to some small extent admit the validity of many of the conservative points of view. The fact that that does not happen here even in a minuscule way shows the divide in this nation is worse than I ever imagined.

The Obama policies continuing would be the end of this nation and Hillary will only double down on these seriously wrong headed policies. Its getting so bad that I'd venture most conservatives would not want to even share a cab with a committed liberal.

He is supported by people so blind they don't recognize that his entire economic "package" will stick it to the little people and give it to the rich. Create a trade war that will start the next great recession. Add many billions to the debt with tax cuts to corporations and the rich. There is nothing in there for the little people, but they're just mad as heck and absolutely determined they need to shoot their foot off.

And then they want to give that creature who doesn't know how to stop and think carefully the codes to the nuclear arsenal. How intelligent is that? I'll tell you, its not intelligent at all.

ron ll
08-09-2016, 07:34 PM
Since we can't get Bernie, I wish O'bama could run again.



The Irish Crimson Tide?

Arizona Bay
08-09-2016, 07:36 PM
Red and Green!

His heritage is more Irish than it is Kenyan or equally so.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 07:38 PM
So, Boatfix, you seem to be saying one of two things:

1. Trump didn't really support armed insurrection, just blundered, saying something that was misinterpreted.
2. He really did call for armed revolt and that's OK, but his mistake was saying it so bluntly, because it helps the opposition.

Which is it?

Arizona Bay
08-09-2016, 07:53 PM
Guess he doesn't know... gone to check Fox for an answer

Hugh Conway
08-09-2016, 07:58 PM
So, Boatfix, you seem to be saying one of two things:

1. Trump didn't really support armed insurrection, just blundered, saying something that was misinterpreted.
2. He really did call for armed revolt and that's OK, but his mistake was saying it so bluntly, because it helps the opposition.

Which is it?

And why the heck does anyone think either is OK?

TomF
08-09-2016, 08:00 PM
I shave in the shower.

The extra humidity makes the shave smooth and close, razor burn free. A guy needs to really KNOW his face to shave this way.

It's zen. Don't diss it until you've tried it.I use a straight razor. If I shaved in the shower, I'd end up doing an homage to Hitchcock one of these mornings.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
08-09-2016, 08:03 PM
I'm quite comfortable with Trump being president when you look at the choices and the future of this nation with a Hillary presidency.


Funny, I saw this dangerous and ridiculous comment unfold today in the media, and I thought..... the WBF probably has a thread on this.. (since I don't think of this place for wooden boats anymore :D) .... and I stopped posting here for a variety of reasons (I do look at Ledger's catboat thread every now and then)not the least of which is the politics of this site.

I am quite convinced Donald Trump may in fact win the presidency. I also believe that he is the most dangerous candidate for President of the United States, and of any significant world power, in my lifetime. I have no interest in communicating with anyone who supports Donald Trump, and my wooden boat american facebook friends who do are being weeded out as I write. Anyone who supports this man is so far distant from me in terms of moral and personal values that I need not have any further contact with them. I had thought America had stepped a least a few feet forward of the incredible hatred and violence of history. I guess not. I feel badly for liberal America and my friends here and I wish you the best possible outcome. Cheers.

CWSmith
08-09-2016, 08:04 PM
that some few people can celebrate this statement by trump, that many others spin it and defend it; while most of us here thankfully condemn it is telling abput the real divide in our country. . .

True. I wonder what motivates his defenders? Do they really agree? Are they just filled with anger? Are they desperate to win at any cost? Do they even hear themselves and think about what those words really mean?

Comments of the type Trump made today run opposite to every thing I was taught and believe from values to behavior.

Hugh Conway
08-09-2016, 08:05 PM
You are not a bad guy but you are full of it when you lay your political analysis that is colored by the left wing pox on the Republicans. Although I will no longer be a republican but an independent, I must point out that your economic rant is wrong. I just today had the chance to hear one respected economist on exactly what we are talking about, the Trump economic policies. He convinced me his plan will be a good change for our economy and will be good for the country. I don't give a damn if you find 20 biased left wing press links that condemn Trump's plan, so don't bother.

http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/m/stephen-moore

I'm pretty sure protectionist populism has been "left wing economics" for decades. Bolting on the same retreaded rightwing taxcuts doubles down on the dumb.

C. Ross
08-09-2016, 08:19 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.

This is helpful. Perhaps this is the Rosetta Stone of Trumpish.

Let's run a few other quotes from the candidate through the translator.


When Mexico sends its people, they’'re not sending the best. They’'re not sending you, they’'re sending people that have lots of problems and they’'re bringing those problems with us. They’'re bringing drugs. They’ bring crime. They’re rapists…. And some, I assume, are good people.

He said: Mexico and the U.S. are important allies.


I will build a great wall – and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me – and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”

He said: America and Mexico should have an open, fair and honest discussion and find constructive answers to the real problems of immigration.


If you look at his wife, she was standing there, she had nothing to say, she probably — maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say, you tell me.

He said: I honor all Gold Star Mothers, regardless of race, religion or political beliefs.


He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.

He said: And while I'm at it, I hold in the highest esteem Sen. John McCain for his service to our country in uniform and in public office, and I fully support and endorse his re-election.


My IQ is one of the highest — and you all know it! Please don't feel so stupid or insecure; it's not your fault.

He said: I've never read a book or spent time with smart people, so I confuse my inherited wealth, shamelessness and narcissism with intelligence.


You know, it really doesn’t matter what the media write as long as you’ve got a young, and beautiful, piece of ass.”

I've said if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.”

He said: Hey, what can I say? I just really like young beautiful ass, even if it's my own daughter.



Yep. Works like a charm!

TomF
08-09-2016, 08:24 PM
A far left liberal talking about morals and personal values and obviously would be ok with Hillary Clinton. What a joke. What about her corruption and incessant lying?
What about yours, Boaty? Every 3rd party fact checking organization observes that Clinton is the most truthful of this crop of candidates. Every one.

Every one observes that your guy can hardly breathe out without stretching the truth. In this contest, it's no contest.

So when will you stop lying about her lying? Or displaying your corruption in knowingly repeating lies about her alleged corruption?

You've become a fricking fascist yourself, Boaty, of the type your parents and grandparents would have fought. Look in your mirror, and then turn yourself around.

ccmanuals
08-09-2016, 08:25 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.

Baloney, you have no idea what he meant.

WX
08-09-2016, 08:31 PM
I didn't say he said anything bad, I said he was careless to say something that could be misconstrued or in any way could be used to attack him. With this massive left wing press Jihad attacking Trump at every turn, he needs to be more careful.
Don't you just love it when people use phrases like that? :D

CWSmith
08-09-2016, 08:33 PM
Every word you wrote can absolutely be applied to the Democrats in how they run campaigns, how they govern and the massive dishonesty they overlook in candidates. I don't like Trump as our candidate but I trust the system and he is much better for this country after 7.5 years of Obama. Hillary will only push us farther down in the drain. To clarify, Trump is not a racist, period. Obviously millions of Americans want our immigration laws enforced, for the good of the country in general and in addition for increased national security. You might not realize this but millions of Americans think the Democrats are without honor in that they have opted for almost open borders simply to increase their voting bloc in the future to stay in power, with no motivation like "what is best for Americans".

Trump has consistently said, his highest priority will always be "what is best for America". And your comment about win at any cost, I'd say the tactics of the democrats have clearly shown that win at any cost goes without saying. No honor, no lie is too small or too big, no attack is not worthwhile, gimme a break.

The only thing you said that is correct is:


Trump is not a racist...

and I do believe this is true. He makes racist comments to attract the votes of people who are blind with prejudice and uninformed. He is a manipulator. Otherwise, your comments ring hollow.

TomF
08-09-2016, 08:33 PM
Take me back to the Dem convention. Quote me one of these famous lies.

Joe (SoCal)
08-09-2016, 08:35 PM
National Evening News is picking up the story. Like I said all Hillary has to do is be quiet and Drump will put his foot in his mouth over and over

Chris Coose
08-09-2016, 08:45 PM
he needs to be more careful.

But you and they adore love him for "telling it like it is". It's his greatest selling feature.

Trouble is he is just bat**** crazy.

LeeG
08-09-2016, 08:49 PM
Think he knows he's gonna lose? So why not generate as much of a persona for the reality TV crowd as possible. It's free advertising.
Brilliant in a really distorted way.

That's what it looks like.

Joe (SoCal)
08-09-2016, 09:11 PM
http://occupydemocrats.com/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-08-09-at-7.32.40-PM.png

TomF
08-09-2016, 09:14 PM
Kicking it!

Keith Wilson
08-09-2016, 09:19 PM
Not even a two-bit dictator, an awkward not-very-bright 14-year-old who'd like to be a dictator to get revenge on all the kids who teased him.

Once again, in case anybody missed them, the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (https://www.bpdcentral.com/narcissistic-disorder/hallmarks-of-npd/):


A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

- Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
- Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
- Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
- Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
- Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
- Requires excessive admiration
- Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
- Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
- Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

TomF
08-09-2016, 09:26 PM
It is really not like "joking " about 2nd Amendment remedies for Clinton's scotus choices. I'm kinda floored that you can't see this.

Gerarddm
08-09-2016, 09:37 PM
Folks, why you bother to riposte with Rod/Ron is beyond me. He is adamantine in his Drumpf dittoness. Let It Be, as McCartney said. Or as Mose Allison would have it, his mind is on vacation and his mouth is working overtime.

hokiefan
08-09-2016, 10:17 PM
You are not a bad guy but you are full of it when you lay your political analysis that is colored by the left wing pox on the Republicans. Although I will no longer be a republican but an independent, I must point out that your economic rant is wrong. I just today had the chance to hear one respected economist on exactly what we are talking about, the Trump economic policies. He convinced me his plan will be a good change for our economy and will be good for the country. I don't give a damn if you find 20 biased left wing press links that condemn Trump's plan, so don't bother.

http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/m/stephen-moore

In other words you heard one guy you agreed with so you don't need to listen to the multitudes you don't agree with. That is how huge mistakes are made. You sound like Trump, ignoring his advisors and making big mistakes every day.

David G
08-09-2016, 11:03 PM
Even Fox News is shaking their heads about his sloppy irresponsibility --

https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/08/09/fox-s-charles-krauthammer-admits-trump-can-t-make-pivot-and-become-responsible/212282

skuthorp
08-09-2016, 11:07 PM
Fox and their employees need to have a future beyond the election.

David G
08-09-2016, 11:23 PM
https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p200x200/13920783_1263495230362123_6731082206589884223_n.jp g?oh=9fcb0d81e6a65f315be6483897a28ee4&oe=5821DED1

David G
08-09-2016, 11:54 PM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.

https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/1913526_10153842083935255_6265260394747036884_n.jp g?oh=e9eb44c4490d027f0a3aaa12515841a2&oe=58566FDA

WX
08-10-2016, 12:19 AM
Written for today's democrats.

You obviously haven't thought about the meaning of the quote.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
08-10-2016, 03:16 AM
You obviously haven't thought about the meaning of the quote.

The first forty percent of those words nails it.

AndyG
08-10-2016, 04:45 AM
Once again, in case anybody missed them, the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (https://www.bpdcentral.com/narcissistic-disorder/hallmarks-of-npd/):

Without giving too much away, many years ago I worked in a department with a manager who ticked literally all of those boxes.

I don't like to rely on my initial reactions to meeting someone, but after my first encounter with him, I left thinking he was either a genius or a completely barking-mad, bat-$hit-crazy lunatic. What was really odd was that I wasn't sure which it was, not least because the dichotomy was so extreme: I'd never met anyone like it.

Within a week or so it became increasingly obvious to me it was the latter. Over the next few months many of us necessarily began to adopt a process of "damage limitation": his increasingly grandiose schemes and projects had to be dragged back into the real world of what we could do with the technology, timescales and budgets available.

A couple of years later, after getting the entire department - fifty people - working full-time on what can only be described as a personal vanity project for him, his bosses stepped in and he was suspended. They wrote to us, asking for details about 'mismanagement' and 'misappropriation of budgets' that we'd witnessed. I was more than happy to provide a long and detailed answer. He was 'let go' a short time later.

What amazes me now are two things.

Some people within the department must have bought the 'genius' line: they stuck with him until the very end, supportive of all his ideas. They couldn't see that they were witnessing unrealistic, increasingly mentally unstable behaviour. They never questioned it: or, perhaps, they never could question it, because they just couldn't see it.

Others, who must have grown to realise that something was very wrong, also stuck with him to the end. Maybe they were concerned about their jobs, their positions or - worse - putting off that 'loss of face' when, at the end of this bizarre spiral, they would have had to admit to themselves that they'd been duped into The Fantasy.

After this whole sorry mess ended, I did wonder whether these two attitudes were present for those involved in the final months of the Third Reich.

Today? This is Trump's career, only played on a larger canvas. Ultimately the wheels will come off, we know they will. I can only hope this occurs before the election or after his defeat. The other option is too appalling to consider.

Andy

WX
08-10-2016, 05:03 AM
The first forty percent of those words nails it.

Yep I could have stopped right there.:D

brucemoffatt
08-10-2016, 05:17 AM
Andy, once you buy into something it's very hard to admit a mistake and back out. Even harder when there's a wall of people calling you out for it. That just builds walls that you'll defend. There's a name for that syndrome, I don't recall it, but it's like a relentless car driver praising the virtues of a lemon they paid a bomb for, right to the bitter calamitous end.

sent from my nerdy phone app

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 05:36 AM
Andy, once you buy into something it's very hard to admit a mistake and back out. Even harder when there's a wall of people calling you out for it. That just builds walls that you'll defend. There's a name for that syndrome, I don't recall it, but it's like a relentless car driver praising the virtues of a lemon they paid a bomb for, right to the bitter calamitous end.

sent from my nerdy phone app

There is a third way. Just stop saying new stupid chit.

Daniel Noyes
08-10-2016, 06:00 AM
http://occupydemocrats.com/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2016-08-09-at-7.32.40-PM.png


Anything to distract the Voters from the Democrats dirty dealing with Bernie and getting their Data base hacked by ..... ????? they dont know who... mabey the Russians :D seriously they cant make this stuff up!


Keep running off at the Mouth Warren! NO one is listening... except a few Bilge Rats :)

PeterSibley
08-10-2016, 06:10 AM
He'll lose to a girl ! Love it :D:D

Duncan Gibbs
08-10-2016, 06:40 AM
I'm beginning to think Trump is a giant conspiracy to destroy the GOP from within.

He lose and then turn around and say, "See how DUMB the GOP actually are! They swallowed all my chit? I'm mean, WOW! That's tremendous!"

Tom Wilkinson
08-10-2016, 06:51 AM
Anything to distract the Voters from the Democrats dirty dealing with Bernie and getting their Data base hacked by ..... ????? they dont know who... mabey the Russians :D seriously they cant make this stuff up!


Keep running off at the Mouth Warren! NO one is listening... except a few Bilge Rats :)

60k likes on her comment and no one is listening.....
delusional

C. Ross
08-10-2016, 07:08 AM
Andy's post seems right on the money. Narcissists can certainly be the angry loser muttering on a park bench but they can also be driven, charming and manipulative. The few I've worked for or with seem to have some kind of reality distortions field around them.

One has to acknowledge Trump's particular genius. He can give speech after speech saying things about his opponent that are quite unprecedented in their personal nastiness. (Not just Clinton, but all of his Republican opponents too.) He uses language of violence and retribution. Governor Christie puts her "on trial" and the crowd yells "guilty!" and "lock her up!" over and over. All of this plays on squeamishness about Secretary Clinton's character - I get it, I'm squeamish too.

But it once Trump convinces people they've been screwed, everything's rigged, there's no way out, he can subtly invoke the image of assassination. Just a whiff. Those emotionally tuned to his message get it. The people with guns aren't powerless. They'll stop the witch and her evil judges. Yeah......

And then like a boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar, he acts innocent and offended, claiming he is only speaking about second amendment rights. So Mr. Trump can call for the hit in the back room, and have a nice meal with the decent folk up front. Genius. A master of the dog whistle.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 07:21 AM
Genius. A master of the dog whistle.Nah. He's a hamfisted amateur. If he were a master, 'TRUMP CALLS FOR VIOLENCE, with thin veil of plausible deniability' wouldn't be on every political blog and editorial page in the country right now. The 'Aw shucks; I didn't mean that' shtick only works every now and then, not five times a week. Not everybody's stupid, and folks eventually catch on. We can all hear the whistle now.

TomF
08-10-2016, 07:32 AM
I worry that this cycle's impact will mostly be in the normalization of this tone.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 07:36 AM
I worry that this cycle's impact will mostly be in the normalization of this tone.Could be. We could also see a reaction against it, particularly if he loses badly enough, 'We're not like that lunatic."

C. Ross
08-10-2016, 08:00 AM
Nah. He's a hamfisted amateur.

...

We can all hear the whistle now.

Keith, Trump is somewhere on the spectrum of dysfunctional/mentally ill/malignant and is polling at 45% and has changed all the rules of public discourse. That's genius.

I think there are tens of millions of Americans who respond to the whistle emotionally (it gives them a little forbidden thrill to imagine violence as a way of stopping the evil of Obamination/Clinton) but they deny it intellectually (Give me a break! Of course he's just calling for second amendment rights! Geez!). That's genius too.

I think a big part of America is turned on by Donny Bad Boy but they're sure once we marry him we can turn him into a loving husband and caring father. We've seen THAT story before.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 08:38 AM
Maybe. I think it says more about what John called the 'fascist-shaped hole' in the minds of part of the right that Trump has fitted himself into, than about any particular genius on his part - but maybe that's a kind of genius. And it's about 40%, not 45, but that's a quibble.

Osborne Russell
08-10-2016, 08:46 AM
Baloney, he meant the political power of the gun owners was great.

Illogical.

Trump refers to there being "nothing you can do" if Hillary starts appointing judges.

She can't do that unless she's elected. I'm going slowly, one sentence per paragraph.

If she's elected, they don't have the political power to stop her.

Trump is saying she must be stopped by violence.

That's insurrection.

Osborne Russell
08-10-2016, 08:49 AM
"Losing to a girl . . . "

Will Rachel Maddow say this was "creepy"?

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 09:27 AM
One more time, just to remind everybody (emphasis added).


18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115)

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Rich Jones
08-10-2016, 09:42 AM
No one in the media is concentrating on the last sentence of Trump's remarks. It clarifies his statement beyond all doubt. After saying that maybe the 2nd amendment people could do something, he says, "But that would be a terrible thing". He clearly means it would be a terrible thing if a 2nd amendment person followed his suggestion and shot Clinton. With this statement included, there's no way the Trump people can put the spin on this that it has to do with the election.

Gerarddm
08-10-2016, 10:02 AM
The battle will be for the middle 10%. Perhaps a bit more, it depends on the third party votes.

See my signature. Cathargo delenda est.

biga
08-10-2016, 10:16 AM
One more time, just to remind everybody (emphasis added).

cool quote Keith. here's another one

(18 U.S.C. § 2071)
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

biga
08-10-2016, 10:52 AM
i agree, alluding to assassinations is bad form



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0QAewVrR28

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 10:59 AM
When the best you can do is false equivalence, things don't look good.

biga
08-10-2016, 11:01 AM
When the best you can do is false equivalence, things don't look good.



no comment on the law post keith? but WHY? hahahahhahahaha

false equivalence? not really. they're BOTH lame claims. i just find it funny that depending on how you vote, one is ATROCIOUS and HIGH TREASON and the other is "false equivalence"..

biga
08-10-2016, 11:11 AM
cool quote Keith. here's another one

(18 U.S.C. § 2071)
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.



keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeith!!!


KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEITH!!!!!!!!!

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 11:16 AM
no comment on the law post keith? but WHY? hahahahhahahaha


You talking about the Bush administration of 2007?

biga
08-10-2016, 11:19 AM
You talking about the Bush administration of 2007?



THROW THEM IN JAIL!!!!!!!

but throw ALL of them in jail. do you think i care if you throw all of the Bush family in prison? NOPE. i don't play partisan games when it comes to that stuff. ONE LAW for ALL. now quit being partisan and start calling for hillary to get THROWN IN JAIL or at least barred from holding public office. could that law be ANY MORE CLEAR? by the words out of her OWN MOUTH she deleted those emails. i don't care if they were talking about her afternoon tea party, the DELETION was illegal.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 11:28 AM
Amazing! He's actually arguing that deleting e-mails is equivalent to encouraging armed insurrection. Well, everybody has opinions . . .

ccmanuals
08-10-2016, 11:31 AM
THROW THEM IN JAIL!!!!!!!

but throw ALL of them in jail. do you think i care if you throw all of the Bush family in prison? NOPE. i don't play partisan games when it comes to that stuff. ONE LAW for ALL. now quit being partisan and start calling for hillary to get THROWN IN JAIL or at least barred from holding public office. could that law be ANY MORE CLEAR? by the words out of her OWN MOUTH she deleted those emails. i don't care if they were talking about her afternoon tea party, the DELETION was illegal.

Huh? Deleting emails is illegal?

Amazing

gilberj
08-10-2016, 11:42 AM
I note the trumpsters are trying very hard to divert attention from the statements made by the Dumpster. We have all heard the recording, and each of us can do our best to interpret what he actually meant. What's that old saw about peoples separated by a common language??
Question....How many times will you explain, interpret, suspend judgment, or just pretend he did not really say that before you might tumble to the sad fact the Republican Nominee for emperor has no clothes.
This is not about the perfidious progressives, despicable Democrats, or horrible Hillary. That is a different discussion. FWIW I am not a supporter of Hillary, but if I were American I would volunteer in her campaign to defeat Trump. He is unfit to run a lemonade stand.

biga
08-10-2016, 11:51 AM
Amazing! He's actually arguing that deleting e-mails is equivalent to encouraging armed insurrection. Well, everybody has opinions . . .



wait, are we down to picking and choosing what laws we follow depending on who the suspect is? b/c you're not saying she isn't guilty, just whining that trump isn't in a gulag within 24 hours of making a comment.

hey, if you can charge trump under that law, DO IT.

biga
08-10-2016, 11:56 AM
Huh? Deleting emails is illegal?

Amazing



are you serious? YES it IS. when those emails are government property it is ILLEGAL to not turn them over. read the law associated with it. it's a crime to delete government records. emails are correspondence records

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 11:56 AM
It seems to me that if there was a case to answer, the GOP would have it in front of the courts long since. Have they?


Just asking.;)

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 11:59 AM
Here's the transcript (http://time.com/4445813/donald-trump-second-amendment-speech/). It's truly bizarre to read, more like random free-association than a speech. After reading through lots of it, I'm not 100% convinced he was really advocating violence; it's possible he had no idea at all what he meant by that bit of word salad. He makes Sarah Palin look coherent. I cannot imagine why anyone with an IQ above room temperature would want to elect this guy president, but but there you have it.

The section in question, with a fair bit before and after. The bolded part is what caused all the fuss.


Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick…(CROWD BOOING)

If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know. But — but I’ll tell you what. That will be a horrible day. If — if Hillary gets to put her judges — right now, we’re tied. You see what’s going on.

You see what’s going on? We tied because Scalia – this was not supposed to happen. Justice Scalia was going to be around for ten more years at least and this is what happens. That was a horrible thing.

So now look at it. So Hillary essentially wants to abolish the Second Amendment. Now, speaking to the NRA folks – who are great – when you – when you — and I’ll tell you, they endorsed me. (APPLAUSE)

They endorsed me very early. My son’s a member. I’m a member.
If you – we can add I think the National Rifle Association, we can add the Second Amendment to the Justices – they almost go – in a certain way, hand in hand. Now the Justices are going to do things that are so important and we have such great Justices, you saw my list of 11 that have been vetted and respected. (APPLAUSE)

And have gotten great. And they to a little equate – but if you don’t do the right thing, either you’re not going to have a Second Amendment or you’re not going to have much of it left. And you’re not going to be able to protect yourself, which you need.

You know, when the bad guys burst into your house, they’re not looking about into Second Amendments, and, do I have the right to do this? OK, the bad guys aren’t going to be giving up their weapons.

But the good people will say, “oh, well, that’s the law.” No, no, not going to happen, we can’t let it happen. We can’t let it happen.

Arizona Bay
08-10-2016, 12:02 PM
He makes Palin sound rational.

Tom Wilkinson
08-10-2016, 12:03 PM
are you serious? YES it IS. when those emails are government property it is ILLEGAL to not turn them over. read the law associated with it. it's a crime to delete government records. emails are correspondence records

Is there a reason no one is going after Colin powell then? He freely admits he used a personal email server and can't come up with emails, he doesn't have caches of emails anywhere. He doesn't know if the state department captured them or not. why no uproar? http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-secretary-state-colin-powell/story?id=29463658

It's obviously a partisan attack, if it wasn't then the others that have used them would be investigated also.

hokiefan
08-10-2016, 12:05 PM
He makes Palin sound rational.

Impossible. They're both loony's.

biga
08-10-2016, 12:05 PM
Is there a reason no one is going after Colin powell then? He freely admits he used a personal email server and can't come up with emails, he doesn't have caches of emails anywhere. He doesn't know if the state department captured them or not. why no uproar? http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-secretary-state-colin-powell/story?id=29463658

It's obviously a partisan attack, if it wasn't then the others that have used them would be investigated also.

start the uproar! i don't give a rat's rear if it's colin powell, hillary clinton, or Jesus Christ. you break the laws, you face the penalties.

Tom Wilkinson
08-10-2016, 12:21 PM
start the uproar! i don't give a rat's rear if it's colin powell, hillary clinton, or Jesus Christ. you break the laws, you face the penalties.

But that's exactly the point. They ONLY care if it's Hillary. The precedent was set to use email that way long before her. If they want to cause a stink about it, then do it across the board, otherwise, let it go.

biga
08-10-2016, 12:22 PM
let's throw Biden in prison while we're at it


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqzfd1lcmSI

biga
08-10-2016, 12:25 PM
But that's exactly the point. They ONLY care if it's Hillary. The precedent was set to use email that way long before her. If they want to cause a stink about it, then do it across the board, otherwise, let it go.



when she INTENTIONALLY wiped her server after being asked to turn over her emails... THAT'S the problem. they asked for emails, she DELETES THEM ALL. at the very least she should be denied any sort of classified info certification and be denied any public office. she's not fit to manage a rural post office

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 12:26 PM
Impossible. They're both loony's.

Be fair, Sara might not be the sharpest knife in the box, she did abuse her position in a personal spat, but she is not a loony in the same universe at Trump.

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 12:28 PM
It seems to me that if there was a case to answer, the GOP would have it in front of the courts long since. Have they?


Just asking.;)


when she INTENTIONALLY wiped her server after being asked to turn over her emails... THAT'S the problem. they asked for emails, she DELETES THEM ALL. at the very least she should be denied any sort of classified info certification and be denied any public office. she's not fit to manage a rural post office

Well?

Canoeyawl
08-10-2016, 12:41 PM
email again?

"Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive".

At least eighty-eight Republican National Committee email accounts were granted to senior Bush administration officials, not "just a handful" as previously reported by the White House spokesperson Dana Perino in March 2007. Her estimate was later revised to "about fifty." Officials with accounts included: Karl Rove (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove), the President’s senior advisor; Andrew Card (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Card), the former White House Chief of Staff; Ken Mehlman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Mehlman), the former White House Director of Political Affairs; and many other officials in the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Communications, and the Office of the Vice President.
The RNC has 140,216 emails sent or received by Karl Rove. Over half of these emails (75,374) were sent to or received from individuals using official ".gov" email accounts. Other users of RNC email accounts include former Director of Political Affairs Sara Taylor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Taylor) (66,018 emails) and Deputy Director of Political Affairs Scott Jennings (35,198 emails). These email accounts were used by White House officials for official purposes, such as communicating with federal agencies about federal appointments and policies.
Of the 88 White House officials who received RNC email accounts, the RNC has preserved no emails for 51 officials.
There is evidence that the Office of White House Counsel under Alberto Gonzales (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales) may have known that White House officials were using RNC email accounts for official business, but took no action to preserve these presidential records.
The evidence obtained by the Committee indicates that White House officials used their RNC email accounts in a manner that circumvented these requirements. At this point in the investigation, it is not possible to determine precisely how many presidential records may have been destroyed by the RNC. Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive.

wiki

biga
08-10-2016, 12:43 PM
email again?

"Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive".

At least eighty-eight Republican National Committee email accounts were granted to senior Bush administration officials, not "just a handful" as previously reported by the White House spokesperson Dana Perino in March 2007. Her estimate was later revised to "about fifty." Officials with accounts included: Karl Rove (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove), the President’s senior advisor; Andrew Card (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Card), the former White House Chief of Staff; Ken Mehlman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Mehlman), the former White House Director of Political Affairs; and many other officials in the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Communications, and the Office of the Vice President.
The RNC has 140,216 emails sent or received by Karl Rove. Over half of these emails (75,374) were sent to or received from individuals using official ".gov" email accounts. Other users of RNC email accounts include former Director of Political Affairs Sara Taylor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Taylor) (66,018 emails) and Deputy Director of Political Affairs Scott Jennings (35,198 emails). These email accounts were used by White House officials for official purposes, such as communicating with federal agencies about federal appointments and policies.
Of the 88 White House officials who received RNC email accounts, the RNC has preserved no emails for 51 officials.
There is evidence that the Office of White House Counsel under Alberto Gonzales (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales) may have known that White House officials were using RNC email accounts for official business, but took no action to preserve these presidential records.
The evidence obtained by the Committee indicates that White House officials used their RNC email accounts in a manner that circumvented these requirements. At this point in the investigation, it is not possible to determine precisely how many presidential records may have been destroyed by the RNC. Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive.

wiki

start up the proceedings. these real world flunkies turned government teat sucking lackeys need to be dealt with.

Joe (SoCal)
08-10-2016, 12:46 PM
Some of you missed it. Is there a Bigger Font ?? :D

F.B.I. Director James Comey Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton on Email


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 12:46 PM
start up the proceedings. these real world flunkies turned government teat sucking lackeys need to be dealt with.

Any idea why, nine years on, nothing has happened?

Canoeyawl
08-10-2016, 12:51 PM
start up the proceedings. these real world flunkies turned government teat sucking lackeys need to be dealt with.

That would be Issa, Gowdy, McConnell and that gang eh? A bunch of "teat sucking lackeys"

biga
08-10-2016, 12:52 PM
Any idea why, nine years on, nothing has happened?



if i had to guess, it's insider buddy buddy garbage that also needs to be dealt with.

and i don't give a rat's what COMEY has to say. if you think politics aren't getting in the way of all of that then you're blind, stupid, or both.

Joe (SoCal)
08-10-2016, 12:54 PM
and i don't give a rat's what COMEY has to say. if you think politics aren't getting in the way of all of that then you're blind, stupid, or both.

..... and so ends civil, reasonable dialog.

Foster OUT

Canoeyawl
08-10-2016, 12:57 PM
You always have to be careful when backing rats into a corner.

David G
08-10-2016, 01:03 PM
No... YOU are blind, stupid, and ugly.

No... YOU are.

Well... YOU probably eat your boogers.

No... YOU DO!

Nice job, biga. If you're attempting to be regarded as a crank, that is. And dismissed instead of talked with.

biga
08-10-2016, 01:07 PM
oh, everything was civil before i got here?

dismissal is fine by me, i don't whine and run away when my feelings get hurt... but whatever floats your boat

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 01:09 PM
Oh, it's only that Biga's preferred candidate has stepped in it with both feet, so he's attempting to distract as much as possible, raising as much dust as he can. Best ignore him 'til the fit passes, or Mr. Trump says something even more outrageous which preempts his latest blunder.

gilberj
08-10-2016, 01:14 PM
It seems the trumpsters have managed to hijack this thread away from the Donald and on to Hillary's alleged emails again.
Let me get this straight. Hillary has been investigated and the proper authority has stated there is no case to pursue as a criminal indictment.

The Donald has on the other hand been fairly regularly inciting violence, acting like a petulant 12 year old school-yard bully, pathologically lying to the point that independent fact checkers have difficulty finding clear truths in what he has said.


I like Elizabeth Warren

biga
08-10-2016, 01:15 PM
Oh, it's only that Biga's preferred candidate has stepped in it with both feet, so he's attempting to distract as much as possible, raising as much dust as he can. Best ignore him 'til the fit passes, or Mr. Trump says something even more outrageous which preempts his latest blunder.


distract? nah. his wording was incredibly stupid. but do i think he was ACTUALLY asking someone to MURDER hillary? no, and neither do you, john, tom, or any of the other libs commenting in here. you can say whatever you like, but i would consider you a moron if you actually believed trump intentionally ordered an assassination on live tv.

skuthorp
08-10-2016, 01:16 PM
"It seems the trumpsters have managed to hijack this thread away from the Donald and on to Hillary's alleged emails again."

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTZUhmKh-EdpceUHLs_SSNB-npVYNH7-V3NEXWU_ju7ZVU2_f1YEM0qpw

Peerie Maa
08-10-2016, 01:17 PM
and i don't give a rat's what COMEY has to say.

Can some one please explain to this Englishman what that is about? Never-mind, Google brings enlightenment. The bottom line is that his politics do not align with those of Alan, so he is ipso facto corrupt.

hokiefan
08-10-2016, 01:28 PM
distract? nah. his wording was incredibly stupid. but do i think he was ACTUALLY asking someone to MURDER hillary? no, and neither do you, john, tom, or any of the other libs commenting in here. you can say whatever you like, but i would consider you a moron if you actually believed trump intentionally ordered an assassination on live tv.

I think he very much tried to play to the "2nd amendment remedy" group of loony's amongst his supporters. He walked it right up to the line and blew that dog whistle as hard as he could. Knowing most will defend it as calling for the NRA types to get the vote organized, but also knowing that the loony's will froth at the mouth and lap it up.

biga
08-10-2016, 01:29 PM
Can some one please explain to this Englishman what that is about? Never-mind, Google brings enlightenment. The bottom line is that his politics do not align with those of Alan, so he is ipso facto corrupt.

actually, comey's politics do align with mine for a majority of the sense. but there's some dirty backroom dealings happening with clinton. it's be nice to know what was really going on

hokiefan
08-10-2016, 01:31 PM
actually, comey's politics do align with mine for a majority of the sense. but there's some dirty backroom dealings happening with clinton. it's be nice to know what was really going on

And you just know this somehow?

biga
08-10-2016, 01:31 PM
And you just know this somehow?



when is there NOT dirty backroom dealings in washington?

hokiefan
08-10-2016, 01:35 PM
when is there NOT dirty backroom dealings in washington?

Just about the lack of specific knowledge I expected.

Paul Pless
08-10-2016, 01:38 PM
He makes Sarah Palin look coherent.

you might have missed this


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnIbBNVEkQ4

TomF
08-10-2016, 01:40 PM
I suspect that what was really going on was that there were 2 emails (0.0001% of those reviewed) which were even incompletely designated with the lowest level of security status, and that neither actually revealed anything serious. That there were several further email tracks which included retroactively-designated classified info, for which Clinton could not reasonably be held responsible. This did not amount to anything approaching a threshold of actual wrongdoing or even negligence sufficient to bring charges, or expect anything except a very stern and sharp judicial rebuke of any Justice Department prosecution attempt.

But I think that Comey was also deeply disturbed by the practice of using a private server at all (despite precedent), and felt that doing so was careless. In principle it put security at risk, even if there's no proof that it played out that way in the actual instances. I think, btw, that he's right about that.

In the circumstances, and particularly when Comey also knew that in contrast the "official" servers had in fact been hacked by foreign conspirators, there was nothing to gain from an attempted prosecution. That the meaningful "gain" in terms of risk management was already gained - security practices were changed and enforced, etc.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 01:44 PM
His wording was incredibly stupid. but do i think he was ACTUALLY asking someone to MURDER hillary? No, and neither do you . . .No. I don't think he was seriously asking someone to murder Hillary or anyone else; he was just blathering. He did, as far as one can make any sense of that sentence, speculate about the possibility using violence to stop Clinton from appointing judges, which violates all kinds of important political norms. The problem is that there are people who may take him seriously His speeches resemble some not-too-bright guy in a bar after three or four beers.

Osborne Russell
08-10-2016, 01:44 PM
No one in the media is concentrating on the last sentence of Trump's remarks. It clarifies his statement beyond all doubt. After saying that maybe the 2nd amendment people could do something, he says, "But that would be a terrible thing". He clearly means it would be a terrible thing if a 2nd amendment person followed his suggestion and shot Clinton. With this statement included, there's no way the Trump people can put the spin on this that it has to do with the election.

Excellent point.

Those words, plus the nudge nudge wink wink, remove all ambiguity.

Keith Wilson
08-10-2016, 01:48 PM
The exact quote (source (http://time.com/4445813/donald-trump-second-amendment-speech/)):
Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick…(CROWD BOOING)

If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know. But — but I’ll tell you what. That will be a horrible day. If — if Hillary gets to put her judges — right now, we’re tied. You see what’s going on.

You see what’s going on? We tied because Scalia – this was not supposed to happen. Justice Scalia was going to be around for ten more years at least and this is what happens. That was a horrible thing.It's not at all clear if "that will be a horrible day" refers to somebody getting shot, or Hillary getting to appoint judges. I think it's more likely the latter. The problem is that we're trying to parse semi-coherent stream-of-consciousness rambling, with very little thought behind it.

TomF
08-10-2016, 01:49 PM
you might have missed this


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnIbBNVEkQ4Why did you do that? How did I offend you?

Chip-skiff
08-10-2016, 02:01 PM
At this point, the GOP campaign might choose a new theme song: Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit.

Load up on guns
Bring your friends
It's fun to lose and to pretend
She's overboard, self assured
Oh no I know, a dirty word

Hello, hello, hello, how low [x3]
Hello, hello, hello
With the lights out, it's less dangerous
Here we are now, entertain us
I feel stupid and contagious
Here we are now, entertain us

Paul Pless
08-10-2016, 02:04 PM
perfect choice chip

Rich Jones
08-10-2016, 02:15 PM
The exact quote (source (http://time.com/4445813/donald-trump-second-amendment-speech/)):It's not at all clear if "that will be a horrible day" refers to somebody getting shot, or Hillary getting to appoint judges. I think it's more likely the latter. The problem is that we're trying to parse semi-coherent stream-of-consciousness rambling, with very little thought behind it. I'll agree with that. The film clip I saw was cut off after he says, "That would be a horrible day".

Arizona Bay
08-10-2016, 02:25 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/508960761826131968/LnvhR8ED_bigger.pngCNN ‏@CNN (https://twitter.com/CNN) 24m24 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/CNN/status/763449692810309633)
The US Secret Service has spoken to the Trump campaign about his Second Amendment comment http://cnn.it/2aM6Rtw (https://t.co/oX5zc5vCnJ)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CphRVqLWgAEVs-P.jpg

(CNN)A US Secret Service official confirms to CNN that the USSS has spoken to the Trump campaign regarding his Second Amendment comments.

"There has been more than one conversation" on the topic, the official told CNN.







~~Maybe some "enhanced" techniques are called for....

biga
08-10-2016, 02:45 PM
hahahha

oznabrag
08-10-2016, 03:02 PM
"Losing to a girl . . . "

Will Rachel Maddow say this was "creepy"?

I certainly hope so.


distract? nah. his wording was incredibly stupid. but do i think he was ACTUALLY asking someone to MURDER hillary? no, and neither do you, john, tom, or any of the other libs commenting in here. you can say whatever you like, but i would consider you a moron if you actually believed trump intentionally ordered an assassination on live tv.

You REALLY oughtta check out this thread. (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?210582-Stochastic-Terrorism&p=4974434#post4974434)

He wasn't actually asking someone to murder Hillary, he was suggesting that some, anonymous, unpredictable one OUGHT to murder Hillary.


VERY SICK, TWISTED, AMORAL rat****er you're backing there, bub.

I will tell you this, however. I read a good bit of the speech this controversy (Jesus Christ. I can NOT believe that this lowlife's actual fitness to be President is a point of CONTROVERSY!), but I read a good bit of it, and he is definitely hitting all the right notes.

He is identifying legitimate points of complaint.

The trouble is that he is just using those points to manipulate people into voting for him.

To call him an amoral swindler of a used-car salesman is a reprehensible libel against the character of crooked used car salesmen everywhere.

gilberj
08-10-2016, 03:56 PM
distract? nah. his wording was incredibly stupid. but do i think he was ACTUALLY asking someone to MURDER hillary? no, and neither do you, john, tom, or any of the other libs commenting in here. you can say whatever you like, but i would consider you a moron if you actually believed trump intentionally ordered an assassination on live tv.

I am not sure it was just stupid, or calculated. His defense is plausible ...sort of. Unfortunately there are just enough really seriously sick wing-nuts in the target crowd (it only takes one and I am sure there are many more than one) that it is a real possibility that the germ of an idea is planted. We all know those people exist there, so to even make a vague suggestion as he did is at least criminally bad judgment. If there is an assassination attempt, successful or not on Hillary after this, they should reopen this in a Criminal Prosecution.
On the subject of criminally bad judgment, do you really want that person leading your country?
The very thought buggers the imagination....

skuthorp
08-10-2016, 04:02 PM
Reports here say the Secret Service has had 'several conversations' wit Trumps campaign managers. I wonder if they've had a conversation with Trump? Trump say they never happened.
If anyone else outside the candidate had said that would they still be on the street?

Arizona Bay
08-10-2016, 04:16 PM
This is nonsense when about 99% of the violence we have seen in the campaigns has been left wing fascists infringing on the first amendment rights of the Donald Trump supporters.

To add, Trump's meaning was quite clear to his supporters.

Saved for the otherworldliness of the statement.... Wow!

Tom Wilkinson
08-10-2016, 04:27 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/08/09/the-gop-must-dump-trump/?utm_term=.7ce1968b6af2

gilberj
08-10-2016, 04:29 PM
left wing fascists??? cool that picks up just about everyone

oznabrag
08-10-2016, 04:29 PM
This is nonsense . . .

This is not nonsense, but well-documented, scientific fact.

hokiefan
08-10-2016, 04:30 PM
This is nonsense when about 99% of the violence we have seen in the campaigns has been left wing fascists infringing on the first amendment rights of the Donald Trump supporters.

To add, Trump's meaning was quite clear to his supporters.

Yep, quite clear. It is amazing how he could use the same words to provide one message for the majority of his supporters and another message for the lunatics. Remarkable.

Cheers,

Bobby

johnw
08-10-2016, 06:47 PM
Yep, quite clear. It is amazing how he could use the same words to provide one message for the majority of his supporters and another message for the lunatics. Remarkable.

Cheers,

Bobby

Yes, his meaning was that it's quite acceptable to talk about violence against his opponents. Here's an article about why the "Just joking" defense doesn't work:

http://www.vox.com/2016/8/9/12417100/donald-trump-assassinate-hillary-clinton-joke

ccmanuals
08-10-2016, 07:03 PM
are you serious? YES it IS. when those emails are government property it is ILLEGAL to not turn them over. read the law associated with it. it's a crime to delete government records. emails are correspondence records

You have no idea what you are talking about.

skuthorp
08-10-2016, 09:38 PM
Clutching at straws. Of course if the GOP had managed to field and support a decent candidate then Hill. might have a problem.

David G
08-10-2016, 10:17 PM
There's actually a term for it, apparently: Stochastic Terrorism --

http://bluenationreview.com/trumps-violent-incitement-against-hillary-stochastic-terrorism/

David G
08-10-2016, 10:25 PM
It gets better and better. Now Trump says the Secret Service is lying about the incident --

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/08/10/donald-trump-calling-secret-service-bunch-liars.html

ShagRock
08-11-2016, 01:22 AM
It gets better and better. Now Trump says the Secret Service is lying about the incident --
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/08/10/donald-trump-calling-secret-service-bunch-liars.html

I suppose you haven't considered the possibility that you don't have an 'inside' clue what's really going on?

skuthorp
08-11-2016, 05:04 AM
My reading was that they had talked to his organisation, not him.
They have to be absolute sticklers for protocol the speaker being who he is, whereas if it was just any Joe he'd likely be a deep custody now.

Chris Coose
08-11-2016, 05:29 AM
The agents protecting Trump should walk off the job.

doorstop
08-11-2016, 05:38 AM
It seems that the rest of the planet could be in deep merde should you folk get the T Rump for POTUS..

brucemoffatt
08-11-2016, 07:30 AM
It seems that the rest of the planet could be in deep merde should you folk get the T Rump for POTUS..
I'm not so sure. I'm concerned, but I think that it's pretty likely that risk assessments are continually being done back-of-house, and that if a clear and present risk to US national security is presented that actions might be taken to ameliorate the risk-causing factor. Depending on which conspiracy theories you subscribe to, it wouldn't be the first time. Anyway, I wouldn't be happy to be standing near the orange one if he wins, and if he continues to divide and inflame extreme elements of the population.

sent from my nerdy phone app

David G
08-11-2016, 08:50 AM
I suppose you haven't considered the possibility that you don't have an 'inside' clue what's really going on?

Ummmm... maybe? There are certainly times I have no clue. Like I have no clue what you're getting at. Care to rephrase?

C. Ross
08-11-2016, 10:15 AM
Mr. Trump tweeted last night that Reuters reports the Secret Service did not have a conversation with him about these remarks.

So we now have two Presidential candidates for whom good news counts as "I wasn't indicted" and "The Secret Service doesn't have me on their watch list".

Next, both will announce they are NOT cannibals, satanists, or meth dealers. Perhaps this will help with their likeability problems.

johnw
08-11-2016, 02:20 PM
Mr. Trump tweeted last night that Reuters reports the Secret Service did not have a conversation with him about these remarks.

So we now have two Presidential candidates for whom good news counts as "I wasn't indicted" and "The Secret Service doesn't have me on their watch list".

Next, both will announce they are NOT cannibals, satanists, or meth dealers. Perhaps this will help with their likeability problems.

Remember when Edward Edwards ran against David Duke? The unofficial slogan was, "Vote for the crook. It's important."

LeeG
08-11-2016, 02:31 PM
The exact quote (source (http://time.com/4445813/donald-trump-second-amendment-speech/)):It's not at all clear if "that will be a horrible day" refers to somebody getting shot, or Hillary getting to appoint judges. I think it's more likely the latter. The problem is that we're trying to parse semi-coherent stream-of-consciousness rambling, with very little thought behind it.

This is a clue to his popularity as an avatar for the low information voter fed a diet of stimulating sound bytes. It really is how some people think.

Osborne Russell
08-11-2016, 02:45 PM
My wife says it's salesman talk. "I can go 200 but 300 would be better because you get B and C for less than you would if purchased separately, so we'll do it for 350."

What has he offered? Confusing? Intentionally so. Anyway, You come away thinking the deal went your way.

If you agree to their offer, for now they can say, Hillary getting to appoint judges is what we're talking about. When violence comes, they can say America was deaf to their warnings.

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 02:46 PM
This is a clue to his popularity as an avatar for the low information voter fed a diet of stimulating sound bytes. It really is how some people think.And THAT's one of the scarier things I've heard lately. It was almost painful to read that transcript, it was so totally disconnected, incoherent, and poorly thought out. Well, half the population has below-average intelligence . . .

John of Phoenix
08-11-2016, 03:45 PM
Who cares what these psychotic reds say here. The FRIKIN' US Secret Service called his ass on it.

Get the message Donnie?

LeeG
08-11-2016, 04:02 PM
And THAT's one of the scarier things I've heard lately. It was almost painful to read that transcript, it was so totally disconnected, incoherent, and poorly thought out. Well, half the population has below-average intelligence . . .

I don't think it's intelligence as much as when an issue or event where one has very little control over, the economy, global warming, inability to carry as much debt, wars, it's simply easier to let ones mind go unfocused and let sloppy associative reasoning and emotional responses rule.

StevenBauer
08-11-2016, 04:14 PM
Is there a thread on trump calling President Obama the founder of ISIS or can we just lump all of his latest wacky statements here in this thread?

C. Ross
08-11-2016, 04:23 PM
Is there a thread on trump calling President Obama the founder of ISIS or can we just lump all of his latest wacky statements here in this thread?

You have your pick. I started the "No more Mr. Nice Guy" thread as a collector for evidence that Mr. Trump, well, isn't a nice guy. I'd say accusing the U.S. President of forming an ultra-violent radical Islamic sect is not nice.

Kevin T
08-11-2016, 04:29 PM
Maybe this thread can be catch all.

In the end though I feel it is a lost cause in trying to convince anyone in the Trump camp that such incoherent speech is a clear and present danger to the Republic.

It's not like 50 former Republican security pros wrote a letter denouncing him because they had nothing better to do that day, so instead of going to the beach they outlined the problems he would cause. But yet, people still flock to him. :-(

LeeG
08-11-2016, 04:44 PM
Is there a thread on trump calling President Obama the founder of ISIS or can we just lump all of his latest wacky statements here in this thread?

That was a doozy

Ian McColgin
08-11-2016, 04:45 PM
Trump and his apologists keep trying to say that second amendment fanatics can do something about Clinton appointing a supreme court judge and now they are saying that it's political, they can be voting. But Trump and his followers know that's flat false - If Clinton is in a position to appoint a supreme court judge that means that she won in November and that Democrats won enough Senate campaigns that they can get the nomination through. At that point, as Trump knew and meant when he spoke, the voting bit is over. But as usual in so many things from his birther spouts to this, he tries a smarmey 'aw shucks' evasion. Won't wash. Trump's calls to hatred and violence are not even a dog whistle anymore. He's loud an clear.

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 04:46 PM
I'd say accusing the U.S. President of forming an ultra-violent radical Islamic sect is not nice.Ya think? Not burdened with an excess of scruples, is he? :D

FWIW, here's the latest cover of Time magazine. There's some indication that South Carolina might even go for Clinton. South Carolina!

http://size.blogspirit.net/blogs.ouest-france.fr/international/400/media/01/00/467638146.jpg

switters
08-11-2016, 05:00 PM
The agents protecting Trump should walk off the job.

So does this mean what progressives think it means when trump says it?

hokiefan
08-11-2016, 05:25 PM
Reagan's daughter Patty Davis clearly believes that what Trump said could easily incite violence from the crazies.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/ronald-reagans-daughter-blasts-trumps-verbal-violence/story?id=41292972

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 07:14 PM
You want to explain how Barack Obama and Hillary Clnton are "the founders of ISIS"? :d They also sank the Titanic, kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, shot John Kennedy, lost China to the Communists, blew up the dam that caused the Johnstown flood, ate the last of the chocolate ice dream in the freezer, and flew the planes into the Word Trade Center

Hugh Conway
08-11-2016, 07:23 PM
You want to explain how Barack Obama and Hillary Clnton are "the founders of ISIS"? :d They also sank the Titanic, kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, shot John Kennedy, lost China to the Communists, blew up the dam that caused the Johnstown flood, ate the last of the chocolate ice dream in the freezer, and flew the planes into the Word Trade Center

Sorry - point of order. Ted Cruz's dad shot JFK. |;)

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 07:25 PM
Sorry - point of order. Ted Cruz's dad shot JFK. |;)Oh, right. So did Obama shoot Martin Luther King, or Bobby Kennedy? Or was it Hillary? I can never keep these things straight.

Hugh Conway
08-11-2016, 07:27 PM
Oh, right. So did Obama shoot Martin Luther King, or Bobby Kennedy? Or was it Hillary? I can never keep these things straight.

El Douche will have to schedule a meeting with Elvis in the Piggly-Wiggly frozen foods section - Aisle 23 - Frozen Bananas - to let us know.

Arizona Bay
08-11-2016, 07:44 PM
"Always lie as forcefully as you can"... El Douche

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 07:49 PM
I really don't care what they get blamed for as long as Hillary loses. But I will say, Trump is stating the issue as strong as he can and to hell with the press. Right! To hell with the press, to hell with truth, to hell with honesty, to hell with sanity even. Did you know that Obama caused Hurricane Katrina to make Bush look bad and improve his election chances? And hey, how about this one?

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/55efd193e4b0fe570119ac34/t/573c2c00a3360cdc73fdff22/1463561225622/

oznabrag
08-11-2016, 09:39 PM
Bunch of nonsense Keith.

How can you tell?

Arizona Bay
08-11-2016, 09:47 PM
http://i.imgur.com/DCmZ4t7.png

Keith Wilson
08-11-2016, 09:49 PM
Bunch of nonsense Keith.Of course it is; that's the point, just like Obama founding ISIS. Did you know that Hillary Clinton was actually the Boston Strangler?

gilberj
08-12-2016, 12:17 AM
I'll ask again.... when do you stop trying to be an apologist for the Trump. When do you stop trying to explain what he said.
I totally get the anti-Hillary sentiment. What I don't get is the blind support for this twit.

Peerie Maa
08-12-2016, 03:40 AM
Here are 70 Republicans who think he has.

More than 70 Republicans have signed a letter to the party's National Committee head urging him to stop helping Donald Trump's campaign.
They said Mr Trump's "divisiveness" and "incompetence" risked drowning the party in November's election.
The letter said that the party should instead focus on protecting vulnerable candidates in elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Former members of Congress are among the signatories of the letter.

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37055398

WX
08-12-2016, 05:03 AM
Of course it is; that's the point, just like Obama founding ISIS. Did you know that Hillary Clinton was actually the Boston Strangler?

I heard she teamed up with Elvis and kidnapped JFK.

Kevin T
08-12-2016, 07:24 AM
Currently (8:00 AM Friday, 8/12) this lunatic after two straight days of absolutely claiming that Mrs Clinton and President Obama are the founders of ISIS, and not founders in the sense that some kind of vacuum was created and ISIS was formed, he said last night that they were actual founders.

Now he sees that the press is crucifying him on this utter nonsense on the heels of the Hillary and a 2a remedy nonsense, he tweets CNN that it was all sarcasm. He (DT) must believe American voters are maroons and will believe anything, maybe he's right as there are a number of DT supporters right here who vociferously defend him. Although to be fair the defense is never substantiative, it is only defense framed around "Hillary is bad" because I've yet to see any actual real policy plans his administration would champion and promote.

Trump bumper stickers are now a signifier that the operator of the particular vehicle should be given a wide birth as drivers of those cars do not have the mental horsepower to operate anything with real horsepower. A one and a half horsepower Briggs and Stratton lawnmower might even be too much for them. Use extreme caution when encountering these maroons.

skuthorp
08-12-2016, 07:34 AM
Beyond parody really, as the parody is the reality.

C. Ross
08-12-2016, 07:50 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1980294624/DJT_Headshot_V2_reasonably_small.jpg (https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)
Donald J. Trump– http://forum.woodenboat.com/image/gif;base64,R0lGODlhBQAGAIAAAP///////yH5BAEKAAEALAAAAAAFAAYAAAIFjI pawUAOw==Verified account ‏@realDonaldTrump (https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)

http://forum.woodenboat.com/image/gif;base64,R0lGODlhDQAMAIAAAP///////yH5BAEKAAEALAAAAAANAAwAAAILjI py 0Po5y0ngIAOw==


I love watching these poor, pathetic people (pundits) on television working so hard and so seriously to try and figure me out. They can't!
4:43 AM - 12 Aug 2016
2,623 RETWEETS7,112 LIKES

This is indeed the Real Donald Trump. Sickening exhibitionist self-pleasuring.

His legacy will be "don't be such a Trump". If in doubt, act, feel and speak exactly opposite of what Trump would do.

skuthorp
08-12-2016, 08:25 AM
I have suggested on my own modest thread that one of the options is that he is having you all on. Not just the GOP in particular having been such a fat target, but the whole US electoral system.

biga
08-12-2016, 08:47 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw

mmd
08-12-2016, 08:54 AM
Yup. I remember watching that boondoggle develop in real time. HRC summed it up pretty concisely - the American war-by-proxy with the USSR had unintended consequences that have now come back to haunt all Westerners.

Keith Wilson
08-12-2016, 09:02 AM
His legacy will be "don't be such a Trump". If in doubt, act, feel and speak exactly opposite of what Trump would do.Amen! Now that is a meme worth spreading. I'll start using that one. Y>

biga
08-12-2016, 09:05 AM
Yup. I remember watching that boondoggle develop in real time. HRC summed it up pretty concisely - the American war-by-proxy with the USSR had unintended consequences that have now come back to haunt all Westerners.



indeed. and the same crap has only continued since then. clinton, bush, obama... all furthering the stupid middle eastern games. you're only getting more of it if we get hillary.

John of Phoenix
08-12-2016, 09:08 AM
His legacy will be "don't be such a Trump".

Absolutely love it!

Keith Wilson
08-12-2016, 09:40 AM
Indeed. and the same crap has only continued since then. Clinton, Bush,Obama... all furthering the stupid Middle Eastern games. you're only getting more of it if we get Hillary.Have you actually listened to him? His major complaint is that we haven't been aggressive enough! You want less of that, don't vote for him.

Dude, don't be such a Trump! :D

biga
08-12-2016, 09:52 AM
hey, at least trump is on record for being against all of these middle east wars and crap. hillary is on record for wanting to blow iran off the map.

Keith Wilson
08-12-2016, 09:59 AM
Oh, don't be such a trump. He's on record being for and against them all. These days he's beating his chest and talking about how he'll squash ISIS like a bug (and how Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama founded it) - until tomorrow, when he'll say something different, or that he was only kidding.

ccmanuals
08-12-2016, 11:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqn0bm4E9yw

About time someone called out Reagan for this mess. Good one Hillary.

biga
08-12-2016, 12:27 PM
man, that trump is CRAZY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2NkjNvwuaU

Osborne Russell
08-12-2016, 12:32 PM
Is there a difference between causing something unwittingly, versus causing it intentionally?

biga
08-12-2016, 12:37 PM
Is there a difference between causing something unwittingly, versus causing it intentionally?



well, i think we all know what trump was saying. he's claiming the policies and strategies of clinton and obama allowed for ISIS to evolve. and i believe that's a VERY legitimate argument to make. but the anti-trumpers ramble on saying he means clinton and obama sit down with them and work out suicide bombing plots.

Keith Wilson
08-12-2016, 12:51 PM
Well, I think we all know what trump was saying. he's claiming the policies and strategies of Clinton and Obama allowed for ISIS to evolve.That would be a halfway reasonable argument, although I'd mostly disagree. But he specifically said that was not what he was saying. He said he meant it literally. The person interviewing him tried to steer him over to the interpretation you suggested; he wouldn't go there. Now I don't know whether he believes his own schtick or not, and I don't know which would be worse.

gilberj
08-12-2016, 01:13 PM
Trump stood by his original statement. He said "founded"........ that is an intentional act.
To suggest that ISIL is an unintentional consequence of past policies in the region is reasonable. That is not what he did.
As Hillary said in that old clip it all goes back to Ronald Reagan through two Bushes and Bill Clinton and now Obama.
Quit trying to interpret for us the silly things that twit says. He will shoot you down as quickly as he shoots at Obama and Hillary....as he in fact did this time.

Osborne Russell
08-12-2016, 01:24 PM
Mr. Trump is not a politician and so cannot be expected to differentiate "caused" from "founded". Stuff like that may be important to politicians, like when they go into the foreign world and try to get all those pesky people to behave. Important thing, he speaks for those who don't differentiate, and on that basis have been disenfranchised from politics. Only a non-politician can do it . . . and only one, of them.

Daniel Noyes
08-12-2016, 01:31 PM
That would be a halfway reasonable argument, although I'd mostly disagree. But he specifically said that was not what he was saying. He said he meant it literally. The person interviewing him tried to steer him over to the interpretation you suggested; he wouldn't go there. Now I don't know whether he believes his own schtick or not, and I don't know which would be worse.


don't be such a Trump! :)

Why wont people Give Obama his due and give him crdeit for something??? Now the Lefties are trying to take credit away from Obama for "Founding " ISIS... Obama made ISIS (ISIL) possible! with out him they would be NOTHING

dude... this poor President cant catch a Brexit!

Keith Wilson
08-12-2016, 01:32 PM
Where's that special sarcasm font when you need it? Maybe we should have a rule that you have to use Times New Roman when being sarcastic?

johnw
08-12-2016, 02:17 PM
Mr. Trump is not a politician and so cannot be expected to differentiate "caused" from "founded". Stuff like that may be important to politicians, like when they go into the foreign world and try to get all those pesky people to behave. Important thing, he speaks for those who don't differentiate, and on that basis have been disenfranchised from politics. Only a non-politician can do it . . . and only one, of them.

Times new Roman, I take it?

Rum_Pirate
08-24-2016, 07:47 AM
The agents protecting Trump should walk off the job.


If you believe that you sink to his level.

As an aside, IF agents protecting Trump did walk off the job and leave that Presidential candidate without security who would attack and possibly kill him? A Republican, a Tea party member, a Libertarian, a Democrat, other?

S/V Laura Ellen
08-24-2016, 09:02 AM
Where's that special sarcasm font when you need it? Maybe we should have a rule that you have to use Times New Roman when being sarcastic?

Wouldn't comic sans be more appropriate?

Dan McCosh
08-24-2016, 09:05 AM
You want to explain how Barack Obama and Hillary Clnton are "the founders of ISIS"? :d They also sank the Titanic, kidnapped the Lindbergh baby, shot John Kennedy, lost China to the Communists, blew up the dam that caused the Johnstown flood, ate the last of the chocolate ice dream in the freezer, and flew the planes into the Word Trade Center Well, remember Cruz conspired to kill JFK.

David G
08-24-2016, 11:59 AM
https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s526x395/13625377_1150793591648250_6720884740471022017_n.jp g?oh=f6b0790a406d42ae6d87bff8f06e3cbb&oe=58518C3F