US Election: 2016

[Rocky Mountains]

All we have on Trump are "words".

Subject to main stream media interpretation as required for the Democratic Party narrative.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I would say that not many of the candidates on either side were very outstanding.

However, all we have to judge Trump on are "words".  The opposite is true of Clinton, where she can be judged on her "actions".  She has proven to be all that some have claimed, with her lies/falsehoods about her trip to Bosnia, her actions in reference to Libya and Benghazi, and so on.  All we have on Trump are "words".

"Just words"?  Really? 

Do the words not reveal the thoughts and intent?  Or are you saying he is LyingTrump, and that his words are not true?  That he can not be trusted to speak the truth about his thoughts and intent?  That we should judge him solely on his actions as a business man (which will, to be fair, not be all positive)?

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Subject to main stream media interpretation as required for the Democratic Party narrative.

Do you mean "interpretation" like this?

Donald Trump was given an opportunity to clean up his assertion that President Obama is the “founder of ISIS” on Thursday… and he declined.

Right-wing radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Trump on Thursday if he meant that Obama founded ISIS metaphorically — that is, because he pulled out of Iraq, it created a power vacuum that was filled by ISIS.

“No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS,” was Trump’s reply.

Those MSM scoundrels sure did interpret all of the truthiness out of that statement by Mr Trump....oh wait - they merely quoted his response to a direct question.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

I would say that not many of the candidates on either side were very outstanding.

However, all we have to judge Trump on are "words".  The opposite is true of Clinton, where she can be judged on her "actions".  She has proven to be all that some have claimed, with her lies/falsehoods about her trip to Bosnia, her actions in reference to Libya and Benghazi, and so on.  All we have on Trump are "words".

The Benghazi incidents that she was cleared of wrongdoing on? 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/21/mike-pence/mike-pences-false-claim-about-clintons-role-and-re/

 

[George Wallace]

Do you mean "interpretation" like this?

Those MSM scoundrels sure did interpret all of the truthiness out of that statement by Mr Trump....oh wait - they merely quoted his response to a direct question.

But.....

Trump tweeted Friday morning that the media was missing his sarcasm.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/12/politics/donald-trump-obama-clinton-isis-founder-sarcasm/

>

 

[George Wallace]

I must admit;  I sure am glad that I am not an American voter trying to decide between these two. 

 

[PPCLI Guy]

But..... http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/12/politics/donald-trump-obama-clinton-isis-founder-sarcasm/

You buy that?

If you were to look at this issue as an Intelligence Operator, what credibility would you assign to that statement?

Note that I am not touting either candidate - merely questioning the strength of various arguments.  It seems that objectivity is not an easy thing to find in the political arena.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Whoops!  Missed the emoticon!

Many apologies Mr Wallace.

:-[

 

[George Wallace]

Whoops!  Missed the emoticon!

Many apologies Mr Wallace.

:-[

Not a problem.  You know me.....I am quite capable of stepping on my

But I really am glad that I have no legal standing or stake in making a decision that will have some sort of outcome as who becomes one of the most powerful people in the world.  The options are scary.  Interesting times.

 

[George Wallace]

F6

F6 for the majority of the crap being posted.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... Hillary admitting they fostered Al Qaeda is a stretch ...

I'm not saying Hillary didn't say that.  The "we" she's mentioning in your YouTube link sounds like more than JUST the Democrats - she could just as easily mean "the U.S. helped create AQ."  The program to fund anti-Soviet groups in AFG started with this guy after the Soviet invasion ...

... and they picked up speed under this guy:

"We helped create AQ" doesn't ONLY mean "The Democrats helped create AQ".

We can guess what we'd see if she now says "in hindsight, maybe we shouldn't have funded some anti-Soviet fighters", right?

 

[The Bread Guy]

But..... http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/12/politics/donald-trump-obama-clinton-isis-founder-sarcasm/

>

Am I the only one seeing him channel Joe Pesci in the first part of this clip?  >

 

[cupper]

I must admit;  I sure am glad that I am not an American voter trying to decide between these two.

Me too. I can just sit back and watch all the fun. op:

 

[cupper]

Speaking of voter fraud....

Trump's latest conspiracy strategy is to mobilize supporters to act as poll watchers to make sure the Dems don't steal the election.

Yeah, like that's not going to creat problems on election day.

Trump: I'll Only Lose With 'Cheating,' Asks Supporters To Watch Polling Places

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/13/489889496/trump-calls-to-stake-out-polling-places

Politicians often urge supporters to get out and vote. But Donald Trump wants them to go further: get out and vote, and then stake out polling places to watch for cheating.

At a Friday campaign event in Altoona, Penn., the Republican presidential nominee said voting might not be enough for him to win.

"The only way we can lose in my opinion — I really mean this — in Pennsylvania, is if cheating goes on," Trump said. "We have to call up law enforcement. And we have to have the sheriffs and the police chiefs and everybody watching."

He wanted the voters themselves to get involved as well.

"I hope you people can sort of not just vote on the 8th, go around and look and watch other polling places, and make sure that it's 100 percent fine," Trump said.

These weren't just off-the-cuff remarks for Trump. On his campaign website, you can sign up to "volunteer to be a Trump election observer."

Critics have decried his call to voters as voter intimidation, which is illegal.

If his remarks are found to be voter intimidation and if Trump is deemed an agent of the Republican National Committee, it would also violate a consent decree banning the RNC from such activity.

That decree, which has been in place since 1982, was ordered in response to claims of voter intimidation against minorities in the 1970s and 80s, according to Politico's Josh Gerstein.

The consent decree states that the RNC must "refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision" to monitor those areas.

It allows normal poll watching, like rallying supporters to vote, but not anything aimed at voter suppression, like posting armed guards at polling locations or questioning people in an intimidating way before they vote.

"It's possible Trump is trying to use this as a fundraising ploy to get people's names," says Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine. "If that's what this is, I'd be relieved, but he's playing with fire here."

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the RNC's plea to remove the decree in 2013, but added an expiration date of Dec. 1, 2017. If Trump is violating the decree, the DNC could ask for an extension of up to eight years, according to Hasen.

Trump spokesman Jason Miller says claims that volunteer poll observers could be a form of voter intimidation are unfounded.

"To be clear, liberals love to throw out the voter intimidation card. What we're advocating are open, fair and honest elections," Miller said in a statement to NPR's Sarah McCammon.

He also added that poll watchers are "standard for professional campaigns" and pointed out poll watcher guides from around the country, including New York and Texas.

In his statement to NPR, Miller echoed Trump's concerns about a "rigged system."

"As we've seen from Crooked Hillary's willingness to use - and outright lie about - government institutions for personal and political enrichment, there's a lot of cheating going on," Miller said.

It's notable that Trump made these remarks in Pennsylvania. It's a key state he'll need to win in November, but Hillary Clinton has a big lead over Trump there. And according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, Trump is getting zero percent of the black vote in the state.

Pennsylvania also notably struck down a voter ID law in 2014, a fact that Trump said was "shocking" in his Friday speech.

Voter ID laws have long been criticized as a masked strategy to discourage minorities from voting. Last month, a federal appeals court threw out a voter ID law in North Carolina that, as Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote, targets "African-Americans with almost surgical precision."

Trump's suggestion that the election will be rigged is one he keeps making, even though proven cases of voter fraud are actually very rare. As of 2014, a law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who has spent years tracking fraud allegations had found only 31 instances of voter fraud out of more than one billion votes cast.

In the absence of a Pennsylvania ID law that might deter certain voters, Trump's call to action could be seen as another strategy to deter voters: voter intimidation.

And unlike voter fraud, voter intimidation has been a problem historically. It's what the RNC consent decree is trying to prevent, and it's not restricted to the GOP either. During the 2008 election in Philadelphia, two members of the New Black Panther Movement were charged with voter intimidation after they stationed themselves outside of polling locations. The Department of Justice later dropped the case, which led to criticism that the Obama administration was unwilling to prosecute the black men for civil rights violations.

At the very least Trump is setting up a case to argue for legal action should the outcome on Nov. 8th not be in his favour. At worst this creats an atmosphere as bad or worse than the claims of illegitimacy that have dogged Obama through his 8 years.

 

[FJAG]

Speaking of voter fraud....

Trump's latest conspiracy strategy is to mobilize supporters to act as poll watchers to make sure the Dems don't steal the election.

Yeah, like that's not going to creat problems on election day.

Trump: I'll Only Lose With 'Cheating,' Asks Supporters To Watch Polling Places

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/13/489889496/trump-calls-to-stake-out-polling-places

At the very least Trump is setting up a case to argue for legal action should the outcome on znov. 8th not be in his favour. At worst this creats an atmosphere as bad or worse than the claims of illegitimacy that have dogged Obama through his 8 years.

I can already see rag tag crews of the 2nd Amendment people exercising their AR15 open carry rights at the poling booths.  aranoid:

:cheers:

 

[Rocky Mountains]

I can already see rag tag crews of the 2nd Amendment people exercising their AR15 open carry rights at the poling booths.

Or you might see scrutineers like in every Canadian election.

If state law allows open carry at particular polling places, why not?  Rag tag?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I can already see rag tag crews of the 2nd Amendment people exercising their AR15 open carry rights at the poling booths.  aranoid:

:cheers:

Most US polling stations do not allow open carry. Most polling stations are in schools, government buildings and churches. The majority of these are 'no gun zones'.

No matter the Canadian thoughts on it, the Second Amendment gives them the right. If people in the US wish to exercise that right, free and legal, why shouldn't they? Not everyone gets paranoid at the sight of a firearm. The idea of picking and choosing which part of the Constitution and Amendments is allowed and which is not (Free speech vs right to bear arms). They both carry the same weight. You can't maintain the First by discounting the Second.

 

[tomahawk6]

I can already see rag tag crews of the 2nd Amendment people exercising their AR15 open carry rights at the poling booths.  aranoid:

:cheers:

Dont forget the Democrat poll watchers from the Black Panthers.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/6/problems-black-panthers-surface-pa-polling-places/

 

[muskrat89]

No matter the Canadian thoughts on it, the Second Amendment gives them the right.

Ahhh... the old days when it was Americans who were the arrogant ones...

 

[cupper]

Ok, when your spokesperson is this stupid, and you continue to let her spout Palinesque drivel, what does that say about your campaign?



Trump spokeswoman: Afghanistan was 'Obama’s war

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-spokeswoman-afghanistan-was-obamas-war-226983

Donald Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson on Saturday morning said the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was "Obama's war."

During an interview with CNN's Victor Blackwell, Pierson was asked about the GOP nominee's comments on President Barack Obama as the founder of ISIS, and if they were sarcastic, as Trump had subsequently claimed.

Pierson said it was up to the interpreter, but that Trump didn't mean Obama or Clinton founded ISIS in the literal sense, "they didn't file the paperwork of incorporation," she said.

"If you want to go way back, we can look at the troop surge. And after 2007, al Qaeda was essentially in ashes,” she said. “It was Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton who then destroyed the entire rollout by wanting to pull out early, announcing their plans, ignoring intelligence and that is the reason why ISIS is a global issue and not a ...”

Blackwell interrupted Pierson, asking if she said “Barack Obama in 2004."

She replied no, and added: “I said afterwards. After the surge when al Qaeda was in ashes. Entering Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — remember we weren’t even in Afghanistan by this time. Barack Obama went into Afghanistan creating another problem. It was Hillary Clinton and her incidents in Libya, which was also a reckless decision to create that vacuum. They armed the rebels and they're even funding them now.”

Following her statement, Blackwell proceeded to ask if Pierson was saying Obama took the country into Afghanistan post-2009.

"What I'm saying is the policies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — that was Obama’s war, yes,” Pierson said.

Earlier this month, Pierson said it was the policies of Obama and Clinton that killed Army Capt. Humayun Khan. Khan was killed in 2004 during the George W. Bush presidency. Trump has recently claimed that Obama was the founder of ISIS, and has said ISIS would give Clinton an "MVP award."

On Saturday afternoon, Pierson appeared to blame the gaffe on technical problems in the CNN studio, tweeting: "For the record, audio disruptions and echos should be fixed immediately. Especially when you say it out loud on the air. @CNN"

Later in the segment, Blackwell fact-checked Pierson's statement, saying that troops invaded Afghanistan in 2001 under President George W. Bush.

He also clarified that ISIS was first created in 2004 as al Qaeda in Iraq and then morphed into the Islamic State in Iraq in 2006.

"ISIS came out of the Obama side of the war," Pierson said. "This is also Obama saying they were the JV team. Again, the incompetence of even recognizing the threat while he was in office. And then to make it worse, going into Libya and creating a vacuum, leaving all those weapons behind, essentially arming the enemy."