[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

If you're going to use such an unfitting example sure let's go with that.

What happens when you get in a car accident? You go to the hospital (and repair place) and get it fixed.

We don't say "Well you chose to drive guess you gotta live with that broken leg and rib"

[Dad]

That goes both ways. And as soon as you decide that women's health lies in the government's hands, you've gone too far.

 

Condoms are fine. Unreliable, but fine. But you know damn well dudes aren't about to wear condoms for every sexual occasion. Can't feel nothing with it on anyway >.>

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

That goes both ways. And as soon as you decide that women's health lies in the government's hands, you've gone too far.

 

Condoms are fine. Unreliable, but fine. But you know damn well dudes aren't about to wear condoms for every sexual occasion. Can't feel nothing with it on anyway >.>

Get her to take the pill then and buy her morning after 

 

Yes condoms suck, but really you feeling good for the 10 seconds > paying $750 and killing a life?

If you're going to use such an unfitting example sure let's go with that.

What happens when you get in a car accident? You go to the hospital (and repair place) and get it fixed.

We don't say "Well you chose to drive guess you gotta live with that broken leg and rib"

I was thinking more along the lines of you could die

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

You could die walking outside, that's not an argument.

But I guess this has gone off topic a bit too long.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You could die walking outside, that's not an argument.

But I guess this has gone off topic a bit too long.

It is though, walking outside could kill (permanently change your life) you, but you still do it. 

 

Yeh, Idk how reasonable it is to hope for a court under President Trump to overturn Roe v. Wade

 

But the killing the Hyde Amendment is not ok at all

 

Can we talk about how pathetic it is that Trump is gaining in polls even after that nightmare debate? I watched it again, he missed 15 easy gg shot. And she's still basically tied with him 

[Dad]

If it's not in the proper stages, it's not a life, so you miss me.

 

And I'll have you know I can last a lot longer than ten seconds.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuFO3yVbC5k

 

This woman is a monster. There's no other words to describe it

 

Please watch it, it's only a 3 minutes long

[Dad]

There's a similar video about Trump. Its all bullshit. I thought you didn't care about the fear mongering nonsense?

 

Or is it only monstrous because it's Clinton?

 

Meanwhile Duke and his homies are rallying behind the great Trump. "Oh he disavowed". He hasn't changed his message and the man is a monster.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

There's a similar video about Trump. Its all bullshit. I thought you didn't care about the fear mongering nonsense?

 

Or is it only monstrous because it's Clinton?

 

Meanwhile Duke and his homies are rallying behind the great Trump. "Oh he disavowed". He hasn't changed his message and the man is a monster.

Not BS actually. There's absolutely nothing in factual about that video. The "false" part of the story that's thankfully not in that video, is that she asked for the case. But if you want to elaborate on what's false in it, I'm willing to listen

 

It's monstrous because she used Nymphomania as an excuse to defend a clearly guilty defendant - her job

 

Then laughed and trivialized about it later when recalling the case. Does that sound like a woman desperate to get off the case?

 

I can't fault her for pulling the "shady" tricks, getting the underwear thrown out, using Nymphomania, neglecting to mention the victim was a virgin before the incident. That's all on the shitty defense, and the mother pushing the case as fast as she could, it's monstrous she laughed about it.

 

She has the same cavilier attitude towards all of Bill's rape victims, while those haven't been proven to be reality in a court of law, this has. Just tells you what kind of woman she is

[Dad]

And this fiasco in Cuba could cost Trump Florida. Is he for real? Dealing with Castro and breaking the embargo? What the funk was he thinking?

[Aerion Brightflame]

And this fiasco in Cuba could cost Trump Florida. Is he for real? Dealing with Castro and breaking the embargo? What the f*** was he thinking?

More money, more power, more women? Like the idea behind it is simple - Hear rumour that embargo is being lifted, get in first so that Trump hotels are the main hotels on this new market, so you hire someone to circumnavigate the embargo. It's not insane as a business move. 

 

Odds are he just spins it and says Obama followed his lead on relations with Cuba. Which nobody will believe except for the people already enamoured in him, but it's fairly standard. 

 

It's also possible he denies it ever happening. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://baltimoregazette.com/clinton-received-debate-questions-week-debate/

 

And they caught a guy removing and placing papers on her podium too...hmmmm

[Dad]

Please tell me thats satire. Suddenly "sources" say she was given the questions ahead of time because she was overprepared, and someone moved papers at her podium?

 

Holy sheet, this straw grasping is ridiculous. That could be anything from posture points to a secret recipe. This is the most pathetic attack I've seen yet. And everyone knows Clinton ads are notorious for being crap shoots.

[Aerion Brightflame]

Well it's a local paper, so it's using Fox news reporters as evidence for the papers being delivered to the Clinton campaign. That should raise alarm bells - Fox is well known for actively lying out of there arses. In fact I think that it was proven watching Fox actually makes you less informed than watching no news at all. 

 

But seriously, unless there's some kind of legitimate proof this is just speculation. A politician should be incredibly prepared for a debate, and will have prepared answers for anything under the son. Additionally, they are public speakers - They are meant to be able to look prepared when asked essentially any question. 

 

So it is just weak-ass speculation at this point. Even if it was true, it doesn't mean that much. Trump's performance would still be weak in and of itself which is a bigger issue than how Hillary looked compared to him. 

[Dad]

What's most laughable about this is the overprepared nonsense. She's had decades in politics. Decades. My responses would sound scripted too if I knew what the funk I was talking about.

 

Cuz, you know, preparing for debates based on sheet that you already know is so hard.

[Aerion Brightflame]

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-manager-conway-admits-illegal-cuba-spending-c53ab74ff200#.s4snhkm3m

 

I was wrong - The defence chosen isn't to deny the crime, it's to argue that the statue of limitations is passed and thus he can't be convicted for it. 

 

Which is an interesting line of defence, because it's basically going 'Na na na na' to a situation that makes him look bad either way. Either his companies did spend the money, which makes him a criminal, or that he claimed it was for humanitarian purposes, which devalues Trump's ideas of Charity hugely. The fact that the term treasonous gets thrown around in there as well is amazing, because it means this man standing for 'Making America great' could have been tried as a traitor to the US. 

 

So then naturally they go to the weakass Hillary deflection claiming 'She does shady s*** too'. Which is kinda irrelevant unless you are trying to measure which is the greater shitstain which is a pretty poor form of decision making tbh 

 

EDIT: Whilst it says it in the article I figure I should reitorate - This admission of guilt comes from Trump's Campaign Manager. This is literally the best the woman in charge of his campaign could come up with as a defence for an incredibly obvious question. The woman is just plain incompetent from what I've seen of her. 

 

EDIT2: And even then woman tries to claim that Hillary gets protection from stuff that happens in 98'... when the Trump campaign has been attacking her over things her husband did in 98. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Well we have video of a guy removing papers from her podium only

Also we're finding out now that Trump was the one who stopped her from losing her crown in '98...wonder why that part was neglected

[Aerion Brightflame]

Well we have video of a guy removing papers from her podium only 

 

And I assume as well you have evidence suggesting this is not the norm? Or the papers that were removed themselves?

 

Or anything really that's not Fox News suggesting that there was illicit activity surrounding the debate? 

 

Because otherwise it's rampant speculation that means very little. Because none of the questions Hillary was asked are really questions you'd expect a seasoned politician to have difficulty answering given how much prep you can assume she'd do anyway because it's a televised debate. 

[Dad]

Which is exactly why this is a load of bullshit. That means little of nothing. Half assed accusations and piss poor preparation aren't an excuse to get funking bodied.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Wasn't on fox, I assume it wasn't norm becuase nobody removed papers for Trump and that same man was seen around HRC later that night

Y'all need to need to read that Newsweek piece again is all I'm gonna say. Ignoring the fact the author already got caught before spreading outright lies about Trump, there's not much there

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-reporter-tweets-his-way-into-trouble-with-a-claim-about-trump-that-lacked-evidence/2016/09/14/f8bd2a54-7a95-11e6-beac-57a4a412e93a_story.html

Edit: Aurely a picture of this trump invesment should be available? Right? You're using a money trail to silver arrows to spin a full pathway

[Aerion Brightflame]

I'm reading the Baltimore Gazett article you linked as evidence for this accusation and I'm clearly reading the words ' A reporter from Fox News recognised the intern'. All of the following evidence comes from the perspective of the Fox News caster, because no other reporter there out of all the press involved also happened to recognise this intern. 

 

So the reason I say that Fox News is the source isn't because it aired on fox, but because the source that you yourself linked as evidence has a fox news reporter as the only witness to this guy who could possibly incriminate him, and even that is sketchy at best. 

 

I would take a guess that the reason this hasn't been picked up by any major network is because it's a weak ass story with seemingly no factual basis or evidence that's only been run by a local paper in Baltimore. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm reading the Baltimore Gazett article you linked as evidence for this accusation and I'm clearly reading the words ' A reporter from Fox News recognised the intern'. All of the following evidence comes from the perspective of the Fox News caster, because no other reporter there out of all the press involved also happened to recognise this intern. 

 

So the reason I say that Fox News is the source isn't because it aired on fox, but because the source that you yourself linked as evidence has a fox news reporter as the only witness to this guy who could possibly incriminate him, and even that is sketchy at best. 

 

I would take a guess that the reason this hasn't been picked up by any major network is because it's a weak ass story with seemingly no factual basis or evidence that's only been run by a local paper in Baltimore. 

No you're probs right about it, the footage is on NBC too, but I don't think HRC would that that bold to do it on open camera

 

 

As for Cuba it seems odd that Trump would pen a 1999 column in The Miami Herald, writing that he had snubbed chances to do business in Cuba. "It would place me directly at odds with the longstanding US policy of isolating Fidel Castro. I had a choice to make: huge profits or human rights. For me, it was a no-brainer."

 

If he was really using off-shore accounts to invest in Cuba right? Or was he so cocky he committed the crime, then went on to publicly deny a crime that nobody was questioning him about the next year? 

 

~68K was paid for a consultant to look into Cuba is the actual story thus far, and that was before his Herald column...IDK, gonna want more proof...and is this even the best course of attack? In recent years, observers say a generational shift is taking place, and a Florida International University poll of Cuban Americans in Miami-Dade County earlier this month found a majority now support lifting the embargo. The same survey found 35.5% of Cuban-Americans favor Trump to 31.4% for his Democratic challenger, Hillary Clinton.

 

So what's the end game here

 

And Idk where the funk miss housekeeping came from, but there sure as hell is no proof of that matter

 

Need video? https://twitter.com/Canine_Rights/status/781333446421516288

 

Sorry, dunno how to embed videos here

 

"She's totally beautiful now" and "calling her miss piggy"

 

"Did you ever consider letting her go?" TD:LR no

 

His biggest crime was laughing at what Stern said

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Ignoring the fact the author already got caught before spreading outright lies about Trump, there's not much there

Isn't this kind of a big thing to just ignore?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Isn't this kind of a big thing to just ignore?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-reporter-tweets-his-way-into-trouble-with-a-claim-about-trump-that-lacked-evidence/2016/09/14/f8bd2a54-7a95-11e6-beac-57a4a412e93a_story.html

 

I mean, I think it's disgraceful, but most like Tom will probs be forgive some routine libel if it means giving air to his next half assed hit-peice, so why beat the dead horse

 

But someone really needs to put a sock in it, and it looks like Tom and Dad are unable to actually dig into the story beyond headline grabbing so look like I'll have to do it

 

 

 

According to the report, Trump Hotels hired the consulting firm Seven Arrows to visit Cuba on exploratory mission with the goal of “giv[ing] Trump’s company a foothold should Washington loosen or lift the trade restrictions.”  Months after the trip, Seven Arrows “submitted a bill to Trump Hotels for the $68,551.88 it had ‘incurred prior to and including a trip to Cuba on behalf of Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc.’”  The report then claims Trump knowingly paid the bill and in doing so, violated U.S. law, including the economic embargo and sanctions against Cuba.

 

In order to put this story in its proper context, it is first important to understand what was going on with U.S. — Cuba relations back in the late 1990s.  As a Washington Post article from July of 1999 explains, then-President Bill Clinton’s administration had recently announced “liberalized interpretation of licensing requirements for Americans visiting Cuba.”

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/cuba/stories/econ072899.htm

 

The new interpretation under Clinton allowed the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to approve “more or less 6,000” licenses for individuals and groups to travel to Cuba in the late 1990s.  This reportedly led to a “powerful new coalition pushing the White House and Congress to end, or at least loosen, the … sanctions against the government of President Fidel Castro.” Included in that coalition were “hotel and entertainment sectors long hoping to expand into Cuba.”

 

Accordingly, it is not all that surprising that Trump Hotels would’ve been interested in hiring a consulting firm to take an exploratory trip to Cuba.  Furthermore, there is nothing inherently shady about hiring a consulting firm to take trips to Cuba.  It is a common practice used by major American companies for years.  In fact, there are major D.C. based lawyers and firms that have made a career off the Cuban consulting business.

 

Although, any consulting firm should have obtained the necessary license from the OFAC prior to making the trip. Eichenwald claims Seven Arrows did not have the required license, and that would possibly make the reimbursement illegal — if funds spent in Cuba were reimbursed.  However, if you read closely, you’ll notice the article does not make any direct allegation that Trump Hotels was aware of this problem before the trip took place.  Again, the payment for the Cuban trip portion of the invoice may have violated the law as the result of Seven Arrows failure to obtain the necessary license; but there is no allegation that Trump Hotels (or Donald Trump himself) was aware of the licensing problem prior to the trip.

 

In addition to failing to provide the full context of the circumstances surrounding the trip, the Eichenwald article essentially argues that the consulting trip is evidence of Trump’s hypocrisy on Cuban policy.  Eichenwald would have you believe Trump was trying to play both sides by exploring potential business opportunities in Cuba, but then turning around and telling potential voters that he would maintain strong Cuban sanctions.

 

"And perhaps that was the calculation behind the company’s decision to flout the law: the low risk of getting caught versus the high reward of lining up Cuban allies if the U.S. loosened or dropped the embargo. The only catch: What would happen if Trump’s Cuban-American supporters ever found out?" -Kurt

 

Yet, this rather cynical interpretation ignores Trump’s own explanation of his dealings in Cuba.  In a 1999 op-ed published in the Miami-Herald Trump wrote:

 

S"everal large European investment groups have asked me to take the “Trump Magic” to Cuba. They have “begged” me to form partnerships to build casino-hotels in Havana. With the influx of foreign tourists, we would make a fortune, they promise, and they are no doubt right. They are also right to say that this type of arrangement would allow me to skirt the U. S.-imposed embargo.

 

But rushing to join those who would do business in Cuba would do more than that. It would place me directly at odds with the longstanding U. S. policy of isolating Fidel Castro. I had a choice to make: huge profits or human rights. For me, it was a no-brainer

 

Foreign investors are not allowed to hire or pay Cuban workers. They must pay the government directly for the workers. Castro then pays the workers in worthless Cuban money and keeps the rest. Under these circumstances, my investment cannot help average Cubans — it can only replace the Soviet subsidy Castro no longer receives" -Trump

 

So...if HRC's best attempt to win over Cubans in Dade, she's gonna need to do better

 

Keep shilling away Tom, it's always fun to see your latest "Will this sink Trump" segments

 

Edit: In case that's too much work for you to read

 

 

edit:

 

Insider trafficking from mole in one of HRC's super pac

 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Lotsa good stuff just came out, so funk it, I'm gonna doublepost

 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/clinton-emails-update/

 

State Dept admitted 5,600 Clinton emails recovered by FBI were not personal emails. She lied under oath to both Congress and FBI

 

 

Diplomacy from State Dep. And Obama isn't nearly as much of warhawk as HRC. What's the point of a statement like this from the State Dept. spokesperson other than to antagonize Russia? They're out of their minds.

 

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-signed-secret-document-to-lift-u-n-sanctions-on-iranian-banks-1475193723

 

 

U.S. Signed Secret Document to Lift U.N. Sanctions on Iranian Banks Administration backed measures on the same day Tehran released four American citizens from prison