|
Post by refugeepea on Apr 16, 2016 0:03:34 GMT
Hilary Clinton received $225,000 dollars from Verizon for a corporate speaking engagement and then she supported picketers. That was before she ran for president (the speech), so I probably shouldn't say anything. It doesn't count! Or she regrets speaking for them and sees the error of her ways. Either way she wins and is trustworthy.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 29, 2024 22:24:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 0:22:35 GMT
They are not as you say deporting refugees they are denying them asylum for whatever reasons. Just like us we have a system that refugees have to pass. Well, Sweden is ejecting the people from their country, denying them asylum for whatever reason. So is the US.....for whatever reason! more than 120 people have been taken into custody in the last several weeks since the Department of Homeland Security announced its plan to deport families who had sought asylum from Central American countries, including Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.
LINK
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Apr 16, 2016 15:39:24 GMT
But, and there is always a but, it doesn't matter how many videos are out there with current and past presidents you are not going find one of them saying as clearly as Trump did that he wanted to ban Muslims. That was a gift to the terrorists. I don't think you are really "getting" my point. Hillary is using it as campaign rhetoric when the reality is that it's a big yawn. Consider: 1. It wasn't a "gift" to the terrorists. They have been making recruitment videos for years just fine without Trump. They don't need a quote from Trump or Obama or anyone else to make their recruitment videos. For them to "feature" Trump in one is a big "so what?" 2. Trump said in two sentences exactly what our own politicians - both parties - have had hearings about in Washington. Even the likes of prominent Democrats Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein considered a bill asking for better vetting. In the end, 47 Democrats voted for better security measures: The legislation would have prevented any refugees from Syria or Iraq from entering the United States until the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Director of National Intelligence could certify that none of them are dangerous. Politico article: Syrian refugees split Democratic Party And here is an article in a local NY publication featuring Charles Schumer: U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, in a break with most of his Democratic colleagues, says the U.S. may have to consider a pause in the resettlement of Syrian refugees. Source: ttp://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/11/schumer_us_may_have_to_pause_intake_of_syrian_refugees.html Their next recruitment video may very well feature Charles Schumer. Personally, I don't think that would be a "gift" but another yawn. The whole reason I brought Sweden into the picture was that the EU is in the same boat. It is not some radical viewpoint to be considering a pause. Or, put another way, a temporary ban.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 29, 2024 22:24:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 3:02:07 GMT
But, and there is always a but, it doesn't matter how many videos are out there with current and past presidents you are not going find one of them saying as clearly as Trump did that he wanted to ban Muslims. That was a gift to the terrorists. I don't think you are really "getting" my point. Hillary is using it as campaign rhetoric when the reality is that it's a big yawn. Consider: 1. It wasn't a "gift" to the terrorists. They have been making recruitment videos for years just fine without Trump. They don't need a quote from Trump or Obama or anyone else to make their recruitment videos. For them to "feature" Trump in one is a big "so what?" 2. Trump said in two sentences exactly what our own politicians - both parties - have had hearings about in Washington. Even the likes of prominent Democrats Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein considered a bill asking for better vetting. In the end, 47 Democrats voted for better security measures: The legislation would have prevented any refugees from Syria or Iraq from entering the United States until the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Director of National Intelligence could certify that none of them are dangerous. Politico article: Syrian refugees split Democratic Party And here is an article in a local NY publication featuring Charles Schumer: U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, in a break with most of his Democratic colleagues, says the U.S. may have to consider a pause in the resettlement of Syrian refugees. Source: ttp://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/11/schumer_us_may_have_to_pause_intake_of_syrian_refugees.html Their next recruitment video may very well feature Charles Schumer. Personally, I don't think that would be a "gift" but another yawn. The whole reason I brought Sweden into the picture was that the EU is in the same boat. It is not some radical viewpoint to be considering a pause. Or, put another way, a temporary ban. Actually I did get your point but I don't agree with it. As far as Trumps comments. It was a gift to terrorists groups everywhere. He also went on, at one point, suggesting if you were an American citizen who is a Muslim and left the country you may not be allowed back into the country. And let's don't forget how he talked about putting all Muslims living in this country in some data base. He has since walked away from those last two ideas. But it doesn't matter because those words "are out there" for any terrorist group to use. But it's not just Trump. Let's don't forget Ted Cruz's bright idea of doing special patrols in Muslim neighborhoods. Because you know all Muslims are budding terrorists that hate people in the West. These comments by Trump, Cruz, and other idiots about Muslims are on the Internet for all to see if they have internet access so the terrorist really don't need to put together a recruitment video because these idiots are doing all the work for the terrorists. Again words matter and if you think they don't your kidding yourself. There is a reason President Obama is both careful and deliberate about what he says and calls the various terrorists group. Yes all refugees coming to this country should be vetted. No question. And there should be some concern. But when presidential candidates of the most powerful country in the world imply that all Muslims are terrorists there ckukd be consequences. So I disagree with you this is a "big yawn". Hillary may have jumped the gun in that debate but she she was not wrong in her reasoning that words like what Trump & Cruz are spewing about Muslims could result in negative consequences for our country. By the way. Is the US still the most powerful country in the world? Or do we share that title with China and Russia?
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Apr 17, 2016 16:48:56 GMT
I do agree with you that Trump and Cruz have made idiotic statements, I just disagree that they are "gifts." Because the terrorists are good at propaganda anyway. By the very definition of propaganda, so are both political parties (good at it, I mean): "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view." By the way. Is the US still the most powerful country in the world? Or do we share that title with China and Russia? ? I have no idea what you are talking about here.
|
|
StephDRebel
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,691
Location: Ohio
Jul 5, 2014 1:53:49 GMT
|
Post by StephDRebel on Apr 17, 2016 17:50:05 GMT
I don't need examples or proof of how I feel about a candidate. Perception and intuition goes a long way for me. If I don't feel a person is trustworthy I don't owe them my vote (or friendship, or trust, etc.). We are constantly told to trust our intuition and I do I feel like I hear this a lot, and I agree that trusting your gut is important. My problem comes in with the people who are going on intuitions or whatever else yet scream, holler, and try to convince everyone else that their intuition is fact. It's one thing to have a gut feeling, go on it and base your vote around that. It's another entirely to spread'factual information' that isn't rooted in fact.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 29, 2024 22:24:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 19:36:14 GMT
I don't need examples or proof of how I feel about a candidate. Perception and intuition goes a long way for me. If I don't feel a person is trustworthy I don't owe them my vote (or friendship, or trust, etc.). We are constantly told to trust our intuition and I do I feel like I hear this a lot, and I agree that trusting your gut is important. My problem comes in with the people who are going on intuitions or whatever else yet scream, holler, and try to convince everyone else that their intuition is fact. It's one thing to have a gut feeling, go on it and base your vote around that. It's another entirely to spread'factual information' that isn't rooted in fact. Perhaps for these people it's the feeling they get every time they see yet another thing she's said has been proven a lie, but the specifics don't stick, just the feeling does. Because as you can see there are plenty of examples to show.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 29, 2024 22:24:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 21:48:01 GMT
Read up about rare earth metals, and the Clinton foundation . This is why we never could vote for mrs Clinton
|
|
|
Post by pepperwood on Apr 17, 2016 23:56:37 GMT
Read up about rare earth metals, and the Clinton foundation . This is why we never could vote for mrs Clinton I found Clinton Cash an interesting book on the Clinton Foundation. I am not familiar with the rare earth metal issue.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 18, 2016 23:38:31 GMT
Follow the money: Democratic Party fundraising effort helps Clinton find new donors, tooBernie 2016: Letter to DNCStatement from Bernie2016 (excerpt): "While the use of joint fundraising agreements has existed for some time — it is unprecedented for the DNC to allow a joint committee to be exploited to the benefit of one candidate in the midst of a contested nominating contest,” said Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager. Basically - The DNC and Hillary have a joint committee called Hillary Victory Fund (HVF), which can accept up to $356,100 in individual donations (unlike $2,700, which is the maximum an individual can contribute to Hillary for this primary directly). Of this, $2,700 is the maximum that can go to Hillary's campaign, Hillary for America (HFA). The HVF can coordinate with any state Democratic party and with the DNC itself. The HVF can donate, of the $356,100, $33,400 to the DNC and up to $10,000 (if they wish to) to any of the 32 participating state Democratic parties in the HVF. The Sanders campaign alleges that HVF is subsidizing HFA indirectly. In particular, HVF has spent so far around $15 million in online and direct mail advertisements. These adverts promote people donating money mostly to HFA and the donations do not benefit either the DNC or the state Democratic parties. Initially, the advert money used by HVF was small. Now, it is being spent at a magnitude that this spending can no longer be ignored as it directly advertises people to donate to HFA. Another allegation is that HVF has paid HFA $2.6 million to reimburse the HFA staff for the time spent on running HVF. ETA: (The Atlantic) From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton-Scandal PrimerAlso, (HuffPo) Hillary Clinton Accused Of Using Static Noise To Conceal Fundraising Speech. Even if she is 100% innocent, why hide it? It's the fact that she is hiding the contents of her speeches that is the problem. What is she hiding is the question, but that she is hiding anything is the problem. Could be completely innocent but we would never know because she isn't being forthcoming about any of it. (its been 73 days since Hillary said she'd look into releasing her Wall Street transcripts) I find it both amusing and disturbing that she's guarding those transcripts with like a pit bull locked in a death grip...far more effort than she put into protecting her government emails. Is she a liar? Probably not, but there is a way to tell the truth without really being forthcoming and that is not the same thing as being honest. Is she trustworthy? No. I do not believe she is.
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Apr 19, 2016 2:17:12 GMT
I think bernie is putting a spin on this...they didn't find new donors for hillary in organizing the clooney event....
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 19, 2016 2:56:06 GMT
We will see.
|
|