Friendships with Trump Suppporters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump voters are fearful voters. They are afraid foreigners will take our jobs or kill us. When you are very frightened, you fall back on your basic survival instinct - see threat, get rid of threat. So Trump promises to get rid of all the scary foreigners. That makes the frightened people feel safer.

So don't be angry with your friends for falling for Trump's comforting BS. Pity them for being consumed by fear. And don't talk politics with them until after the election.

No, we are not fearful. We are just sick of what is happening to this country. Our military. Our economy. Our foreign “policy” (of which there is really no policy at all).
So, we are just fed up. Not fearful.
Don’t pity us.

Our country? Yes, you can't stand the sight of brown people and you freak out when you hear someone speaking in any language other than English.
Our military? What the fuck are you talking about? We STILL spend more than the next ten biggest countries combined on our military, and yes, that includes both Russia and China. If you think our military is being cut back in any meaningful way you are delusional.
Our foreign policy? Ah, yes, what you mean by that is the continuing fall out of fucked-up BUSH foreign policy, which got us into multiple wars, destabilized the entire Middle East, gave rise to Al Qaeda and ISIS, and put us trillions of dollars in debt.

You're fed up? No, I'm fed up, because it was your kind of bullshit that's been screwing up our economy, letting our infrastructure fall apart, and making America a less safe. Trump needs to go. Needs to LOSE. Needs to BE FIRED.

Amen. Every Trump supporter I know is a racist and a hypocrite. Thinks their "bad luck" is other people's fault, and that other people are getting rich off their taxes. When in reality, it's the Trump supporters who like him because they think he's going to give them a bunch of stuff --- when in reality, he plans to slash everything to make the 1 percent richer. They are such suckers.

Op here. I don't believe all or even most Trump supporters are racist. I do; however, believe they are ignorant. And what they don't realize is that in their blindness in hating the Clintons or any other Democrat, they are supporting, in my opinion, a modern day, more dangerous version of George Wallace. A person who is promoting policies that would actually strip our freedoms away. That's not even the half of it either.

How much difference is there really, between people who are bigots and people who tolerate bigotry? This is the possible leader of our country that we are talking about.

Not much difference. But I think there is a difference intent. Some of Trumps supporters truly may not understand what the impact some of his policies will have on others..

For example, I have a friend who supports Trump bc he believes Trump will do a better job of protecting our country from Muslim extremists. He thinks some level of banning Muslims from the middle eastern region may be effective in accomplishing this objective. I don't believe he is a bigot, as I know him well and know the company he keeps. But his fears have lead him to support policies that promote bigotry and that are against this country's founding values. In order to have a serious conservation with him about this issue, it's important to understand where is coming from. So simply calling or labeling him a bigot is too simplistic. It's more complex than that.

I get this. It's kind of like Romney. I doubt he was a racist. i doubt he even liked Trump. But he was willing to let the guy raise money for him, and when asked to address the birther issue he said something to the effect of "I don't agree with them but I need their votes". So he's not racist but he is complicit with racists.

Yes. Both are dangerous positions at the end of the day.

Continuing with my example, if we allow Trump to enact a policy such as a Muslim ban, we will essentially be going backwards. If we allow this, what's to stop the him or the government from creating camps to house Muslim U.S. Citizens? Whats to stop him from deporting blacks bc he thinks they are thugs? It's a slippery slope that will weaken the core of our country. If I am Russia, China, North Korea, or Iran, I am licking my chops for a Trump presidency. Bc they will have have first dibs...

[Anonymous]

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

Plenty? Like what? Feel free to quote the report itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

Basically all it says is that she violated State department rules on using a private email address. And so did a lot of other people who work for the government. It really isn't that serious. Up until about 18 months ago there was no law against it, but a lot of high level officials were using private emails address to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests, so Congress restricted the practice. But federal employees can still do it as long as they send a copy of the email to their official email address. The only other possible issue is that she may have released classified information, but so far they have said none of the information was classified at the time. A few emails were deemed classified after the fact, but it would be really hard to prosecute her for mishandling classified information when it wasn't classified at the time.

[Anonymous]

The report states that they could not recover many of the missing emails. It's around page 23. It certainly does not excuse Clinton in any way. She's told so many different stories herself:
1.she turned everything over
2.convenience
3. nothing classified
4. nothing "marked classified"
5. Finally, it was a "mistake".......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I'll take the flip flopping war mongering lying blue dog democrat over the uninformed, hot tempered, sexist, narcissistic, bigot, any day of the week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The report states that they could not recover many of the missing emails. It's around page 23. It certainly does not excuse Clinton in any way. She's told so many different stories herself:
1.she turned everything over
2.convenience
3. nothing classified
4. nothing "marked classified"
5. Finally, it was a "mistake".......

Do you really believe that Hillary Clinton went into her office, printed out 55,000 pages of emails, and presented them herself?

No.

Her staff did it. And I can easily imagine whoever on her staff was in charge of this project thought 55,000 pages covers everything. Do you see how easy it is for confusion to develop over this topic? I'm not saying she did a top-notch job here or is anywhere near transparent, but let's be honest with ourselves. This is not disqualifying for the presidency, especially when your opponent is an orange freakshow. Colin Powell didn't even hand over ANY emails. Not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I thought that the whole purpose of the Inspector General is to be able to indict for wrongdoing without interference from the President?

[Anonymous]

Her staff did it. And I can easily imagine whoever on her staff was in charge of this project thought 55,000 pages covers everything. Do you see how easy it is for confusion to develop over this topic? I'm not saying she did a top-notch job here or is anywhere near transparent, but let's be honest with ourselves. This is not disqualifying for the presidency, especially when your opponent is an orange freakshow. Colin Powell didn't even hand over ANY emails. Not one.

Her "staff" refused to answer many questions the other day to Judicial Watch. In fact, Pagliano wants to plead the fifth again--which is not normally done in civil cases. And, had she not had a private server, it would not have been an issue. She would not have had to "turn over" anything. But, you just keep on sayin.........it's what you want to believe. I understand that. However, it smells--and, unless you are really misguided, you know that. I know you don't want to believe it. I don't like Trump either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Her staff did it. And I can easily imagine whoever on her staff was in charge of this project thought 55,000 pages covers everything. Do you see how easy it is for confusion to develop over this topic? I'm not saying she did a top-notch job here or is anywhere near transparent, but let's be honest with ourselves. This is not disqualifying for the presidency, especially when your opponent is an orange freakshow. Colin Powell didn't even hand over ANY emails. Not one.

Her "staff" refused to answer many questions the other day to Judicial Watch. In fact, Pagliano wants to plead the fifth again--which is not normally done in civil cases. And, had she not had a private server, it would not have been an issue. She would not have had to "turn over" anything. But, you just keep on sayin.........it's what you want to believe. I understand that. However, it smells--and, unless you are really misguided, you know that. I know you don't want to believe it. I don't like Trump either.

Wait a second... you are switching from the IG report to a civil lawsuit. I don't give a shit about some lawsuit. Why would anyone on her staff be cooperative for a lawsuit? That's just dumb. Judicial Watch is an right-wing organization, one of many bent on Hillary's destruction.

The right has been telling us the Clintons are corrupt nightmare people for decades. And yet, they have never been able to knock them out. I think, at this point, either the Clintons are not that bad, or they are criminal masterminds. Either way, Hillary is still loads better than Trump. The man who is attacking a judge in his own lawsuit for the crime of being Mexican. The man who mocked a disabled reporter. The man who thinks Saudi Arabia should have nuclear weapons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I thought that the whole purpose of the Inspector General is to be able to indict for wrongdoing without interference from the President?

No, the Inspector General is supposed to find waste, fraud and mismanagement. If they do find a criminal violation, they give the information to the Department of Justice for prosecution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I thought that the whole purpose of the Inspector General is to be able to indict for wrongdoing without interference from the President?

No, the Inspector General is supposed to find waste, fraud and mismanagement. If they do find a criminal violation, they give the information to the Department of Justice for prosecution.

So did they do that with Hillary's emails?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I thought that the whole purpose of the Inspector General is to be able to indict for wrongdoing without interference from the President?

No, the Inspector General is supposed to find waste, fraud and mismanagement. If they do find a criminal violation, they give the information to the Department of Justice for prosecution.

So did they do that with Hillary's emails?

FBI was already doing its own investigation, so they probably already had the emails. If the IG thought there was a criminal violation, it would probably be in the report. So that's one element in Clinton's favor, although FBI still has the final word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don't you think, between a year with the FBI and the OIG report, they would have found something serious by now? That's two teams investigating simultaneously.

It takes time. FWIW, the IG report found plenty that was serious. As for the FBI, if there weren't something serious, I would imagine the investigation would be over. Pagliano didn't get immunity for no reason. Maybe he is the only one implicated, but I find that doubtful. The IG likely did not investigate whether or not the server had been compromised. However, whether it was compromised or not, we do know that there was classified material on it. Trouble is, it could be a can of worms. I think there are many serious issues here.

Do I think she will be indicted? Not likely. After all, Obama will have the final say--not Comey.

I thought that the whole purpose of the Inspector General is to be able to indict for wrongdoing without interference from the President?

No, the Inspector General is supposed to find waste, fraud and mismanagement. If they do find a criminal violation, they give the information to the Department of Justice for prosecution.

So did they do that with Hillary's emails?

FBI was already doing its own investigation, so they probably already had the emails. If the IG thought there was a criminal violation, it would probably be in the report. So that's one element in Clinton's favor, although FBI still has the final word.

This all suggests to me that there is little else to find out about this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Her staff did it. And I can easily imagine whoever on her staff was in charge of this project thought 55,000 pages covers everything. Do you see how easy it is for confusion to develop over this topic? I'm not saying she did a top-notch job here or is anywhere near transparent, but let's be honest with ourselves. This is not disqualifying for the presidency, especially when your opponent is an orange freakshow. Colin Powell didn't even hand over ANY emails. Not one.

Her "staff" refused to answer many questions the other day to Judicial Watch. In fact, Pagliano wants to plead the fifth again--which is not normally done in civil cases. And, had she not had a private server, it would not have been an issue. She would not have had to "turn over" anything. But, you just keep on sayin.........it's what you want to believe. I understand that. However, it smells--and, unless you are really misguided, you know that. I know you don't want to believe it. I don't like Trump either.

Wait a second... you are switching from the IG report to a civil lawsuit. I don't give a shit about some lawsuit. Why would anyone on her staff be cooperative for a lawsuit? That's just dumb. Judicial Watch is an right-wing organization, one of many bent on Hillary's destruction.

The right has been telling us the Clintons are corrupt nightmare people for decades. And yet, they have never been able to knock them out. I think, at this point, either the Clintons are not that bad, or they are criminal masterminds. Either way, Hillary is still loads better than Trump. The man who is attacking a judge in his own lawsuit for the crime of being Mexican. The man who mocked a disabled reporter. The man who thinks Saudi Arabia should have nuclear weapons.

Exactly.