|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
|
|
On August 23 2016 11:54 TheFish7 wrote:Hey check out the ads popping up on my TL They said on Face the Nation yesterday that the campaign was planning to do a big online ad buy ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pIReuYn.png) + Show Spoiler +
These are Google-ads.
+ Show Spoiler +
I don't receive any MAGA-ads which does indicate that they at least know to not serve them to non-US IP-adresses. They might also be served as remarketing ads, i.e. you only see them if you've visited the Donalds site (I have). Its probably just blanket display advertising though. Also, a greenback-colored button would most probably net him more donations.
|
WASHINGTON ― After bragging for a year about how cheaply he was running his campaign, Donald Trump is spending more freely now that other people are contributing ― particularly when the beneficiary is himself.
Trump nearly quintupled the monthly rent his presidential campaign pays for its headquarters at Trump Tower to $169,758 in July, when he was raising funds from donors, compared with March, when he was self-funding his campaign, according to a Huffington Post review of Federal Election Commission filings. The rent jumped even though he was paying fewer staff in July than he did in March.
The Trump campaign paid Trump Tower Commercial LLC $35,458 in March ― the same amount it had been paying since last summer ― and had 197 paid employees and consultants. In July, it paid 172 employees and consultants.
“If I was a donor, I’d want answers,” said a prominent Republican National Committee member who supports Trump, asking for anonymity to speak freely. “If they don’t have any more staff, and they’re paying five times more? That’s the kind of stuff I’d read and try to make an (attack) ad out of it.”
In addition to the rent for Trump Tower space in Manhattan, Trump has paid his eponymous golf courses and restaurants more than $260,000 since his campaign and the RNC struck a joint fundraising deal in mid-May, after he essentially locked up the GOP nomination. On May 18, the day the fundraising deal was announced, Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach was paid $29,715; Trump National Golf Club in Jupiter, Florida, was paid $35,845; and Trump Restaurants LLC was paid $125,080, according to FEC records. Such large payments were much rarer when Trump was self-funding.
It’s unclear from the campaign filings the purpose of the golf course and restaurant payments, although both of the Florida golf courses hosted Trump campaign news conferences in March. Also unclear from the filings is whether Trump is using more space in Trump Tower than he was in the spring and, if he is, why, given that his staffing is lower.
The Trump campaign did not respond to The Huffington Post’s queries.
Source
|
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value.
|
On August 23 2016 19:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 19:36 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2016 17:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Can someone help me understand how the 15,000 emails that were work related but deleted by Clinton would happen unintentionally? Would that not require an extraordinary amount of incompetence?
WASHINGTON — The dispute over Hillary Clinton’s email practices now threatens to shadow her for the rest of the presidential campaign after the disclosure on Monday that the F.B.I. collected nearly 15,000 new emails in its investigation of her and a federal judge’s order that the State Department accelerate the documents’ release.
As a result, thousands of emails that Mrs. Clinton did not voluntarily turn over to the State Department last year could be released just weeks before the election in November. The order, by Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court, came the same day a conservative watchdog group separately released hundreds of emails from one of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, which put a new focus on the sometimes awkward ties between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.
The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. In late July, it turned them over to the State Department, which now must set a timetable for their release, according to Judge Boasberg’s order.
While the emails were not in the original trove of 55,000 pages that Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers handed to the State Department last year, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said in July that he did not believe they had been “intentionally deleted.” Still, he characterized Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information during her years at the State Department as “extremely careless.”
SourceIt's very hard to imagine Hillary as both the political mastermind her supporters envision her as, and also the unimaginably incompetent, and extremely careless person the FBI has asserted she is as to justify not recommending charges. At some point this has got to irritate Democrats? Because E-discovery in a nightmare and an email chain isn't a chain. Each response is a new email. Each person on the chain, a new email. Sometimes emails are deleted from one side, but saved on the other. You will note they didn't find the emails on her system, but on the back ups of other government officials she corresponded with. Her office and the state department did not have access to them. It is weird the FBI just got around to searching those now. But this is why asking for "all the emails anyone ever sent or received" is a nightmare and leads to shit like this. uh? Show nested quote +The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. They may not have intentionally deleted them from her server to avoid them going to the investigation, but it's pretty hard to imagine they had no idea they were destroying public records. Of course I imagine this is where the incompetence comes in.
For context, I delete several hundred emails a week and I still have about 8,000 unread messages in my work email alone just from the past two years. Most of my coworkers get to about 50-100 unread messages, deleting about 10k emails a year.
And we're nobodies. I can only imagine being the Secretary of State.
|
On August 23 2016 22:15 Plansix wrote:
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value.
So you are talking about the clinton foundation?
|
On August 23 2016 22:19 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:15 Plansix wrote:
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value. So you are talking about the clinton foundation?
No.
|
On August 23 2016 22:18 TMagpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 19:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 23 2016 19:36 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2016 17:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Can someone help me understand how the 15,000 emails that were work related but deleted by Clinton would happen unintentionally? Would that not require an extraordinary amount of incompetence?
WASHINGTON — The dispute over Hillary Clinton’s email practices now threatens to shadow her for the rest of the presidential campaign after the disclosure on Monday that the F.B.I. collected nearly 15,000 new emails in its investigation of her and a federal judge’s order that the State Department accelerate the documents’ release.
As a result, thousands of emails that Mrs. Clinton did not voluntarily turn over to the State Department last year could be released just weeks before the election in November. The order, by Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court, came the same day a conservative watchdog group separately released hundreds of emails from one of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, which put a new focus on the sometimes awkward ties between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.
The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. In late July, it turned them over to the State Department, which now must set a timetable for their release, according to Judge Boasberg’s order.
While the emails were not in the original trove of 55,000 pages that Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers handed to the State Department last year, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said in July that he did not believe they had been “intentionally deleted.” Still, he characterized Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information during her years at the State Department as “extremely careless.”
SourceIt's very hard to imagine Hillary as both the political mastermind her supporters envision her as, and also the unimaginably incompetent, and extremely careless person the FBI has asserted she is as to justify not recommending charges. At some point this has got to irritate Democrats? Because E-discovery in a nightmare and an email chain isn't a chain. Each response is a new email. Each person on the chain, a new email. Sometimes emails are deleted from one side, but saved on the other. You will note they didn't find the emails on her system, but on the back ups of other government officials she corresponded with. Her office and the state department did not have access to them. It is weird the FBI just got around to searching those now. But this is why asking for "all the emails anyone ever sent or received" is a nightmare and leads to shit like this. uh? The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. They may not have intentionally deleted them from her server to avoid them going to the investigation, but it's pretty hard to imagine they had no idea they were destroying public records. Of course I imagine this is where the incompetence comes in. For context, I delete several hundred emails a week and I still have about 8,000 unread messages in my work email alone just from the past two years. Most of my coworkers get to about 50-100 unread messages, deleting about 10k emails a year. And we're nobodies. I can only imagine being the Secretary of State.
Just think of all the email chains she was CCed on that she didn’t need to be CCed on. That has to make up at least 40% of my email.
|
On August 23 2016 22:19 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:15 Plansix wrote:
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value. So you are talking about the clinton foundation?
They should look at that too, but thats a separate issue because the Clinton Foundation isnt a business. But I can see how you would make that mistake given your proclivity.
Paying your for profit businesses with campaign moneys isnt even subtle.
On August 23 2016 22:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:18 TMagpie wrote:On August 23 2016 19:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 23 2016 19:36 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2016 17:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Can someone help me understand how the 15,000 emails that were work related but deleted by Clinton would happen unintentionally? Would that not require an extraordinary amount of incompetence?
WASHINGTON — The dispute over Hillary Clinton’s email practices now threatens to shadow her for the rest of the presidential campaign after the disclosure on Monday that the F.B.I. collected nearly 15,000 new emails in its investigation of her and a federal judge’s order that the State Department accelerate the documents’ release.
As a result, thousands of emails that Mrs. Clinton did not voluntarily turn over to the State Department last year could be released just weeks before the election in November. The order, by Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court, came the same day a conservative watchdog group separately released hundreds of emails from one of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, which put a new focus on the sometimes awkward ties between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.
The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. In late July, it turned them over to the State Department, which now must set a timetable for their release, according to Judge Boasberg’s order.
While the emails were not in the original trove of 55,000 pages that Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers handed to the State Department last year, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said in July that he did not believe they had been “intentionally deleted.” Still, he characterized Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information during her years at the State Department as “extremely careless.”
SourceIt's very hard to imagine Hillary as both the political mastermind her supporters envision her as, and also the unimaginably incompetent, and extremely careless person the FBI has asserted she is as to justify not recommending charges. At some point this has got to irritate Democrats? Because E-discovery in a nightmare and an email chain isn't a chain. Each response is a new email. Each person on the chain, a new email. Sometimes emails are deleted from one side, but saved on the other. You will note they didn't find the emails on her system, but on the back ups of other government officials she corresponded with. Her office and the state department did not have access to them. It is weird the FBI just got around to searching those now. But this is why asking for "all the emails anyone ever sent or received" is a nightmare and leads to shit like this. uh? The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. They may not have intentionally deleted them from her server to avoid them going to the investigation, but it's pretty hard to imagine they had no idea they were destroying public records. Of course I imagine this is where the incompetence comes in. For context, I delete several hundred emails a week and I still have about 8,000 unread messages in my work email alone just from the past two years. Most of my coworkers get to about 50-100 unread messages, deleting about 10k emails a year. And we're nobodies. I can only imagine being the Secretary of State. Just think of all the email chains she was CCed on that she didn’t need to be CCed on. That has to make up at least 40% of my email.
I know right. I dump atleast a dozen emails a day that I know will get archived somewhere else because I dont want to ask for more space. But good luck finding them a year from now.
Management level people is generally off the charts.
|
On August 23 2016 22:23 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:19 GoTuNk! wrote:On August 23 2016 22:15 Plansix wrote:
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value. So you are talking about the clinton foundation? They should look at that too, but thats a separate issue because the Clinton Foundation isnt a business. But I can see how you would make that mistake given your proclivity. Paying your for profit businesses with campaign moneys isnt even subtle.
And once again, the Clinton Foundation is pretty transparent. I would prefer it didn’t exist, took in less money from major corporations or was very separate from Clinton herself, but it’s a known quantity. I can know who donates that is enough for me at this time. I do want them to create a very clean break between the Clintons and the foundation during her time as president. To be honest, I think they should have done that some time ago. But that isn’t enough to change my vote.
|
On August 23 2016 22:23 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:19 GoTuNk! wrote:On August 23 2016 22:15 Plansix wrote:
After November, I bet there is an investigation into exactly how that money was spent and changes in the laws about self funding an election bid. Funneling donations directly into your own business should be unethical at face value. So you are talking about the clinton foundation? They should look at that too, but thats a separate issue because the Clinton Foundation isnt a business. But I can see how you would make that mistake given your proclivity. Paying your for profit businesses with campaign moneys isnt even subtle. Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 22:23 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2016 22:18 TMagpie wrote:On August 23 2016 19:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 23 2016 19:36 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2016 17:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Can someone help me understand how the 15,000 emails that were work related but deleted by Clinton would happen unintentionally? Would that not require an extraordinary amount of incompetence?
WASHINGTON — The dispute over Hillary Clinton’s email practices now threatens to shadow her for the rest of the presidential campaign after the disclosure on Monday that the F.B.I. collected nearly 15,000 new emails in its investigation of her and a federal judge’s order that the State Department accelerate the documents’ release.
As a result, thousands of emails that Mrs. Clinton did not voluntarily turn over to the State Department last year could be released just weeks before the election in November. The order, by Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court, came the same day a conservative watchdog group separately released hundreds of emails from one of Mrs. Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, which put a new focus on the sometimes awkward ties between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.
The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. In late July, it turned them over to the State Department, which now must set a timetable for their release, according to Judge Boasberg’s order.
While the emails were not in the original trove of 55,000 pages that Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers handed to the State Department last year, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said in July that he did not believe they had been “intentionally deleted.” Still, he characterized Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified information during her years at the State Department as “extremely careless.”
SourceIt's very hard to imagine Hillary as both the political mastermind her supporters envision her as, and also the unimaginably incompetent, and extremely careless person the FBI has asserted she is as to justify not recommending charges. At some point this has got to irritate Democrats? Because E-discovery in a nightmare and an email chain isn't a chain. Each response is a new email. Each person on the chain, a new email. Sometimes emails are deleted from one side, but saved on the other. You will note they didn't find the emails on her system, but on the back ups of other government officials she corresponded with. Her office and the state department did not have access to them. It is weird the FBI just got around to searching those now. But this is why asking for "all the emails anyone ever sent or received" is a nightmare and leads to shit like this. uh? The F.B.I. discovered the roughly 14,900 emails by scouring Mrs. Clinton’s server and the computer archives of government officials with whom she corresponded. They may not have intentionally deleted them from her server to avoid them going to the investigation, but it's pretty hard to imagine they had no idea they were destroying public records. Of course I imagine this is where the incompetence comes in. For context, I delete several hundred emails a week and I still have about 8,000 unread messages in my work email alone just from the past two years. Most of my coworkers get to about 50-100 unread messages, deleting about 10k emails a year. And we're nobodies. I can only imagine being the Secretary of State. Just think of all the email chains she was CCed on that she didn’t need to be CCed on. That has to make up at least 40% of my email. I know right. I dump atleast a dozen emails a day that I know will get archived somewhere else because I dont want to ask for more space. But good luck finding them a year from now. Management level people is generally off the charts.
I expect the Clinton campaign to also be paying friends and associates for content and services. I just don't think they are doing it as blatantly as Trump is doing where he is paying his own businesses or his digital manager who is paying the company he owns millions for online ads.
|
There is a difference between hiring people you worked with before and straight up paying money directly to your own business that you own.
|
Trump telling minorities how unsafe they are is bizarre. It's like Trump doesn't remember what happened the last time we tried to get really tough on crime. Tough on crime rarely works out well for black people. Some rich white guy telling a group of black people he's gonna be tough on crime should scare the living shit out of said black people.
|
Most of the discussion around those remarks from Trump is that they are not designed to appeal to minorities, but deflect claims racism and appear more palatable to white voters.
|
Donald Trump's paid campaign staffers have declared on their personal social media accounts that Muslims are unfit to be American citizens, ridiculed Mexican accents, called for Secretary of State John Kerry's death by hanging and stated their readiness for a possible civil war, according to a review of their postings by The Associated Press.
The AP examined the social media and backgrounds of current and former campaign staffers who helped propel Trump through the primary elections. Most come across as dedicated, enthusiastic partisans, but at least seven expressed views that were overtly racially charged, supportive of violent actions or broadly hostile to Muslims.
A graphic designer for Trump's advance team approvingly posted video of a black man eating fried chicken and criticizing fellow blacks for ignorance, irresponsibility and having too many children. A Trump field organizer in Virginia declared that Muslims were seeking to impose Sharia law in America and that "those who understand Islam for what it is are gearing up for the fight."
...
The AP also reviewed the public social media accounts of more than three dozen employees of Hillary Clinton's far larger campaign staff and found nothing as inflammatory. One staffer said Trump's style of speaking reminded him of a roommate who had taken too many hallucinogenic mushrooms. AP also reviewed images attached to more than 19,000 stolen internal emails from the Democratic National Committee for racially or religiously inflammatory memes, finding nothing of note.
www.yahoo.com
Let's hope that if this man gets elected, he immediately becomes politically competent.
|
I wonder what one would find on a similar look at Hillary staffers. There's a lot of crazies in America; and part of the goal of society is to let them participate while limiting the damage their crazy can cause. Just cuz they have some crazy views doesn't mean they can't do their jobs reasonably well.
|
On August 24 2016 00:51 zlefin wrote:
I wonder what one would find on a similar look at Hillary staffers. There's a lot of crazies in America; and part of the goal of society is to let them participate while limiting the damage their crazy can cause. Just cuz they have some crazy views doesn't mean they can't do their jobs reasonably well.
Ehm, the article mentions they did a similar look at Hillary's staff and found nothing of note.
Now they might not have checked everyone because unlike Trump Hillary actually employs a large team but still.
Read the article.
|
On August 24 2016 00:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 00:51 zlefin wrote:
I wonder what one would find on a similar look at Hillary staffers. There's a lot of crazies in America; and part of the goal of society is to let them participate while limiting the damage their crazy can cause. Just cuz they have some crazy views doesn't mean they can't do their jobs reasonably well. Ehm, the article mentions they did a similar look at Hillary's staff and found nothing of note. Now they might not have checked everyone because unlike Trump Hillary actually employs a large team but still. Read the article.
ah, I missed that line. TY.
|
On August 23 2016 05:31 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2016 05:28 mahrgell wrote:On August 23 2016 05:27 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 23 2016 05:26 mahrgell wrote:On August 23 2016 05:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 23 2016 05:23 On_Slaught wrote:Man, are we really having a discussion about whether a mess is sexist? Let's all just agree he acts like a piece of shit to all people equally. Unless you're Russian.  Glad you agree it isn't sexist and it's fucking retarded for doodsmack to assert it is You know that your insistence on this "victory" makes you look pretty much the same as doodsmack? I'd argue your defense of him makes you look like him. You may have noticed I already agreed on your judgement of him, which I would call hardly "defending him". But go on. I think it's funny how if some alt-right guy comes in this thread posting nonsense when everyone jumps on his bullshit, none of the right-oriented posters speak up to defend him. Bullshit is bullshit and there's no need to. But it seems like when a regressive-left guy like doodsmack starts spreading nonsense, if you try to call him out on it the cavalry comes because left sticks together even if it's just retarded No one should be defending Doodsmack's argument here yet so many of you are fighting against the shitstorm he's getting. He said something ridiculous. He got called out on it and refused to acknowledge he was wrong.
it's more funny how if someone comes in giving a horrible source like infowars or breitbart but gives some batshit crazy conspiracy theory about someone the right wing people dislike, all the "right-oriented posters" speak up to defend them and their horrible source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RHBZ9Rv.png)
