Every Single Question Hostile to Trump, Wow!

[Kurt]

The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the Hillary campaign picked them.

Like living in Stalinist Russia.

[Kurt]

The big questions for the debate:

1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?

4. Etc. That's the first hour.

[Kurt]

Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is wrong.

Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of it, the format everything rigged.

[hypatiab7]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> The big questions for the debate:
>
> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

Then they'd have more money to lend him.

>
> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.

>
> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?

Yes, why did he and, it was racist.

>
> 4. Etc. That's the first hour.

He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
and made no sense.

All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <0c4c6946-ce6c-45fc...@googlegroups.com>,

He couldn't even give a straight answer to the final question about
whether he would support Clinton if she won.

--

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream
up a God superior to themselves. Most
Gods have the manners and morals of a
spoiled child.

[hhya...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:15:38 AM UTC+8, Kurt wrote:
> The big questions for the debate:
>
> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

Because he is a beneficiary to the policy.

>
> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

Something to hide???

>
> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?

Open secret that Trump is a racist.

>
> 4. Etc. That's the first hour.

Thousands more.....

[hhya...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:38:28 AM UTC+8, Kurt wrote:
> Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is wrong.

Hillary is correct and even the moderator cannot help.

>
> Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of it, the format everything rigged.

Just because your lousy candidate being exposed that you can't stand straight?

[hypatiab7]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 12:59:55 AM UTC-4, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <0c4c6946-ce6c-45fc...@googlegroups.com>,
> hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> > >
> > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> > >
> > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> > Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> > >
> > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> >
> > He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> > He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> > and made no sense.
> >
> > All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
>
> He couldn't even give a straight answer to the final question about
> whether he would support Clinton if she won.

When he was outside the debate room, he said that he would support Hilary if she won. Does anyone believe him?

[Kurt]

Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate

NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking” Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq War.
Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.

Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from the Clinton campaign’s talking points, and which were obvious set-ups for Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump asserted in his own defense).

Here are the five worst examples.

Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings. But he did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved to hear.

Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record of racist statements, including her “super-predator” remarks as First Lady, or her explicit appeal to “white Americans” in her 2008 primary campaign against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and cast it as racist.

Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of “stop-and-frisk,” Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating, erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.

“A presidential look.” Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential look.” He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman” to be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on women.

Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never asked Clinton about her own vote.

In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump calling for Clinton’s emails.

Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley-moment-first-debate/

[Kurt]

Lester Holt: The Third Debater?

At tonight’s debate, Donald Trump faced off not just against Hillary Clinton, but against moderator Lester Holt.

The game of two-on-one saw Holt ask no questions about:

he game of two-on-one saw Holt ask no questions about:

Hillary’s emails
Benghazi
The Clinton Foundation
While ignoring these issues, Holt grilled Trump on stop-and-frisk, the birther story, his comments about women, his many bankruptcies, why he hasn’t released his tax returns — and a host of other issues the media sees as unfriendly to the Republican candidate.

Holt also repeatedly attempted to “fact check” on some of Trump’s positions, such as his claim to have opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. Holt interrupted Trump several times to interject, but rarely succeeded (and may have come across as weak and impotent).

The Twittersphere has taken note:...

http://heatst.com/politics/lester-holt-the-third-debater/

[tirebiter]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 12:59:55 AM UTC-4, Jeanne Douglas wrote:

> In article <0c4c6946-ce6c-45fc...@googlegroups.com>,
> hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> > >
> > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> > >
> > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> > Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> > >
> > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> >
> > He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> > He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> > and made no sense.
> >
> > All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
>
> He couldn't even give a straight answer to the final question about
> whether he would support Clinton if she won.
>

Even more important, he couldn't answer the first question as to how
he would bring jobs back to the US. Clinton hit that one out of the
park.

---
a.a. #2273

[tirebiter]

Yeah sure. He clearly really doesn't want to be president. He wants
to start the Trump TV network, which will likely dilute Fox News.

---
a.a. #2273

[viva padrepio]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:38:28 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is wrong.
>
> Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of it, the format everything rigged.

This is desperation time for the globalist. They know they're losing big time and yes, they'll still be behind a corpse to win the cause for them. They'll play it out for what it's worth. There's nothing left for them to do really but to focus on 2020.

[Wexford Eire]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
>
> NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking” Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq War.

Because Trump lied about it and continued to lie about it. Trump never admits a mistake.

> Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.

Awwwww.... Conservatives bitching and crying. Nothing new about that.

>
> Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from the Clinton campaign’s talking points,

Yes, cogent questions about policy are a bother when all you want to do is bluster and bullshit.

and which were obvious set-ups for Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump asserted in his own defense).

Why are fact-checkers suddenly evil? Oh, that's right, its because Trump incessantly lies or makes things up.

>
> Here are the five worst examples.
>
> Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings.

The Clinton Foundation has no "dubious dealings." That's a Conservative hoax. Why ask about Benghazi? SHe's sat through 8 congressional hearings on it and been exonerated each time. As for the e-mails, Trump certainly did ask about those, she admitted her mistake and Trump jumped on that saying it was no mistake, it was purposeful (as if mistakes couldn't be purposeful). He certainly did gore her with the question but it was obvious he didn't know enough to pursue it.

> But he did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved to hear.

Which is the only reason Trump is the first presidential candidate in 40 years not to reveal them. Clinton's speculation about them wasn't contested by Trump. She was too close to the truth.

>
> Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record of racist statements, including her “super-predator” remarks as First Lady, or her explicit appeal to “white Americans” in her 2008

WTF? She made no such "explicit appeal to white Americans." He statement referred to the fact that she didn't think it was possible to win the presidency without the support of the white working class. That's a demographic statement, not a racist one.

primary campaign against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and cast it as racist.

Clinton said ten words on the subject in one interview. Trump trumpeted the Birther cause for five bloody years. You don't see a difference?

>
> Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of “stop-and-frisk,” Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating, erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.

No true. Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, who Trump vilified in his own childish way as a as a "very against police judge" found stop and frisk unconstitutional. The city appealed and the appeal went no where. The City later stated it would revise its policies.

Of course a budding fascist like Trump or a true fascist like Giuliani loves the idea of stopping people who are not committing crimes and searching them. Both have nothing but contempt for the Bill of Rights. In Trump's case, it's probably because he hasn't the faintest idea of what the 4th Amendment is about.

BY the way, the crime rate in New York continued to decline after Stop and Frisk was stopped. The Mayor now claims that most Stop and Frisks were time wasting and useless anyway, and by stopping them they've freed the police to do their jobs more effectively.

>
> “A presidential look.” Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential look.” He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman” to be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on women.

He called Trump on Trump's own words????? Oh, poor baby. Maybe the moron should keep his mouth shut.

>
> Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never asked Clinton about her own vote.

There is incontrovertible evidence that Trump supported the Iraq war at least initially. He admitted as much, referring to his interview with Howard Stern then again denied it. All Trump had to do was say "I was an early opponent of the war," and he would have been fine. But he always has to be the first, the center, the greatest, and if a lie supports that, he'll keep lying.

>
> In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump calling for Clinton’s emails.

Awwwww.... Poor babies. Holt only said it once, then seemed to give up. As the evening wore on, boos and cheers were heard both for and against either one of the two candidates and he said nothing about them.

>
> Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.

Actually, he did an excellent job.

>
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley-moment-first-debate/

Breibart????? HAHAHAHAHA! Well I guess they have to blame someone for Tump's miserable performance.

[Wexford Eire]

[Wexford Eire]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:

> Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
>
> NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking” Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq War.

Because Trump lied about it and continued to lie about it. Trump never admits a mistake.

> Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.

Awwwww.... Conservatives bitching and crying. Nothing new about that.

>

> Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from the Clinton campaign’s talking points,

Yes, cogent questions about policy are a bother when all you want to do is bluster and bullshit.

and which were obvious set-ups for Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump asserted in his own defense).

Why are fact-checkers suddenly evil? Oh, that's right, its because Trump incessantly lies or makes things up.

>

> Here are the five worst examples.
>
> Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings.

The Clinton Foundation has no "dubious dealings." That's a Conservative hoax. Why ask about Benghazi? SHe's sat through 8 congressional hearings on it and been exonerated each time. As for the e-mails, Trump certainly did ask about those, she admitted her mistake and Trump jumped on that saying it was no mistake, it was purposeful (as if mistakes couldn't be purposeful). He certainly did gore her with the question but it was obvious he didn't know enough to pursue it.

> But he did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved to hear.

Which is the only reason Trump is the first presidential candidate in 40 years not to reveal them. Clinton's speculation about them wasn't contested by Trump. She was too close to the truth.

>

> Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record of racist statements, including her “super-predator” remarks as First Lady, or her explicit appeal to “white Americans” in her 2008

WTF? She made no such "explicit appeal to white Americans." He statement referred to the fact that she didn't think it was possible to win the presidency without the support of the white working class. That's a demographic statement, not a racist one.

primary campaign against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and cast it as racist.

Clinton said ten words on the subject in one interview. Trump trumpeted the Birther cause for five bloody years. You don't see a difference?

>

> Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of “stop-and-frisk,” Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating, erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.

No true. Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, who Trump vilified in his own childish way as a as a "very against police judge" found stop and frisk unconstitutional. The city appealed and the appeal went no where. The City later stated it would revise its policies.

Of course a budding fascist like Trump or a true fascist like Giuliani loves the idea of stopping people who are not committing crimes and searching them. Both have nothing but contempt for the Bill of Rights. In Trump's case, it's probably because he hasn't the faintest idea of what the 4th Amendment is about.

BY the way, the crime rate in New York continued to decline after Stop and Frisk was stopped. The Mayor now claims that most Stop and Frisks were time wasting and useless anyway, and by stopping them they've freed the police to do their jobs more effectively.

>

> “A presidential look.” Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential look.” He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman” to be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on women.

He called Trump on Trump's own words????? Oh, poor baby. Maybe the moron should keep his mouth shut.


>

> Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never asked Clinton about her own vote.

There is incontrovertible evidence that Trump supported the Iraq war at least initially. He admitted as much, referring to his interview with Howard Stern then again denied it. All Trump had to do was say "I was an early opponent of the war," and he would have been fine. But he always has to be the first, the center, the greatest, and if a lie supports that, he'll keep lying.

>

> In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump calling for Clinton’s emails.

Awwwww.... Poor babies. Holt only said it once, then seemed to give up. As the evening wore on, boos and cheers were heard both for and against either one of the two candidates and he said nothing about them.

>

> Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.

[Wexford Eire]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:55:25 AM UTC-4, viva padrepio wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:38:28 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is wrong.
> >
> > Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of it, the format everything rigged.
>
> This is desperation time for the globalist.

Trump IS a globalist, you stupid shit.

[tirebiter]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:

> Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
>
> NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking” Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq War.
> Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.
>
> Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from the Clinton campaign’s talking points, and which were obvious set-ups for Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump asserted in his own defense).
>
> Here are the five worst examples.
>
> Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings. But he did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved to hear.
>

A 100% valid question. Trump has never given a believable answer to this.
There is no restriction for him to release his taxes, even under audit.
But still, he has no excuse for not releasing tax returns for years that
aren't under audit.

Plus, I wonder why nobody ever asks why is he under a permanent audit? He
even admitted that his billionaire buddies don't have this happen. There
must be something very fishy in his finances.

> Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record of racist statements, including her “super-predator” remarks as First Lady, or her explicit appeal to “white Americans” in her 2008 primary campaign against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and cast it as racist.
>

Because he is racist. Clinton has retracted and apologized for the "super
predator" comment. Trump has never and will never apologize for being a
birther.

> Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of “stop-and-frisk,” Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating, erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.
>

Because it is clearly unconstitutional. And the "benefits" are fully
inflated by its proponents. Throughout its full use, it has less than
3% conviction rate at the expense of publicly shaming thousands of
innocent people.

Think about that if you were black or latino, and every time you went
out, you were at risk of being stopped and hassled by the police? Would
that make you be friendly towards them?

> “A presidential look.” Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential look.” He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman” to be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on women.
>

He is trying to be the most powerful person in the world, and yet he can't
get over a silly slight from 10 years ago. It was fully on point to show
his character. Clinton didn't even scratch the surface of things like
when he told men to "treat women like shit", or when he blamed one of his
divorces on his wife having become a successful business person. The
man is a pig.

> Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never asked Clinton about her own vote.
>

And Clinton has acknowledged it and also expressed regret for that vote.
Not that a nay vote would have made a difference. In the hysteria of the
time, the vote for the war was a massive majority.

However, There are MULTIPLE videos of Trump being in favor of the war.
He should just admit that at the time, he felt it was an appropriate
decision, but has since changed his mind. But his narcissism won't
allow it.

> In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump calling for Clinton’s emails.

I don't know what debate you watched, but in the one I saw, there was a
loud audience interruption for Trump. Holt correctly admonished them.
Then there were a few less raucous ones for both candidates (mostly for
Trump) and Holt didn't respond to any of them.

>
> Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.
>

Actually, he should have done a better job of stopping Trump from
constantly stealing Clinton's time, and ignoring the questions by
simply repeating the same 3 sentences several times over. But it turned
out good for Clinton because Trump was intent on putting his foot in
his mouth, up to the knee. Still, Holt let Trump prevent him from
stopping Trump's several meandering filibusters which wasted well over
10 minutes total. One weak attempt to stop Trump and then nothing for
at least 2-3 minutes (but at least it was 3 minutes of further grave
digging).

---
a.a. #2273

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley-moment-first-debate/

[Wexford Eire]

Good observations. You saw exactly what I saw and you expressed it better. I think when one candidate's time is up and other candidate is speaking they should turn off the microphone of the quiet candidate so the speaker can't be interrupted. Toward the end, when Hillary was reminding people that Trump called women "pigs" and other names and relating the story of the beauty contestant, red-faced Trump did all he could to talk over her. He was positively panicking. Could you imagine this moron in the White House? I think Trump has about exhausted his cliches and evasions. The next two debates should put him down far enough to push Hillary over the top.

[Wexford Eire]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:08:18 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the Hillary campaign picked them.
>
> Like living in Stalinist Russia.

Koo-Koo, Kurt, even for you.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <3f7d5bde-f900-4aac...@googlegroups.com>,

As long as he makes a reasonable concession speech without mentioned
being cheated, I'll be happy.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <16d55059-98c0-46fd...@googlegroups.com>,

If he doesn't chicken out.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <d8fa0f79-a0cb-4dd4...@googlegroups.com>,

We need to remember that he cried about the "mean" questions Megyn Kelly
asked him.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 06:32:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>In article <d8fa0f79-a0cb-4dd4...@googlegroups.com>,
> Wexford Eire <wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
>> > Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
>> >

>> > NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley�€? moment at the first debate of

>> > the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the

>> > Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking�€?

>> > Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq
>> > War.
>> > Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the
>> > worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican
>> > candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.
>> >
>> > Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from
>> > the Clinton campaign’s talking points, and which were obvious set-ups for
>> > Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump
>> > asserted in his own defense).
>> >
>> > Here are the five worst examples.
>> >
>> > Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about
>> > Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings. But he
>> > did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there
>> > might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved
>> > to hear.
>> >
>> > Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record

>> > of racist statements, including her “super-predator�€? remarks as First Lady,
>> > or her explicit appeal to “white Americans�€? in her 2008 primary campaign

>> > against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and
>> > cast it as racist.
>> >
>> > Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of

>> > “stop-and-frisk,�€? Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating,

>> > erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been
>> > declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the
>> > new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.
>> >

>> > “A presidential look.�€? Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump

>> > about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential

>> > look.�€? He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman�€? to

>> > be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump
>> > up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton
>> > a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on
>> > women.
>> >
>> > Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has
>> > been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for
>> > it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never
>> > asked Clinton about her own vote.
>> >
>> > In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in
>> > Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the
>> > rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump
>> > calling for Clinton’s emails.
>> >
>> > Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.
>> >
>> > http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley
>> > -moment-first-debate/
>>
>> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
>> > Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
>> >

>> > NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley�€? moment at the first debate of

>> > the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the

>> > Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking�€?

>> > Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq
>> > War.
>>
>>
>> Because Trump lied about it and continued to lie about it. Trump never admits
>> a mistake.
>>
>> > Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the
>> > worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican
>> > candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.
>>
>> Awwwww.... Conservatives bitching and crying. Nothing new about that.
>
>
>We need to remember that he cried about the "mean" questions Megyn Kelly
>asked him.

He's a narcissist who imagines he gets away with anything - but he
doesn't seem to understand whom his audience is.

When he got the Republican nomination, it went from just the loonies
who supported his troll-like behaviour to include the entire
electorate.

And he doesn't realise this.
whole country.

[tt]

trump is prejudice dont vote for trump

[Kurt]

In debate, Clinton gets no follow-up questions, Trump gets 6
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in-debate-trump-gets-6-follow-up-questions-clinton-gets-none/article/2602939

[Kurt]

At tonight’s debate, Donald Trump faced off not just against Hillary Clinton, but against moderator Lester Holt.

The game of two-on-one saw Holt ask no questions about:

Hillary’s emails
Benghazi
The Clinton Foundation
While ignoring these issues, Holt grilled Trump on stop-and-frisk, the birther story, his comments about women, his many bankruptcies, why he hasn’t released his tax returns — and a host of other issues the media sees as unfriendly to the Republican candidate.

Holt also repeatedly attempted to “fact check” on some of Trump’s positions, such as his claim to have opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. Holt interrupted Trump several times to interject, but rarely succeeded (and may have come across as weak and impotent).

The Twittersphere has taken note:

Follow
Tim S Clark ✔ @TimSClark
Lester Holt taking heat for obvious pro-Clinton moderation of the debate. http://bit.ly/2dy40XB #CA4Trump #debatenight

11:00 PM - 26 Sep 2016
Photo published for 5 Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
5 Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
NBC News' Lester Holt had his "Candy Crowley" moment at the first debate, bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the media.
breitbart.com
1,613 1,613 Retweets 1,614 1,614 likes
Jeff ✔ @JeffTutorials
Dumb @LesterHoltNBC was EXTREMELY bias during this debate

He did not question Crooked Hillary on Benghazi, Clinton Foundation & More!
10:58 PM - 26 Sep 2016
345 345 Retweets 419 419 likes
Follow

Tony Maglio ✔ @TonyMaglio
Bad job by Lester Holt & mainstream reporters on Trump walkout. Let him hang himself, tying the noose isn’t your job. Ethics, assholes.
10:57 PM - 26 Sep 2016
93 93 Retweets 119 119 likes
Follow

Eric Bolling ✔ @ericbolling
Lester Holt train of thought right now:
Tax returns- ck
Birth Cert- ck

Emails? Health? Benghazi?
(Oops we ran out of time)
10:13 PM - 26 Sep 2016
6,968 6,968 Retweets 10,891 10,891 likes
Follow

Deplorable Jim @SaveUSA1776
Lester Holt didn't ask about "basket of deplorables". No server. No Clinton Foundation. Nothing. #debatenight #Debates2016 Donald Trump
10:44 PM - 26 Sep 2016 · Indiana, USA, United States
1,388 1,388 Retweets 1,599 1,599 likes

Follow
jimgeraghty ✔ @jimgeraghty
I suppose Lester Holt just forgot about the no-applause, no-cheering rule as the night wore on.http://bit.ly/2d26r6t
11:10 PM - 26 Sep 2016
272 272 Retweets 387 387 likes
Follow

HowardKurtz ✔ @HowardKurtz
Nearly all of Holt's followups and fact-checking efforts were directed at Trump, not Clinton. Look for a big debate over his role
10:28 PM - 26 Sep 2016
887 887 Retweets 927 927 likes
Follow

Mike Matusow ✔ @themouthmatusow
Lester Holt questions all attacks on Trump which put him on defense all night!! Not 1 question on any things she has done #debates
11:23 PM - 26 Sep 2016
187 187 Retweets 222 222 likes
Follow

toddstarnes ✔ @toddstarnes
Lester Holt should've moderated -- instead of auditioning to be Hillary's press secretary. http://bit.ly/2cYOoKS #debatenight

11:17 PM - 26 Sep 2016
Photo published for Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton & her Press Secretary Lester Holt
Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton & her Press Secretary Lester Holt
Donald Trump came to debate. Hillary Clinton came to insult. And NBC's Lester Holt came to apply for a job as Mrs. Bill Clinton's press secretary. Watch my reaction to the first presidential debate:
toddstarnes.com
1,461 1,461 Retweets 1,894 1,894 likes
Follow

James Poniewozik ✔ @poniewozik
I don't know who this debate benefitted or not, but one sign will be if / how fast Trump attacks Lester Holt on Twitter.
11:03 PM - 26 Sep 2016
48 48 Retweets 112 112 likes
Follow

The nerds at Vox.com tried to argue that Hillary was interrupted a lot during the debate because she is a woman. However, the cute little graphic they made actually shows that Lester Holt interrupted Trump far more often than he interrupted Hillary....

http://heatst.com/politics/lester-holt-the-third-debater/

[Kurt]

Eight examples where ‘fact-checking’ became opinion journalism

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/26/eight-examples-where-fact-checking-became-opinion-/

[Kurt]

NBC Crank Lester Holt Interrupted Trump 41 times, Hillary 7 Times …And Lied About His Positions
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/nbc-crank-lester-holt-interrupted-trump-41-times-hillary-7-times-lied-positions/

[viva padrepio]

Wacksford Arse, no. Not in the sense of Crooked Hillary and the banks who constantly want their hands up your arse to see if you're hiding any money in there.

[viva padrepio]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 1:46:12 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> NBC Crank Lester Holt Interrupted Trump 41 times, Hillary 7 Times …And Lied About His Positions
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/nbc-crank-lester-holt-interrupted-trump-41-times-hillary-7-times-lied-positions/

What Holt did was win the Presidency for Trump. If the nation didn't know it before, they know now. 35 years in politics and Crooked Hillary hasn't done anything but get people killed.

[Wexford Eire]

How many more excuses can you make for Trump's miserable performance? Trump's bluster and blather didn't work this time, so its the moderator's fault. Poor, abused Trump, everyone is against him; the system is rigged. I'll bet he cried all the way home, poor baby. Maybe next time he'll learn to speak in coherent sentences, stop the name calling, exaggerations and lies and stay on topic. Oh, that's right, incoherence, vagueness and bullying are his signal methods. Too bad Hillary trounced him.

[Wexford Eire]

He has all his merchandise made overseas, you moron. He employs foreigners in his hotels and resorts (the ones he guilds here), stupid. He relies on the freedom those treaties he condemns as job-draining to keep his businesses going, idiot. He's the quintessential globalist and despite what he says, he doesn't give a flying shit about jobs here. If he can make a buck more by outsourcing, he does it. Lord, you're stupid.

[Wexford Eire]

Tell you what, Kurt, you keep scouring the wing nut web sites regarding the debate. I know it makes you feel better, considering Trump's miserable, largely incoherent performance during the debate and his breakdown at the end. No matter what excuses you make, he was unprepared. He repeatedly attempted to interrupt and talk over Clinton. He got more time than she did by stealing it from her, and he made, if any, very few comprehensible answers to any questions posed to him. On the other hand, he lied, viciously attacked Clinton, gratuitously praised himself, attempted to bully her, exaggerated like hell, as he usually does, and made a general fool of himself. He's your boy, though. Stick with him to the end. After he loses the general election you can cry it was all rigged.

[duke]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:15:34 -0700 (PDT), Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The big questions for the debate:
>
>1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

Raise the GNP.

>2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

Waiting on crooked hillary to release her 33,000 emails.

>3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?

Crooked hillary started it.

>4. Etc. That's the first hour.

the dukester, American-American

*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****

[duke]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:38:23 -0700 (PDT), Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is wrong.

Why wasn't hillary challenged on her 33,000 missing emails, her emailing
classified material on a open server, her selling state department access for
donations to the clinton charities, here letting 4 Americans die in Benghazi.
And so they mount up..

>Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of it, the format everything rigged.

[Thomos.Roberts]

On 9/27/2016 12:59 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <0c4c6946-ce6c-45fc...@googlegroups.com>,
> hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>

>> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
>>> The big questions for the debate:
>>>
>>> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
>>

>> Then they'd have more money to lend him.
>>>

>>> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
>>

>> Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
>>>

>>> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
>>

>> Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
>>>

>>> 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
>>

>> He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
>> He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
>> and made no sense.
>>
>> All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
>
> He couldn't even give a straight answer to the final question about
> whether he would support Clinton if she won.
>

We were owned by the slavers before the President Mr Lincoln freed us.
He was a republican in name, but in reality he was a democrat.
The question is what have republicans done for us? They always
been for rich white folks. I have time to decide who I will vote
for.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 14:55:42 -0700 (PDT), Wexford Eire
<wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>Tell you what, Kurt, you keep scouring the wing nut web sites
>regarding the debate. I know it makes you feel better, considering
>Trump's miserable, largely incoherent performance during the debate
>and his breakdown at the end. No matter what excuses you make, he
>was unprepared. He repeatedly attempted to interrupt and talk over
>Clinton. He got more time than she did by stealing it from her, and he
>made, if any, very few comprehensible answers to any questions posed
>to him. On the other hand, he lied, viciously attacked Clinton,
>gratuitously praised himself, attempted to bully her, exaggerated
>like hell, as he usually does, and made a general fool of himself.
>He's your boy, though. Stick with him to the end. After he loses the
>general election you can cry it was all rigged.

The trolls like him because he reflects them, their sociopathy, their
narcissism. their ignorance, their thoughtless nastiness, their
stupidity, etc.

[Kurt]

Translation: "He's a businessman that makes money and does international business."

100% of the Globalists, 19 out of 20 billionaires, 100 out of 100 of the fortune 100 CEO's, all of Wall Street most of which will fire you if you don't support Hitlery.

Guess you are ignorant as shit, huh?

[Kurt]

It's statistical fact. And yes, the Machine will do anything no matter how Fascist, to keep control of power. Hitlery sure as hell didn't get here democratically, we have proof of that. The party bosses fixed that too. She's about as democratically elected as the president of Communist China.

[Kurt]

Never in the history of the Republic has rich white men universally supported one candidate like they support Hitlery.

The revolution has arrived! Workers of America rise up! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

[Wexford Eire]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 8:55:25 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> Never in the history of the Republic has rich white men universally supported one candidate like they support Hitlery.

"Never in the history of the Republic???" Look up the Grant Administration. You know nothing about the "history of the Republic," and you're saying it's so don't make it so. Why don't you grow up?

[Wexford Eire]

Another totally unsubstantiated rant by one of our principal lunatics. Thanks, Kurt, every time I read one of nonsensical, unsubstantiated posts it tells me I'm right, Trump supporters are deplorable.

[hhya...@gmail.com]

Hillary should have gotten viva and Cunt killed, but she didn't, right?

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:08:18 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the Hillary campaign picked them.
>
> Like living in Stalinist Russia.

You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that for months Trump has been saying all kinds of outrageous things that might have made him a target?

On the other hand, Hilary should have been hammered harder on the e-mail thing and the number of documented lies she has told in the matter.
She lied to the face of a mother of a soldier and said it was about a video, when she knew better.

One thing for sure, this is not the walk in the park it was supposed to be for Clinton.

Somebody told me yesterday that it's over because Hilary has enough electoral college votes to win. Doesn't that have to wait until the popular vote is in?
I know the delegates can vote as they see fit, but they are supposed to vote according to the way their state voted.

I have a hunch the undecideds will be a big factor plus the fact that it seems like people will come out of the woodwork to vote against Hilary. Nothing about says warm and fuzzy.

I'll just be glad when it's over. The makeup of the Senate might be changed and the GOP could lose its majority, which will still not make it possible for any of her spending increases and tax increases to get passed.

Am I the only one who thinks it crazy to talk about free education when we are 20 trillion dollars in debt? Shouldn't we be cutting spending?

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:15:38 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> The big questions for the debate:
>
> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
>

Because that's where the money for new jobs comes from.

> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
>

Why doesn't Hilary release her emails?

> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
>

Sheer stpidity.

> 4. Etc. That's the first hour.

The lesser of 2 evils is still evil.

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:20:24 PM UTC-7, hypatiab7 wrote:

> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > The big questions for the debate:
> >
> > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
>

> Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> >

> > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
>

> Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> >

Or nothing at all. Remember how they managed to make Romney look bad over Bain Capital? He did nothing wrong, broke no laws, yet he was still stuck with a smear.

> > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
>

> Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> >

Maybe, maybe not, nothing about that screams racism.

> > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
>

> He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> and made no sense.
>
> All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.

The consensus today seems to be he won. Go figure.

[%]

the lesser of two boners is still you

[Kurt]

I don't need to go back 150 years to find such total Wall Street running dog lackeys as you, I know the history...

Goldman Sachs bans top employees from donating to Trump: Reports
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/07/goldman-sachs-bans-top-employees-from-donating-to-trump-report.html

Goldman Sachs Bans Employees from Donating to Trump, But Allows Clinton Donations
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/08/goldman-sachs-bans-employees-from-donating-to-trump-but-allows-clinton-donations/

Hillary Clinton Is Outraising Trump 20-to-1 Among Billionaires
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/billionaire-donors-led-by-soros-simons-favor-clinton-over-trump

No CEOs at Fortune 100 Companies Are Backing Donald Trump
http://fortune.com/2016/09/24/fortune-100-companies-donald-trump/

Workers of the world, take off your blinders and unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains.

[Kurt]

No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the Fascist maggot from CNN and had her speeches all ready. And the Fascist maggot did everything possible to help Hitlery. Constantly interrrupting Trump, constantly "fact checking" which was usually flat out wrong and always at least a matter of opinion.

It's the Machine that's been running both parties, and the mass media, playing hardball. It's like Communist China. We now know for a fact that the Machine rigged the Democrat nomination, that she did not get that democratically, that she got where she is like in Communist China where the party bosses pick.

Oh, the Machine will do a lot more than rig a debate before this is over. He actually cares about the American people.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <a2b055c8-7f08-4553...@googlegroups.com>,

Wexford Eire <wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 4:47:00 PM UTC-4, viva padrepio wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 5:11:13 AM UTC-7, Wexford Eire wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:55:25 AM UTC-4, viva padrepio wrote:
> > > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:38:28 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > > > > Every single question is an attack on Trump, and the maggot
> > > > > constantly interrupts him and constantly and FALSELY says Trump is
> > > > > wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Amazing they they would do something this crooked in public. All of
> > > > > it, the format everything rigged.
> > > >
> > > > This is desperation time for the globalist.
> > >
> > > Trump IS a globalist, you stupid shit.
> >
> > Wacksford Arse, no. Not in the sense of Crooked Hillary and the banks who
> > constantly want their hands up your arse to see if you're hiding any money
> > in there.
>
> He has all his merchandise made overseas, you moron. He employs foreigners in
> his hotels and resorts (the ones he guilds here), stupid.

And he's been caught lying on that. He had a request for a shitload of
foreigners to be maids and waiters in his Florida resort because he said
he couldn't find any Americans to do the jobs. Of course, the jobs
companies contacted said they had hundreds of Americans trying to get
exactly those jobs.

> He relies on the
> freedom those treaties he condemns as job-draining to keep his businesses
> going, idiot. He's the quintessential globalist and despite what he says, he
> doesn't give a flying shit about jobs here. If he can make a buck more by
> outsourcing, he does it. Lord, you're stupid.

Not to mention his confessing that he pays no taxes to support the
country that helped him get rich and thinks that makes him smart.

--

JD

Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream
up a God superior to themselves. Most
Gods have the manners and morals of a
spoiled child.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <a723da13-e273-492c...@googlegroups.com>,

Wexford Eire <wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 4:40:04 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > At tonight’s debate, Donald Trump faced off not just against Hillary
> > Clinton, but against moderator Lester Holt.
> >
> > The game of two-on-one saw Holt ask no questions about:
> >
> > Hillary’s emails
> > Benghazi
> > The Clinton Foundation
> > While ignoring these issues, Holt grilled Trump on stop-and-frisk, the
> > birther story, his comments about women, his many bankruptcies, why he
> > hasn’t released his tax returns — and a host of other issues the media sees
> > as unfriendly to the Republican candidate.
> >
> > Holt also repeatedly attempted to “fact check” on some of Trump’s
> > positions, such as his claim to have opposed the Iraq War from the
> > beginning. Holt interrupted Trump several times to interject, but rarely
> > succeeded (and may have come across as weak and impotent).
> >
> > The Twittersphere has taken note:
> >
> > Follow

> > Tim S Clark ? @TimSClark

> > Lester Holt taking heat for obvious pro-Clinton moderation of the debate.
> > http://bit.ly/2dy40XB #CA4Trump #debatenight
> >
> > 11:00 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > Photo published for 5 Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at
> > First Debate
> > 5 Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
> > NBC News' Lester Holt had his "Candy Crowley" moment at the first debate,
> > bowing to pressure from the Hillary Clinton campaign and the media.
> > breitbart.com
> > 1,613 1,613 Retweets 1,614 1,614 likes

> > Jeff ? @JeffTutorials

> > Dumb @LesterHoltNBC was EXTREMELY bias during this debate
> >
> > He did not question Crooked Hillary on Benghazi, Clinton Foundation & More!
> > 10:58 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 345 345 Retweets 419 419 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > Tony Maglio ? @TonyMaglio

> > Bad job by Lester Holt & mainstream reporters on Trump walkout. Let him
> > hang himself, tying the noose isn’t your job. Ethics, assholes.
> > 10:57 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 93 93 Retweets 119 119 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > Eric Bolling ? @ericbolling

> > Lester Holt train of thought right now:
> > Tax returns- ck
> > Birth Cert- ck
> >
> > Emails? Health? Benghazi?
> > (Oops we ran out of time)
> > 10:13 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 6,968 6,968 Retweets 10,891 10,891 likes
> > Follow
> >
> > Deplorable Jim @SaveUSA1776
> > Lester Holt didn't ask about "basket of deplorables". No server. No Clinton
> > Foundation. Nothing. #debatenight #Debates2016 Donald Trump
> > 10:44 PM - 26 Sep 2016 · Indiana, USA, United States
> > 1,388 1,388 Retweets 1,599 1,599 likes
> >
> > Follow

> > jimgeraghty ? @jimgeraghty

> > I suppose Lester Holt just forgot about the no-applause, no-cheering rule
> > as the night wore on.http://bit.ly/2d26r6t
> > 11:10 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 272 272 Retweets 387 387 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > HowardKurtz ? @HowardKurtz

> > Nearly all of Holt's followups and fact-checking efforts were directed at
> > Trump, not Clinton. Look for a big debate over his role
> > 10:28 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 887 887 Retweets 927 927 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > Mike Matusow ? @themouthmatusow

> > Lester Holt questions all attacks on Trump which put him on defense all
> > night!! Not 1 question on any things she has done #debates
> > 11:23 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 187 187 Retweets 222 222 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > toddstarnes ? @toddstarnes

> > Lester Holt should've moderated -- instead of auditioning to be Hillary's
> > press secretary. http://bit.ly/2cYOoKS #debatenight
> >
> > 11:17 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > Photo published for Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton & her Press Secretary
> > Lester Holt
> > Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton & her Press Secretary Lester Holt
> > Donald Trump came to debate. Hillary Clinton came to insult. And NBC's
> > Lester Holt came to apply for a job as Mrs. Bill Clinton's press secretary.
> > Watch my reaction to the first presidential debate:
> > toddstarnes.com
> > 1,461 1,461 Retweets 1,894 1,894 likes
> > Follow
> >

> > James Poniewozik ? @poniewozik

> > I don't know who this debate benefitted or not, but one sign will be if /
> > how fast Trump attacks Lester Holt on Twitter.
> > 11:03 PM - 26 Sep 2016
> > 48 48 Retweets 112 112 likes
> > Follow
> >
> > The nerds at Vox.com tried to argue that Hillary was interrupted a lot
> > during the debate because she is a woman. However, the cute little graphic
> > they made actually shows that Lester Holt interrupted Trump far more often
> > than he interrupted Hillary....
> >
> > http://heatst.com/politics/lester-holt-the-third-debater/
>
> How many more excuses can you make for Trump's miserable performance? Trump's
> bluster and blather didn't work this time, so its the moderator's fault.
> Poor, abused Trump, everyone is against him; the system is rigged. I'll bet
> he cried all the way home, poor baby. Maybe next time he'll learn to speak in
> coherent sentences,

He doesn't seem capable of doing so. Apparently, that's how bad his ADD
is.

> stop the name calling, exaggerations and lies and stay on
> topic. Oh, that's right, incoherence, vagueness and bullying are his signal
> methods. Too bad Hillary trounced him.

Yeah, anyone who thought Trump had a chance in hell of bullying Clinton
is so stupid it's a miracle he can remember to breathe in and out.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ac8b45ef-c399-4bab...@googlegroups.com>,

Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:20:24 PM UTC-7, hypatiab7 wrote:
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> > >
> > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> > >
>
> Or nothing at all. Remember how they managed to make Romney look bad over
> Bain Capital? He did nothing wrong, broke no laws, yet he was still stuck
> with a smear.

Because he destroyed thousands of lives by destroying their companies
and for nothing other than vultured money. He's a disgusting vile
monster.

> > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> > Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> > >
> Maybe, maybe not, nothing about that screams racism.

Not one President has ever been harassed for his birth certificate in
the history of country. Why all of a sudden did the first black
President have to prove he was born in the United States.

It's so racist you have to be willfully blind not to see it.

> > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> >
> > He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> > He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> > and made no sense.
> >
> > All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
>
> The consensus today seems to be he won. Go figure.

What consensus? The only people who think he won are the idiots voting
multiple times on non-scientific internet polls. Everyone else knows he
was slaughtered.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <6e451c09-8da9-4ac4...@googlegroups.com>,

Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:15:38 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > The big questions for the debate:
> >
> > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> Because that's where the money for new jobs comes from.

Reagonomics? Seriously? Have you not seen what's happening in Kansas
where they went full in on it? The wealthy sock their money away in the
Caymans and other places where they can hide it.

> > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> Why doesn't Hilary release her emails?

What does one thing have to do with the other?

> > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> Sheer stpidity.

Pure racism directed against the first black President. Period.

> > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
>
> The lesser of 2 evils is still evil.

There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton is evil. Every single
investigation for 35 years has failed to prove she's done anything wrong.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <78375df0-98a2-477d...@googlegroups.com>,

Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:08:18 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the
> > Hillary campaign picked them.
> >
> > Like living in Stalinist Russia.
>
> You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that for months Trump has
> been saying all kinds of outrageous things that might have made him a target?
>
> On the other hand, Hilary should have been hammered harder on the e-mail
> thing and the number of documented lies she has told in the matter.
> She lied to the face of a mother of a soldier and said it was about a video,
> when she knew better.

It WAS the video that gave the terrorists the cover to invade the
consulate.

> One thing for sure, this is not the walk in the park it was supposed to be
> for Clinton.
>
> Somebody told me yesterday that it's over because Hilary has enough electoral
> college votes to win. Doesn't that have to wait until the popular vote is
> in?

Popular vote is irrelevant.

> I know the delegates can vote as they see fit, but they are supposed to vote
> according to the way their state voted.
>
> I have a hunch the undecideds will be a big factor plus the fact that it
> seems like people will come out of the woodwork to vote against Hilary.
> Nothing about says warm and fuzzy.

Trump has lost women. Trump has lost all minorities. He's definitely
lost the young. There aren't enough insane, racist, and angry white men
to elect him.

> I'll just be glad when it's over. The makeup of the Senate might be changed
> and the GOP could lose its majority, which will still not make it possible
> for any of her spending increases and tax increases to get passed.
>
> Am I the only one who thinks it crazy to talk about free education when we
> are 20 trillion dollars in debt? Shouldn't we be cutting spending?

No, we should be increasing investments that will improve the country
while interest rates are still basically "0". Anything else is
incredibly stupid and shortsighted.

[Cloud Hobbit]

Perhaps if Holt had asked some tough questions to Hilary it might have been different. Nothing about Benghazi, nothing about her perjury to the FBI, nothing of substance about the e-mail server. She has lots of baggage that was never brought up.

I must amend an earlier comment about the polling showing Trump won, those were online polls and totally useless.

Looks like Hilary won. It's easier when the moderator is on your side.

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:47:45 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <ac8b45ef-c399-4bab...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:20:24 PM UTC-7, hypatiab7 wrote:
> > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > > The big questions for the debate:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> > >
> > > Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> > >
> > > Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> > > >
> >
> > Or nothing at all. Remember how they managed to make Romney look bad over
> > Bain Capital? He did nothing wrong, broke no laws, yet he was still stuck
> > with a smear.
>
> Because he destroyed thousands of lives by destroying their companies
> and for nothing other than vultured money. He's a disgusting vile
> monster.
>
>

Should he run his companies at a loss? They are his companies, not those of the employees who have a week to week contract. Closing of companies is usually done because either the company is losing money or it has become worth more to sell it than to keep it. Sometimes that means that companies get shut down so that the rest of the companies can run more efficiently. Bottomline is there was nothing immoral in such actions. The job of a businessman is to make a profit and stay competitive. The job of an employee is to do a good job and to stay competitive.

> > > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> > >
> > > Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> > > >
> > Maybe, maybe not, nothing about that screams racism.
>
> Not one President has ever been harassed for his birth certificate in
> the history of country. Why all of a sudden did the first black
> President have to prove he was born in the United States.
>

Might have been more about being a suspected Muslim than race.

> It's so racist you have to be willfully blind not to see it.
>
>

Or willing to consider another logical possibility.

> > > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> > >
> > > He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> > > He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> > > and made no sense.
> > >
> > > All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
> >
> > The consensus today seems to be he won. Go figure.
>
> What consensus? The only people who think he won are the idiots voting
> multiple times on non-scientific internet polls. Everyone else knows he
> was slaughtered.
>
> --

You are correct. I didn't read thouroughly. My apologies.
They still need someone who will ask tough questions to both candidates.

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:50:21 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <6e451c09-8da9-4ac4...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:15:38 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> > >
> > Because that's where the money for new jobs comes from.
>
> Reagonomics? Seriously?

No, just regular old economics.

Have you not seen what's happening in Kansas
> where they went full in on it?

That does not change the basic fact that investment in new job-creating businesses comes from those who can afford it, those who have enough money they can afford to take a risk to make some more. This is a basic economic fact of life, not Voodoo economics.

Some good things, some not so good, but that describes lots of states right now. Could be worse, they could have a debt like California.

What is it that you think is a problem. Unemployment is down. New business formation is up.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinquefield/2016/07/18/kansas-an-unsung-hero-for-economic-growth/#5b23fa3d5992
Kansas now offers the highest Earned Income Tax Credit in the region. Plus, the Brownback administration increased the standard deduction for “head of household” filings in order to help single-parent households. Importantly, 388,000 of the lowest-income Kansans have been removed from the tax rolls, leaving them with zero tax liability.

The wealthy sock their money away in the
> Caymans and other places where they can hide it.
>

Wouldn't you?

>
> > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> > >
> > Why doesn't Hilary release her emails?
>
> What does one thing have to do with the other?
>

They are both things the American public wants to see.


I think her comments about Trump not paying any personal federal income tax, somehow making him unpatriotic are a whole new kind of nasty. Unless he did something illegal to avoid paying taxes, he is doing what every person who ever plunked down money for TurboTax has done, look for every damn deduction you can find to lower your tax bill. Are they all unpatriotic? Is there some evil attached to wanting to keep your own money that worked to get?
No, it's just human nature and has not a damn thing to do with patriotism.

>
> > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> > >
> > Sheer stpidity.
>
> Pure racism directed against the first black President. Period.
>
>

Unless it was something else like Muslim sympathy or the possibility that he was in fact, a Muslim. I find that a lot easier to believe than racism.

> > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> >
> > The lesser of 2 evils is still evil.
>
> There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton is evil. Every single
> investigation for 35 years has failed to prove she's done anything wrong.
>
> --

She's a very good lawyer, but the server thing is beyond the pale. Whatever else she may be, she is not stupid and had to know that was the wrong thing to do. I don't believe anything she has said about it and indeed she has lied about it several times.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/31/hillary-clinton/fact-checking-hillary-clintons-claim-her-email-pra/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/

"I am the only candidate who ran in either the Democratic or the Republican primary who said from the very beginning (that) I will not raise taxes on the middle class."
— PolitiFact National on Wednesday, August 17th, 2016
That one got a pants on fire rating.

And so did this:
Says, regarding the presence of classified information in her email, FBI Director James "Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I've said is consistent with what I have told the American people."
— PolitiFact National on Monday, August 1st, 2016

Here's another pants on fire winner.
"I'm the only candidate in the Democratic primary, or actually on either side, who Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers are actually running ads against."
— PolitiFact National on Sunday, April 3rd, 2016



I don't think she is honest, I thnk she will say anything to get elected. I don't like her policies for sure and I don't care if she is a woman, it is meaningless.

Still not voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I don't mean evil as people, but what they want to do. Abortion restrictions is a deal breaker for me. A person has a right to do what they want with their own body.

The entitlement mentality is another. The soviets used to have a slogan: "Who doesn't work, does not eat." I am not suggesting we get quite that far, but the federal government has no business in this, it should be the states. Maybe then the feds could start spending money on infrastructure that they've been neglecting since ever. The state should absolutely be the last resort of people who need help because it means people are being forced to support you. At least with charity it is funded by donations.

If money is leaving our shores for foreign banks, maybe we ought to rethink how much we are taxing those who feel that need.

If there is one thing that is certain, it's that we do not need more government or more government programs.

[hypatiab7]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 11:25:53 PM UTC-4, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:20:24 PM UTC-7, hypatiab7 wrote:
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:15:38 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Then they'd have more money to lend him.
> > >
> > > 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Because he's hiding something. Several possibilities.
> > >
>
> Or nothing at all. Remember how they managed to make Romney look bad over Bain Capital? He did nothing wrong, broke no laws, yet he was still stuck with a smear.

Then, he would have no reason to hide his income tax returns. He is
definitely hiding something.

>
>
> > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> > Yes, why did he and, it was racist.
> > >
> Maybe, maybe not, nothing about that screams racism.

Yes, it was. He wouldn't have done it if Obama wasn't half black. He
kept trying to prove that the President was born in Kenya. Anyway, he
is still American through his American mother, so the whole thing was
pointless. President Obama would still be an American even if he was
born on Mars.

> >
> > He'd been reduced to a pile of mush by the last half hour.
> > He was constantly interrupting Hilary, raising his voice
> > and made no sense.
> >
> > All good questions that he tiptoed around without really answering them.
>
> The consensus today seems to be he won. Go figure.

Snap polls that allow people to vote more than once. The real results won't be available until Friday or Monday. Results always take about a week.

[tirebiter]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 4:33:43 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> In debate, Clinton gets no follow-up questions, Trump gets 6
> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in-debate-trump-gets-6-follow-up-questions-clinton-gets-none/article/2602939

Actually, the so-called follow-up questions to Trump were the original questions asked that Trump refused to answer the first time.

---
a.a. #2273

[tirebiter]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 4:46:12 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> NBC Crank Lester Holt Interrupted Trump 41 times, Hillary 7 Times …And Lied About His Positions
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/nbc-crank-lester-holt-interrupted-trump-41-times-hillary-7-times-lied-positions/

That's because Clinton was more respectful of the debate process than Trump
was. Trump's droning filibusters were nowhere near the questions that were
asked and he constantly went over his allotted time. I just wish Hold had
been more successful at interrupting Trump.

Stats like these with no context mean absolutely nothing.

---
a.a. #2273

[tirebiter]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 6:04:25 PM UTC-4, duke wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:15:34 -0700 (PDT), Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >The big questions for the debate:
> >
> >1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
>

> Raise the GNP.

>
> >2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
>

> Waiting on crooked hillary to release her 33,000 emails.

>
> >3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
>

> Crooked hillary started it.

>
> >4. Etc. That's the first hour.
>

> the dukester, American-American
>
> *****
> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI
> *****

Each of those replies are lies and/or deflections.

Thanks for pointing out Trump's dishonesty.

---
a.a. #2273

[crazyrainbow]

Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
> No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the Fascist maggot from CNN and had her speeches all ready. And the Fascist maggot did everything possible to help Hitlery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[tirebiter]

It's just as well for Trump that Holt didn't ask those questions. They've been answered over and over. Don't you think Clinton was ready for them?

---
a.a. #2273

[hypatiab7]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:50:21 AM UTC-4, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <6e451c09-8da9-4ac4...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:15:38 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > > The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> > >
> > Because that's where the money for new jobs comes from.
>
> Reagonomics? Seriously? Have you not seen what's happening in Kansas
> where they went full in on it? The wealthy sock their money away in the
> Caymans and other places where they can hide it.

Trickle down economics never works for anyone but the wealthy. all the
money seems to trickle up to them.

[Davej]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:15:38 PM UTC-5, Kurt wrote:
> [...]

> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?

Why can't Donald buy some better questions? He's a billionaire,
right? He can buy anything, right?

[hypatiab7]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:53:58 AM UTC-4, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <78375df0-98a2-477d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:08:18 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > > The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the
> > > Hillary campaign picked them.
> > >
> > > Like living in Stalinist Russia.
> >
> > You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that for months Trump has
> > been saying all kinds of outrageous things that might have made him a target?
> >
> > On the other hand, Hilary should have been hammered harder on the e-mail
> > thing and the number of documented lies she has told in the matter.
> > She lied to the face of a mother of a soldier and said it was about a video,
> > when she knew better.
>
> It WAS the video that gave the terrorists the cover to invade the
> consulate.
>
>
> > One thing for sure, this is not the walk in the park it was supposed to be
> > for Clinton.
> >
> > Somebody told me yesterday that it's over because Hilary has enough electoral college votes to win. Doesn't that have to wait until the popular vote is in?
>
> Popular vote is irrelevant.

Trump has lost Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Jews, women of all races,
many veterans, gays. All Trump has are old, beer-guzzling male fascists and
a few Millenial right-wingers. And a few very foolish women.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <c2ec6d42-de08-48aa...@googlegroups.com>,

Because those subjects have all been beaten to death and nobody gives a
shit anymore about phony scandals. Every single thing they've tried to
pin on Clinton for the last 35 years has been completely refuted. Only
idiot wingnuts fall for that crap.

> I must amend an earlier comment about the polling showing Trump won, those
> were online polls and totally useless.
>
> Looks like Hilary won. It's easier when the moderator is on your side.

You must be joking. Holt is a Republican.

--

[Wexford Eire]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 12:47:59 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> I don't need to go back 150 years to find such total Wall Street running dog lackeys as you, I know the history...
>
> Goldman Sachs bans top employees from donating to Trump: Reports
> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/07/goldman-sachs-bans-top-employees-from-donating-to-trump-report.html

"Politico reported Goldman sent an email saying that beginning September 1, partners would not be allowed to engage in political activities or make "contributions to candidates running for state and local offices, as well as sitting state and local officials running for federal office." Is Trump a state or local official?

>
> Goldman Sachs Bans Employees from Donating to Trump, But Allows Clinton Donations
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/08/goldman-sachs-bans-employees-from-donating-to-trump-but-allows-clinton-donations/

Breibart's spin, nothing more. Again, is Trump a state or local official?

>
> Hillary Clinton Is Outraising Trump 20-to-1 Among Billionaires
> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-26/billionaire-donors-led-by-soros-simons-favor-clinton-over-trump

Good for her.

>
> No CEOs at Fortune 100 Companies Are Backing Donald Trump
> http://fortune.com/2016/09/24/fortune-100-companies-donald-trump/

I guess they know what an ass he is.

>
> Workers of the world, take off your blinders and unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains.

Stop it, you Marxist fraud. Trump doesn't give a flying shit for workers or for non-workers, like Kurt.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 05:45:56 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

But not a vowel.

[Wexford Eire]

NASTY? NASTY? Considering Trump's childish penchant for name-calling, making fun of people, his sexism and appeals to racism, you think asking him about his taxes is NASTY??? You are a moron.

> Unless he did something illegal to avoid paying taxes, he is doing what every person who ever plunked down money for TurboTax has done, look for every damn deduction you can find to lower your tax bill. Are they all unpatriotic? Is there some evil attached to wanting to keep your own money that worked to get? No, it's just human nature and has not a damn thing to do with patriotism.

Sorry, but his patriotism wasn't attacked, but his insouciant, condescending bullshit was attacked. Every candidate fort the last 40 years has released his/her tax returns. What makes El Trumpo any different? What the hell its ashamed of and needs to hide? Why do you trust this overgrown adolescent, this wannabe Fascist?

> >
> > > > 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> > > >
> > > Sheer stpidity.
> >
> > Pure racism directed against the first black President. Period.
> >
> >
> Unless it was something else like Muslim sympathy or the possibility that he was in fact, a Muslim. I find that a lot easier to believe than racism.

Why? And why is it any better to be hitting him because his father was a nominal Muslim (certainly not a religious one). Why, after all evidence was provided, after the REPUBLICAN Governor of Hawaii stated Obama was born in the state, after the original copy of the Birth Certificate was removed from the Hawaiian archives and shown to Journalists did Trump keep it up? Why? He knew there was a broad racist group of voters that was obsessed with Obama's birth and he was pandering to them. They're his original base. What a disgusting low-life Trump is. Even if he's not personally a racist, building a campaign by pandering to racists is just as bad, even worse. Can't you see that? Are you that stupid?

>
> > > > 4. Etc. That's the first hour.
> > >
> > > The lesser of 2 evils is still evil.
> >
> > There's absolutely no evidence that Clinton is evil. Every single
> > investigation for 35 years has failed to prove she's done anything wrong.
> >
> > --
> She's a very good lawyer, but the server thing is beyond the pale. Whatever else she may be, she is not stupid and had to know that was the wrong thing to do. I don't believe anything she has said about it and indeed she has lied about it several times.
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/31/hillary-clinton/fact-checking-hillary-clintons-claim-her-email-pra/

Did you actually read your own reference? Politifact relies on "State Department Policy,"and the entire article only refers to ONE ambiguous statement she made, not some mythical list of lies as you'd make it seem. She was SECRETARY of STATE, moron. All State policy emanated from her office and was subject to her approval. The most you could blame her for was violating policies in place, but as for her authority to do so, that's unequivocal, she was the CEO of State. She could do what the hell she wanted and make exceptions for herself. This is one reason why the FBI stated flatly she'd done nothing for which she could be indicted, but her disregard for security was sloppy. (Their opinion, by the way. There was never any proven or even hinted-at security breech.)

>
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/
>
> "I am the only candidate who ran in either the Democratic or the Republican primary who said from the very beginning (that) I will not raise taxes on the middle class."
> — PolitiFact National on Wednesday, August 17th, 2016
> That one got a pants on fire rating.
>
> And so did this:
> Says, regarding the presence of classified information in her email, FBI Director James "Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I've said is consistent with what I have told the American people."
> — PolitiFact National on Monday, August 1st, 2016
>
> Here's another pants on fire winner.
> "I'm the only candidate in the Democratic primary, or actually on either side, who Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers are actually running ads against."
> — PolitiFact National on Sunday, April 3rd, 2016
>
>
>
> I don't think she is honest,

WHY? Because 25 years of incessant Republican propaganda has told you so? Name all the indictments against her, all the findings of guilt. Here:

> I thnk she will say anything to get elected. I don't like her policies for sure and I don't care if she is a woman, it is meaningless.

You don't think Trump will "say anything t get elected?" You haven't even read her plans or gone to her web site, have you? She has a solid platform, much more so than fat Donald whose plans and thoughts are incoherent.

>
> Still not voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I don't mean evil as people, but what they want to do. Abortion restrictions is a deal breaker for me. A person has a right to do what they want with their own body.
>
> The entitlement mentality is another. The soviets used to have a slogan: "Who doesn't work, does not eat."

That's from the Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle (with Silvanus and Timothy) to the Thessalonians, in which Paul writes: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. Lennon borrowed it.

> I am not suggesting we get quite that far, but the federal government has no business in this, it should be the states.

It is the sates who administer the programs, meat head. They get federal block grants and use the money for welfare.

> Maybe then the feds could start spending money on infrastructure that they've been neglecting since ever.

It's the business of the Fed government if it involves two or more states, but states have a responsibility, too. If your roads are crapped up, look to the state legislature. Too many states have been run by right morons like Scott Walker, who is more than willing to let roads deteriorate if he can keep taxes low.

> The state should absolutely be the last resort of people who need help because it means people are being forced to support you. At least with charity it is funded by donations.

Good. And what would you do with the dead bodies, especially the children? Have the local trash pick them up?

>
> If money is leaving our shores for foreign banks, maybe we ought to rethink how much we are taxing those who feel that need.

Money leaves the USA for foreign banks and foreign capital flows into the USA, usually from profits made abroad. The Positive balance of capital flows is greater than the deficit, at least it was last Summer. In any event, jobs leave because some companies would rather chase cheap labor and tax breaks than invest in productive capital. It's a stupid strategy. US taxes, by the way, aren't that onerous. Companies have many ways to reduce their tax burden and the effective rate of taxation here is much less than the nominal rate. Why do you think Mercedes, Honda and Toyota manufacture here?

>
> If there is one thing that is certain, it's that we do not need more government or more government programs.

Oh, well, that says nothing.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <a490ef39-0e2f-4a04...@googlegroups.com>,

Wexford Eire <wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 12:47:59 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > I don't need to go back 150 years to find such total Wall Street running
> > dog lackeys as you, I know the history...
> >
> > Goldman Sachs bans top employees from donating to Trump: Reports
> > http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/07/goldman-sachs-bans-top-employees-from-donatin
> > g-to-trump-report.html
>
> "Politico reported Goldman sent an email saying that beginning September 1,
> partners would not be allowed to engage in political activities or make
> "contributions to candidates running for state and local offices, as well as
> sitting state and local officials running for federal office." Is Trump a
> state or local official?

I still don't see how they can enforce this. Are employees forced to
give their bosses access to their personal finances? Their personal
checking accounts?

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <15529d82-e398-4226...@googlegroups.com>,

tirebiter <dontsp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 6:04:25 PM UTC-4, duke wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:15:34 -0700 (PDT), Kurt <passer...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >The big questions for the debate:
> > >
> > >1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Raise the GNP.

How will giving money to billionaires that they will stash in their
secret offshore bank accounts raise the GNP?

> > >2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?
> >
> > Waiting on crooked hillary to release her 33,000 emails.

What do his taxes have to do with emails?

> > >3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> > Crooked hillary started it.

So what? Even if her campaign did, they investigated and found that
there was no truth to it. And dropped it.

Then Donald picked up the dead issue and rode it all the way to the
nomination.

> > >4. Etc. That's the first hour.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ca12fc1f-5fc6-45ec...@googlegroups.com>,

Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 10:50:21 PM UTC-7, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > In article <6e451c09-8da9-4ac4...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:15:38 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > > > The big questions for the debate:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?
> > > >
> > > Because that's where the money for new jobs comes from.
> >
> > Reagonomics? Seriously?
>
> No, just regular old economics.
>
> Have you not seen what's happening in Kansas
> > where they went full in on it?
>
> That does not change the basic fact that investment in new job-creating
> businesses comes from those who can afford it, those who have enough money
> they can afford to take a risk to make some more. This is a basic economic
> fact of life, not Voodoo economics.
>
> Some good things, some not so good, but that describes lots of states right
> now. Could be worse, they could have a debt like California.

What debt? You need to keep up. California has one of the strongest
economies in the country, with some of the highest job growth. AND we
got the budget so under control that we now have a rainy day fund.

I expect better of you than spouting right-wing propaganda that's years
out of date.

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ca12fc1f-5fc6-45ec...@googlegroups.com>,

So what? That doesn't mean one has anything to do with the other. That
answer was way beneath you.

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ca12fc1f-5fc6-45ec...@googlegroups.com>,

Why would she think any such thing since every Secretary of State before
her (and others in government) did exactly the same thing?

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ca12fc1f-5fc6-45ec...@googlegroups.com>,

But you have nothing but innuendo and lies to back up your thoughts. No
evidence.

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <514e0cd8-b5bc-4457...@googlegroups.com>,

Exactly.

--

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nsg8li$r9u$1...@news.albasani.net>,

crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:

> Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
> > No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the
> > Fascist maggot from CNN

What "Fascist maggot from CNN" are you talking about?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 07:38:22 -0700 (PDT), Wexford Eire
<wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 6:18:36 AM UTC-4, Cloud Hobbit wrote:

>> I think her comments about Trump not paying any personal federal income
>>tax, somehow making him unpatriotic are a whole new kind of nasty.
>
>NASTY? NASTY? Considering Trump's childish penchant for name-calling,
>making fun of people, his sexism and appeals to racism, you think asking
>him about his taxes is NASTY??? You are a moron.

Trump said he didn't pat Federal taxes because he was smart - which
was a remarkably stupid thing to say when the vast majority of the
electorate do.

He doesn't seem to understand that his audience changed from just his
supporters to the entire country, when he won the Republican
nomination.

[Christopher A. Lee]

>> household�€? filings in order to help single-parent households. Importantly,

People got more net.savvy since then.

She was at best careless - but I doubt she has the computer knowledge
to set it up herself.

[Wexford Eire]

That loathsome Trump prefaces everything he says about her with "Crooked Hillary." Every time I challenge one of these winger Bozos who support Trump to give me some example, any example of her alleged dishonesty, to point to indictments or legal cases brought against her, I get nothing. Of course, there's nothing there. The Republicans and their huge propaganda machine are the most disgusting lice ever to inhabit Washington. I don't mind a fair criticism or an honest fight, but they seem utterly incapable of either. I can't name a single issue or plank or plan she;s described that they've tried to rebut. All you get are accusations, nonsense, misstatement of facts, purposeful misinterpretations, and lies.

Some people are so into all this it's impossible to get them to consider any sort of fairness or fact checking. Christ, Governor Christi is quoted as saying "fact checkers have their own agenda." Sure they do -- getting the facts straight. Last week I was corresponding with a colleague who, I was to find, was an ardent Trump supporter. When I asked her why, she told she could never support a crook like Hillary. "What makes you think she's a crook?" "Her Charitable Foundation is nothing but a slush fund for her and her husband. It's pay for play all the way, etc." When I challenged her to look up the foundation on Charity Watch and see how they rated it ("A" rating), and when I said that the woman has spent her life devoted to public causes, she accused me of being brainwashed by left-wing propaganda. Right. Anyone who votes for Trump is either insane, stupid or a racist or some combination of all three. I've lost my tolerance for them or for the petite Fascist, Trump.

[crazyrainbow]

Am 28.09.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> In article <nsg8li$r9u$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
>>> No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the
>>> Fascist maggot from CNN
>
> What "Fascist maggot from CNN" are you talking about?
>

Do you actually realize what i really posted and who posted the above.
There is something like a marker at the biginning of the first sentence
that indicates that is a repost/quotation. Maybe you should have clickad
at the link i supplied to actually grasp my notion!

[crazyrainbow]

Or maybe you should read the top of my posting to realize the
connections, i'll give you a hint, the german word "schrieb" means
wrote in english!

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nsh3i3$g08$1...@news.albasani.net>,

crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:

> Am 28.09.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> > In article <nsg8li$r9u$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> >> Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
> >>> No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the
> >>> Fascist maggot from CNN
> >
> > What "Fascist maggot from CNN" are you talking about?
> >
>
> Do you actually realize what i really posted and who posted the above.
> There is something like a marker at the biginning of the first sentence
> that indicates that is a repost/quotation. Maybe you should have clickad
> at the link i supplied to actually grasp my notion!

Why didn't you answer my question? It's a very simple question so I
don't know why you're so determined not to answer it.

So, try again. Just give us the name of this alleged "Fascist maggot
from CNN" you're talking about.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nsh3n8$g08$2...@news.albasani.net>,

crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:

> Am 28.09.2016 um 20:52 schrieb crazyrainbow:
> > Am 28.09.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> >> In article <nsg8li$r9u$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> >> crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
> >>>> No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to
> >>>> the
> >>>> Fascist maggot from CNN
> >>
> >> What "Fascist maggot from CNN" are you talking about?
> >>
> >
> > Do you actually realize what i really posted and who posted the above.
> > There is something like a marker at the biginning of the first sentence
> > that indicates that is a repost/quotation. Maybe you should have clickad
> > at the link i supplied to actually grasp my notion!
>
> Or maybe you should read the top of my posting to realize the
> connections, i'll give you a hint, the german word "schrieb" means
> wrote in english!

Still not an answer. The answer is the name of the person you called a
"Fascist maggot from CNN"; why are you so reluctant to name the person?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <f0unub53lc4l1hptb...@4ax.com>,

And I continue to posit that the natural paranoia the Clinton's have
developed over the years would lead to her server being more secure than
government servers. And, considering the number of breaches we've heard
of in government servers vs none of her server supports my thought.

[crazyrainbow]

Am 29.09.2016 um 03:15 schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
> In article <nsh3i3$g08$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 28.09.2016 um 18:02 schrieb Jeanne Douglas:
>>> In article <nsg8li$r9u$1...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> crazyrainbow <robert_...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 28.09.2016 um 06:56 schrieb Kurt:
>>>>> No, I think it's that the Hitlery campaign supplied the questions to the
>>>>> Fascist maggot from CNN
>>>
>>> What "Fascist maggot from CNN" are you talking about?
>>>
>>
>> Do you actually realize what i really posted and who posted the above.
>> There is something like a marker at the biginning of the first sentence
>> that indicates that is a repost/quotation. Maybe you should have clickad
>> at the link i supplied to actually grasp my notion!
>
>
> Why didn't you answer my question? It's a very simple question so I
> don't know why you're so determined not to answer it.
>
> So, try again. Just give us the name of this alleged "Fascist maggot
> from CNN" you're talking about.
>

Fuckit! Are all atheists that stupid or can't i make myself enough
clear? If you would look closely at that posting you would realize that
i called nobody no name but that the namecalling which i included as a
repost/quote in my answer was by Kurt and that i answered his
namecalling with the wikipedialink! That's why all that hints! Or better
if you still don't understand look at the posting by Kurt which is full
of similar quotes and the one i reposted/quoted!

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nshu20$g8q$1...@news.albasani.net>,

I still don't know who the "Fascist maggot from CNN" is.

[Kurt]

And we are all having a good laugh at your comical stupidity.

[Kurt]

On the Wikileaks poll, up until recently the darling of the liberals, 87% say it was rigged for Hitlery..

https://twitter.com/wikileaks

The Demoncrat nomination was rigged or Sanders would be the nominee. Not the slightest difference from the Communist Chinese Party or the Mullah's in Iran choosing the president. Everyone knows it, it was proved.

And now the rigged "debate".

Fascism.

A closed society.

And there's only one man that can save us, and the odds are strongly against him. The Machine isn't done yet stopping any hope of democracy.

[crazyrainbow]

That makes me really wonder if this Jeanne thing is either a atheist-bot
or i am too overburdened with the abstract womens logic!

Last hint: ask Kurt he is the one responsible for the quote!

Maybe if i really am that crazy i will continue this strain of thread
and explain into eternity!

[crazyrainbow]

Another theory about Jeanne, maybe she's one of this army officers who
are getting paid to troll the internet and make people crazy, about
which i read on fb!

[crazyrainbow]

Or myabe she's getting wet down there because i am kind of a worthy
opponent or because i am so considerate and put so much effort in
answering allmost all her posts. Maybe she gets arroused discussing with
me, may it be however stupid?

[hypatiab7]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:08:18 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> The machine has it fixed, and shamelessly, every single question like the Hillary campaign picked them.
>
> Like living in Stalinist Russia.

If the questions had been "What time is it?" and "What's your favorite color?", you'd still be saying the same thing.

[hypatiab7]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 10:07:01 AM UTC-4, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 05:45:56 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:15:38 PM UTC-5, Kurt wrote:
> >> [...]

> >> 1. Why do you favor tax breaks for the ultra rich, Mr Trump?

> >> 2. Why don't you release you taxes, Mr Trump?

> >> 3. Why did you do the birther thing Mr Trump and isn't that racist?
> >
> >

> >Why can't Donald buy some better questions? He's a billionaire,
> >right? He can buy anything, right?
>
> But not a vowel.

Trump is a vowel. He considers himself to be Super I.

[hypatiab7]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 9:32:27 AM UTC-4, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <d8fa0f79-a0cb-4dd4...@googlegroups.com>,
> Wexford Eire <wexford....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
> > >
> > > NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of
> > > the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the
> > > Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking”
> > > Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq
> > > War.
> > > Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the
> > > worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican
> > > candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.
> > >
> > > Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from
> > > the Clinton campaign’s talking points, and which were obvious set-ups for
> > > Clinton to attack (and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump
> > > asserted in his own defense).
> > >
> > > Here are the five worst examples.
> > >
> > > Tax returns. Holt never asked Clinton about her e-mail scandal, about
> > > Benghazi, or about the Clinton Foundation and its dubious dealings. But he
> > > did ask Trump about his tax returns, arguing — not asking — that there
> > > might be questionable information in them that the American public deserved
> > > to hear.
> > >
> > > Birther conspiracy theory. Holt never asked Clinton about her past record
> > > of racist statements, including her “super-predator” remarks as First Lady,
> > > or her explicit appeal to “white Americans” in her 2008 primary campaign
> > > against Obama. Yet he asked Trump about the Birther conspiracy theory and
> > > cast it as racist.
> > >
> > > Stop-and-frisk. After an exchange between the candidates over the policy of
> > > “stop-and-frisk,” Holt interjected to bolster Clinton’s point by stating,
> > > erroneously, that stop-and-frisk had ended in New York because it had been
> > > declared unconstitutional by a court. Trump countered, correctly, that the
> > > new mayor had canceled the policy before the litigation was over.
> > >
> > > “A presidential look.” Towards the end of the debate, Holt asked Trump
> > > about what he meant by saying Hillary Clinton did not have “a presidential
> > > look.” He did so after noting that Clinton had become “the first woman” to
> > > be nominated for president by a major political party, thus setting Trump
> > > up as a sexist. As Trump answered, Holt interrupted him, then gave Clinton
> > > a chance to respond with her talking points about Trump’s past comments on
> > > women.
> > >
> > > Iraq War. The question of whether Trump supported the Iraq War or not has
> > > been widely debated. What is beyond doubt is that Hillary Clinton voted for
> > > it. Holt only represented one side of the debate about Trump, and never
> > > asked Clinton about her own vote.
> > >
> > > In addition, the audience repeatedly interjected — almost always in
> > > Clinton’s favor — and Holt did not stop them, though it was against the
> > > rules. He only stopped the audience when there were cheers for Trump
> > > calling for Clinton’s emails.
> > >
> > > Bow again, Lester Holt. You did your job.
> > >
> > > http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/26/lester-holt-candy-crowley
> > > -moment-first-debate/
> >
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 7:07:45 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
> > > Five Times Lester Holt Shilled for Hillary Clinton at First Debate
> > >
> > > NBC News’ Lester Holt had his “Candy Crowley” moment at the first debate of
> > > the 2016 presidential election on Monday night, bowing to pressure from the
> > > Hillary Clinton campaign and the liberal media by “fact-checking”
> > > Republican nominee Donald Trump on the question of his support for the Iraq
> > > War.
> >
> >
> > Because Trump lied about it and continued to lie about it. Trump never admits
> > a mistake.
> >
> > > Holt lived up to the expectations of his peers. But he lived down to the
> > > worst expectations of conservatives, who routinely see Republican
> > > candidates treated unfairly by debate moderators.
> >
> > Awwwww.... Conservatives bitching and crying. Nothing new about that.
>
>
> We need to remember that he cried about the "mean" questions Megyn Kelly
> asked him.
>
Whenever things don't go his way, Trump moans and groans and pouts and
complains and says stupid lies about his microphone being sabotaged
and how he would be the last person to mention a conspiracy (thereby
mentioning one). And he repeats himself all the time, as though he
can't believe the nonsense he's spewing himself.

[hypatiab7]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 4:51:05 PM UTC-4, viva padrepio wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 1:46:12 PM UTC-7, Kurt wrote:
> > NBC Crank Lester Holt Interrupted Trump 41 times, Hillary 7 Times …And Lied About His Positions
> > http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/nbc-crank-lester-holt-interrupted-trump-41-times-hillary-7-times-lied-positions/
>
> What Holt did was win the Presidency for Trump. If the nation didn't know it before, they know now. 35 years in politics and Crooked Hillary hasn't done anything but get people killed.

That's slander, you know. And, your accusation has been investigated and the Clintons were cleared.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nsij9o$81k$1...@news.albasani.net>,

I don't care who said it. I want an answer.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <nsijut$952$1...@news.albasani.net>,

Where on FB?