Re: Comey letter: FBI investigating emails that might mention Hillary Clinton

[abelard]

On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:44:49 +0000, James Harris
<james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 31/10/2016 09:13, Joe wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:58:04 +0000
>> James Harris <james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I don't disagree that Clinton comes with a lot of baggage but I bear
>>> in mind that she has been under scrutiny for something like 30 years.
>>> No one can behave perfectly in all that time. It is simply not
>>> reasonable to expect that she has not made mistakes. All people do.
>>>
>>
>> Then the question is: is it possible for a holder of high office in the
>> United States, and a presidential candidate for same, to set up an email
>> server outside government facilities, use it to carry and store secret
>> and confidential government material and then order it to be wiped clean
>> *by* *mistake*? "Oooops, I didn't mean to do that, my hand slipped."
>
>Do you have a link to a transcript of what she said, or a letter that
>she wrote about it?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/22/clinton-lectured-state-dept-staff-on-cybersecurity-in-2010-video.html
"Despite conducting her own government business through a personal
“homebrew” server while secretary of state, Hillary Clinton is seen in
a newly obtained video lecturing her staff of their “special duty” to
recognize the importance of cybersecurity.

“The real key to cybersecurity rests with you,” Clinton says in the
2010 video"



--
www.abelard.org

[abelard]

On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 14:21:08 +0000, James Harris
<james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 01/11/2016 14:05, abelard wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 13:54:53 +0000, James Harris
>> <james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/11/2016 10:54, abelard wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 10:53:38 +0000, James Harris
>>>> <james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 01/11/2016 10:12, abelard wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 07:12:17 +0000, James Harris
>>>>>> <james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>>> How can anyone possibly think that putting such a person in the
>>>>>>> White House is a good idea? That is a genuine question. Trump may be a
>>>>>>> break from the cabal and I get that people desperately want a change.
>>>>>>> But he is far from up to the job. AFAICS he is just not credible and
>>>>>>> could well be dangerous.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what do you suppose he can or will do that is 'dangerous'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please list examples
>>>>>
>>>>> What could POTUS do that's dangerous? Um, let me see! ;-)
>>>>
>>>> i see no examples
>>>
>>> Well, for arguably the world's most powerful man, the mind boggles as to
>>> what he could get up to.
>>>
>>> There's appointments of officials (internal and external to the
>>> government) based on who he thinks likes him. There is international
>>> relations conducted based on who he likes and who he doesn't like. There
>>> are trade arrangements based on his whims. There is surrounding himself
>>> with yes men and women who will stroke his ego. There are various forms
>>> of retribution against all manner of organisations and individuals based
>>> on who has upset him. There are making up and promoting stories about
>>> staff and fellow politicians. There are attempts to interfere in the
>>> justice system. There are fights with those who oppose him - and who
>>> knows how far that would go. And there is possibly a danger of him
>>> becoming increasingly paranoid, isolated, angry and troublesome.
>>
>> that all sounds like politics as usual...
>>
>> they always appoint their favourites...it's human nature...
>> and it's the people they trust...
>>
>> 'Liary is described as paranoid...
>>
>> pootin is paranoid
>>
>> brown the clown was paranoid...
>>
>> most people in such orgs creep around the boss...
>>
>> do you believe loretta lynch is there on merit?
>> do you believe o'barmy looked first for merit?
>>
>> even cameron gave medals to his closest assistants and he
>> is unusually capable...
>>
>>> Remember Watergate.
>>
>> i'm well aware of it...in my view 'Liary is worse and without
>> the redeeming achievements of nixon....
>> in fact she is followed by disaster...
>>
>> you don't seem to be making a useful case or being specific...
>
>I wouldn't attempt to predict the specific things he would do. I hope we
>never get to find out! But my comments are based on things he has
>already done.

o'barmy and 'Liary have left chaos in the middle east....
they've tried to nationalise 16%(and more of the economy...

none of that has made the world of society better or safer...

meanwhile you'll be happy to know that trump is moving ahead
in polls and the effects have yet to feed through

meanwhile trump has built a large business that is producing a
great deal and tends to function efficiently...
why do you believe that can be achieved by impulsive behaviour?

your approach seems to owe much more to emotion that to analysis

i quote words you have now expunged:-
>... Trump. He is thin-skinned, vindictive,
>spoiled, petulant, a liar, does not respect the law and is detached from
>reality.

meanwhile it is *clear* that 'Liary has broken serious laws, laws
which tend to attract long prison sentences...

the clinton machine even looks to me to be vulnerable to rico...



--
www.abelard.org

[James Harris]

Obama has been weak and reticent on foreign policy. That's one reason I
thought that America needed a right-winger for a change.

> they've tried to nationalise 16%(and more of the economy...
>
> none of that has made the world of society better or safer...
>
> meanwhile you'll be happy to know that trump is moving ahead
> in polls and the effects have yet to feed through
>
> meanwhile trump has built a large business that is producing a
> great deal and tends to function efficiently...

Maybe. But maybe it is all built on confidence and could collapse if the
internals were known. Lehman Brothers were thought to be strong.

As for his finances, Trump said he would publish his tax returns if he
ran for President. Where are they?

He lost something like $900 million in one year, 1995.

He has declared bankruptcy multiple times, hasn't he?

Do you still believe that his business empire is strong?

> why do you believe that can be achieved by impulsive behaviour?
>
> your approach seems to owe much more to emotion that to analysis

It is more an assessment of his character. That screams out to me that
he is dangerous in the ways I wrote before and which you copied below.

I tend to trust my own judgement of character and that would be
basically enough. But in this case the assessment is validated by things
he has done and said so I am fairly confident that it would be unwise to
place him in a position of power.

> i quote words you have now expunged:-

Thanks. I deleted the entire old part of the backlog but I'm delighted
to see such sagacious words again. :-)

>> ... Trump. He is thin-skinned, vindictive,
>> spoiled, petulant, a liar, does not respect the law and is detached from
>> reality.

There are some things I missed.

Trump says he will do things - such as his release his tax returns,
mentioned above - but does absolutely nothing of the sort. He has been
making grandiose claims - such as he will get Mexico to pay for a vast
wall - without, AFAIK, giving any detail over how he will get them to do
so.

He is a fantasist and arrogant, obsessed with his own opinion. He keeps
praising himself and I think he genuinely believes in his own rhetoric.
He feels that those who speak against him are prejudiced and wrong
because he is so wonderful. Putin apparently called him flamboyant but
Trump claimed that Putin had called him a genius!

I have nothing against him personally and have ignored the sexism issue
because we cannot tell whether the women who accused him were telling
the truth or not. But I have seen more than enough coming out of his own
mouth to view his as dangerously disconnected from reality.

Putting a thin-skinned fantasist in charge of the most powerful nation
on earth doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

> meanwhile it is *clear* that 'Liary has broken serious laws, laws
> which tend to attract long prison sentences...
>
> the clinton machine even looks to me to be vulnerable to rico...

I don't know how clear Clinton's guilt is or not but would have thought
it was up to prosecutors to establish that in court.


--
James Harris

[abelard]

On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 15:26:59 +0000, James Harris

and 'maybe' it isn't going to 'collapse'..do you have any evidence to
support your maybe?

trumps assets are not just government derivatives

>As for his finances, Trump said he would publish his tax returns if he
>ran for President. Where are they?

so what?

>He lost something like $900 million in one year, 1995.

so what?
fortunately his businesses were strong enough to take such
a paper loss

such large losses are common in large corporations

>He has declared bankruptcy multiple times, hasn't he?

look up chapter 11...it is not the same as 'bankruptcy'

>Do you still believe that his business empire is strong?

i see no reason to suppose otherwise...he is even finding tens
of millions to fund his run allegedly
usually such runs depend on other people's money...like 'Liary's
run...people who then want 'favours'

>> why do you believe that can be achieved by impulsive behaviour?
>>
>> your approach seems to owe much more to emotion that to analysis
>
>It is more an assessment of his character. That screams out to me that
>he is dangerous in the ways I wrote before and which you copied below.
>
>I tend to trust my own judgement of character and that would be
>basically enough. But in this case the assessment is validated by things
>he has done and said so I am fairly confident that it would be unwise to
>place him in a position of power.

i think you...and most of the left, are badly misreading him

he's a master of the media...have you even started to consider
what that means?

>> i quote words you have now expunged:-
>
>Thanks. I deleted the entire old part of the backlog but I'm delighted
>to see such sagacious words again. :-)
>
>>> ... Trump. He is thin-skinned, vindictive,
>>> spoiled, petulant, a liar, does not respect the law and is detached from
>>> reality.
>
>There are some things I missed.
>
>Trump says he will do things - such as his release his tax returns,
>mentioned above - but does absolutely nothing of the sort.

sensible move..'Liary would just start lying about the meaning
of them and confusing the uneducated

> He has been
>making grandiose claims - such as he will get Mexico to pay for a vast
>wall - without, AFAIK, giving any detail over how he will get them to do
>so.

that is easy...put a tariff on their goods

>He is a fantasist and arrogant, obsessed with his own opinion.

those are your opinions...are you 'obsessed' with them

> He keeps
>praising himself

so does every politician seeking g to get elected...

'Liary keeps going on about her wonderful experience and
record...i see much more evidence that trump can actually
back up his claims

>and I think he genuinely believes in his own rhetoric.

does he? is that a mind-read?
do you believe in your rhetoric? you know, that cascade of unbacked
adjectives you copied from the fossil media

>He feels that those who speak against him are prejudiced and wrong

so do you

>because he is so wonderful. Putin apparently called him flamboyant but
>Trump claimed that Putin had called him a genius!

i don't know whether putin did or did not...

while he may not be what i'd call a genius,,,he certainly
looks like one alongside missis clinton...
so indeed does mister clinton alongside her

>I have nothing against him personally

i do hope he appreciates that...

>and have ignored the sexism issue
>because we cannot tell whether the women who accused him were telling
>the truth or not.

indeed you don't, but of course you will mention it anyway

>But I have seen more than enough coming out of his own
>mouth to view his as dangerously disconnected from reality.

i'll be more convinced when you make a better case, if you ever do

>Putting a thin-skinned fantasist in charge of the most powerful nation
>on earth doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

you seem to confuse what a person says with what they do....

how does that work with 'Liary who can hardly open her mouth
without lying?

>> meanwhile it is *clear* that 'Liary has broken serious laws, laws
>> which tend to attract long prison sentences...
>>
>> the clinton machine even looks to me to be vulnerable to rico...
>
>I don't know how clear Clinton's guilt is or not but would have thought
>it was up to prosecutors to establish that in court.

i expect them to be given much opportunity to do that...

of course i also expect o'barmy to forgive her...i even wonder
if she will give herself an official exemption!....

though i'm slightly hesitant to believe o'barmy actually likes her...
even mister clinton may prefer her at home
neither of them are entirely supportive of her...

i see she just lost the 3rd of her surrogate girl friends...soon there
will be nobody left left left available to throw under the busses..
what happens when she runs out of scapegoats?

i predict a troubled future for the madam...even if the ignorati
vote for her in their trillions


--
www.abelard.org

[Osmium]

"James Harris" wrote:

> He has declared bankruptcy multiple times, hasn't he?

As far as I can find out he has never declared personal bankruptcy.
Businesses that were his have delcared bankrupty. He likes to use his name
a lot so some of these may have been owwned by someone else by the time they
declared bakruptcy.

[James Harris]

I gave two maybes, one for each side. We won't know the situation on
either side without disclosure.

> trumps assets are not just government derivatives
>
>> As for his finances, Trump said he would publish his tax returns if he
>> ran for President. Where are they?
>
> so what?

That's odd. You don't think that broken promises tell us anything about
his integrity? Or about how reliable or unreliable his promises are? Or
about how ready he is to give an undertaking but how reticent he is to
deliver on what he has said he would do? Or how that relates to the
grandiose claims he is now making for what he would do as President?

>> He lost something like $900 million in one year, 1995.
>
> so what?
> fortunately his businesses were strong enough to take such
> a paper loss

Or his bankers sustained him, and maybe still do. Do you know that his
business empire is owned by him? Or how much of it is owned by the banks?

> such large losses are common in large corporations
>
>> He has declared bankruptcy multiple times, hasn't he?
>
> look up chapter 11...it is not the same as 'bankruptcy'
>
>> Do you still believe that his business empire is strong?
>
> i see no reason to suppose otherwise...he is even finding tens
> of millions to fund his run allegedly
> usually such runs depend on other people's money...like 'Liary's
> run...people who then want 'favours'
>
>>> why do you believe that can be achieved by impulsive behaviour?
>>>
>>> your approach seems to owe much more to emotion that to analysis
>>
>> It is more an assessment of his character. That screams out to me that
>> he is dangerous in the ways I wrote before and which you copied below.
>>
>> I tend to trust my own judgement of character and that would be
>> basically enough. But in this case the assessment is validated by things
>> he has done and said so I am fairly confident that it would be unwise to
>> place him in a position of power.
>
> i think you...and most of the left, are badly misreading him

I feel that you and most of the left are misreading him!

> he's a master of the media...have you even started to consider
> what that means?

No. What does it mean?

>>> i quote words you have now expunged:-
>>
>> Thanks. I deleted the entire old part of the backlog but I'm delighted
>> to see such sagacious words again. :-)
>>
>>>> ... Trump. He is thin-skinned, vindictive,
>>>> spoiled, petulant, a liar, does not respect the law and is detached from
>>>> reality.
>>
>> There are some things I missed.
>>
>> Trump says he will do things - such as his release his tax returns,
>> mentioned above - but does absolutely nothing of the sort.
>
> sensible move..'Liary would just start lying about the meaning
> of them and confusing the uneducated

Sensible to say he will do something and then not do it?

Won't he be found out sooner or later? Clinton has been under political
scrutiny for 30 years or so. Trump has never faced such scrutiny. He may
be in a honeymoon period when, to the public, he is new and exciting.
But he has not been tested.

Even before taking office he has been found out making absurd claims
such as that he would publish his tax returns if he ran for office, or
Obama not being American, or that all the polls were in his favour.

>> He has been
>> making grandiose claims - such as he will get Mexico to pay for a vast
>> wall - without, AFAIK, giving any detail over how he will get them to do
>> so.
>
> that is easy...put a tariff on their goods

Has he said he would do that? Wouldn't he have to scrap and renegotiate
NAFTA to do that? What would a trade war do to US and global economies?

>> He is a fantasist and arrogant, obsessed with his own opinion.
>
> those are your opinions...are you 'obsessed' with them

No, not at all. You asked me to list the reasons why I thought he was
dangerous as POTUS, didn't you.

>> He keeps
>> praising himself
>
> so does every politician seeking g to get elected...
>
> 'Liary keeps going on about her wonderful experience and
> record...i see much more evidence that trump can actually
> back up his claims
>
>> and I think he genuinely believes in his own rhetoric.
>
> does he? is that a mind-read?
> do you believe in your rhetoric? you know, that cascade of unbacked
> adjectives you copied from the fossil media

You seem to be losing the thread. You wanted me to explain why I thought
Trump would dangerous. I explained. And NONE of it was copied from the
media. Now, you are seeking to make this personal and attack me for some
reason. If you don't like to hear negative opinions about Trump, you
shouldn't ask for them.

>> He feels that those who speak against him are prejudiced and wrong
>
> so do you

Personal again. Do you see what's happening to your argument?

>> because he is so wonderful. Putin apparently called him flamboyant but
>> Trump claimed that Putin had called him a genius!
>
> i don't know whether putin did or did not...
>
> while he may not be what i'd call a genius,,,he certainly
> looks like one alongside missis clinton...
> so indeed does mister clinton alongside her
>
>> I have nothing against him personally
>
> i do hope he appreciates that...
>
>> and have ignored the sexism issue
>> because we cannot tell whether the women who accused him were telling
>> the truth or not.
>
> indeed you don't, but of course you will mention it anyway

No, I am putting the argument in context because you seem to think this
is personal on my side. It is not.

--
James Harris

[abelard]

On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 09:48:27 +0000, James Harris

<james.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 01/11/2016 17:02, abelard wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 15:26:59 +0000, James Harris

>>> Maybe. But maybe it is all built on confidence and could collapse if the
>>> internals were known. Lehman Brothers were thought to be strong.
>>
>> and 'maybe' it isn't going to 'collapse'..do you have any evidence to
>> support your maybe?
>
>I gave two maybes, one for each side. We won't know the situation on
>either side without disclosure.

it's meaningless

>> trumps assets are not just government derivatives
>>
>>> As for his finances, Trump said he would publish his tax returns if he
>>> ran for President. Where are they?
>>
>> so what?
>
>That's odd. You don't think that broken promises tell us anything about
>his integrity? Or about how reliable or unreliable his promises are? Or
>about how ready he is to give an undertaking but how reticent he is to
>deliver on what he has said he would do? Or how that relates to the
>grandiose claims he is now making for what he would do as President?

it's meaningless

he has a mass of policy

there are around 100 pages of trump's audited capital position...
i've read through them...

meanwhile the clinton family affairs smell of rico to me...

>>> He lost something like $900 million in one year, 1995.
>>
>> so what?
>> fortunately his businesses were strong enough to take such
>> a paper loss
>
>Or his bankers sustained him, and maybe still do. Do you know that his
>business empire is owned by him? Or how much of it is owned by the banks?

it's meaningless

it's all your uninformed speculation which has already been
answered

all that matters is the vote and the supreme court and such like...
your media copied speculation is irrelevant
they are designed for only one thing...distraction...

>>> I tend to trust my own judgement of character and that would be
>>> basically enough. But in this case the assessment is validated by things
>>> he has done and said so I am fairly confident that it would be unwise to
>>> place him in a position of power.
>>
>> i think you...and most of the left, are badly misreading him
>
>I feel that you and most of the left are misreading him!

of course you do/hope..i agree the left is misreading him

i've bothered to inform myself as well as is available...you've just
jumped in with a cartload of adjectives

>> he's a master of the media...have you even started to consider
>> what that means?
>
>No. What does it mean?

i may answer that after the election

>> sensible move..'Liary would just start lying about the meaning
>> of them and confusing the uneducated
>
>Sensible to say he will do something and then not do it?

i know enough

he says he will build a hotel..he builds a hotel...

>Won't he be found out sooner or later? Clinton has been under political
>scrutiny for 30 years or so. Trump has never faced such scrutiny. He may
>be in a honeymoon period when, to the public, he is new and exciting.
>But he has not been tested.

'Liary has been lying all her life...she has not been under 'scrutiny'

the whole clinton machine is dubious...

>Even before taking office he has been found out making absurd claims
>such as that he would publish his tax returns if he ran for office, or
>Obama not being American, or that all the polls were in his favour.

so what?

o'barmy was raised in a moslem/marxist environment...where he was
plopped out is of no interest...

trump has a very fine sense of humour...eventually o'barmy was
forced to produce evidence...

were the usa population informed, o'barmy would never have been
president...like every socialist he has no intention of
transparency...
he is trying to rule by executive order bypassing the
constitutional constraints on him...

like bliar, he is a vacuous grin and a fossil media construction...
he's acting as a rap star...not as a responsible leader of
president
and all the little sheep go quack quack quack...

you'd be far better ignoring the blithering and attending to the real
world actions of politicians

>>> He has been
>>> making grandiose claims - such as he will get Mexico to pay for a vast
>>> wall - without, AFAIK, giving any detail over how he will get them to do
>>> so.
>>
>> that is easy...put a tariff on their goods
>
>Has he said he would do that? Wouldn't he have to scrap and renegotiate
>NAFTA to do that? What would a trade war do to US and global economies?

so what?
you're already in a 'trade war'...

>>> He is a fantasist and arrogant, obsessed with his own opinion.
>>
>> those are your opinions...are you 'obsessed' with them
>
>No, not at all. You asked me to list the reasons why I thought he was
>dangerous as POTUS, didn't you.

and all you provided were adjectives and speculation

>>> He keeps
>>> praising himself
>>
>> so does every politician seeking g to get elected...
>>
>> 'Liary keeps going on about her wonderful experience and
>> record...i see much more evidence that trump can actually
>> back up his claims
>>
>>> and I think he genuinely believes in his own rhetoric.
>>
>> does he? is that a mind-read?
>> do you believe in your rhetoric? you know, that cascade of unbacked
>> adjectives you copied from the fossil media
>
>You seem to be losing the thread. You wanted me to explain why I thought
>Trump would dangerous. I explained. And NONE of it was copied from the
>media. Now, you are seeking to make this personal and attack me for some
>reason. If you don't like to hear negative opinions about Trump, you
>shouldn't ask for them.

all the fluff you have reproduced i've seen from the fossil media
and 'Liary's surrogates and from her

>>> He feels that those who speak against him are prejudiced and wrong
>>
>> so do you
>
>Personal again. Do you see what's happening to your argument?

certainly...i'm not being diverted by your tirade of fluff

>>> I have nothing against him personally
>>
>> i do hope he appreciates that...
>>
>>> and have ignored the sexism issue
>>> because we cannot tell whether the women who accused him were telling
>>> the truth or not.
>>
>> indeed you don't, but of course you will mention it anyway
>
>No, I am putting the argument in context because you seem to think this
>is personal on my side. It is not.

then why are you repeating speculation and low level fluff?

you made assertions...you can't support them...the only effect
that is having on me is to reassess any ideas as to why you
are so keen on brexit...

i am moving a slider towards 'political' and away from
'interested/objective' which you are trying to sell...


--
www.abelard.org

[James Harris]

Bankruptcies (or debt protection measures) still prevent debts being
paid. The creditors lose out.

I just searched. This came up on the first page.

The Four Bankruptcies

Where and when: 1991, 1992, 2004, 2009

The dirt: Four times in his career, Trump’s companies have entered
bankruptcy.

In the late 1980s, after insisting that his major qualification to
build a new casino in Atlantic City was that he wouldn’t need to use
junk bonds, Trump used junk bonds to build Trump Taj Mahal. He built the
casino, but couldn’t keep up with interest payments, so his company
declared bankruptcy in 1991. He had to sell his yacht, his airline, and
half his ownership in the casino.

A year later, another of Trump’s Atlantic City casinos, the Trump
Plaza, went bust after losing more than $550 million. Trump gave up his
stake but otherwise insulated himself personally from losses, and
managed to keep his CEO title, even though he surrendered any salary or
role in day-to-day operations. By the time all was said and done, he had
some $900 million in personal debt.

Trump bounced back over the following decade, but by 2004, Trump
Hotels and Casino Resorts was $1.8 billion in debt. The company filed
for bankruptcy and emerged as Trump Entertainment Resorts. Trump himself
was the chairman of the new company, but he no longer had a controlling
stake in it.

Five years later, after the real-estate collapse, Trump
Entertainment Resorts once again went bankrupt. Trump resigned from the
board, but the company retained his name. In 2014, he successfully sued
to take his name off the company and its casinos—one of which had
already closed, and the other of which was near closing.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/donald-trump-scandals/474726/


--
James Harris

[James Harris]

Each one based on observation, not hatred or dislike or any other
personal feelings of animosity.

I'll try to explain one of those 'adjectives' in detail so you can see
that this is not an emotional response.

For example, I said that he was a fantasist. That was based on numerous
examples of him claiming something was the case when the evidence was
there to the contrary (e.g. opinion polls all putting him ahead when we
could see that they weren't) or him making assertions that had no
support in fact (e.g. for years saying that Obama was not American).

If he knew that what he was saying was false he would be a liar. If he
believed it to be true he would be a fantasist. Either way, it's not good.

Or now, we know that emails of someone close to Clinton are about to be
examined by the FBI. If he said, "We don't know what is in those emails
so should not rush to judgement. It is important that we follow the due
process of law in this country" then I could respect him as a statesman.
AFAICS, someone who behaved in a mature manner would be on the way to
picking up support. Instead, still without knowing their contents Trump
claims not just that there are bad things to come out but that it is the
biggest scandal since Watergate!

I don't understand how a man who condemns without trial and puts his
opinions above the due process of the legal system can be considered fit
to lead America.

Isn't it that he /wants/ to think of Clinton as a criminal and so, in
his mind, she is?

>>> he's a master of the media...have you even started to consider
>>> what that means?
>>
>> No. What does it mean?
>
> i may answer that after the election

That reminds me of Trump saying he would decide whether he thought the
process was rigged or not after the election. Presumably if he wins he
will be OK with it...!

>>> sensible move..'Liary would just start lying about the meaning
>>> of them and confusing the uneducated
>>
>> Sensible to say he will do something and then not do it?
>
> i know enough
>
> he says he will build a hotel..he builds a hotel...

On Hotels, I just looked them up and found this lot. But I've not
researched him like you have. Are any of them true?

In the late 1980s, after insisting that his major qualification to
build a new casino in Atlantic City was that he wouldn’t need to use
junk bonds, Trump used junk bonds to build Trump Taj Mahal. He built the
casino, but couldn’t keep up with interest payments, so his company
declared bankruptcy in 1991. He had to sell his yacht, his airline, and
half his ownership in the casino.

A year later, another of Trump’s Atlantic City casinos, the Trump
Plaza, went bust after losing more than $550 million. Trump gave up his
stake but otherwise insulated himself personally from losses, and
managed to keep his CEO title, even though he surrendered any salary or
role in day-to-day operations. By the time all was said and done, he had
some $900 million in personal debt.

Trump bounced back over the following decade, but by 2004, Trump
Hotels and Casino Resorts was $1.8 billion in debt. The company filed
for bankruptcy and emerged as Trump Entertainment Resorts. Trump himself
was the chairman of the new company, but he no longer had a controlling
stake in it.

Five years later, after the real-estate collapse, Trump
Entertainment Resorts once again went bankrupt. Trump resigned from the
board, but the company retained his name. In 2014, he successfully sued
to take his name off the company and its casinos—one of which had

already closed, and the other of which was near closing.

...

>>>> He is a fantasist and arrogant, obsessed with his own opinion.
>>>
>>> those are your opinions...are you 'obsessed' with them
>>
>> No, not at all. You asked me to list the reasons why I thought he was
>> dangerous as POTUS, didn't you.
>
> and all you provided were adjectives and speculation

No, as I said above, they were all based on specifics. I gave fantasist
examples above.

If you don't believe me, why not consider the comments of someone who
got to know him over a period of time, the person who wrote or co-wrote
his best seller The Art of the Deal.

He was interviewed by the BBC PM programme on Friday. It makes sobering
listening.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07zxh28

The interview starts at 32m09.

--
James Harris

[abelard]

during that time period most banks and governments went insolvent....

he still has an empire...he has survived...

many banks and governments are still over their heads in debt...

why would you care?

much depends on how you read the numbers but it is the bottom
line that matters...

the world is full of troubles and strife....surviving and achieving
is different outside the sheep pens...



--
www.abelard.org

[Osmium]

That $900 million personal debt is a new factoid to me. It's mind boggling
to me that any organization (bank for example) would even *allow* such a
thing to happen. What in the world was the guy cutting the check for the
last measly million thinking of? To me, it sounds like there was no thought
process at all involved in the loan that brought the total up to $900
million. It is small wonder that we had a financial meltdown following
2009. To get back on topic (Trumps evil) I note that Obama has let the
clock run out on the financial people for eight years so their malfeasance
can not now be punished, the statute of limitations kicks in and protect
these simple-minded, crooked bastards. Thanks Obama. Thanks Eric Holder.
Thanks Loretta Lynch.

So will Trump go to his grave with something approaching $900 million in
personal debt. Is there any reason to pay off this debt? Life seems to be
treating him pretty well, he got another airplane, and a helicopter, I
think. Or, at least ones that he can treat as if they were his. He can say
how they are painted and where they go and what brand of caviar they have in
the pantry.

[First-Post]

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 09:38:50 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Trump's 2016 personal financial-disclosure report lists Trump as a
trustee, president, chairman, or member for more than 530 entities.
Almost half of these companies listed have Trump's name as part of the
company name.
4 Bankruptcies out of over 500 is a damn good track record in the
business world.
Likely a damn site better record than either of you two wannabe
financial wizards have ever had in your lives.
At least he isn't running a scam "foundation" that rakes in millions
from terrorist supporting states and then only gives 5% or less to
charity with the rest going into the pockets of the namesake.

[Osmium]

>>> off the company and its casinos-one of which had already closed, and the

>>> other of which was near closing.
>>>
>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/donald-trump-scandals/474726/
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>
> Trump's 2016 personal financial-disclosure report lists Trump as a
> trustee, president, chairman, or member for more than 530 entities.
> Almost half of these companies listed have Trump's name as part of the
> company name.
> 4 Bankruptcies out of over 500 is a damn good track record in the
> business world.
> Likely a damn site better record than either of you two wannabe
> financial wizards have ever had in your lives.
> At least he isn't running a scam "foundation" that rakes in millions
> from terrorist supporting states and then only gives 5% or less to
> charity with the rest going into the pockets of the namesake.

I didn't mean to present myself as a financial wizard. It simply seems to
me that you don't let someone get $900M into debt unless you think he has
$900M. And within a few short years, you find he has a worth of -$900M.
That's a HUGE error, $1.8B! Note that my criticism was not of Trump, but of
the bozos who made the loans. Trump is to be commended for taking those
clowns for all they were worth.

It also seems to me that to have a significant role in 530 entities when
there are only 365 days in a year is spreading the Trump too thin.

I can't see that what Hillary Clinton has done has any bearing at all on
what Trump has done. They are two different people, each with their own
obnoxious traits.