Slashdot Mirror

This never was about a blanket "Muslim" ban.

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."

— Donald Trump

He surely could have gotten his foundation to pay for it. Since they've paid for everything from the boyscouts to lawyers fees.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

That is an interesting question. Here are my thoughts on the topic.

I think Trademarks are too flexible for that too happen. For example, look up the word 'Boston' in the trademark database, several different companies have trademarked for various, non-conflicting uses. Additionally, each Trademark registration only lasts 6 months, so you'd need to re-register or something. Maybe it would work if you got a bulk deal on trademarks? But it might be hard to convince a court that your trademark is meaningful if you are registering them in bulk.

On the other hand, there are some kinds of trademark trolls

Don't care who they support as long as they are doing it legally and not seeking to buy elections.

And not trying to bomb an apartment complex in Kansas or setting a Reichstag fire in North Carolina.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Prof. Orin Kerr, a noted expert on the 4th Amendment and on computer crime law posted his negative reaction to this ruling; he has a longer commentary on this issue here

According to Prof. Kerr this is the third court of appeals to rule that that reading the stripes is "not a search", and that this runs counter to Supreme Court precedent such as Arizona v. Hicks .

Prof. Orin Kerr, a noted expert on the 4th Amendment and on computer crime law posted his negative reaction to this ruling; he has a longer commentary on this issue here

According to Prof. Kerr this is the third court of appeals to rule that that reading the stripes is "not a search", and that this runs counter to Supreme Court precedent such as Arizona v. Hicks .

“It's very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”

That was a cute joke, but Clintons have certainly beaten Trump to it. Unless you think, Bill and Hillary Clinton receiving hundreds of thousand of dollars per speech can be explained by anything other than his past presidency and, more importantly, the "inevitability" of her future one.

Having left the White house "dead broke" by their own admission, the couple are now worth tens of millions of dollars. What exactly have they sold in 15 years, that is that valuable?

That original quote is totally misunderstood... Trump said the first candidate to "run" and make money on it. I.e. - make money on RUNNING, not having anything to do with winning. Remember that once donors and the party started picking up the tabs he jacked up the rates on the offices and rooms in his own properties they were using? And now he plans to launch a TV network, etc? He doesn't need to win. He is saying he will be the first one to run, lose, cost the Republican party their shot at succeeding after Obama AND make off like a bandit anyway.

I'm amazed more people don't see through it all.

I see... Well, strictly speaking, that's just a Grand Jury deciding, whether or not to prosecute him. Convened in 2011, they were still at it in 2013. Probably, still are...

Clearly, much easier to continue calling him "rapist"...

“It's very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”

That was a cute joke, but Clintons have certainly beaten Trump to it. Unless you think, Bill and Hillary Clinton receiving hundreds of thousand of dollars per speech can be explained by anything other than his past presidency and, more importantly, the "inevitability" of her future one.

Having left the White house "dead broke" by their own admission, the couple are now worth tens of millions of dollars. What exactly have they sold in 15 years, that is that valuable?

Syria was a civil war incited by the Arab Spring and a dictator butting heads that we were keeping our collective noses out of for a decade.

Bullshit! https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Classified U.S. diplomatic cables show that the State Department has funneled as much as $6 million to the group since 2006 to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria.

Once the fire finally ignited you added more fuel:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06...

Same sort of thing for Libya, Iraq[1] etc. The US has been helping to start fires and keep them ablaze for decades.

As for 9/11 guess who helped Osama bin Laden and gang grow in power: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sou...
http://archive.is/1wddN

Open your eyes. These are all mainstream articles not conspiracy nut sites. You bunch are far from the good guys. Heck even the Russians have more legal justification for messing with Syria (the Syrian government asked them to help).

If you think a country having a corrupt evil government doing really bad stuff gives other countries the right to help overthrow it perhaps you should look at the USA sometime. Corrupt? Evil? Actively doing really bad stuff? All checked.

[1] Yeah Saddam was an evil dictator, guess who helped him get in power and kept supporting him? http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/...
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03...

people will forgive Trump for daring to say "p***y" off the record. There's still another three weeks, and I think by then people will realize that no matter how outraged they are at Trump saying a "bad word"

No one gave a shit that Trump said pussy.

People cared that Trump bragged about being able to grab women's pussy without consent, aka sexual assault.

And then a bunch of came forward to say that for once Trump was telling the truth, and his habit of sexually assaulting women was very real.

Of course if they ever do get bored they can start talking about how he's telling his followers that they have to watch out or minorities are going to steal the election. I'm actually wondering at this point, is he deliberately trying to cause election day violence?

Statements by 'anonymous government sources' don't count.

The Russian hacks of the state election systems were not announced by "anonymous sources". They came directly from the FBI, as well as election officials in Arizona (red state) and Illinois (blue state). Oh, and Florida (red state).

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/12/...

https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Remember tho' - these Einsteins believe that the FBI is in on the Fix, cuz you know, they didn't put Grandma in a pantssuit in front of a firing squad.

Statements by 'anonymous government sources' don't count.

The Russian hacks of the state election systems were not announced by "anonymous sources". They came directly from the FBI, as well as election officials in Arizona (red state) and Illinois (blue state). Oh, and Florida (red state).

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/12/...

https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Except that your smartphone has a dedicated piece of hardware listening for the activation phrase. Your battery would drop faster than a Samsung battery explodes if it was surveilling you like an Echo.

Funny, that's how the Echo works as well.

Is the Washington Post good for you? https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Same with Google News. Lately, only Trump bashing or Clinton praising editorials dominate the top stories. But I'm sure it is just a coincidence, after all, Google says trust them and that they are not using their position as a major news aggregator to influence public opinion.

The panel seemed to say it found the equivalent of a smoking gun. “Before enacting that law, the legislature requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices,” Motz wrote. “Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans.”

So, yes, please go explain how these laws are about protecting vote integrity. And then.explain why if they care so much about vote integrity they don't do anything about absentee ballot voter fraud which is a much more common and well-documented problem.

Anecdotes? Whoa there, buddy, you're argument about a few people is clearly statistically significant! I guess we should discard what scientists say because it doesn't seem right to you.

Its a data point, and one shared by others. It's shared as well by universities, who are spending that money to retrain students and especially their parents

You want references? Need data? Of course in social matters what constitutes data is ephemeral but here goes:

http://counseling.uoregon.edu/...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://news.fsu.edu/news/educa...

http://newsinfo.iu.edu/web/pag...

I can give you hundreds more, so label Universities as trolls and call each one irrelevant.

My anecdotes - and I can give you more - merely corroborate the larger experience. Point is, young adults come out with unrealistic expectations, have not been allowed to grow up and have trouble making their own decisions, and are prone to depression and disappointment, and their parents are the cause.

They are damaged goods, and will need a decade of trying to sort out what they should have learned since childhood. Don't blame your grandparents, and don't blame yourselves. But blame only goes so far, so ya gotta pick yourselves up and move on.

Since she hasn't been convicted of a crime, she needs to be absolved of exactly squat.

Oh, this coming from the people, who've already convicted Trump of sexual assault?

The grand-parent implicitly admitted her wrongdoing, but tried to absolve her on the grounds, that her actions involved no criminal "intent". That was patently wrong and warranted a correction — intent is not always necessary, and certainly is not in the case of mishandling classified information. She is also obviously guilty of obstructing justice/destruction of evidence — deleting thousands of e-mails after getting a subpoena...

Learn how due process works.

Well, it certainly does not work, when your husband can put in a good word for you with the country's top prosecutor. Obviously, due process is for the little people — which Clintons surely aren't...

"It's not slavery if the man allows the whipping to take place".

It is slavery, if the man can be punished (up to and including by death) for refusing to work for free.

Trump held no power over the women involved. He may have flaunted his wealth, but, unlike Clinton, he never used armed men under his command to compel his victims into sex acts. And yet, you consider Bill Clinton the best President ever (or second only to Obama), while Trump's "assaults" make him an abomination.

Your hypocrisy is not even thick — it is rock solid already...

"Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." - Abraham Lincoln

No, what Lincoln actually said was “Bitch nigga buy your own damn fries.”

No, silly, he's talking about their exploding washer line. If the load is heavy enough, and the washer agitates just enough, the power circuit board shorts out and blows up. I suspect that the agitation shorts the windings on the step down transformer which then applies 120V to the (max) 25V power conditioning caps (those big ones that eliminate ripple). Then again, 120V to a 25V inductor's (or the low voltage side of the step down transformer's) not going to make it very happy, either.

Link
Hope you don't have one of these bad boys:)

I completely blame Democrats for nominating a reasonable person.

Thats just a number you plucked out your backside

http://www.politico.com/story/...
http://prospect.org/article/ma...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

There you go. There's three references. One a university study, one from a polling company, and one from a government organisation. Those were just the first 3 links on Google in order. Let me know how far down you get before you find one that suits your agenda.

Only if Microsoft Tay gets a permanent account.

Which Trump tax plan are you reading?

I based the remark on analysis of his plans that I've read such as this and a few others which seem to agree that his plan would increase the incomes of the top 1 %, but I admit I do not know if the plan on his page has been altered since these kinds of calculations have been last done.

Thanks for the interesting points about the tapes. Do you happen to have a source on the point about the reactions being out before the tape itself? Would be interesting to check out.

Samsung has sold millions of these things. Three of them have caught fire. That makes the odds of a device catching fire less than 1 in 1,000,000. Business Insider says that 17 cars catch fire every hour. Where are the cries for recalling cars?

I'm going to keep a copy of your post for safe keeping. This "what about y" device is constantly being invoked as justification for everything from mass surveillance to red rum so often in so many different contexts it usually makes me cringe/sigh Al Gore style whenever I encounter it.

Boldly inquiring about cries for recalling products that catch on fire takes it to a whole new level.

http://www.reuters.com/article...

http://q13fox.com/2016/09/30/s...

http://abcnews.go.com/Business...

http://www.techtimes.com/artic...

http://jalopnik.com/5935974/fi...

http://www.autonews.com/articl...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/01/...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04...

http://www.popularmechanics.co...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://www.streetdirectory.com...

https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2...

If you want to hear cries from victims themselves click keywords and enter fire. http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/o...

There are nearly enough guns in civilian hands currently to arm every man, woman, and child in the US. Even if everyone was on-board and willingly turned in firearms, it would still be decades before significantly more than half were turned in just due to the sheer numbers involved and the size of the nation, so you'll have some areas gun-free and some not for decades, and criminals will simply go to the places where victims are unarmed.

I don't doubt that this is a major issue. Interestingly, the percentage of US citizens who are gun owners seems to be at an historic low, while at the same time the number of guns owned by those who do own guns has increased - about 20% of gun owners seem to be owning more tha 65% of all the guns out there. I guess if we could convince those 20% to dispose of their firearms, that would get us over the 50% mark pretty quick!

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And Mashiki fails to note that they were doing so in order to track the process and thus improve their ability to make arrests.

You mean they were not tracking the process, ignoring informant information, and not doing any arrests. And according to the FOIA requests, the Obama administration went even further and blocked agents from actively perusing investigations against solid leads. Did not inform the Mexican government unlike the Bush administration did, illegally engaged in straw sale purchases, and in the end was so shitty that they "lost" thousands of weapons. Openly discussed and/or blocked ATF lab reports which showed that the weapons that the administration had approved for gunrunning were being used to commit crimes. Which came directly from Holder's office. And attempted to use "executive privilege" in order to block all information on it. Which of course is why it was such a big scandal...unless you watch the US news, in which case they simply brushed it off as nothing. Much like you did, and of course if all that had happened under a Republican president, you would be screaming from the rooftop right now.

But much like Yeland Lee(who was gunrunning as well FYI also a democrat), the only difference between the two is that no one in the Obama administration actually went to prison over it.

More like because in these days of Alice Through The Looking Glass political correctness actually increasing police in an area of high crime would be called racism?

So they either try to do things in secret like the above or more likely what is happening in just about every major city in the country you let the inner city become a slaughterhouse thanks to Ferguson effect making more and more cops simply unwilling to do their jobs for fear of being accused of racism. Sadly we can look to the UK to see where this leads where one of the largest pedo rings in history operated without fear because the cops were afraid of being called racist if they stopped them.

Think Chicago hitting over 500 murders in a single year was a big deal? Wait until next year when I have no doubt it will double, why? Because cops simply will not go into those neighborhoods and the criminals know it so its a free for all. They have already seen with Darren Wilson it doesn't matter if everything from eye witnesses to forensics shows you were being attacked by someone that had just pulled a robbery, all the MSM cares about is race so their only logical move is to leave the inner cities to the criminals.

But don't worry, I'm sure the stink this program is causing will insure Baltimore PD will not do anything in the future, well other than send the meat wagon to pick up the bodies that is.

Liberals literally attacking Trump supporters in the street.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Liberals burning down part of their cities.

See Ferguson or Baltimore just as two easy examples. You can't pretend you're unaware of these events, or of the fact that most of the arrests made turn out to be of people who don't even live in the effected areas.

Saying that first amendment rights shouldn't apply to non-liberals.

See every recent discussion, always started on the left, about doing things like bringing the "Fairness Doctrine" back from its well-earned, unconstitutional grave. See virtually every college campus, especially when progressive protesters threaten to disrupt speeches by people like Condi Rice ... and school administrations agree with them, cancelling such gatherings in order to appease the angry liberals. There are so many examples of this sort of thing that you can't possibly be unaware of them.

Saying that Assange should be shot.

Take or leave reports of Hillary Clinton doing a "Will nobody rid me of this troublesome priest?" and talking (while in office) about "droning" Assange. But for a more on-video example of a typical self-professed arch liberal pundit, look to people like Bob Beckel, famous for saying things like, "A dead man can’t leak stuff. This guy’s a traitor, he’s treasonous, and he has broken every law of the United States. And I’m not for the death penalty, so ... there’s only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch."

Liberals calling for police to be killed.

You're kidding, right? We've seen whole marches full of people chanting about "killing pigs" and that old favorite, "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!" Who? Black Lives Matter gatherings. BLM is a darling of the progressive left, and local franchises thereof receive substantial support from groups like OSF (famously liberal activist George Soros' channel for putting cash into such movements and events).

The point, of course, is that the poster above is asserting that some fringe element he especially dislikes is the very definition of the wider party he wants to see defeated. Pretending that the party he DOES like doesn't have, dragging around with it, people who are every bit as bad or worse, including some that literally violent or at least enthusiastic about violence ... well, that's just pretending. And no, most people don't think that defines the Democrat party, per se.

The reason you even consider Hillary comparably evil to Trump is the unprecedented media campaign against him and for her.

Merely 7% of journalists are Republicans... There has not been a day in the last 6 months, when my iPhone did not have at least one link to a bad article about him, while she is mentioned either neutrally or positively. Washington Post alone has 20 journalists digging up dirt on Trump full time. In 2008, at least, the media still feigned neutrality, hiding the skew against McCain — although, it was an obvious pretense. The public was staggeringly misinformed about both sides — far more people knew all about the cost of Palin's new clothes, for example, than about Biden's past plagiarism, an objective evidence of media's failure to inform.

This time, they don't even pretend any more...

If, despite all these partisan efforts, the worst things they can come up with is his calling some cunt a cunt in 1988 (!), you really ought to ask yourself, how much of that negative perception you have of him is artificially planted...

There isn't any "evidence" in the press release. It's an announcement; an accusation.

With regard to your last question, here is a starting point:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

If you're looking for more, start here:

https://slashdot.org/comments....

Why are there scare quotes up there? Dr. Stein is a doctor same as Dr. Paul. She graduated Harvard Medical School and practiced internal medicine for 25 years. She was also an instructor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

You wouldn't be exhibiting a little... sexism... with those scare quotes, would you?

"I think there's no question that vaccines have been absolutely critical in ridding us of the scourge of many diseases â" smallpox, polio, etc. So vaccines are an invaluable medication," Stein said. "Like any medication, they also should be -- what shall we say? -- approved by a regulatory board that people can trust. And I think right now, that is the problem. That people do not trust a Food and Drug Administration, or even the CDC for that matter, where corporate influence and the pharmaceutical industry has a lot of influence."

(WaPo, July 29th, 2016.)

Disclaimer: I'm voting for the lizard people's candidate this year, not Dr. Stein.

I was wondering why a big deal was being made out of the 2014 breach not being disclosed now, when everyone knew about it in 2014. Now I understand...

Yeah, and you're the type of person who'd say that there are no connections when 10+ outlets suddenly all come out yesterday with exactly the same talking points about Pence and his non-2020 campaign. Or that 90% of beltway reporters either vote democrat or are registered democrats, or that 80% or so of reporters in general are democrats. Even when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. There might be right-wing talking points, but there sure is a democrat echo chamber.

This is completely false:"Publicly traded companies like these are required by law to do what is best for it's shareholders"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

A telltale symptom is the mind boggling stagnation in rocket technology. Look at main lift engine development: ULA is using Russian engines designed in the cold war. The rocket cartel hasn't invested a dime in big lift vehicles since the early 90's.

It took two outsiders, Musk and Bezos, to inject life into the US space sector. They were both technologists with no ties to aerospace. They independently realized that new booster technology was the key to 21st century space flight, manned or unmanned. They both spent their own money to build new rockets from scratch. Yes, they got federal funding, but they spent a lot more then that. (ULA has been developing new upper stage rockets, but that is a much smaller effort then building a new launch system from scratch.)

When ULA woke up and realized they were at least six years behind SpaceX in engine design, they went to Blue Origin. Their next generation main lift stage will based on the Blue Origin design. That's called being asleep at the switch.

Don't start whining about NASA, feel sorry for them. They are constrained by politics and budgets. If Congress only gave them rubber band and paper clip money they would still be making a valiant effort to get into space somehow.

Speaking of Congress, ten House Republicans are trying to squash SpaceX. They claim to be "greatly concerned" about the recent pad explosion and want the USAF and NASA to cut SpaceX off. What they are actually doing is shilling for ULA. Who gives a rat's ass about US technological leadership or actual capitalism when there are campaign contributions and jobs to protect in their districts? Congress are the real jokers behind the rocket cartel.

A telltale symptom is the mind boggling stagnation in rocket technology. Look at main lift engine development: ULA is using Russian engines designed in the cold war. The rocket cartel hasn't invested a dime in big lift vehicles since the early 90's.

It took two outsiders, Musk and Bezos, to inject life into the US space sector. They were both technologists with no ties to aerospace. They independently realized that new booster technology was the key to 21st century space flight, manned or unmanned. They both spent their own money to build new rockets from scratch. Yes, they got federal funding, but they spent a lot more then that. (ULA has been developing new upper stage rockets, but that is a much smaller effort then building a new launch system from scratch.)

When ULA woke up and realized they were at least six years behind SpaceX in engine design, they went to Blue Origin. Their next generation main lift stage will based on the Blue Origin design. That's called being asleep at the switch.

Don't start whining about NASA, feel sorry for them. They are constrained by politics and budgets. If Congress only gave them rubber band and paper clip money they would still be making a valiant effort to get into space somehow.

Speaking of Congress, ten House Republicans are trying to squash SpaceX. They claim to be "greatly concerned" about the recent pad explosion and want the USAF and NASA to cut SpaceX off. What they are actually doing is shilling for ULA. Who gives a rat's ass about US technological leadership or actual capitalism when there are campaign contributions and jobs to protect in their districts? Congress are the real jokers behind the rocket cartel.

I was in my teens for Reagan and the start of the first Bush administration, so my memory of what was said about them is pretty fuzzy. But i don't recall a big deal being made about nuclear war being made, and that certainly wasn't my biggest concern during either the election for Bush 1's 2nd term or either of Bush 2's terms.

But Trump has said that he's okay with using nuclear weapons offensively:
https://thinkprogress.org/9-te...

Trump has also said that he won't guarantee defending our allies, which is potentially a very destabilizing action:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyli...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...

He said during the first debate that attacking an Iranian ship would not start a war. (To be fair, doing so wouldn't _definitely_ start a war, but almost identical actions have been considered acts of war in the past and could easily be considered so again, so saying that it definitely wouldn't is 100% wrong.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And i can find any number of references for the off the wall stuff Trump has posted on twitter at 3am, in fact there has been analysis presented here on slashdot about the emotional tones of his tweets then vs when his staff is in charge:
https://politics.slashdot.org/...

Now normally i wouldn't say "this person acts unhinged on twitter, therefore they'll end civilization." However he has stated himself that he's willing to cause turmoil among our allies, which will lead to politically unstable situations, he's said himself that he's willing to preemptively use nuclear weapons, and he's said things that seem to indicate he doesn't know what is and is not an act of war.

If you combine that with the kind of temper and tendency to get unhinged when he feels he's been attacked or insulted that he's demonstrated both in real life and in his late night twitter sessions, i feel that it's reasonable to be very concerned.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press...

Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

That is 110 counts of Felony mishandling of classified information.

With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been “up-classified.”

There are three more counts.

Now, as to the government issued cell phone, she was offered a Blackberry like every other government employee, she chose instead to have her own Blackberry, so how did she exactly avoid the "poor excuse" for a cell phone?

http://www.politico.com/story/...

As well, the fact that she failed to turn over official records, that were improperly stored and destroyed breaks the records retention laws that were clarified after she left office, but were always assumed to cover email as well as paper.

https://www.archives.gov/about...

You can choose to believe that she did nothing wrong, but fact is, she committed many felonies, and concealed evidence of them by running her own server. We will never know what she did or didn't do for Benghazi, but we do know that she destroyed emails related to it. It is rather hard to run an investigation when the party is destroying evidence the whole time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It is quite clear that there are many emails not delivered to the investigation. and in fact, there were several emails requesting additional security before the attack that were ignored, that would have been sent to Clinton, but none were in her email dump. In fact, other countries had already closed their embassies at that time, so it isn't like no one knew there were issues.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

But, I wasn't even speaking about Benghazi, you bring tha

Trump backers realize they've been played as WikiLeaks fails to deliver October surprise

More or less. Why is the espionage act being used with prejudice against soldiers that take selfies in the wrong places or marines trying to warn comrades of trouble but Comey takes it upon himself to declare that he recommends against indicting Clinton on the grounds that there was no intent? Over a hundred of her "Special Access Program" e-mails got onto a private server that nobody else had access to except herself, Chelsea, and Huma Abedin, the server had to go down at least once on fears that it might have been hacked, and Comey in his own words described how careless and negligent this was, but he couldn't find intent? Why is the FBI granting so much immunity in this case? Why is the FBI negotiating with Clinton and her aides instead of just treating them the way they'd treat anybody else they wanted to confiscate evidence from? And perhaps the most intriguing question: What kind of power does Hillary have over the FBI that they have to tiptoe around this disaster?

If we can gather anything from the CIA black camps in Poland, it's that unless you're Roman Polansky (or probably any actual Polish citizen), the Polish are perfectly ready to sell you out.

Trump never said the IRS wouldn't let him release returns

Yes, he did say that. Repeatedly, starting in February of 2016.

When someone repeatedly says they want to do something but can't, when the truth is that they can do that thing, but don't want to, that is what we call a LIE.

Um... because Buzzfeed is supporting the correct narrative?

An article from the left-leaning Washington Post... apparently they're not all blinded by the light of their chosen ones:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Finance isn't your thing, it's beyond you. Trump could have had a stellar decade and intentionally put those losses in one year.

That's sheer idiocy. First of all, these are Trump's PERSONAL taxes, not his business. That means that Trump personally lost over $900M in a year. If they were his business losses that would be stupid on Trump's not to shield himself. There's a reason people create LLCs: so they don't have to absorb losses personally. Obviously you don't understand business.

Let's for the sake of your argument he had "a stellar decade and intentionally put losses in one year." While some deferment of losses can happen over multiple years, he still lost $900M. Over a decade that means $90M per year. You're not allowed to defer profits from an entire decade from any tax code that I know.

Is such a move even allowed? Some say it might have been illegal.

Others have raised another scenario entirely — that Trump’s advisers may have created a new tax entity, possibly offshore, to which he continued to owe some or all of the $916 million. This strategy, which is illegal and is called “parking” debt, would have allowed him to claim to the IRS that he still was incurring losses to avoid declaring any debt he had erased as income.

Some Wonder If It Means the US Has Given Away The Internet

"Some" refers to geniuses like Trump who worry about "The Cyber" and 400-pound hackers "sitting in their beds." And people like Ted Cruz, who is Ted Cruz.

At the other end of the argument, you have people like Tim Berners-Lee who wrote an editorial in the Washington Post rebutting Cruz's nonsense.

Slashdot has been wasting electricity with this "story" before. Seems like a waste. Or does Slashdot, like Trump and Cruz, also believe climate change is a hoax?

Hillary already called almost half the voters "enemies".

A bad comment but she seemed to be referring to the party itself, and not the voters.

She doubled down and said many of them were "deplorable", "irredeemable" and "not America".

She apologized (unlike Trump's offensive comments). She was also right, about half of Trump's supporters are racist or sexist..

If I have to choose between my government hurting others or hurting me

Did Obama hurt you? The fact is that neither candidate it likely to have much impact on the lives of middle class whites.

And why do blacks, Hispanics, and so many other people get a pass for supporting a candidate who so obviously hates many of their fellow Americans?

Because that candidate obviously doesn't hate many of their fellow Americans.

She's clearly frustrated with a lot Trump's core supporters, everyone is at least frustrated with some portion of the US electorate. But I see no evidence that she actually "hates" them.

I wouldn't necessarily say Trump "hates" any demographic, even if his policies would be extremely harmful and discriminatory to them.

Hillary already called almost half the voters "enemies". She doubled down and said many of them were "deplorable", "irredeemable" and "not America".

If I have to choose between my government hurting others or hurting me, what's my rational choice?

And why do blacks, Hispanics, and so many other people get a pass for supporting a candidate who so obviously hates many of their fellow Americans?

Story explaining some of them.

This is now the SIXTH time (in a single thread) you've called someone a liar where a 5 second search would have told you different. I no longer believe you are just uninformed, you are a shill/troll and deserver every -1 Flamebait you get. I don't think anyone likes your name calling posts that do nothing to advance the discussion. You should probably take a break until after the election.