Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Co-Founder Commits $20 Million To Help Defeat Trump (buzzfeed.com)
Mat Honan reports: Dustin Moskovitz, the billionaire co-founder of Facebook and Asana, announced on Thursday that he intends to give $20 million to a "number of organizations" to help Democrats, and Hillary Clinton, win in 2016. Moskovitz published a fiercely-worded Medium post arguing that Republican nominee Donald Trump is "running on a zero-sum vision" and that his attempts to woo economically disenfranchised voters "are quite possibly a deliberate con, an attempt to rally energy and support without the ability or intention to deliver." He also wrote that while he and his wife, Cari Tuna, have previously voted for Democrats in presidential elections, this is the first time they endorsed a candidate and donated. The move represents a sharp break with Asana and Facebook board member, Peter Thiel, a Trump delegate who spoke at the Republican National Convention and earlier this week published an op-ed in the Washington Post in support of the Republican nominee.
Sorry bro, Trump represents the majority of Americans, Crooked Hillary represents big business and Wall Street criminals. Bye bye!
Hillary is a criminal, breaking the law sending classified information from her personal email server. I wouldn't recommend him or the Democrats endorsing that lying criminal. They need to pick a candidate that believes in upholding the law.
Facebook Co-Founder Donates $20 Million to Hillary For Political Favors
But I don't have millions to buy a voice.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
...this should certainly reduce the amount of money in politics.
-Styopa
Trump or Hillary, what's the difference? It is the same bunch of crooks and their lobbyists that will decide what's going on, not you.
So what he's saying is that Trump is trying to pull a Brexit.
From what I understand about brexit none of them really expected they would win and when they did win everyone was like oh well we didn't really mean any of the things we said we were just trying to keep any third party from winning.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Hey kids, remember when it was evil for those 1%er nazis to illegally influence elections with their dirty evil money?
Well, it's officially OK now that the money is going to Hillary. Obey to the 1%er rich people you little drones!
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
There's a surprise, a Jew spending millions to get Clinton elected.
The left is going to furious about this. One of their biggest goals is to get big money out of politics.
the massive H1B's Hillary is going to give out to drive down their costs to hire skilled american talent are probably just a coincidence here? taking more money and power away from independent working class folks and further consolidating it among billionaires and their establishment cronies...now THAT'S something Hillary and FB's co-founder can get behind!
This is nothing new. The 1%ers control politicians. They are all just talking heads for the guy(s) behind the curtain.
...that money can buy.
"Of the people, by the people and for the people" ended a long time ago.
Hillary is already outspending Trump 5 to 1, spending hundreds of millions already - and the result is she is slipping in the polls, further every day.
Part of that I feel is because people get sick of ads, so Trump has been inadvertently brilliant in not having many.
I guess perhaps part of his 20 million is going to directly rig votes in areas where the machines can be altered? I guess that would be effective, but Clinton has already got that covered as much as she can.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Trump is against the offshoring of tech jobs.
Nothing like rank partisan hypocrisy.
I'm not a Trump fan, in fact quite the opposite, but this is disturbing.
No individual should be allowed to spend so much on an election. No one should have this much power. It's not exactly "buying votes" (which is illegal), but it is buying ad-time which can translate into votes.
It is excessive to allow more than $100 per person (or corporation)- adjustable for inflation. (I don't think those campaigning should be allowed to give more than $100 to their own campaign either). It truly is disgusting how much money is involved in the election and how much money influences who wins.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Having one of the creeps who started "spybook" come out in favour of the utterly corrupt Clinton just gives the voter yet another great reason to vote Trump.
Stick one on the globalists, the bankers and the political elites.
Vote Trump ! make America great again !!!
This is very helpful post.Thank you for your good article.I am give here a link which help you to found more good article. www.ezinearticle.com
I knew sooner or later people would buy their way into politics to this degree. Kind of sad actually.
So no matter.
Wait. Aren't these the same Democrats that vilify "big money" from the likes of the Koch Brothers? Funny how they scream about that, but didn't say a word in this case, or when Soros donated 8 million to Hillary.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
But I don't have millions to buy a voice.
The donation is only $20 million. I have to think that's barely any more of a voice than you or I have in this democracy. Maybe $100 million gets you noticed.
That's great that they're pushing against Trump, but Hillary is just as shitty of a choice, albeit in different ways. Who's left that is capable of running the country? There's Johnson, but I'm not sure how I feel about him.
I think that the people who typically held that view point were those who were voting for Sanders and have moved on to vote third party (Green or Libertarian) instead of supporting Clinton. It would be hypocritical for them to complain in this case, but there are a large number of Democrats who had no real problem with this kind of politics so it's unfair to fling this in their faces as well.
He just scared another guy into giving them another 20 million bucks. Pretty neat trick, eh?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
to say there have [tux.org]B? Are you
Jeb Bush spent $150 million on a primary race with tons of ad buys and campaigning goodness that money could buy and came in nearly dead last.
http://www.politico.com/magazi...
Money gets your message out but it doesn't mean that it will automatically translate into votes.
If that were the case the new Ghostbusters movie should be the highest grossing movie of all time.
Now it does represent a barrier to entry for candidates without the money/support networks - But - here's a perfect example where one man with the means can fund another with the vision. What if he had spent that much on Bernie's campaign instead?
Are all those millions buying your vote? If not, then what's the problem? Money doesn't compel me to vote one way or the other. We have the power to make this election between Stein and Johnson, and turn the money into confetti.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Actually it is the 0.1%ers
Trump 2016!!!!
You're probably right, but the Hillary supporters were perfectly happy to endorse that view as long as it benefited them.
You can see actual advertising against the 3rd parties this year, for just about the first time ever.
Needless to say, I don't like either major party candidate one bit. I wouldn't trust them with a used fig.
Just got an email this morning from Public Citizen, a 501(c)(4) organization that is very upset about the Citizens United decision, which allowed 501(c)(4) organizations to spend money to forward their respective political agendas--but not to donate to campaigns. They want it overturned.
A snippet: "If we lose, the forces of plutocracy — like the notorious Koch Brothers and casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson, the Big Banks and Big Pharma, Karl Rove and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and so many more — would be even more emboldened to continue exploiting Citizens United and dismantling our democracy."
This guy is not on the list. Nor is Tom Steyer, George Soros, or Michael Bloomberg. Nor the millions spent by the SEIU, AFL-CIO, and other unions. By doing so they paint their organization as nothing more than a group of partisan hacks and not as true defenders of the democratic process.
The money flowing from their rich donors and supporting their causes is just a righteous investment in good government...the money from the other guys are bribes.
Speaking of Public Citizen, I recently received an email from them. Now, PublicCitizen.org is a 501(c)(4) corporation, who's primary purpose seems to be opposing the ruling handed down in the Citizens United case. Recall that the Citizens United case hinged on the fact that a 501(c)(4) corporation produced a movie that had a political purpose, in this case a documentary "Hillary: The Movie" that was intended to highlight Mrs. Clinton's shortcomings the first time she was running for president.
The email from Public Citizen was urging me to donate money to support their production of a documentary DVD highlighting how bad the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United was.
That's right: a 501(c)(4) corporation made a movie with the express political purpose of protesting the Supreme Court decision that a 501(c)(4) corporation could make a movie with an express political purpose!
Agreed. It's quite possible this is a business decision so Facebook et al. can get more visa workers, and offshore without consequences.
While Trump flip-flops on those issues, it appears he's more likely to curtail visa workers and offshoring than Hillary.
Table-ized A.I.
He should give it directly to Hilary's Foundation, so if somehow Hilary wins (I sure hope not) he can ask Hillary for some special tax break or something to put any Facebook competitor out of business.
I see no other reason why someone would spend $20 million to help someone who promised to tax him more, would mess up foreign relations more, and sell out our children's future to give to Mexican citizens who are living in the USA. I would think people would have learned after 8 years of Obama that you can't trust a Democrat.You can count of them saying whatever it takes to win, and then on the few things they DO do that they say the do, they mess it up. Like Obamacare.
Hillary has collected more from the big banks than anyone in history but that doesn't matter because in her speeches/commercials she talks about how she is going to regulate them.
How fucking dumb are people.
Depending on the source, but was soundly defeated on the issue.
Money doesn't buy votes. Ads seldom sway pre-formed opinions.
"Facebook Co-Founder Throws $20 Million Down Toilet"
$20 million could make a world of difference to any number of causes, particularly those which provide aid to the less fortunate in this world. But he's giving it to politics, which is already the largest and most successful business this world has ever known. What an obnoxious waste -- and I say that as someone who believes 100% that it's his money and therefore his choice.
Big corporations and billionaires.
Oh, no. My mistake. The correct answer is unions. Percentages are to Democrats and to Republicans, respectively.
1 Service Employees International Union $233,948,108 $231,783,862 $1,295,669 99% 1%
2 Fahr LLC $114,005,803 $113,755,803 $0 100% 0%
3 National Education Assn $109,427,714 $105,078,729 $3,452,808 97% 3%
4 American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $98,678,433 $97,694,335 $676,830 99% 1%
5 Carpenters & Joiners Union $80,768,463 $75,823,760 $4,798,328 94% 6%
6 National Assn of Realtors $74,982,087 $26,027,003 $28,258,810 48% 52%
7 American Federation of Teachers $74,932,481 $74,120,164 $363,250 100% 1%
8 Renaissance Technologies $73,792,377 $36,170,416 $36,646,874 50% 50%
9 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $72,175,924 $70,714,074 $1,136,150 98% 2%
10 Las Vegas Sands $70,782,782 $53,240 $70,732,661 0% 100%
11 Laborers Union $68,330,958 $64,165,186 $3,679,066 95% 5%
12 AT&T Inc $65,956,335 $27,437,253 $38,360,404 42% 58%
13 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $65,832,840 $65,272,289 $327,750 100% 1%
14 Soros Fund Management $59,210,620 $54,524,165 $1,813,415 97% 3%
15 AFL-CIO $57,212,102 $52,305,234 $1,286,876 98% 2%
Considering facebook's stance on privacy and free information / free press, if their money is that much against Trump, it's a good sign we need Trump.
Took the IRS to get him. Of course, these days he IRS is a political attack dog with a leash held by Obama, so it will not touch Hillary or the even the Clinton Foundation, which has recently had to redo taxes for several years due to “errors in the report of donations from foreign governments”.
He just can afford a lot more free speech than most.. Only in America! (well, maybe not just here.. )
You liberals should be up in arms over this... Remember the evil Koch brother's donations during the last election cycle and how you all went ballistic about how much $$ they put into their PAC? Where's that outrage now? (crickets)
Yea, I don't care if he wants to spend his money this way. Just make sure everybody knows where the money comes from and where it goes. We don't want anybody getting special favors though making donations or anything....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Aren't these exactly the type of actions that fuel the support of Trump?
Thanks dude!
Like so many others in the Clinton sphere. Lots of accidents and suicides for people who say bad things about Hillary.
An FBI director who realized that his only chance to assuage his guilt over his role in the charade was to go on TV and say she did it, anyone else would be in prison, but no "reasonable prosecutor" would indict. My bosses at Justice and the WH are reasonable prosecutors, and Brutus is an honorable man.
They found lots and lots and lots of grounds for her to be in Leavenworth, or at least put on trial for. They just chose to not prosecute.
And Bill's tarmac visit with Lynch had nothing at all to do with it...
You can take a losing case to trial and prosecute. Juries acquit all the time.
In this case, the reality seems to be more of choosing to not prosecute just to avoid the political outrage that would accompany the proceedings. A more cynical would say it was a decision based on partisan criteria--Obama and Lynch fixed it for Hillary when anyone else would be on trial for mishandling classified information, for destroying evidence (even after subpoena), and any number of other things.
Is it really that nutty to fight fire with fire? If it takes a 501c to reduce 501c scope I'm okay with that.
Those would be examples of escalating ongoing efforts. Now, dropping bombs on Venezuela would be "starting" a war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That's the audio of her laughing about getting a child molester off. The tapes were buried and the media refuses to play them. Snopes still calls it "false" even though we have the audio now.
It's not disputed that she attacked the women who accused her husband of rape and sexual assault.
The current FBI investigation turned up the fact that she mishandled classified information and they said flat out anyone else would be prosecuted.
So yes, she is being protected by the media and friends.
She's a walking dead politician.
At least Nixon had the integrity to resign.
Work Safe Porn
I'm one of those Sanders supporters and I would still like to get money out of politics. However, I'm also a realist - not an idealist - so I realize that we're not simply going to proclaim "This Isn't Done Anymore!" and separate politicians from big donations from rich people and companies. I toyed with supporting a third party, specifically Jill Stein, but I can't abide her anti-vaccine comments. I'm reluctantly supporting Hillary. For me, it's not "She's The Best One For The Job" as much as it is "On Her Worst Day She's Much Better Than Trump On His Best Day."
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
and by far the worst candidate of any major party in modern history, surpassing G W Bush.
But in democracy, the rich shouldn't be allowed to buy the election. US democracy is so flawed. Most developed countries at least have some form of cap in spending.
Our millionaires? Enlightened funders of progress on the side of the angels!
Get it right, or we'll send over some SJW types to accuse you of being racists.
The problem is that one of two people - Clinton or Trump - is going to end up as President. While neither of them is particularly likable you have to consider all the judges that they will appoint, all of the cabinet secretaries that they wil appoint, etc. All of those people have a big influence on the direction of the country albeit less obviously that the President.
If you live outside a swing state, feel free to vote a third party, just don't tell your friends in swing states to vote that way. But focus more of your attention on down-ballot races where your votes count.
If you live in a swing state, you are directly responsible for deciding on any delta between the two major candidates, and failing to vote or voting for a third party if you see ANY difference between the two viable candidates--no matter how small--makes you responsible for the winner in areas where they differ.
It's like choosing between hiring 2 doctors to provide health care to ten million people or hiring 3. Yes, it might be much better to hire 100, but if you say 100 your vote doesn't count, so you should hire 3 doctors, even though people die because you don't hire more. If you say you should hire 100 when you otherwise would have supported hiring 3, then you are supporting the people who want to hire 2 doctors, and your choice ended the lives that doctor #3 would have saved.
Real lawyers write in C++
That would help hitlery and maybe a few of us plebs too.
Who is Donald Trump again? Oh right... a 1%er
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
When one billionaire elite decides to use his power to defeat another billionaire elite? So American.
Yes, she's terrible but she's not a misogynist. Trump demonstrates he is on an almost daily basis.
The only one who will actually preserve a womans' right to control her own fucking corporeal being is Hillary, thru her Supreme Court appointments, whereas the GOP want to afford American women the same rights they have under Whhabbist Islam.
To deny any of this is hate all women, even if, or especially if, you have no women in your life whatsoever.
I'm reluctantly supporting Hillary. For me, it's not "She's The Best One For The Job" as much as it is "On Her Worst Day She's Much Better Than Trump On His Best Day."
I'm a Republican who'll be voting Hillary for the same reason.
The Hilldebeast Internet Shill Force is on the warpath today.
Maybe, but I thought Trump looked very presidential when he was on Russian TV criticizing America and praising Vladimir Putin.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
This is your typical "the peasants hate me" so they believe throwing money to support defeating public enemy X will gain them some love. So obvious it is painful to watch.
No, but if you say fire is evil while using fire to fight fire, why shouldn't everyone laugh at you?
She is not a criminal, she has not been convicted of anything. Note that I am not claiming she is innocent of wrongdoing, simply that it has not been proven in a court that she did anything wrong. The toxic state of political discourse has insured that anything short of a conviction cannot be trusted to be anything more than slander and innuendo.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
The 1%, Goldman Sachs, and Big Business only support Republicans... this has to be a mistake.
A company has no business sticking its ( Jew ) nose into politics.
I hope this fucker dies of cancer soon.
You need to move from Oregon to a swing state where your vote actually counts.
And then he decided to hire more H1-B Visa workers from India and fire Americans.
I love how all of a sudden the Democrats are flag-waving patriots skeered of teh ebil rooskies.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Instead of spending $20mil to help another candidate that is going to do (pardon sarcasm) *SOOOO MUCH* for the "disenfranchised voters", how about giving $20mil to "disenfranchised voters"? Your name would be much more of a legacy and you'd actually be accomplishing something other than indirectly displaying your lack of confidence in the publicly noted length of your manhood.
Adopting a "vote third party" attitude at this point is reckless. You should have done that early. You should have been getting the third party candidate up to being competitive during the last 4 years. Now is a hell of a time to get philosophical. You have to choose the lesser of two evils now because we should try to get fucked the least amount. It's too late for a third party candidate. Sorry. Voting for a third party candidate is sealing your fate to the worst of two evils.
If you want a third party candidate to win, starting to campaign 2 months before an election might not be a good idea. Just saying.
Where were your 3 years ago? 2 years ago ? WTF. Now's a hell of a time!
If a republican were publicly doing the same thing, the left leaning media loses it's collective hive mind over it..
Hillary is a criminal
[citation needed] And no, Fox News does not count. Deliver evidence of a successful prosecution or STFU.
You can review everything released by the FBI yourself. They didn't prosecute her because she was incompetent, and for her*, they decided incompetence mitigates reckless behavior when it comes to criminal prosecution. Clinton is damned by every line of everything released by the FBI except for this part :"Oh, we decided not to recommend prosecuting her."
You people cling to that line like it's solid gold when every other sentence incriminates her. And why did she have that server to begin with? To evade the requirements of federal records retention laws. Why would she want to do that? I have my guesses.
Anyway, back to the last remaining defense of HRC. What a ringing endorsement:
Hillary Clinton: certifiably incompetent to protect national secrets.
or maybe:
Hillary Clinton: She's so stupid, we can't hold it against her.
The FBI could only recommend prosecution to a corrupt DoJ- you know, the one with the Attorney general who met with Hillary's husband the week before the announcement.
*"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
And the $20,000,000 garnered from you the product, is going to fight Donald Trump
I love when people waste time AND money :)
He was on Russian.State.Owned.Television. As in, owned by the state. And then claimed he didn't realize he was on Russian state-owned television. The guy who can "read body language" couldn't figure out that "RT" stands for "Russian Television"
I want you to think for a moment what would have happened if in 2008 Barack Obama had gone on Russian state-owned television and trashed George Bush's foreign policy. Butt-plugs like you would have been screaming for him to withdraw from the race and be tried for treason.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You idiots, you can't talk 3rd party candidate today it's SEPTEMBER 2016!!
How can anybody even know which 3rd party candidate is not a crook? You should have started the campaign I don't know a few years ago. Maybe you should start the 2020 campaign today .. but guess what we have to select one of the two candidates in November. So yeah if you have zero analytical skills and thus think they are equally bad that's fine .. but if you have a I dunno half a brain or more .. then use your brain and sense of humanity to SELECT THE BETTER CANDIDATE.
It's too late for a third party candidate. If you can't even change my mind on that and you are able to reply this comment .. how are you supposed to change the minds of 30% of America in TWO MONTHS? You couldn't do it in years, now you expect it can be done in 2 months? WTF?
Just because I state an opinion that is anti-Hillary?
What I find very interesting is how George Bush who was, by all Democratic opinion, an idiot barely capable of remembering to breath was able to trick Hillary, Kerry, to vote for his war.
Similarly, how is it that Trump--by far the worst Republican candidate in memory--barely trails "the most qualified candidate ever" (really? more qualified than George Washington?) and even leads her in some polls?
This election is truly the giant douche vs the turd sandwich.
Alas, Gary Johnson has been sounding like Bernie Sanders and Bill Weld channeled his inner Michael Bloomberg on a gun-control chant. And Jill Stein? Seriously?
So not only giant douch and turd sandwich, but sides of dog vomit and cat hairballs.
PACs are needed when sociopathic billionaires are running for Pres. Thanks SuperPACs :)
Politicians will sic the antitrust police on giant corporations that don't play the game, as Google learned in the US and member nations of the EU, but they forgot to donate to politicians of the EU itself in Brussels.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
if you needed one goid reason not to vote for trump... once Facebook does sonething that's reason enough to junp ship
Hillary views the Citizens United decision, which allows this kind of thing, as the worst modern decision, and seeks to overturn it, or have an amendment that alters, for the first time, the First Amendment.
This money buys almost exclusively advertising, which is to say, the mass production and distribution of speech, directly protected in the First Amendment
Can't have that!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Remember that in all corrupt nations and dictatorships, people go into politics so they can get in the way to so they can get paid to get back out of the way.
It is ludicrous to think a free press and voting removes this dynamic. At best, it reduces it somewhat.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
remember when it was evil for those 1%er nazis to illegally influence elections with their dirty evil money? Well, it's officially OK now that the money is going to Hillary.
Fact checking you. You fail.
The limit on campaign spending was overturned by a republican-dominated supreme court with all five conservative republican appointees affirming the decision and all four democrat appointees opposing. Or more simply: republicans made this bed, now they must lie in it.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Butt-plugs like you would have been screaming for him to withdraw from the race and be tried for treason.
Would you have been? If not, why are you mad at Trump now?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
So what? I bet they'd let Putin speak on the Voice of America if he wanted.
I could have sworn that the Republicans were the shills of Big Business? Are they the ones that got all that lobby money? Oooops. Seems like all we hear about today are the huge sums that Hillary is raking in....for the campaign, for her speeches, for the Foundation, for access to diplomatic IDs, for classified talking points....
Simply put, Hillary is selling the US. Get in line for the gravy train!
Only the Republicans do this...they're big business, stock brokers. Ooooops! Looks like Hillary has figured out how to sell political influence.....remember pay-to-stay in the Lincoln Bedroom (look this up if you don't remember!), $200k for 20 minute speech to Wall Street, contribution to the Foundation to get access and diplomatic IDs, etc. The Clinton-graft express lives!
Exactly where is the evidence that the IRS is, quote, A political attack dog with a leash held by Obama? Is it by any chance in the same place as Barry's long form Kenyan Birth Certificate?
/.... folks. If you think Hilary is bad wait till you get a load of Mike "Bathroom Bill" Pence running the show (look it up).
Here's the story: A bunch of right wing think tanks were campaigning for Republican politicians and calling themselves charities. They weren't even trying to hide it. The IRS went after them because hey, low hanging fruit. That didn't change a damn thing about how illegal their actions were. There's a reason it's illegal to pretend to be a charity. A good one. And you're being disingenuous (read: lying through your teeth) when you suggest otherwise.
Christ, the shit that gets Modded up on
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"The Era of Hope and Change has been one prolonged act of suicide. If anyone had said that Obama would manage to alienate Israel and the Philippines, lose Turkey, pay Iran a hundred billion dollars, preside over the loss of a won war in Afghanistan, lose billions of dollars in military equipment to ISIS, watch a consulate burn, restart the Cold War with Russia, cause Japan to re-arm and go the knife's edge with China would you have believed it? If someone had told you in 2008 millions of refugees would be heading for Europe and that the UK would leave the EU after Obama went there to campaign for them to remain would you not have laughed?" --Richard Fernandez - Belmont Club - pjmedia-dot-com
Pretty much sums up the foreign policy failures of Obama and Hillary.
Look most of us are in tech, heck all of us are in tech. We all know exactly what Hillary did and how it was done and incredibly screwed up things must have been for her to get away with it. I mean don't even get me started... She didn't want to carry two phones and she didn't want to use the States BlackBerry because she feared they would be able to track her personal email (if their BES even allowed personal email) and she feared FOIA Requests more than anything. It's like the IRS manager targeting Tea Party tax exempt status and using a phony alias email to avoid FOIA requests. People she worked with must have been emailing her @clintonemail address knowing full well that it was not a State Department email. She wasn't listed in the GAL directory. Her assistants clearly took top secret and classified emails from the secure systems and retyped them into an email to Hillary and removed the headers in the process. She emailed Blumenthal constantly because she simply couldn't make a decision without him. She actually tried to hire him but Obama was pissed at his tactics during the second term election. There is a clear evidence trail showing she knew exactly what she was doing but she refused to listen to anyone. She even hired that plead the 5th email engineer at the State Department and he was this outcast nomad that no one in IT knew what he was doing. He would be in IT meetings and such and everyone else was whose that guy? This is the guy who dropped much of the security on her private email server because it was causing emails to bounce and otherwise not be delivered.
It just really pisses me off. On this one topic alone she's done in my book. She should be in prison and she should lose her security clearance. All the pay for play money should be seized and her assets frozen. She deserves to be held accountable for her actions. Anyone else would be locked away by now, it's a damn disgrace.
Hey any of you millennials even alive during the 1970's and 1980's? Cause it's worse now than in the 1970's under Carter. Yet Regan and the GOP managed to turn around the economy in an enormous way. I mean things were really booming in the mid-late 80's. Then it tanked a bit during Clinton years. The housing bubble was the direct result of Democrats forcing Freddie May and Fannie Mac to give mortgages to people who could not afford them. Then all the other companies got greedy and did the same thing. If it were not for Obama's heavy tax and regulation government along with the failed ACA the economy would have rebounded by now. For 6 years companies have been afraid to spend cash because they didn't know what ACA and other regulations would mean for the future.
It works every time it's tried. Reducing regulation, reducing taxes on corporations and the rich produces jobs and boosts the economy. The rich have gotten richer even under Obama and more so because they can keep their money and invest it wisely. But the middle class and entrepreneurs are suffering greatly. 97 Million workers have literally given up on finding work. Government does not create jobs, but companies do. If you tax them too much they won't hire. If you make things seem risky due to regulation they won't take risks. Government is standing in the way of American business.
Throwing big money at a questionable (at the very least) candidate for personal enrichment. I believe they call that "pay for play".
:"They"?
And if Putin spoke on the Voice of America, you can bet your ass that he'd know a little bit about the network he was on and not claim to have been "tricked" into appearing on VoA, the way Trump claims he was tricked into being on RT.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Some people just get flabberghasted every now and again when confronted with what insane hypocrites hard-right conservatives generally are. You know the sort of thing: Michelle Obama wears a sleeveless dress and it's the end of the world, Melania Trump is a soft-core porn model and that's just fine and how can people be so judgemental!!! Also, for the record, I'm not judgemental and don't care personally. People can do with they want as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't care if the first lady is a hard-core porn actress. Heck, for that matter, I'd be ok with the law allowing people to have sex in public. It's just the hypocrisy that's amazing. It wouldn't be so bad if I could believe that these people have learned their lesson and won't be so hyper-judgmental in future, but I know that they'll go right back to it as soon as they can.
Then there's the undocumented immigrants thing. They're terrible and should be rounded up and destroying america... Unless they're married to Trump (and let's face it, there's no way she wasn't being paid when she was nude modeling in the States before she had a visa allowing her to work). I'm not sure how they feel about the other illegal immigrants Trump has employed and even brought into the country to work, but they definitely seem to give Trump himself a pass for it.
Left isn't judgmental at all, though, right?
I think you'll find most everyone in politics is a hypocrite.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
The cold war is over grandpa, and there are many things the US could stand to be criticized on.
Oh yeah, that makes sense! Voting is more than just marking a ballot every two years and going back to sleep. "Democracy" is high maintenance. You gotta pay attention to what your representative is doing during the brief time he is at work and not campaigning. If you watch his voting record instead of his speeches, you will get a much more accurate picture of his position and his character. And at the same time you can devalue the campaign dollar to damn near zero. This whole money issue is bullshit. Blame the desire, not the object.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Trump is saying Putin is a better leader of HIS COUNTRY than Obama is of the US. He has said many times that he does not support Putin's goals - he's just insulting Obama.
This statement outs all the leftists who believe Obama to be a near-perfect super-leader and then leapto the wildly insane conclusion that Trump must OBVIOUSLY be heaping praise onto Putin. That aint it, bubba. The reason Trumps supporters are not freaked-out by this even as most of them are very solidly anti-Putin is that thay have been paying attention to ALL of what Trump has repeatedly said on the subject. They get it quite clearly: Putin's a bad guy whose interests only align with the US on some occasions (like FDR's love-fest with Stalin???) but he's at least leading his government and nation, whreas Obama is a feckless idiot who is more-often seen apologising for the US on the international stage, driving racial wedges through the civil society, and playing golf.
they do not murder somebody else.
I'm all for a woman doing whatever she wants with her body, but I draw the line at her paying a doctor to shove a scissors into somebody else's skull to stir-up the brans and collapse the cranium before ripping off his (or HER) arms and legs. I'm also oppsed to using very strong chemicals to dissolve the body of a third person. The woman can do anything to HER body and the doctor can even help her if he/she is so inclined, but NOT to a non-consenting 3rd human being.
Don't want a kid? Fine. I'm all in favor of you doing anything you choose to do to avoid creating one, as long as your chosen method does not involve creating the kid and then killing it.
When the left drops the whole homoicidal maniac bent on infanticide thing, then we can all get along just fine without slightly unpleasant arguments. Incidentally, I'm also one of those people who is glad the Republicans never gave up on the arguments that forced the Democrats to stop owning black people as slaves. The Democrats demanded that the Republicans give up on that moral cause too, and when the GOP refused to back down on the opposition to slavery, the Democrats split the country in two with a civil war. The right will NEVER drop its opposition to the murder of children just as it was never going to drop its opposition to slavery; some things are non-negotiable.
Do you actually realize that voting for the winner gains you exactly zero?
Americans really do scare me, its as if being on the 'side' of a winner makes you a winner in some way.
Really, no matter who wins, they will give exactly zero shits about who YOU voted for, and will do exactly what they want.
A vote 'for the winner because I guessed they were going to be the winner' achieves exactly one thing, it marks you as a failed sycophant.
You would be better staying at home.
of course your libertarian stupidity supports the buying of elections.