Posts made by pppucci

@raphjd:

Hmmm, the first 30 seconds shows a clear agenda against Trump, trying to link Trump to a hate group/person.

You are probably right. I think CNN is over-reacting.  I personally feel Trump thought it was clever and re-tweeted it.  But imagine if he accompanied the tweet with a statement like, "In the old days, this what I would have done, but now as President I have to protect the freedom of the press and the first amendment, even if I disagree with their coverage."  There would have been no way to criticize him.  The joke would have been mildly self-deprecating, but still would have gotten its point across.  But, I fear Trump is a stranger to nuance.

@mhorndisk:

Nah, he DID do something about it. He EXPOSED it. That makes him pretty awesome. Now they feel the pressure and voters will use their checks and balances to vote in people who do something about it. You are just plain wrong on so many levels, it's astounding.

He exposed nothing.  Trump got the idea from Alex Jones and InfoWars.  He simply has used the presidency to create a presidential commission to look into it.  He isn't fooling anyone except his die-hard supporters.  That is why there is such wide-spread push-back against it.

@raphjd:

Ok, so voting is a states' rights issue, so what is to stop them from allowing illegals to vote?

Many states already pander to illegals by giving them driver's licences and countless other rights.

There is a good summary of Voting law here:  https://www.usa.gov/voting-laws
I am not a lawyer, but I don't think the federal government can interfere, since Article I of the Constitution gave states the responsibility for overseeing federal elections.  Any fundamental change would require at the very least an act of congress, but more probably a constitutional amendment.

Think of it this way–the president cannot insist that all states strictly enforce speeding laws, even though that probably would save thousands of lives a year.

I am not going to argue with your ignorance of how our government works.  He is the Chief Executive of the Federal Government.  That does not give him the power to change state laws or even enforce state laws.  For example, he could not sign an Executive Order that raises the minimum driving age to 25, because states grant driving licenses.  I am not admitting any significant problem with illegal voting, I am just pointing out that the commission is investigating a problem that they have no power to remedy even IF they find one.

@mhorndisk:

Dude, the 17 thing was already admitted to being fake news and it was retracted! HELLO!!!!!!! IS ANYBODY HOME!?!?!?!?

Did Wellness Natsha tell you that.  Show me the reference.  Please. Or shut up.  You do not know what you are talking about.

I suspect taht when the president starts tweeting about the news, the media will cover it.  You can't expect them, or anyone else just say "ha Ha, that was a great joke!" , now let's talk about health care, when Trump fills his twitter feed with this crap.

@Frederick:

[Thanks for the idea!   Just about every one of your messages contains references to "fake news" sources.  I will have to start pointing that out.  Great idea!
[/quote]

So what news outlets do you trust?  Perhaps we can meet on some middle ground so we can have a fact-based discussion.  I am not going to let you spout your mouth without some legitimate fact-checking.  And no, the president's twitter feed doesn't count.

@mhorndisk:

Just because they are red, doesn't mean they don't have a problem with fraud. Trump has shown that he doesn't care if you are red or blue, the law is the law. Draining the swamp doesn't mean just going against democrats. That's the narrow frame of reference you are drawing conclusions from.

So now our President is some uber-policeman who is going to tell sates how to enforce their own laws?  There is no federal jurisdiction here.  If anything, his commission can make recommendations to the states.  Even congress is probably limited by the constitution on how much it can change voting laws.  Certainly, he cannot do anything by Executive Order.  The entire exercise if just to give his ridiculous claim about illegals making up Hillary's popular vote margin a shred of validity.

@mhorndisk:

Everything you just said is false.

If you mean to accuse me of that, you need to back it up with facts.  Here are a few more of my own:

Fact check.org:
Activities of the Clinton Foundation:
    Clinton Development Initiative staff in Africa train rural farmers and help them get access to seeds, equipment and markets for their crops.
    Clinton Climate Initiative staff help governments in Africa and the Caribbean region with reforestation efforts, and in island nations to help develop renewable energy projects.
    Staff at the Clinton Health Access Initiative, an independent, affiliated entity, work in dozens of nations to lower the cost of HIV/AIDS medicine, scale up pediatric AIDS treatment and promote treatment of diarrhea through life-saving Zinc/ORS treatment.
    Clinton Health Matters staff work with local governments and businesses in the United States to develop wellness and physical activity plans.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Charity Watch:
Program expenses 88%
Administration 12%
https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/clinton-foundation/478

The overall confusion comes from a misreading of the foundations IRS 990 form, which lists 6% of its income going to outside charities, but the other 82% go to charitable programs run directly by the foundation.  Now you can believe what you want to believe. You  have shown before that you are not persuaded by facts, even when offered up by independent sources with no political agenda.  I can't help you there.  You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

@mhorndisk:

You don't need evidence??? Really? That's absurd.

I am convinced you do not read posts carefully and just skim them and blast off!

I said we don;t need evidence that Trump was aware of the collusion to make the Russia thing true.  By that I meant that if members of Trump's campaign colluded with Russia without Trump's knowledge it would still be a big deal and not "fake news."  Can you accept that premise, or will we have to prove that Trump himself got on the phoen with Putin to set up the whole meddling effort in the election.  BTW, do you even accept the conclusion of 17 out of 17 US intelligence agencies that Russia hacked the DNC, Podesta's emails, tried to hack voter rolls and embarked on a true "fake news campaign via social media to undermine Hillary and try to elect Trump?  I suspect you are with Trump on supposing it was a 400 pound man sitting on his bed.

@mhorndisk:

Wellness Natasha isn't a news reporter. She's just a Red White and Blue American commenting and giving her opinion ON the news - OBVIOUSLY. I never presented her video as an official story. It was just to show you how ridiculous real people think you are.

People in ridiculous houses shouldn't throw stones.

@Frederick:

Trump may be smart, but I think you have the Comey Tape thing all wrong. The best explanation I've heard is that Trump was taken aback by the level of detail related in the first NYT article regarding the "loyalty" dinner.  That made Trump worry the Comey had taped him, not realizing that Comey was relying on contemporaneous memos.  He put that tweet out to see if Comey would leak the tapes.  That's why he waited so long.  Once he was convinced that Comey had not taped him, Trump realized he could lie about what was said.  It is just a theory, but makes more sense than yours.  Why would Comey lie before Congress when he had discussed what was said with his colleagues long before he knew he would be fired?  Comey is a lawyer.  He would not risk perjury charges that could be proven by a third party.

@raphjd:

Illegals voting is a states' issue?

Absolutely.  It is solely a state issue.  The federal government has no role in maintaining the integrity of voter rolls.  That there is so much controversy over voter ID laws, which vary from state to state.  There have been several Supreme Court decisions, of course, that deal with the matter.  The Court, however, must only rule on the constitutionality of the states' laws.  Probably the most important case was Bush vs. Gore in 2000 regarding the Florida recount.  Here is a summary of the issues:

Loathe to make broad precedents, the per curiam opinion limited its holding to the present case. Rehnquist (in a concurring opinion joined by Scalia and Thomas) argued that the recount scheme was also unconstitutional because the Florida Supreme Court's decision made new election law, which only the state legislature may do. Breyer and Souter (writing separately) agreed with the per curiam holding that the Florida Court's recount scheme violated the Equal Protection Clause, but they dissented with respect to the remedy, believing that a constitutional recount could be fashioned. Time is insubstantial when constitutional rights are at stake. Ginsburg and Stevens (writing separately) argued that for reasons of federalism, the Florida Supreme Court's decision ought to be respected. Moreover, the Florida decision was fundamentally right; the Constitution requires that every vote be counted.

Well, they are being prosecuted.. Not a capital offense, though.

Dream on.  I will take you up on that bet.  Remember, we don't need an impeachment or evidence that Trump was aware of collusion to make the "Russia thing" true.

@Frederick:

@pppucci:

@raphjd:

Snopes doesn't have the honesty it did 10 years ago.    They have been caught in some lies that favoured the left.

I'm not saying that is the case with this story though, but a warning not to blindly trust them.

I also cited the original Breitbart article which itself cited a third source.  I have no objection to discussing the issue of governmental glut and budget cuts as long as we stick to the facts.  But relying on Wellness Natasha  as the source for those facts is ridiculous.

It's funny to see you showing concern for "facts"… you are a disciple of "fake news"  pppussi

Stop changing my username.  I don't call you Frederadick.  Second, give me one example of "fake news" that I have mentioned on this board.  Just defending CNN does not make me a disciple of fake news.

@mhorndisk:

Puh-lease!!! CNN/Time Warner were producing the New York play in which Trump is assassinated, and the liberals are all cheering! "Oh yes! Yes!" They cry! "We need to assassinate him and we love this play! It is so powerful and speaks what I'm actually dreaming of! Yes give me more please!" The liberals are sick. The WWF thing was clearly just a silly joke as our President has a sense of humor that over half the country connects with. There really is NO comparison. If you don't get it, you're demented.

You are right.  The interpretation of a 16th century play is a form of artistic expression, while Trump's tweet is just vulgar crap.  Another company portrayed Obamma as Caesar in 2011.  It is just a way to modernize a play from 450 years ago, not really a threat to either president.  Liberals didn't get their panties in a knot over the 2011 production.  I have yet to attack your intellect, but you tempt me every day.

@mhorndisk:

So 10 cents on the dollar might have went to the Trump Organization, and 90 cents on the dollar to the charity, although that is speculation, not fact, because you haven't actually seen the paperwork or the bills, so you have an allegation and an accusation, but really nothing solid or concrete.

Hillary on the other hand took 90% of the near one billion dollars raised for Haiti to "administrative costs." That's a fact that we DO know. In fact, during the VP debate, Mike Pence looked Tim Kaine square in the eye and said, the Hillary Foundation donates 10 cents on the dollar to charity, the other 90% goes to administrative costs. Tim Kaine changed the subject fast.

I guess you don't care about those kids in Haiti, since you probably voted for Hillary, right? I guess that makes you an extraordinary hypocrite, doesn't it?

Edit: At the end of the article, it notes that 2.9$ million was donated to St. Jude last year alone… But there were other charities not mentioned in this article. So you are calling him corrupt and unethical and fraudulent for a few hundred thousand dollars in costs? That's obscene, especially when you give Hildabeast a pass for taking $900 MILLION in costs. REAALLLYYY OBSCENE.

Another example of you swallowing the pablum of the conservative media without checking your facts,  The Clinton foundation donated to other charities about 10% of its income, but the vast amount of the foundation is done directly by it, Making it a public charity.  In fact, its administrative cost were only 12%, and it Got an A rating from independent third party that evaluates all charities.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/25/reince-priebus/reince-priebus-false-claim-80-clinton-foundation-c/

And you still don't understand the issue with the Eric Trump foundation.  Yes,Eric did raise a lot of money for kids with cancer, but his father converted money that other people gave to the Donald Trump Foundation into income for the Trump Corporation.  That's the last time I will explain it.

You are eagerly propagate lies about Hillary without checking the facts, but when we point out something true about Trump that you don't like, you call it fake news.

Keep enjoying your fantasy.  The final word has not been spoken on Russian collusion.  Even if he was not directly involved, more and more evidence is coming to light.  The latest involves Republican operative Peter Smith who said he was working with Michael Flynn to get Russian hackers to try to  get Hillary's emails. Hold your fire until Mueller releases his final report.  Calling every piece of news you don't like fake doesn't make it not true.

@raphjd:

Snopes doesn't have the honesty it did 10 years ago.    They have been caught in some lies that favoured the left.

I'm not saying that is the case with this story though, but a warning not to blindly trust them.

I also cited the original Breitbart article which itself cited a third source.  I have no objection to discussing the issue of governmental glut and budget cuts as long as we stick to the facts.  But relying on Wellness Natasha  as the source for those facts is ridiculous.