Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

Your defense seems to be that she "didn't know" what is or isn't classified information. It was her job to know and it's the law to know. I understand you not knowing shit because you've already displayed a complete lack of mental acumen. The secretary of state isn't supposed to be that stupid. She broke the law numerous times. Dozens of others have been convicted for the same thing and served time. And others lost their jobs and can no longer work where a security clearance is required. And you're only defense for her is that you think she's as stupid as you are.

 

I know you haven't bothered to read anything besides Fox News, The Federalist and Breitbart, but if you had bothered, you would have seen that information is not always obvious when it should be classified or not.

A New York Times article on drones that had been sent to her had been classified, at one point before it was declassified and emailed to her. You know, an article that was available to millions of New York Times readers? Classified.

Another email that she was waiting for to be declassified by an official merely had one line in it that said the U.S. and Britain would work towards world peace, which she had emailed back that she didn't see why it had been classified in the first place.

A third email only had one part that was classified, which was the subject line. The rest of the email was not classified.

Those are just three examples off the top,of my head. Fact is, you and the other Republicans are so desperate after 25 years to nail her on anything because you have nothing to offer the majority of voters, you're now clinging to accusing her of breaking the law on something so minor, when in reality, she was obeying the law. What's even more hysterical is that Colin Powell did the exact same thing by not using the government email system. I suppose you think he's stupid, too.

 

Take it to the FraudSeeker.

 

I know YF and others in the Trump admiration society will disagree with me, but it stuns me that Trump has been able to maintain this amount of traction. He is genuinely a know-nothing, and that shit show last night was every bit as "scary" as the Detroit debate, albeit in a different way. He keeps maintaining that he's going to make "great deals," and people buy it. But to make "great deals," you have to have some understanding of what the issues you're dealing with are. He doesn't. And he doesn't care to. Like a certain vice presidential candidate before him, he's too arrogant to think he has to. It's all a buncha bullshit to him.

I think in some ways, he's a one-issue candidate. But it's not immigration. It's trade. And his ideas about that are far scarier than one-liners about his dick. (As an aside, so are Beenie Sanders'.)

 

And as good as Rubio was last night in kicking off his campaign for governor of Florida, he had one of the worst moments of the night, I thought, when he said that "Donsld says what everyone wishes they could say, but as president, you can't just say whatever you think. There are consequences."

I guess that's true, but it's the most uninspiring, tone deaf statement since Hillary announced she was going to begin projecting more warmth and spontaneity.

"We all agree with Donald. We just choose to be politically correct."

Yeah, that'll resonate.

 

To your point:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/u...prod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

Now Mr. Trump is bringing mercantilism back. The New York billionaire is challenging the last 200 years of economic orthodoxy that trade among nations is good, and that more is better.

 

While you were arguing, the Virgin Islands had their Republican caucuses last night. Party members selected all nine delegates as "uncommitted" pledged to none of the four remaining candidates. In the unlikely but not impossible event no candidate has a majority of delegates entering the convention, these nine worthies will be in position to do themselves a bit of good, and we could have a Presidential nominee created by a jurisdiction that can't vote in the subsequent election, which would be only marginally goofier than what's gone on to date.

 

I need to read more about it, but four people -- two couples -- moved there specifically to run as uncommitted delegates, and at least two of them won.

But, I don't know their full motivations.

 

Show me one.

 

"The next time we see him, we might have to kill him."

Next Time We Might Kill Him: Protester Attacked at Trump Rally

 

Rubio is right, of course. But an infinitely better way to phrase it would be something like, "We're running for the most powerful position in the world. The world is watching, and everything we say reflects not only on us, but on the entire country. And Donald makes us look like a country full of bloviating jerkoffs every time he opens his mouth. And that has an effect on our standing in the world, whether you like it or not. Everyone is laughing at us."