Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
ellapenella

No Obama,Hillary Clinton is unfit for office

309 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Astra.
3 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

 He loves himself too much and the radiation backlash could cause his hair to fall out.

images_62.jpg

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
5 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

OMG...he didn't do that.  Geez, how the left desperately flops around trying to find something to pin on him.  I think I'm done with you.

Well, yes - he did.

Okay, he wanted to speak a clever sound-bite that would sound like he was saying something, when he actually was saying something else, but that only works when the people you are speaking to are clever enough to understand you do not mean what you actually say. There are plenty of people in the US (and any other country, for that matter, to stop any accusations of "bias") who aren't clever enough to make that distinction. There are plenty of people in the US who are angry enough, although they may not be able to articulate exactly what it is they are angry about, and invested enough in a certain ideology, to believe that Trump is speaking exactly to them using what the 2nd Amendment protects to "get rid of the threat of Hillary Clinton".

What Trump said is absolutely irresponsible, no matter how much you like his platform, and absolutely could be said to be promoting the use of violence to determine an electoral campaign - because it was vague enough to be interpreted that way.

Edited by Leonardo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
5 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

OMG...he didn't do that.  Geez, how the left desperately flops around trying to find something to pin on him.  I think I'm done with you.

There's hundreds of links to support the fact that big mouth Trump threatened Clinton. It's not hard for you to dig up a link. In fact, you know that if that was an ordinary joe at any one of the many presidential rally's and conventions that said that, he'd be arrested by the secret service and FBI and charged with inciting violence and threatening life. 

As it stands, Trump is supported by cohorts of Right wing republicans like you that have made deflecting Trumps stupidity an art form. Congratulations. 

Edited by Leto_loves_melange
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian
30 minutes ago, Leonardo said:

Well, yes - he did.

Okay, he wanted to speak a clever sound-bite that would sound like he was saying something, when he actually was saying something else, but that only works when the people you are speaking to are clever enough to understand you do not mean what you actually say. There are plenty of people in the US (and any other country, for that matter, to stop any accusations of "bias") who aren't clever enough to make that distinction. There are plenty of people in the US who are angry enough, although they may not be able to articulate exactly what it is they are angry about, and invested enough in a certain ideology, to believe that Trump is speaking exactly to them using what the 2nd Amendment protects to "get rid of the threat of Hillary Clinton".

What Trump said is absolutely irresponsible, no matter how much you like his platform, and absolutely could be said to be promoting the use of violence to determine an electoral campaign - because it was vague enough to be interpreted that way.

Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
1 hour ago, Holmesian said:

Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest.

Excellent example! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
6 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

OMG...he didn't do that.  Geez, how the left desperately flops around trying to find something to pin on him. 

Thor - he pins things on himself. I understand how the media can also exaggerate things....and so can the opposition from both sides of the fence when it comes down to the dirty business of politics... (mind you.. this is politics that I have never seen the likes of before)

 But seriously - when he speaks on the world stage in front of millions. It's extremely rare that he doesn't put his foot in his mouth in one way or another. He either drops insults - makes snide remarks and / or cryptic innuendo's in his speeches. The man has a mouth like a bullet train. I think in his own grandeur of a mind he seriously believes in what he blurts out. The thing is - he is so unpredictable with many of his knee-jerk and / or off the cuff remarks.

Good grief - even 50 former national security officials are calling the man reckless. Are they all wrong ?

A group of 50 former national security officials, all of whom have served Republican presidents from Richard M. Nixon to George W. Bush, have signed an open letter calling Donald Trump unqualified to be president and warning that, if elected, “he would be the most reckless President in American history.”

The letter offers a withering critique of the GOP nominee, saying he “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president. The signatories declare their conviction that he would be dangerous “and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/group-of-50-former-gop-national-security-officials-trump-would-be-most-reckless-president-in-american-history/2016/08/08/6715042c-5d9f-11e6-af8e-54aa2e849447_story.html

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
4 hours ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

There's hundreds of links to support the fact that big mouth Trump threatened Clinton.

He didn't directly threaten Clinton. It was more of a veiled innuendo. Quote - "the second amendment people could stop her...."

In other words; those who do not want their firearms taken away 'could harm her' ?. (That is how I perceived it)....

which is rather frightening - especially if some nut job out there gets ideas.

As usual though - he back-tailed on the remark when the heat came down. Nothing new there. 

Edited by Astra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
19 minutes ago, Astra. said:

He didn't directly threaten Clinton. It was more of a veiled innuendo. Quote - "the second amendment people could stop her...."

In other words; those who do not want their firearms taken away 'could harm her'... (That is how I perceived it)....

The most gracious interpretation is that he was saying that people who support the 2nd amendment could vote for him for president since the majority of people support the 2nd amendment (without necessarily supporting what some people believe the amendment actually means in practice), but that is bending over backwards.  Not that this justifies the usual uninformed and biased suspects from hilariously blaming the 'left' for his inability to communicate clearly though. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir
1 hour ago, Astra. said:

Thor - he pins things on himself. I understand how the media can also exaggerate things....and so can the opposition from both sides of the fence when it comes down to the dirty business of politics... (mind you.. this is politics that I have never seen the likes of before)

He's just all talk at this point.  His record doesn't show anything that prevents him from being POTUS.  A good one?  I don't know, but he'll definitely be better than Shrillary, which isn't say much.

1 hour ago, Astra. said:

 But seriously - when he speaks on the world stage in front of millions. It's extremely rare that he doesn't put his foot in his mouth in one way or another. He either drops insults - makes snide remarks and / or cryptic innuendo's in his speeches. The man has a mouth like a bullet train. I think in his own grandeur of a mind he seriously believes in what he blurts out.

"Putting his foot in his mouth" is only in the eye of the beholder.  Again, compare what he is just saying to what Shrillary has actually done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
8 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

Trying to find something on him?? :P  The left doesn't need to.  The guy's a rich and obnoxiously arrogant racist, a chauvinist moron who has no respect for anybody and has no loyalty towards anyone, not even his own Party who in return dislike him.  His only interest is in his own huge and fat egocentric self.  BTW talking about fat, he doesn't like fat people either. He only cares about his own butt and everything he does is for self accreditation, which in return helps market his own product but despite that, I'm pretty certain he isn't doing any of this for the dollar, as he truthfully claims, but he isn't doing it for you either.  It's all about HIS ego.  He doesn't give a rats about you or anyone of your fellow compatriots, despite what he DOES claim. Paradoxically, he's the most unfit "Politician" you could ever come across but I doubt he would ever have the courage to push the Nuke button (thankfully) like some suggest. He loves himself too much and the radiation backlash of such action could cause his hair to fall out. Wouldn't that be a tragedy. 

 

BTW, everything in this post is related to things that he has said, acted upon or done. 

I agree with everything except the bit about the nukes. Nobody asks that many times in an hour long debriefing unless they want to use them. Nobody claims they won't even take them off the table for use on Europe unless they have itchy fingers. 

National security folks coming out against a nominee is unprecedented. People who don't pay attention to that are very foolish.

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
15 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

He's just all talk at this point.  His record doesn't show anything that prevents him from being POTUS.  A good one?  I don't know, but he'll definitely be better than Shrillary, which isn't say much.

"Putting his foot in his mouth" is only in the eye of the beholder.  Again, compare what he is just saying to what Shrillary has actually done.

Why don't you compare what he has done, to what Clinton has done?

How many people/families were ruined due to the bankruptcy he's forced several of his businesses into? How many Americans don't have jobs because the companies he and his family own, off-shore their manufacturing?

You want to compare like-for-like, then do so - but don't insult the people posting here by comparing what someone (you like) says to what someone (you don't like) does in your effort to demonise that second person.

Edited by Leonardo
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
1 minute ago, Leonardo said:

Why don't you compare what he has done, to what Clinton has done?

How many people/families were ruined due to the bankruptcy he's forced several of his businesses into? How many Americans don't have jobs because the companies he and his family own, off-shore their manufacturing?

You want to compare like-for-like, then do so - but don't insult the people posting here by comparing what someone (you like) says to what someone (you don't like) does in your effort to demonise that second person.

There have been 3,500 lawsuits over non-payment. You can't tell me that all 3,500 people/companies were just s***** workers. Someone just doesn't like to pay his bills. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
1 hour ago, Astra. said:

He didn't directly threaten Clinton. It was more of a veiled innuendo. Quote - "the second amendment people could stop her...."

In other words; those who do not want their firearms taken away 'could harm her' ?. (That is how I perceived it)....

which is rather frightening - especially if some nut job out there gets ideas.

As usual though - he back-tailed on the remark when the heat came down. Nothing new there. 

It seemed like he was joking...sort of. 

That said, I'm sure he wouldn't shed any tears if one of his followers actually did something like that. 

This is a tactic that has been used by dictators, and even his new bestie, Putin. They say it, claim it's a joke, and then the opposition gets offed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

It's actually pretty hilarious listening to the clip, and then immediately to people on his side trying so desperately to tell you that you didn't hear what he just said. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
5 hours ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

There's hundreds of links to support the fact that big mouth Trump threatened Clinton. It's not hard for you to dig up a link. In fact, you know that if that was an ordinary joe at any one of the many presidential rally's and conventions that said that, he'd be arrested by the secret service and FBI and charged with inciting violence and threatening life. 

As it stands, Trump is supported by cohorts of Right wing republicans like you that have made deflecting Trumps stupidity an art form. Congratulations. 

Indeed, Michael Hayden confirmed that if it was anyone else, they'd be sitting in the back of a police van right now answering to the secret service. 

The thing of it is, this isn't a spin. It's his own words. He spoke of a scenario where Clinton won the presidential race and was appointing her judges to the Supreme Court. At that point, he said, “By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is."

It's clear that he's not talking about getting out the 2nd Amendment vote. He's been talking about the election being "rigged." 

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
2 hours ago, Astra. said:

Thor - he pins things on himself. I understand how the media can also exaggerate things....and so can the opposition from both sides of the fence when it comes down to the dirty business of politics... (mind you.. this is politics that I have never seen the likes of before)

 But seriously - when he speaks on the world stage in front of millions. It's extremely rare that he doesn't put his foot in his mouth in one way or another. He either drops insults - makes snide remarks and / or cryptic innuendo's in his speeches. The man has a mouth like a bullet train. I think in his own grandeur of a mind he seriously believes in what he blurts out. The thing is - he is so unpredictable with many of his knee-jerk and / or off the cuff remarks.

Good grief - even 50 former national security officials are calling the man reckless. Are they all wrong ?

 

 

At this point in history, I don't care too much about the petty little comments  Donald Trump says that offends people, because the people offended are the people messing up things in the world.  Donald Trump didn't cause these world problems. At least when he speaks he's honest. He's not a fake phony lying politician on the world stage lying to everyone while having blood on their hands.  And about the 2nd amendment to be exact, I know exactly what it is constructed for,do you?

Edited by Ellapennella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

 YOU really want to talk about people calling people reckless ? YOU need to look closer for the truth.Obama and the Clinton's are a good place to look into before You start slinging mud around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo
7 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

He's not a fake phony lying politician on the world stage lying to everyone...

Absolutely right. He's a fake phony lying businessman, not a fake phony lying politician.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
18 hours ago, South Alabam said:

I'm not sure they look into the future far enough, to see everything that the liberals champion, would be lost at the hands of Islam. Gays put to death, women beaten for merely speaking, or put to death because they are raped, all our guns taken away, so their is no fighting back.

But hey, you open your arms long enough, someone is bound to stab you in the back.

You noticed that Hillary had the father of the Orlando shooter sitting up in her V.I.P area during a rally in Fl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
20 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

He's just all talk at this point.  His record doesn't show anything that prevents him from being POTUS.  A good one?  I don't know, but he'll definitely be better than Shrillary, which isn't say much.

"Putting his foot in his mouth" is only in the eye of the beholder.  Again, compare what he is just saying to what Shrillary has actually done.

Well I guess only time will tell if he manages to take Office. But as Leonardo has said - he hasn't totally had a clean bill of health as far as some of his past business enterprises and ventures have gone. And he has left many people / families high and dry without giving much or any thought to them. That speaks volumes to me as also being an unreliable character - who lacks genuine care or concern for others in the wake of his failings. So what would he be like holding the highest office in the land - let alone the world once he snuggles in ?

Will he eventually prove to be just as unreliable - uncaring and lack concern for others - but on a much grander scale ? 

I totally get why you don't want Clinton as POTUS - at the end of the day - it boils down to having to choose between the lesser of two evils.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thorvir
2 minutes ago, Astra. said:

I totally get why you don't want Clinton as POTUS - at the end of the day - it boils down to having to choose between the lesser of two evils.

And that's exactly what I'm doing.  I don't like Trump.  But I don't fear him--at least not until he's earned that fear.  I can't say the same for the Hildabeast.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
1 minute ago, Leonardo said:

Absolutely right. He's a fake phony lying businessman, not a fake phony lying politician.

can you prove that he's lying to the world about what's going on with terrorism and how he wants to eliminate it from expanding? can you stop for a minute and look at all the wrong that the Clinton's and the Obama's have done? Hillary sells America's secrets to foreigners. Who would permit the Clinton's anymore access to the white house and classified information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam

I would charge the Supreme court justices with treason should they take anything away from the constitution. Here is the oath they take upon appointment.

"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God."

Here's the Presidents:

—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Here's an enlisted military oath:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Here's a commissioned Officer's and civil service oath:

An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.

 

All these oaths are to protect the constitution. Amendments 1-27 are all worth protecting. If you look at the way the constitution is worded, it is to keep the government accountable to the people, and not vice versa.

 

 

 

Edited by South Alabam
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
52 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

It seemed like he was joking...sort of. 

That said, I'm sure he wouldn't shed any tears if one of his followers actually did something like that. 

This is a tactic that has been used by dictators, and even his new bestie, Putin. They say it, claim it's a joke, and then the opposition gets offed. 

Yeah - well that's the thing about jokes that those in politics tell. Are they really joking ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
8 minutes ago, South Alabam said:

I would charge the Supreme court justices with treason should they take anything away from the constitution. Here is the oath they take upon appointment.

"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God."

Here's the Presidents:

—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Here's an enlisted military oath:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Here's a commissioned Officer's and civil service oath:

An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.

 

All these oaths are to protect the constitution. Amendments 1-27 are all worth protecting. If you look at the way the constitution is worded, it is to keep the government accountable to the people, and not vice versa.

 

 

 

And you have a nominee who outright says he wants to do things that are diametrically opposed to the Constitution. Doesn't seem to bother anyone in his camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.