2016 Presidential Election Thread

USA Today: Trumps winning terrorist narrative

Clinton’s charge against Trump of what amounts to treason has to be weighed against a grim reality. This weekend’s attacks were much closer to Trump’s worldview than that of the Democrats. The pattern — domestic terrorism allegedly committed by radical Muslim immigrants connected to, or inspired by, ISIL ideology — tracks the type of extremist threat Trump has been warning the country about all along. In addition, incidents over the last year in Chattanooga, San Bernardino and Orlando show similar attacker profiles and motivations. The problem isn’t an image-driven contest of conflicting narratives; it is a fundamental failure to secure America from violent radicals.​

Yup.

The Philly FOP hasn't endorsed a Democrat in two decades.

Incidentally, Philly police shoot and kill people at six times the rate of the NYPD. Maybe they think GOP candidates will be more sympathetic to police brutality ...

I was moderately annoyed at the Clinton campaign for trying such a similar tactic as Cruz used against Carson in Iowa, but hot DAMN did I never expect to get so much amusement from you of all people believing it and spreading it like Clinton's campaign wants you to! Dance, little Clinton puppet, dance!

Well this is damning

A Reddit thread where Hillary's IT guys asked for advice on how to strip VIP (very VIP) e-mail headers off e-mails.

And Comey claims he couldn't find evidence of intent.

Buh bye immunity!

Yes I heard about this on the radio today! The Reddit users were all over this shit. Another way they identified him was his asking (under the same user name he used for the security shenanigans) for advice about fixing a specific type of car, and they found photographic proof of that exact car in his driveway on google maps or some other similar site. No wonder he pled the fifth in court!
After this he'll need to drink a fifth!

CNN going balls-deep with the bias.

CNN going balls-deep with bias? They are balls-deep and breaking it off. CNN = Clinton News Network.

Yes, and facts are irrelevant to the true believers in such movements. Case in point, there's been ample evidence that Obama was born in the US, but that didn't stop people from claiming that he was born in Kenya.

There are, but none of them are easy. What makes the breeding ground for mass movements is discontent amongst the population, as well as a feeling of isolation. Nobody understands them, and they can't find something meaningful to occupy them, and they see little opportunity to be able to improve their lot in life without radical action.

A vibrant economy, where people can change their station in life, and don't face pressures that disrupt their social lives, creates a stable society where mass movements rarely grow. That's the ideal solution.

Less ideal, is that you have a different movement, which is more benign, lead by a more charismatic leader. So, for example, you could have a religious leader who pulls the followers of the other mass movement to their side. This is tricky, because any mass movement can be co-opted by folks with dark intentions.

The bleakest option, and the one easiest to implement, is repression. Clamp down on a society, make sure that the majority of the population fears being arrested and jailed (by arresting and jailing lots of people), and mass movements are DOA.

Yep. And the one thing that would be useless for the Israeli's is racial profiling.

There's probably not a lot of South or Southeast Asian Jews, but they encompass just about everyone else, as do Muslims.

It's damning that he ... wanted to redact an email address?

Yes. Those e-mails technically should have been the property of the United States government. Tampering or altering them is a very serious felony punishable by years in federal prison.

It was also very likely an attempt to destroy evidence being sought by Congress, depending on the date, and an attempt to shield illegal activities from federal oversight.

The evidence being ... what her email address was?

I suppose you're going to declare that the president having a private zip code that isn't released to anyone other than his friends is a scandal, too?

No, he was talking about stripping off the e-mail addresses of all the dictators, criminals, gun runners, smugglers, and foreign oil executives who were communicating with her.

It's only a little bit of evidence tampering. No biggie.

And who cares whether a particular e-mail exchange was between Hillary and ChuckHagel@pentagon.mil or AlexanderBortnikov@fsb.gov.ru?

Those weren't . . . Russian Redditors who uncovered this evidence, is it?

Because if it was, this is nothing more than evil foreigners trying to subvert our democratic processes and should be ignored, and you're a traitor for bringing facts to our attention.

Yes if it was Hillary's (the very VIP) and it was government work related in nature. Even if this wasn't "the government" and just another large corporation, then he would be fired for enabling the competition - corporate espionage is a very real thing - everyone is trying to get a leg up on their rival corporations, not unlike governments.

Breaking news, gtardo is one of these guys scared of radicalized Skittles!

Bear in mind that if the content of the emails were "hey Dmitri, you can have some uranium if you give me a million bucks" like gturner and his winged monkeys want us to believe, redacting the email address wouldn't change that. And the IT guy would presumably be doing a lot more than just taking out the address.

I've worked with public records, and redacting personal contact information like phone numbers and emails -- while retaining names and content -- is fairly common.

Very much this.

(Having said that, an IT staffer at the highest levels of government having to ask reddit how it's done is, I hope, less common.)

Except it shouldn't be done with government emails. Because under your scenario redacting email addresses would do two things:

#1 Prevent anyone from knowing if other persons were CC or BCC on said email

#2 Interferes with proving it was a particular Dmitri

I'm not saying this reddit theory is necessarily true but removing this stuff from Federal government stuff is a no-no.

http://www.joemygod.com/2016/09/20/...58000-in-charity-donations-to-settle-lawsuit/

(Using this link so as not to burn off WaPost's 10 article limit too soon)

Most limits are imposed by means of cookies saved in your browser. You can delete these. Chrome even lets you clear cookies for specific domains each time you exit the browser, automatically. Some cookies are better than others.
Go to settings...privacy... content settings... manage exceptions.



Yeah, Trump's a fraud. Worse than Hillary, but because he's macho and all his base will look the other way. Everyone knows charities are just there to avoid paying taxes.

Does deleting cookies make me a fraud?

Hillary going cock-eyed. Definite signs of neurological problems.




I hope she makes it until November. She's a lock to lose. Bigly.

She cancelled her fundraiser in North Carolina

She is not going to make it.

US News and World report notes something more damning

The IT guy started the Reddit thread the day after the Benghazi Committee reached an agreement with the State Department on turning over all of Hillary's e-mails.

Thanks a lot @Wonka.