Expat Forum For People Moving Overseas And Living Abroad

Expat Forum For People Moving Overseas And Living Abroad (https://www.expatforum.com/expats/)
-   La Chatarrer¯a (https://www.expatforum.com/expats/la-chatarrer/)
-   -   CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC More Trump (https://www.expatforum.com/expats/la-chatarrer/1377002-more-trump.html)

lagoloo 26th December 2017 06:48 PM

This labeling of some news sources and fact checking sites as untrue or true is useless. The bias is obvious.
We would be closer to reality if we did not use any news source but own brains and powers of observation. Hillary is history and her detractors keep on beating that defeated woman to feed some strange need of their own. Why, I don't know nor care.

Trump has the stage. Listen to what comes out of his mouth or his tweets and decide for yourself whose interests he has at heart. You don't need to read a right or left news source.

He's not keeping his promises to the middle class, let alone help those struggling to get by. You don't need a fact checker or a media interpretation to figure that out. The first thing that's evident is how badly that enormous ego needs daily feedings. I need not go on. See for yourself.

Zorro2017 26th December 2017 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanMexicali (Post 13785058)
:)

Donald Trump wrongly says Hillary Clinton laughed at a 12-year-old rape victim | PolitiFact

"The article notes that she can be heard laughing at several points on the tape, but it doesn't say she was laughing at the victim, as Trump claims.

She is "discussing the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied (the accused man, Thomas Alfred) Taylor to the crime," destruction that led the prosecution to seek a plea deal on a lesser charge, according to the article. ​(For the record, DNA testing as we know it was years away, but labs did determine blood type in criminal cases in that era.)

"I plea bargained it down because it turned out they didn't have any evidence," Clinton says. In the tape, available on YouTube, Clinton says of the case, "It's sad." "

Your above news source:

Rape Victim: Hillary Laughed At Me And Blamed Me For Getting Raped

Wikipedia on The Federalist news source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_(website)

"David Weigel from Bloomberg Politics said that The Federalist frequently criticizes left-leaning publications, but was founded with the intention of being "a source of original interviews and real-time arguments between conservatives and libertarians".[9] During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, some political commentators noted a shift in The Federalist's coverage of Donald Trump, first criticizing the presidential candidate, and then, after Trump won the presidency, criticizing Trump's liberal critics in the media and casting Trump as the victim."

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/cl...975-rape-case/
More confirmation Trump lied about the story and a video of him doing it.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...ghed-about-it/

"Hillary Clinton successfully defended an accused child rapist and later laughed about the case.

Mostly False

"The audio on these tapes is difficult to understand, but Clinton can be heard describing the case as “terrible.” She did audibly laugh or chuckle at points, not about “knowing that the defendant was guilty” or “getting a guilty guy off” (which makes little sense, given that the defendant pled guilty) but rather while musing about how elements of the case that might ordinarily have supported the prosecution worked in the defendant’s favor (i.e., observing that the defendant’s passing a polygraph test had “forever destroyed her faith” in that technology):"

Listen to the tapes if you don´t believe Snopes.

Seems all the reliable new sources including Snopes disagree with your rt. wing news source this time. Maybe it is you who needs to get off of the far rt. wing news media and not the rest of us who believe honesty is the best policy and will continue to stick to reliable news sources - Thank You very much. :)

I listened to the tape, somehow the part where she says "I got him off, who cares?" is now missing as are Hillary's emails. Instead of quoting biased sources I suggest that you yourself listen to the woman who was raped.


The mainstream media ignored all of Bill Clinton's sexual assault victims as well but they were all over Trump. Matt Lauer blasted Trump for being a womanizer and was recently fired for being a womanizer. He had a secret button that closed his locked door in his office.

Had this group of women come out against Trump there would have been 24/7 coverage, have you heard these women?


Are you really defending Hillary as a good person?

lagoloo 26th December 2017 09:38 PM

I would like to hear Zorro's real reason for continuing to focus on Hillary Clinton, when the woman is no longer running for any office. How hard is it to understand that THE ELECTION HAPPENED OVER A YEAR AGO. This continuous ranting about her is called "beating a dead horse".

This last batch of rants on the subject are convincing me that Zorro is nothing more than an internet TROLL: stirring the pot just to stir the pot.

Zorro2017 26th December 2017 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanMexicali (Post 13784650)
Why do you hate Liberals?

If you will stop putting words in my mouth I will explain. I don't hate liberals, I hate liberal policies, not the people. Some people here which will remain nameless actually hate a person that they have never met because of their religious and political beliefs, I am able to separate the two.

Tundragreen is a liberal and an atheist. I am a conservative Christian, but I respect his opinion and don't follow him from post to post name calling and insulting because I respect him as a fair man with knowledge. Even if he does consider himself just a highly evolved primate. :D

Isla Verde is a liberal and a Jew, I am a conservative Christian but I like and respect her as well, even when she disagrees with me she does it in a respectful way. I find her witty, a well of knowledge about Mexico and a great addition to this forum.

Both are moderators which have nothing to do with anything, as long as we all follow the rules of the forum it doesn't really matter who is who here. I have been called a brown nose for a lot less than just being honest.

The point I'm trying to make is that we can disagree and yes, even hate the policies of the opposing party with respect for the person if we use logic and not insults or calling names.

I am pro life, I am a conservative Christian and don't feel the least bit guilty about being so. Any time I feel stupid I just consider the fact that some people actually believe that Hillary Clinton would have been a good president. Then I laugh and feel better about myself.

lagoloo 26th December 2017 10:23 PM

While Zorro is feeling so much better about himself because Hillary Clinton isn't POTUS, how about a little trip through history to 1975 when Hillary was a young lawyer who got stuck with the job of defending a rapist and Donald Trump and his dad were at the other end of a lawsuit about discriminating against blacks in their housing policies?

What we have here is the pot calling the kettle "black", so to speak.

When one has to reach back 40 years to find a cause, he should look at what was happening at that time with his guy as well. Gracias to Senor Google.

I'm just curious: If Clinton had been "pro-life" and Trump allegedly "pro-choice", who would Zorro have voted for?

Isla Verde 26th December 2017 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorro2017 (Post 13785362)

Isla Verde is a liberal and a Jew, I am a conservative Christian but I like and respect her as well, even when she disagrees with me she does it in a respectful way. I find her witty, a well of knowledge about Mexico and a great addition to this forum.

Well, Zorro, you've made my day with your generous assessment of my better qualities! Not sure, though, what my being Jewish has to do with your opinion of me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorro2017 (Post 13785362)
I am pro life, I am a conservative Christian and don't feel the least bit guilty about being so.

OK, I'll bite. How do you define "pro life". I too am in favor of life, but I have the feeling that our definitions of this concept are quite different. Throwing around phrases like this one are not the best ways of having an intelligent discussion, don't you agree?

lagoloo 26th December 2017 10:56 PM

"Pro life" is a phrase some groups came up with which allows them to do some pretty abhorrent actions against those who disagree with them, all the way from clinic bombings and murder to deceptive "pregnancy counseling centers". Other people are pro-the-life of pregnant women, and are in favor of letting them decide what to do, depending on their own religion, philosophy or personal circumstances. For men to get passionately invested in making those decisions for women, no matter what the woman's own beliefs, is a cruel irony.

Stevenjb 27th December 2017 12:20 AM

So much easier when people were not conscious of self.

Ref: The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - Julian Jaynes.

Posted from Android using Tapatalk

TundraGreen 27th December 2017 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorro2017 (Post 13785362)

Even if he does consider himself just a highly evolved primate. :D

I am not so sure that I or any other humans are very highly evolved. Looking at all the stuff that goes on in the world, I think we still have a lot of evolving left to do.

Meritorious-MasoMenos 27th December 2017 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lagoloo (Post 13785402)
While Zorro is feeling so much better about himself because Hillary Clinton isn't POTUS, how about a little trip through history to 1975 when Hillary was a young lawyer who got stuck with the job of defending a rapist and Donald Trump and his dad were at the other end of a lawsuit about discriminating against blacks in their housing policies?

What we have here is the pot calling the kettle "black", so to speak.

When one has to reach back 40 years to find a cause, he should look at what was happening at that time with his guy as well. Gracias to Senor Google.

I'm just curious: If Clinton had been "pro-life" and Trump allegedly "pro-choice", who would Zorro have voted for?

She was free to defend a rapist because she was terminated from the Watergate Committee for unethical behavior with her DEMOCRATIC boss giving her a letter that he couldn't recommend her to any other position. Her backers say she then followed Bill to Arkansas out of love, while her detractors say she had been exposed as a deceiving lawyer who was unemployable any longer in DEMOCRAT DC circles.

Plenty on google but most comes from ideological angles, though it seems conclusive she was sacked for unethical behavior and was unemployed playable in D.C.

She certainly brought her "DC" values to Arkansas.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.