Can Trump Still Win?

To answer your question as to who Huma Abedin is, read her biography in the link below. As with just about everything you say, you are long on speculation and short on facts. Even John McCain is a strong supporter of Abedin. Maybe something will come up in the inquiries but right now all negative claims against her are totally baseless. About the only negative I can come up with on her is she married a worthless guy named Anthony Weiner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huma_Abedin Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Do you really think Wikipedia is going to have updated information on Huma? Gimme a break. Look at the circumstances. She grow up in Saudi Arabia soaked in a highly activist family and suddenly shows up in the USA at the right hand of Hilary and gives her access to all confidential information in the USG, and all when the Saudis are pouring a fortune into Clinton's Cash Machine.

There is a good book called "Clinton Cash" which outlines all the various "appearance of conflict of interest" issues with Bill and Hilary and makes connections based on conjecture.

But now the emails have proven the motives and linkages. So it's not just circumstance any more.

Probe began by book written by republican strategist and, I believe, alt right briebart editor. Almost enough said. Found nothing. Then hearsay from a conversation with someone who has no real connection to the foundation. the justice department didn't and doesn't want to prosecute because they don't have any case. Nonsense as usual.

"Several law enforcement sources told the Times this week that the New York agents’ case was mostly based on allegations in the book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich by Peter Schweizer, senior editor-at-large for Breitbart News. The book was turned into a film by former Breitbart chairman and current Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon. "

So much for the fbi ignoring inneudo as the book appears, not suprisingly, to be almost nothing but innuendo and makes some glaring and inexcusable mistakes.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...y-scandal-book.

It's the justice department's decision to make in regards to whether a case warrants a criminal case. Just because they decide not to doesn't mean they are corrupt. Just because you don't get the answer you want, doesn't mean everybody and their fucking brother is in one big giant conspiracy. In fact, the pressure put on both the fbi and the justice department to find SOME criminal charge against hillary clinton at whatever cost or risk their reputation is the thing that is corrupting.

I'm sorry, but just because investigators and justice dept prosecution disagreed over the merits of a particular investigation does not give fbi agents a right to leak information, especially so close to an election. It's just more innuendo because they can't release what the information actually is. I mean, clearly an indictment is not likely if the prosecuting attorneys don't think there is enough of a case. The fbi needs to get its shit together.

.............

It's the justice department's decision to make in regards to whether a case warrants a criminal case. Just because they decide not to doesn't mean they are corrupt. Just because you don't get the answer you want, doesn't mean everybody and their fucking brother is in one big giant conspiracy. In fact, the pressure put on both the fbi and the justice department to find SOME criminal charge against hillary clinton at whatever cost or risk their reputation is the thing that is corrupting.

I'm sorry, but just because investigators and justice dept prosecution disagreed over the merits of a particular investigation does not give fbi agents a right to leak information, especially so close to an election. It's just more innuendo because they can't release what the information actually is. I mean, clearly an indictment is not likely if the prosecuting attorneys don't think there is enough of a case. The fbi needs to get its shit together. Originally Posted by helenasweets

Hillary's decision to use a private email server to conduct official State Department Business is illegal, per se. Of course, this statement assumes that she actually conducted official State Department Business on that server. The FBI has, apparently, located the full contents of Hillary's email server on a laptop owned by Huma Abedin. If the FBI finds (i) emails that weren't previously turned over, or (ii) emails that are related to official State Department business, then Hillary will be indicted; period.

The Clinton Foundation is another matter. By all appearances, Hillary used her position as Secretary of State as a means to generate income in exchange for favors. This potential criminal action is the grand-daddy of them all. As we see from the WikiLeaks Podesta releases, there is plenty of smoke for the public to see. I am certain that the FBI will provide a view of the fire. In fact, I suspect that Mr. Eric Braverman is in protective custody at this moment and has provided the FBI with a wealth of information.

Citizens of the USA should be repulsed by the fact that the Clintons have enriched themselves in such an unseemly manner. The Clintons have obviously placed their greed above their duties to their country. The mere fact that they accept millions of dollars from countries that fund ISIS, abuse women and slaughter LGBT should be enough for any rational thinking person to abandon their criminal enterprise.

Yes, I know that Mr. Trump dropped the "F" bomb twenty years ago and that he likes to grab women "by the pussy". Disgraceful.

Do you really think Wikipedia is going to have updated information on Huma? Gimme a break. Look at the circumstances. She grow up in Saudi Arabia soaked in a highly activist family and suddenly shows up in the USA at the right hand of Hilary and gives her access to all confidential information in the USG, and all when the Saudis are pouring a fortune into Clinton's Cash Machine.

There is a good book called "Clinton Cash" which outlines all the various "appearance of conflict of interest" issues with Bill and Hilary and makes connections based on conjecture.

But now the emails have proven the motives and linkages. So it's not just circumstance any more. Originally Posted by pussycat

There is something in this country we call "Innocent until proven guilty". You and no one else has any PROOF that Huma Abedin has any ties at all to any extremist groups. When you supply any proof at all, then maybe you will have some credibility. Until then . . .

Forget about CNN. They're doing their best to help Hilary across the finish line.

My information is in the last 48 hours from numerous sources on the Internet. You have to look for this stuff because only Fox News on regular cable is presenting this. Look to Drudge, Brightbart, Young Turks, and Huffington. Both Left and Right are presenting the leaks from the FBI but you have to look away from CNN.

I think the best treatment is from Young Turks, a far Left site on Youtube and elsewhere. Originally Posted by pussycat

Yes, CNN is definitely left-leaning but compared to Huffington, Breitbart and Drudge??? They are ridiculously pro-right. The Young Turks is new to me and I found little on the internet on them.

I supplied you with specific websites which contradict your statements. CNN was one of 3 and if you like I can find many more which will state that the Clinton Foundation is an A rated foundation. You supplied me with nothing other than your opinion to support your statements. Your source is the internet!!!!???? Only an idiot would quote statements on the internet without reliable supporting sources.

When real PROOF comes out I will believe it. Right now there is NOTHING concrete to support your OPINIONS.

Hillary's decision to use a private email server to conduct official State Department Business is illegal, per se. Of course, this statement assumes that she actually conducted official State Department Business on that server. The FBI has, apparently, located the full contents of Hillary's email server on a laptop owned by Huma Abedin. If the FBI finds (i) emails that weren't previously turned over, or (ii) emails that are related to official State Department business, then Hillary will be indicted; period.

The Clinton Foundation is another matter. By all appearances, Hillary used her position as Secretary of State as a means to generate income in exchange for favors. This potential criminal action is the grand-daddy of them all. As we see from the WikiLeaks Podesta releases, there is plenty of smoke for the public to see. I am certain that the FBI will provide a view of the fire. In fact, I suspect that Mr. Eric Braverman is in protective custody at this moment and has provided the FBI with a wealth of information.

Citizens of the USA should be repulsed by the fact that the Clintons have enriched themselves in such an unseemly manner. The Clintons have obviously placed their greed above their duties to their country. The mere fact that they accept millions of dollars from countries that fund ISIS, abuse women and slaughter LGBT should be enough for any rational thinking person to abandon their criminal enterprise.

Yes, I know that Mr. Trump dropped the "F" bomb twenty years ago and that he likes to grab women "by the pussy". Disgraceful. Originally Posted by veedub63

Yes, I agree that the eMail controversy could blow up. Time will tell. Unfortunately the timing is terrible because we won't know by the election, so if Clinton is indicted and found guilty, Kaine will be President if Clinton wins.

As for your other statements, as I said to pussycat, do you have any solid PROOF to backup your allegations? There is nothing to support your statements that:

1. "Hillary used her position as Secretary of State as a means to generate income in exchange for favors."

Absolutely no proof at all to back up this statement.

2. "Citizens of the USA should be repulsed by the fact that the Clintons have enriched themselves in such an unseemly manner. The Clintons have obviously placed their greed above their duties to their country."

That is absolutely ridiculous. The Clintons got no money from the Clinton Foundation. The "unseemly manner" in which the Clintons acquired their wealth was through book-writing, consulting, and speeches, for which they were paid obscene amounts of money but there is nothing illegal with doing that. If someone offered me $250,000 to talk, I would certainly take it. The question certainly arises as to whether or not Hillary Clinton "owes" anything to those that paid her the large sums of money. Obviously we won't know the answer to that question until after she becomes President, but to make any assumptions at this point in time is foolish.

........

As for your other statements, as I said to pussycat, do you have any solid PROOF to backup your allegations? There is nothing to support your statements that:

1. "Hillary used her position as Secretary of State as a means to generate income in exchange for favors."

Absolutely no proof at all to back up this statement.

2. "Citizens of the USA should be repulsed by the fact that the Clintons have enriched themselves in such an unseemly manner. The Clintons have obviously placed their greed above their duties to their country."

That is absolutely ridiculous. The Clintons got no money from the Clinton Foundation. The "unseemly manner" in which the Clintons acquired their wealth was through book-writing, consulting, and speeches, for which they were paid obscene amounts of money but there is nothing illegal with doing that. If someone offered me $250,000 to talk, I would certainly take it. The question certainly arises as to whether or not Hillary Clinton "owes" anything to those that paid her the large sums of money. Obviously we won't know the answer to that question until after she becomes President, but to make any assumptions at this point in time is foolish. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Actually, my statement included "By all appearances" with regard to your Provision 1 above. The Clinton foundation has been under investigation for over one year based on this premise. Emails have emerged that indicate this type of arrangement was in place. Money from Saudi Arabia for a weapons deal. Money from Ukraine for political favors in Europe. The list is long.

Regarding Provision 2, I can't overlook the "obscene" amounts of money. I can't overlook who paid this money. Big banks, hostile foreign governments, shady foreign leaders.

I have mentioned that I am biased toward Trump - mostly based upon the revelations surrounding Hillary's actions as SOS. Perhaps this bias leads me to expect the worst from Hillary; I seriously don't know. The Clintons have been corrupt for a very, very long time. I do know that I have forever been repulsed by ex-Presidents who enrich themselves with speeches post-politics. I have always felt this was shady - especially when the speeches were given to corporate interests. To me, the Clinton Foundation allegations take it a treasonous level.

By the way, I don't disagree that if someone wagged 1-2 million dollars in my face for a speech I would take the dough. Absolutely. Good luck on Nov. 8; I, for one, will be glad to see this shit slinging show to end.

This is for veedub63 and pussycat to show how easy it is to throw out baseless charges:

1. Donald Trump raped a 13-year old girl in 1994. From a story released just 6 hours ago:

"Jane Doe accuses Trump of raping her during the summer of 1994 when she was 13, allegedly in the home of Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted pedophile also named in the lawsuit.


She also claims that: “Immediately following this rape, Defendant Trump threatened me that, were I ever to reveal any of the details of Defendant Trump’s sexual and physical abuse of me, my family and I would be physically harmed if not killed.”"


Source: http://people.com/politics/donald-tr...user-raped-13/


2. At least 10 women have come forward accusing Donald Trump of sexual harassment and assault. He is also accused of walking into the women's dressing room at beauty pageants.
Now I can discount 1 or 2 women coming out and accusing Trump of sexual misconduct, but 10 or more???

Source: http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/10/all-...l-assault.html

3. Why won't Donald Trump release his income tax returns? What is he hiding? Maybe he gives almost nothing to charities despite his self-acclaimed great wealth?

Source: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/...-tax-mysteries

"Why won’t Donald Trump release his taxes? An investigation into the G.O.P. candidate’s finances—the extensive deductions he could claim, the F.E.C. filings from his Scottish and Irish golf resorts, and his declarations to the British government—reveals a disturbing pattern of mistakes, hype, and contradictions."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b45_story.html

"Trump’s personal taxes are a mystery. He has refused to release any recent returns, meaning the public cannot see how much money he makes, how much he gives to charity and how aggressively he uses deductions, shelters and other tactics to shrink his tax bill."

4. Does Donald Trump have real ties to Russia or other countries that would compromise his role as POTUS?

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clint...ry?id=42090706

I'm sure I could think of other Trump scandals if I wanted to take the time but hopefully you get the point I'm making. It is so easy to accuse someone of having done something. As of this minute, there is absolutely no proof that any of these allegations are true. Just like Clinton and Abedin, Trump is innocent of all charges until proof comes out that proves otherwise.

Hillary's decision to use a private email server to conduct official State Department Business is illegal, per se. Of course, this statement assumes that she actually conducted official State Department Business on that server. The FBI has, apparently, located the full contents of Hillary's email server on a laptop owned by Huma Abedin. If the FBI finds (i) emails that weren't previously turned over, or (ii) emails that are related to official State Department business, then Hillary will be indicted; period.

The Clinton Foundation is another matter. By all appearances, Hillary used her position as Secretary of State as a means to generate income in exchange for favors. This potential criminal action is the grand-daddy of them all. As we see from the WikiLeaks Podesta releases, there is plenty of smoke for the public to see. I am certain that the FBI will provide a view of the fire. In fact, I suspect that Mr. Eric Braverman is in protective custody at this moment and has provided the FBI with a wealth of information.

Citizens of the USA should be repulsed by the fact that the Clintons have enriched themselves in such an unseemly manner. The Clintons have obviously placed their greed above their duties to their country. The mere fact that they accept millions of dollars from countries that fund ISIS, abuse women and slaughter LGBT should be enough for any rational thinking person to abandon their criminal enterprise.

Yes, I know that Mr. Trump dropped the "F" bomb twenty years ago and that he likes to grab women "by the pussy". Disgraceful. Originally Posted by veedub63

Regarding the emails, uh no, not period. Intent is everything when prosecuting cases of classified mishandling. Knowingly sending classified information could get her in trouble, but that is awfully hard to prove. Gen. Petraeus KNOWINGLY handed his mistress classified information. He got a misdemeanor with a fine.

There is no evidence that she used was involved in pay for play. If you want to look at pay for play, let's talk about the NRA. Much more dangerous and explicit in wielding its intent with out politicians. I do agree that it presents a problem. I think all the clintons, including chelsea should back away from the foundation now, should have a while ago. There is no sense creating that tangled of a web when its not necessary.

Do you honestly thing that trumps vulgarity is the reason that people like myself will not vote for him? Are you serious? He is a crook. He regularly stiffs people and then forces them to engage in expensive lawsuits to get their money. Do you think that mindset has changed? He's somehow become the hero of this story? He's been involved in COUNTLESS lawuits over the years. He abuses the judicial system because he has the money to do so. He has direct ties to the mob; everybody knows that. His best friend is Roger Ailes. He's a terrible businessman. He was NOT a sucess as developer. He blatantly lied to the atlantic city gaming commission and his investors when he said he could get low loans to finance his casinos there. He couldn't because most fucking banks in New York don't trust the motherfucker. He said he would not use junk bonds. He did. The casinos were overleveraged from the get go (which appears to be his MO). Everyone tried to tell him, but he wouldn't listen. Left investors hanging in the wind. Again. The only reason that dude was not completely broken was that those that had invested decided they could get more money out of him using his name than forcing him to give up everything. All those buildings with his name on it, not his. Trump is not a manager (from what I've read, anyone who has worked with him will tell you that). He's a promoter. He makes money by selling his name like a Kardashian. If not for The Apprentice, he would have been gone from the stage a long time ago. He has been sued by the federal government twice for not allowing black people to rent in his building. He's already sold a pack of magic beans with this wall. He's selling you another with his tax plan. Basically, I just don't think he's smart. He has no integrity, whenever he doesn't win it's always because of someone or something else. He doesn't mind throwing around lies and consipiracy theories, but throws a tantrum and tries to sue when someone casts aspirsions towards him. And, he doesn't appear to be very smart. Just listen to him speak. "I am good words. I have the best words." People who actually have the best words don't say that. They just use their good words.

Oh yeah and Trump University. A bait and switch scheme. why on earth you guys don't find that to be nauseating is beyond me?

This is for veedub63 and pussycat to show how easy it is to throw out baseless charges:
...
...
...

I'm sure I could think of other Trump scandals if I wanted to take the time but hopefully you get the point I'm making. It is so easy to accuse someone of having done something. As of this minute, there is absolutely no proof that any of these allegations are true. Just like Clinton and Abedin, Trump is innocent of all charges until proof comes out that proves otherwise. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

First of all, I'm not prosecuting Hillary Clinton for any crime. I'm simply pointing out true FACTS that have come to light relating to her political/professional dealings. These are not some things that people have speculated about. These things have actually, without doubt, occurred.

1. Hillary mishandled government secrets by utilizing a private email server and sending confidential information via that server. Proven Fact.

2. The Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars from hostile foreign nations, nations that support ISIS, nations that abuse women and nations that slaughter the LGBT. Proven Fact.

3. Hillary paid herself an enormous salary via the Clinton Foundation. Hillary was afforded luxurious accommodations via the Clinton Foundation. The same foundation that received the funds mentioned above. Proven Fact.

These facts alone are enough to drive support away from her. The other allegations against her; pay to play (bribery), money laundering, RICO violations, and on and on, will certainly play out over time.

You are correct to point out that the baseless charges against Mr. Trump are just that; baseless charges. Although I don't see how pointing that out helps your argument.

Also, the trump foundation appears to be something of a grift. I dont have time right now to leave a lot of links, but just more of the same from that dude.

Also, the trump foundation appears to be something of a grift. I dont have time right now to leave a lot of links, but just more of the same from that dude. Originally Posted by helenasweets

I'm sorry, but I stopped reading after you decided to hold the NRA in a negative light. First, the NRA isn't asking to be elected president. Second, I hold the US Constitution in high regard; especially the 2nd amendment. Whoever stands on a platform that attempts to erode constitutional rights, is not my candidate. Period.

Now please respond with your asinine rantings about how our government knows what is best for us and we should allow them full control over our lives. Not.

First of all, I'm not prosecuting Hillary Clinton for any crime. I'm simply pointing out true FACTS that have come to light relating to her political/professional dealings. These are not some things that people have speculated about. These things have actually, without doubt, occurred.

1. Hillary mishandled government secrets by utilizing a private email server and sending confidential information via that server. Proven Fact.

2. The Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars from hostile foreign nations, nations that support ISIS, nations that abuse women and nations that slaughter the LGBT. Proven Fact.

3. Hillary paid herself an enormous salary via the Clinton Foundation. Hillary was afforded luxurious accommodations via the Clinton Foundation. The same foundation that received the funds mentioned above. Proven Fact.

These facts alone are enough to drive support away from her. The other allegations against her; pay to play (bribery), money laundering, RICO violations, and on and on, will certainly play out over time.

You are correct to point out that the baseless charges against Mr. Trump are just that; baseless charges. Although I don't see how pointing that out helps your argument. Originally Posted by veedub63

#1 is correct. I'm not sure about "government secrets" being mishandled but some documents marked "Confidential" were mishandled. To the best of my knowledge, no harm has come to the U.S. due to this mishandling of a very few confidential documents. You can either agree with or not agree with James Comey's decision. Since you do not support Clinton, you do not agree with Comey's decision.

#2 is correct and incorrect. Many foreign countries have contributed to the Clinton Foundation, the leader being Saudi Arabia with Australia and Norway right up there. Of the top 10 countries where ISIS supporters are tweeting from (it's difficult to find a source of ISIS supporting countries), there are 2 foreign countries I find that have made sizeable contributions to the Clinton Foundation -- Saudi Arabia is #1 and Kuwait is #6. But Trump also has close ties to Saudi Arabia. Let's be honest -- if Donald Trump the businessman thought there was big money to be made in Saudi Arabia, he would be there in a second.

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2777211

And Saudi Arabia doesn't even make the top 10 in countries that abuse gays according to the following article. Yet Trump has major property holdings in India and Turkey.

http://listverse.com/2013/12/30/10-c...te-gay-people/

#3 is totally incorrect from all the information I have found. The Clintons take absolutely no money in salary from the Clinton Foundation.

Source: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...nal-benefit-f/

"The Clintons don’t take a salary from this work, and they don’t receive any other direct monetary benefit. Other Clinton Foundation leaders take home six-figure salaries, according to tax documents."

Source: https://www.quora.com/How-much-of-a-...ton-Foundation

"The question is: How much of a salary do Bill and Hillary Clinton draw from the Clinton Foundation.

None. Nor does the organization pay travel expenses for any engagement for which any member of the Clinton family receives a speakers fee. 86% of the money raised by the foundation goes to programs (as opposed to fundraising or overhead), which is an extremely high percentage.


Source: The Better Business Bureau’s Give.org"

Hillary Clinton won't lose this election.

Trump won't win.