Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FSogol

FSogol's Journal
FSogol's Journal
October 31, 2016

Trumpís history of corruption is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?

In the heat of a presidential campaign, you’d think that a story about one party’s nominee giving a large contribution to a state attorney general who promptly shut down an inquiry into that nominee’s scam “university” would be enormous news. But we continue to hear almost nothing about what happened between Donald Trump and Florida attorney general Pam Bondi.

I raised this issue last week, but it’s worth an update as well as some contextualization. The story re-emerged last week when The Post’s David A. Fahrenthold reported that Trump paid a penalty to the IRS after his foundation made an illegal contribution to Bondi’s PAC. While the Trump organization characterizes that as a bureaucratic oversight, the basic facts are that Bondi’s office had received multiple complaints from Floridians who said they were cheated by Trump University; while they were looking into it and considering whether to join a lawsuit over Trump University filed by the attorney general of New York State, Bondi called Trump and asked him for a $25,000 donation; shortly after getting the check, Bondi’s office dropped the inquiry.


Snip

That’s important, because we may have reached a point where the frames around the candidates are locked in: Trump is supposedly the crazy/bigoted one, and Clinton is supposedly the corrupt one. Once we decide that those are the appropriate lenses through which the two candidates are to be viewed, it shapes the decisions the media make every day about which stories are important to pursue.

And it means that to a great extent, for all the controversy he has caused and all the unflattering stories in the press about him, Trump is still being let off the hook.


I recommend checking out the entire opinion piece. Paul Waldman has a huge list of Trump's corruption and it is pretty mind boggling.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/05/trumps-history-of-corruption-is-mind-boggling-so-why-is-clinton-supposedly-the-corrupt-one/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_3_na&utm_term=.cff74f515835
October 28, 2016

Polls and Uncertainty - concerned, worried, anxious? Here's the only solution:

[center][font size= 196]GOTV[/font][/center]

October 25, 2016

O'Malley goes on Fox News and destroys the sputtering Pro-Trump hosts



http://media.crooksandliars.com/2016/10/34885.mp4_high.mp4

Despite the three-against-one set up, O’Malley continued laying into Trump’s fascist policies without much effective pushback from any of the cohosts.

My favorite moment:

O’MALLEY: It’s interesting that Donald Trump doesn’t have the balls to talk about the wall when he’s in Texas because even conservative people down there don’t want a giant wall built across their state.

…He might even lose Texas because people don’t like those sort of white, racist appeals.


Article here:

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/10/watch-martin-o-malley-leave-fox-hosts
October 25, 2016

The lap dogs of democracy who didnít bark at Trump

A must read from Dana Milbank in today's Washington Post. Milbank tears into Joe Scarborough and Mark Halperin

...This is not to pick solely on Halperin, with whom I have clashed over the years. Trump exploited a profession dominated by process journalism, and the entire cable news industry irresponsibly gave Trump unfiltered and uncritical coverage as he mounted his assaults on democracy and civility — the equivalent of millions of dollars of free ads that propelled him to the nomination.

In an ordinary presidential campaign, press neutrality is essential. But in Trump we have somebody who has threatened democracy by talking about banning an entire religion from entering the country; forcing Muslims in America to register with authorities; rewriting press laws and prosecuting his critics and political opponents; blacklisting news organizations he doesn’t like; ordering the military to do illegal things such as torture and targeting innocents; and much more. In this case, attempting neutrality legitimized the illegitimate.

It’s not just a concern of the “elites” — nor a dismissal of the real grievances of Trump’s followers — to condemn a candidate’s reluctance to accept a bedrock principle of democracy. There’s nothing “brilliant” about a campaign for the presidency that makes scapegoats of women, immigrants and racial and religious minorities. It’s not “impressive” to consort with white supremacists. It’s not “fair and even” to ignore that much of what Trump has done is a threat to democratic institutions.

And it is absolutely appropriate to “take sides” in a contest between democracy and its alternative.


Whole article at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-lap-dogs-of-democracy-who-didnt-bark-at-trump/2016/10/24/26ba3418-9a28-11e6-9980-50913d68eacb_story.html?utm_term=.2504007cac36

x-posted from GD2016
October 25, 2016

The lap dogs of democracy who didnít bark at Trump

A must read from Dana Milbank in today's Washington Post. Milbank tears into Joe Scarborough and Mark Halperin

...This is not to pick solely on Halperin, with whom I have clashed over the years. Trump exploited a profession dominated by process journalism, and the entire cable news industry irresponsibly gave Trump unfiltered and uncritical coverage as he mounted his assaults on democracy and civility — the equivalent of millions of dollars of free ads that propelled him to the nomination.

In an ordinary presidential campaign, press neutrality is essential. But in Trump we have somebody who has threatened democracy by talking about banning an entire religion from entering the country; forcing Muslims in America to register with authorities; rewriting press laws and prosecuting his critics and political opponents; blacklisting news organizations he doesn’t like; ordering the military to do illegal things such as torture and targeting innocents; and much more. In this case, attempting neutrality legitimized the illegitimate.

It’s not just a concern of the “elites” — nor a dismissal of the real grievances of Trump’s followers — to condemn a candidate’s reluctance to accept a bedrock principle of democracy. There’s nothing “brilliant” about a campaign for the presidency that makes scapegoats of women, immigrants and racial and religious minorities. It’s not “impressive” to consort with white supremacists. It’s not “fair and even” to ignore that much of what Trump has done is a threat to democratic institutions.

And it is absolutely appropriate to “take sides” in a contest between democracy and its alternative.


Whole article at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-lap-dogs-of-democracy-who-didnt-bark-at-trump/2016/10/24/26ba3418-9a28-11e6-9980-50913d68eacb_story.html?utm_term=.2504007cac36

October 20, 2016

Bottom line: Trump hates America

He hates our military, our government workers, our foreign service, our intelligence community, and even our steel. He hates our poor, our inner cities, our immigrants, our women, and anyone who doesn't meet his standards of beauty. Tonight, thanks to the GOP, we had to listen to the angry deranged ramblings of an insane narcissist.

October 18, 2016

Zika!

Presumably it is still going on? Other than opioid addiction, public health isn't even an issue on the campaign. I remember no questions about it in the debates. Is the press ignoring it? Why?

October 14, 2016

Trump Bros! The web series







Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Northern VA
Member since: Fri Oct 29, 2004, 09:34 AM
Number of posts: 45,259

Journal Entries

Latest Discussions»FSogol's Journal