Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 486 posts

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#171

Post by bcg1 »

MichaelGG wrote: post #120
discodave wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The actual facts aside I happen to believe that facts are important in a Presidential race. Essentially your response is repeating talking points of the Trump campaign... which is OK, 1st amendment and all that but to pretend like you're making a constructive addition to the discussion / debate is folly. Right now America has a choice between Trump, a racist, mysoginist demagogue who has never held a public office…

Curious, do you have a handful of racist Trump quotes? Not stuff about illegals, but actual racist stuff (like not wanting to rent to blacks or something)? Trump aside, electing someone that's openly corrupt (DNC Wikileaks show they went against Bernie, against rules) seems to be far more dangerous to the future of the US and worldwide democracy. Up until now, corruption was sort of assumed, but if a publicly corrupt…

'"Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are little short guys that wear yarmulkes every day." (Trump called the things written about him in the book "probably true.")'

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/8-of-the-sleaziest...

Also Trump was the President of the Trump organization when the DOJ fined the company for illegal housing discrimination, doing things like marking the lease applications of African Americans with a 'C' for 'Colored' so that they would know not to rent to them.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#172

Post by tanderson92 »

minikites wrote: post #150
jimmywanger wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "undocumented immigrants", it's "illegal immigrants". If you enforce the law, they should be deported. Now they probably have very good reasons for immigrating, but the fact remains that they broke the law and our borders, and the job of the executive branch is to enforce the laws.

Deporting Syrian refugees (the most recent target of Trump's rhetoric) would be breaking a major international law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Sta...

Syrian refugees are not illegal immigrants, which was the topic of conversation of the GP poster.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#173

Post by jungletek »

cloakandswagger wrote: post #119
imron wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> huh? It's horrifying https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/donald-trump-pepe-the-fr... Edit: In response to your edit, she's attacking a cartoon frog . In seriousness. Not only that, but she's trying to attribute characteristics to that frog that simply aren't any core part of why people post Pepe memes. All of that questions the sensibilities of her campaign. Basically her campaign is going all out trying to paint T…

I especially love the pop-up modal asking me "Is Trump unfit to be President?" on that site. There's only a single button (I Agree), and clicking the X in the corner to close the modal causes the button to be pushed at the same time. For someone as "experienced" as Clinton, her campaign is astoundingly incompetent.

You say incompetent, I say intentional. It's an inverse Hanlon's Razor situation.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#174

Post by Dagwoodie »

yolesaber wrote: post #159
Dagwoodie wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is a long tenancy in a public office a good thing? What happened to strong morality and doing the right thing when nobody is looking? Hillary broke the law [0], plain and simple, and she isn't being punished because well, she is a powerful life-long politician with many friends in high places. At least Nixon had the moral decency to resign when it was clear he wasn't right to lead by example. The simple tr…

>At least Nixon had the moral decency to resign when it was clear he wasn't right to lead by example. Yes, it was because Nixon had moral fiber. Not because he negotiated a deal with Ford to pardon him immediately and preemptively, thus saving him the humiliation of impeachment and legal repercussions.

I'm sure you're absolutely right. If he hadn't been such a snake he would have just fought the system, used his ample government connections to ensure he won't get prosecuted. The people would understand, he was just acting in those good intentions of advancing the desires of the party, after all.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#176

Post by bcg1 »

thatswrong0 wrote: post #145
minikites wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think his rhetoric against undocumented immigrants is racist?

I don't think he's said anything about having a problem with legal immigrants.

Incorrect. He wants to end the H1B visa program (despite the fact that he uses for seasonal work at his club in Florida) and he does not want to accept political refugees attempting to come to the US legally.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#177

Post by Klathmon »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #158
Klathmon wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, not a single line on that page about what she believes, what she stands for.

That's because you can find that here: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

I just find the whole "attack others without any mention of myself" thing to be so... Off putting.

It's sad that it's so common, and scary effective. I just wish that it wasn't this way and that things like attack ads would at least include some info on how the candidate is different/better than the one they are attacking.

The sad truth is that I believe many of the same things as one of the major candidates, and when looking at the issues I do agree with some from the other, but the way they almost entirely ignore the issues and spend most of their time attacking others doesn't fill me with confidence that either one wont just bring that toxicity into an already toxic and gridlocked political system.

Yelling half-truths and over exaggerating the "enemy" isn't going to help the country at all. And IMO that stuff has no place on the offical website of a candidate.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#178

Post by nitsujio »

mcphage wrote: post #96
School-Cotton wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares? Literally what point are you making? Dude, do you think this is a football game? That scoring a point against your opponent negates points scored against you? I suspect a big chunk of the people complaining about this would have complained even harder when Bush did it (if what you say is true), if they had been old enough to be aware what was going on, and had social media like we do now. So, what is your…

> Literally what point are you making? The point I'm making is that I don't think you, or anybody else actually cares about the emails—they care it's something they can criticize Clinton for. Before her, nobody gave a shit. After her, nobody will give a shit. They don't matter, except that they can be used to criticize Clinton. So of course nobody complained about it with Bush, because nobody cares about them. > I su…

Mcphage is trolling when he says nobody cared about Bush's emails.

Politifact tells the truth of it: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/...

Mcphage is trolling. Let's not feed him anymore.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#179

Post by yolesaber »

Dagwoodie wrote: post #137

I have yet to see a single example of Trump's racism. It's an oft repeated cliche that has yet to be demonstrated by anyone. As much of a "clown" as trump might be, half of his labels are completely pulled out of thin air.

Trump was sued repeatedly in the 70s for racially prejudiced housing policies. In the 80s he was accused of racist employment practices in his casinos. In this election he has repeatedly retweeted and positively engaged with white supremacists on twitter. He has retweeted (false) racially-charged statistics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/is-donald-t...

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#180

Post by throwaway2016b »

Tinyyy wrote: post #49
peteretep wrote: post #32

> Citation needed if you're > going to "correct the record." This is not Reddit, and it is not a place for accusing people of being paid shills. Please desist.

Why is this getting down voted? There's no place for these accusations on HN. Using them to silence discussions is very arrogant because you're implying that people disagreeing with you are not capable of independent thought.

Is it? HN has a history of patently obvious shills and downvote brigades policing various topics. Paul Graham and Sam Altman are publicly supporting and creating various PACs with the aim of swinging the election in favor of Hillary, to say nothing of what their hyperbolic language reveals about their loyalties. Is it really so hard to believe that there could be paid political shills operating on here? CTR pays people to spam 4chan ffs, I think they can spare a few people for a tiny site with disproportionate influence like HN.
Post reply on HN