Saturday, October 1, 2016

Hillary at the first debate with trump

I keep hearing snippets of Hillary’s voice during Lester Holt debate opposing Trump and I simply cannot stand it. I slip into argument automatically. It’s a very bad habit. Were anyone else around it would annoy them terribly. I annoy myself. Instead of just clicking off I find myself completing my counterargument digging through my memory for the tainted bits that destroy my personality. It’s horrible. It’s obnoxious.  This post indulges that impulse to work Hillary’s crap out of my system so that I can return to my pure and beautiful and angelic previous self again like I was as an innocent child before being exposed to the horrors of the Democrat party. And that’s all. It won’t hurt my feelings if you skip it. The whole thing is rather long because Hillary is so full of shit. I meant to say poo just now but that cruder Freudian slip word came out of me instead.

Maybe you can enjoy it for a psychological laugh. Maybe you can contribute.

Trump doesn’t bother me, and Lester Holt is insignificant. It’s only Hillary that’s quoted. She starts with “*” and my impulses are enclosed inside brackets.




* The central question in this election is really what kind of country we want to be and what kind of future we'll build together. Today is my granddaughter's second birthday, so I think about this a lot. First, we have to build an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. That means we need new jobs, good jobs, with rising incomes.

[Government doesn’t “build” economy. Government regulates it, that is, imposes rules upon it. Government taps productive private economy, that is, drains it. And nothing else. Everything in government is taken from the private realm.  Hillary’s policies are socialist, they step on the neck of production and services and drain the life from them, redistributing a portion from producers to non-producers while keeping a portion for themselves. The phrase “build together” is disingenuous. Hillary hasn’t actually built a single thing in her life. Whereas Trump has. While she mock his failures and ignores his successes, she tap into his building (including actual buildings, not just his entrepreneurial efforts) as parasite either way.]

* I want us to invest in you. I want us to invest in your future. That means jobs in infrastructure, in advanced manufacturing, innovation and technology, clean, renewable energy, and small business, because most of the new jobs will come from small business. We also have to make the economy fairer. That starts with raising the national minimum wage and also guarantee, finally, equal pay for women's work.

[Government doesn’t know how to invest in the future otherwise it would draw down its debt, not increase it. It doesn’t know how to invest militarily, scholastically, medically, technically, inventively, humanly, in relationships domestically and foreign, fiduciary, structurally, socially, nothing. With all their genius-level planners government is incapable of planning properly.  Hillary’s  perception of future investment is the creation of a debtor nation. Her known public investments are to party supporters with no visible positive result. Her investments are failures. She know nothing of advanced manufacturing,less about innovation and hasn’t a clue about clean renewable energy. Those are all just words to her. She insists on laws and expects private business to comply. Left alone all those areas do much better without government interference, even space exploration. Yet her colossal ego imagines herself leading them. She doesn’t. She rides them, not leads them. Her direction is actually damaging to progress.]

*  I also want to see more companies do profit-sharing. If you help create the profits, you should be able to share in them, not just the executives at the top.

[Good idea but that’s none of her business. Again, she is following, not leading. And all that is a matter of the business itself, its owners, its board, its investors and its workers, but not her, not government. There is no part there for her to stick her nose into. Yet she imagines herrself central to bringing it about all the good effort of others.]

* And I want us to do more to support people who are struggling to balance family and work. I've heard from so many of you about the difficult choices you face and the stresses that you're under. So let's have paid family leave, earned sick days. Let's be sure we have affordable child care and debt-free college.

[She’s campaigning, not debating. Democrat policies are proven destructive to traditional families. Unless she means support families broken by Democrat policies that advance the Democrat party and not strengthen two parent traditional families, not the nation. “Families” is wishy-washy word when she uses it. Her own marriage is bogus and entirely for political ambition. It’s why we’re repulsed hearing her utter the word. Her party, its policies, its membership are instrumental in making college education so expensive. Had government kept its nose out of it then the situation we have today wouldn’t exist. We notice no interest in viable alternatives as the situation as it exists suits her and her party just fine. And that really does need to end.]

* How are we going to do it? We're going to do it by having the wealthy pay their fair share and close the corporate loopholes.

[That again. That’s the talk that appeals to socialist mindset. That’s the sound of envy. Wealthy already pay well more then their fair share. The wealthy basically pay for this whole country. If the wealthy paid their fair share, and everyone paid their fair share, then the wealthy would actually pay a good deal less. She’s playing on envy. She is envious of success and her impulse is to take it.]

* You have to judge us, who can shoulder the immense, awesome responsibilities of the presidency, who can put into action the plans that will make your life better. I hope that I will be able to earn your vote on November 8th.

[She can’t even shoulder an emergency 3a.m. call. Her aides protect her sleep. Her aides help her up and down steps. They stand close behind her to catch her fall. They take her pulse as she walks. Her doctor is literally at her side and her Secret Service detail literally tosses her into your medi-van. She cannot shoulder a schoolchild’s backpack far less the immense, awesome responsibilities of office. Those are just words to her, and this is her ambition speaking, the real work is left to her party as she asks an aide to contact another aide how to find a television channel.]

* Well, I think that trade is an important issue. Of course, we are 5 percent of the world's population; we have to trade with the other 95 percent. And we need to have smart, fair trade deals.

[Hillary hasn’t a clue what happens between New York and Los Angeles. She has no idea what is a good or bad trade deal. If she and her party did know then our balance of trade would not be so distorted to our disadvantage. She makes deals based on foreign contribution to her party, and that’s all.]

* We also, though, need to have a tax system that rewards work and not just financial transactions. And the kind of plan that Donald has put forth would be trickle-down economics all over again. In fact, it would be the most extreme version, the biggest tax cuts for the top percent of the people in this country than we've ever had.

[Campaign talk. Idle, and vapid. Liberal tropes that resonate with uninformed, misinformed, malinformed liberal voters. She’ll have her voters overlook a great deal of her contributions are from investment bankers. Her policies do not reward work, rather they reward government dependency. Her policies tax production at each stage of production and then workers repeatedly at every point of their purchases. So that production is tapped, each member involved with production is tapped, at every point of activity, and not just once, repeatedly. Look at the taxation involved with homeownership for example including the property taxes and you’ll see a steady stream of taxation from extraction of raw materials, the equipment used at every stage of production, income of the homeowner, all thing required for home furnishing and maintenance, to yearly property tax, to death of the homeowner, there is government with its spigot turned to high draining the life from the living, while thinking up new ways to tap, taxed for the audacity of breathing.]

* I call it trumped-up trickle-down, because that's exactly what it would be. That is not how we grow the economy.

[No, Hillary call it that because someone suggested it and she  thinks it sounds cute. Because she imagines Reagan’s “trickle down” economy is discredited. She hasn’t a clue how to grow an economy or else the U.S. economy would have already grown past it’s miserable 1.5%, the worst in modern history. She knows how to grow government, and that’s all that she knows. Her party believes and states outright, “you didn’t build that.” Government growing anything but misery would be risible were it not so tragic. Honestly, Hillary speaks as a conceited girlish liberal dope.]

* We just have a different view about what's best for growing the economy, how we make investments that will actually produce jobs and rising incomes.

[Tell us about Hillary’s adventures “growing” the areas of wind energy and solar farms. And we’ll return with the perfect definition of graft. Her party was advantaged by those investments nothing worthwhile developed from them, her contributors were advantaged by those investments, and nobody else.]

* I think we come at it from somewhat different perspectives. I understand that. You know, Donald was very fortunate in his life, and that's all to his benefit. He started his business with $14 million, borrowed from his father, and he really believes that the more you help wealthy people, the better off we'll be and that everything will work out from there.

[Still campaigning. Knock it off, silly girl. That doesn’t work on adults. She’s ignoring the tens of thousands that Trump employed and who government taxed though their income, at each point of their consumption, especially by their home ownership and their properties, over and over and over again. But it’s all absurd campaign slogan to her. Showing us again she know absolutely nothing about business, save for graft and how to tap her own wealthy friends.]

* I don't buy that. I have a different experience. My father was a small-businessman. He worked really hard. He printed drapery fabrics on long tables, where he pulled out those fabrics and he went down with a silkscreen and dumped the paint in and took the squeegee and kept going.

[So her father was familiar with government from the opposite side of government intrusion and that’s where she decided which side would be most advantageous for her.]

* And so what I believe is the more we can do for the middle class, the more we can invest in you, your education, your skills, your future, the better we will be off and the better we'll grow. That's the kind of economy I want us to see again.

[She can do best by getting off their necks, off their backs, off their skin like a parasite tapping their education, tapping their skills, sinking their future, the better they will be off the less she will grow. She wants an economy under her thumb and perforated with her multiple taps. Simply put, she wants to be the worst business partner on Earth, one who makes the rules, changes them at whim, contributes nothing but paperwork to her from them, and taps into its energy and its profit. She sees business through the green eyes of envy.]

* Well, let's stop for a second and remember where we were eight years ago. We had the worst financial crisis, the Great Recession, the worst since the 1930s. That was in large part because of tax policies that slashed taxes on the wealthy, failed to invest in the middle class, took their eyes off of Wall Street, and created a perfect storm.

[Amazing. Simply amazing how government’s role in that crisis is elided. It’s too lengthy to get into here, nonetheless simply amazing her own role is dismissed, not even mentioned. I’ll tell you from experience that you will not find a more conservative collection of people on earth than bankers. They are most risk-averse people you’ll ever find, as a group. They do nothing at all without proven successful outcome as guide, they’re the most regulated industry in America. They actually welcome audits, they self-audit and do that in layered fashion. It’s all quite incredible. So any risk of that magnitude was forced upon them by government. Yet she skips that part entirely. Had they not been forced to comply with government conceits of equality and along racial lines then they would not have been forced to manage their tranches as they did. Her description is criminal in its misdirection. She’s covering your own ass and the situation too complex for most people to comprehend so the average citizen voters is misled by her lies of omission. She has tax policies inverted. As usual. Her eyeballs see only taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes. taxes. Her world is sustained by taxes. She uses the word quite a lot. Look up the word “tax.” It’s not the requisite cheer she imagines. Hillary knows only the language of envy.]

* In fact, Donald was one of the people who rooted for the housing crisis. He said, back in 2006, "Gee, I hope it does collapse, because then I can go in and buy some and make some money." Well, it did collapse.

[Lie. If Hillary had a fraction of the business acumen that Trump lives and breathes then she’d recognize the root of outrageous government regulation caused crisis, through banks, that Trump and many others of his like parlay to their advantage. Understanding government created crisis that he can do nothing about and investing in it inversely are not the same as “rooting” for it, and saying such exposes ignorance in the extreme. Dangerous precisely by this penchant for government interference in business that politicians do not understand.  That is the sort of thing, the only sort of thing that Hillary is capable of creating. Now Hillary forced to lie, either knowingly, or worse, unknowingly about the motives of Trump and others. She’s actually too incompetent, too massively conceited, too backward in business to even engage. Envy again, and again, and again.]

* Nine million people -- nine million people lost their jobs. Five million people lost their homes. And $13 trillion in family wealth was wiped out.

[Yes, due to government interference. For beginner course see (banking, house loans, redlining https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=banking,+house+loans,+red+line&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8]]

* Now, we have come back from that abyss. And it has not been easy. So we're now on the precipice of having a potentially much better economy, but the last thing we need to do is to go back to the policies that failed us in the first place.

[Slowest recovery ever! Slow due to even more government interference in other areas. Back from the abyss of excessive government conceit and interfering banking regulation that cannot predict unexpected human reaction as using such new regulation for purposes unintended, flipping houses by inexperienced homeowners looking for a quick profit and not knowing what they are getting into creating a housing bubble too inflated to sustain. Without comprehending how its own laws can create bubbles because government does not understand human nature, does not grasp human impulses. Does not understand fully how its well intended motives create unintended consequences. But here is Hillary decrying the results of her own controlling impulses while placing blame for their consequences on everything and everybody else except her very strong impulse for government interference. She is a busybody of the worst kind. One who actually lies about her good intentions as advantage goes to party, then government, and not to the citizens.]

* Independent experts have looked at what I've proposed and looked at what Donald's proposed, and basically they've said this, that if his tax plan, which would blow up the debt by over $5 trillion and would in some instances disadvantage middle-class families compared to the wealthy, were to go into effect, we would lose 3.5 million jobs and maybe have another recession.

[Name them.]

* Incomes went up for everybody. Manufacturing jobs went up also in the 1990s, if we're actually going to look at the facts.

[She have her facts and everybody else has theirs. Her government statistics are plainly distorted to say what you need them to say. Particularly unemployment figures. Her bogus figures don’t even pass the smell test. Further, her government figures, her lying facts, are adjusted each time reliably and usually within a week. Observers have stopped following save for noting the utter nonsense. Democrat politicians take the world of facts and play with them until they become thier own useful bogus facts.]

* When I was in the Senate, I had a number of trade deals that came before me, and I held them all to the same test. Will they create jobs in America? Will they raise incomes in America? And are they good for our national security? Some of them I voted for. The biggest one, a multinational one known as CAFTA, I voted against. And because I hold the same standards as I look at all of these trade deals.

[Hillary engages in trade deals through parties that contribute to her foundation and to her party. That is the only test they need to pass. She’s lying again.]

* But let's not assume that trade is the only challenge we have in the economy. I think it is a part of it, and I've said what I'm going to do. I'm going to have a special prosecutor. We're going to enforce the trade deals we have, and we're going to hold people accountable.

[More interference from the interference lady. More nettlesome, meddlesome burdensome make-work pretend to do something government, “Hey, I’m important, here” interference in business. More unwanted, unneeded, unwelcome and not useful government interference. That’s Hillary in a nutshell.]

* When I was secretary of state, we actually increased American exports globally 30 percent. We increased them to China 50 percent. So I know how to really work to get new jobs and to get exports that helped to create more new jobs.

[Saying so does not make it so. Pulling bogus figures out of her ass is not cogent. Explain our insanely disproportionate balance of trade with China, with Japan, with all Asia, or STFU. The only thing Hillary can trade is well-practiced barbs in a debate prefixed to her advantage by moderator, by opponents malfunctioning microphones, by earpieces, etc. When Hillary was S.O.S the United States veritably created ISIS, ruined the entire Middle East region, completely disrupted North Africa, and created a massive Muslim diaspora globally and especially disruptive to Europe inviting terror directly to the United States and to elsewhere. Her tenure in office is pathetic.]

* Well, that is just not accurate. I was against it once it was finally negotiated and the terms were laid out. I wrote about that in...

[That’s the thing about gigantic trade deals, like supporting wars, you stick with your decision and follow through based on sound reasoning, given that lives are at stake, they’re not the sort of things wistfully changed to suit feckless and shifting public opinion, so insouciantly as the axiomatic “a lady’s prerogative.” But Hillary, like Kerry, believes she can simply come down hard then shift to, “well, now that I have time to think on it, now that I have more information. Bush lied to us!”

* Well, Donald, I know you live in your own reality, but that is not the facts. The facts are -- I did say I hoped it would be a good deal, but when it was negotiated...which I was not responsible for, I concluded it wasn't. I wrote about that in my book...

[No. Never responsible. That’s quite out of the question. There can never be any, “I understood it as a good deal at the time, and I still do. We really do need to see this through to the end when eventually our decision will be vindicated.” ]

* There are different views about what's good for our country, our economy, and our leadership in the world. And I think it's important to look at what we need to do to get the economy going again. That's why I said new jobs with rising incomes, investments, not in more tax cuts that would add $5 trillion to the debt.

[Face it, Hillary is terrible on economic issues because she does not comprehend anything remote to macro economics. Nobody does actually. It’s beyond modeling. It’s too shifty to model. The best models by the most intelligent, the most closely involved are mere guesses at best. Macroeconomics is viewed as a flat board on a fulcrum filled with glasses of water, remove water from one glass on the board and observe the tilt, and spill water into another glass on the board and predict how the board tilts and shifts, and even as you do, the water iteslelf transforms to alcohol and evaporates, turns into oil and floats lighter than expected, turns into glycerine and sinks more heavily than anticipated, the board turns to rubber in one corner and bends, turns into helium balloons on another area and floats off, turns into corrugated roofing and ripples all the glasses. The board shrinks. It expands.  Government cannot “get the country going” by any means except by stepping out of its way. No matter how many genius level economists, no matter how many Cray Supercomputers, no matter how many models compared and analyzed, it’s simply not possible to centrally manage economies effectively because nothing can account for shifting human impulses and reactions to unexpected changes and developments. Government isn’t smart enough. And Hillary is especially not. Hillary cannot “grow” a weed in a pot. She can manage her own graft and that’s all. As we’ve seen, she cannot even do that well at all, even with entire government department’s corrupted to her assistance.]

*  In fact, I have written a book about it. It's called "Stronger Together." You can pick it up tomorrow at a bookstore...

[Together with the 3/4 U.S. citizens who are not deplorable and not irredeemable. 1/4 U.S. citizens written off. Hillary keeps insisting we “do things together” while persisting in alienating millions in carelessly broad swaths. ]

* But it's because I see this -- we need to have strong growth, fair growth, sustained growth. We also have to look at how we help families balance the responsibilities at home and the responsibilities at business.

So we have a very robust set of plans. And people have looked at both of our plans, have concluded that mine would create 10 million jobs and yours would lose us 3.5 million jobs, and explode the debt which would have a recession.

[Americans need their president to shut up, leave them alone, and keep their mind set on State business. Her debate is her campaigning, “We need to fix the economy by fixing growth, fixing its sustainability, fixing its fairness. It’s all empty dividing of fixing without a single actual fixative plan except the fixation of her own ambition. She’s campaigning in her husband’s style of breaking down a problem into separate sub problems without any actual sub solutions. That is, there is no fix strong growth by… there is no have fair growth by means of … there is no achieve sustained growth by means of … there is not balance responsibilities at home with responsibilities of business by way of …. these concrete ideas. There are no solid palpable actual plans at all, just sub challenges. Her response is empty of content and boated with buzzwords.]

*  ... would not add a penny to the debt, and your plans would add $5 trillion to the debt. What I have proposed would cut regulations and streamline them for small businesses. What I have proposed would be paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy, because they have made all the gains in the economy. And I think it's time that the wealthy and corporations paid their fair share to support this country.

[Figures pulled fresh from her ass. Again. Her party had all the power in the world to do these things already and failed to do any of them in favor of their own long held ambitions of healthcare control forced down our uncooperative throats and against the countries wishes save for a portion of her own party. Even bragging about pulling one over. A massive crime against the U.S. citizens and massively disruptive to our economy, one to draw even more power to government. And all that quite offensively. See Gruber. The situation as it stands is due to her party’s economic intrusion, often illegal in its multitudinous steps and activities. Claiming she’ll reverse debt is complete nonsense, while insisting she’ll raise even more taxes from a targeted group already paying the highest percentage, veritably claiming the whole country will belong to the wealthy by dint of the taxes they pay. She persists in using the language of envy, now decades old, rather than the language of American opportunity, American freedom, American liberty to do things, to experiment, and American drive and imagination, and the uniquely American trait of accepting risk. Her one single answer is more taxes on wealthy and not less taxes all around, less taps, less spigots draining the vitality of the nation and sucking its life force to “grow” Washington and its own elitist power stratum. No language of less interference, less horrendous trade deals that have unbalanced reciprocation, no demands for equality across the board with other nations, where we open ourselves to their free trade, their nations’s mercantilism but they keep their economies closed to our products, in simple terms, one-way trade deals.]

* Well, at least I have a plan to fight ISIS.

[She does? Let’s hear it. Does it have anything to do with creating yet another vacuum for another global power to fill? Does it involve nation building? Is it anything similar to Hillary’s plan for Iraq that changes midstream, hawkish in committing soldiers to battle, dovish after they’re already committed? Is it similar to her plan for Libya? “We came, we saw, he died?” How cute. For Egypt where American ally is dispensed with Muslim brotherhood? For Syria? Does it involve a cartoonish reset button and a photo opportunity? Does it resemble our plan for Ukraine? Does it involve resettlement of hundreds of thousands of individuals with religious conviction antithetical to American values?]

* That's a -- that's -- go to the -- please, fact checkers, get to work.

[We know all about “fact checkers” Hillary means “fact shapers.”]

* I have a feeling that by, the end of this evening, I'm going to be blamed for everything that's ever happened.

[Poor Hillary, innocent bystander.]

* Yeah, well, let's start the clock again, Lester. We've looked at your tax proposals. I don't see changes in the corporate tax rates or the kinds of proposals you're referring to that would cause the repatriation, bringing back of money that's stranded overseas. I happen to support that.

[And why is the money overseas in the first place? There’d be no need for repartition of corporate taxes were United States corporate taxes not so grasping. She’s talking about solving a problem her own impulse create. And she insists upon throughout this campaign-debate]

* I happen to -- I happen to support that in a way that will actually work to our benefit. But when I look at what you have proposed, you have what is called now the Trump loophole, because it would so advantage you and the business you do. You've proposed an approach that has a...

[Hillary’s team is devising cute little names for economic policies (in the manner that Trump does for her) with the aim of having them stick in substitution of hard facts that she cannot explain to anyone’s satisfaction.]

* $4 billion tax benefit for your family. And when you look at what you are proposing...

[Always nice round numbers for comfortable ass-pulling. Her team is making things up. Trump’s natural rejoinder is to mention Hillary’s foundation that skirts U.S. laws, her illegal personal server to skirt FOIA requests, and her misappropriation and loss of 6 billion dollars as SOS while demanding more and blaming underfunding for the Libyan security catastrophe.]

*  ... as I said, trumped-up trickle-down. Trickle-down did not work. It got us into the mess we were in, in 2008 and 2009. Slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn't worked.

[Repeating the cutsie phrase developed by her team while practicing three weeks for this debate with the hope that will stick with listeners in the manner of Reagan’s trickle down economy, tagged his detractors and then demeaned and repeated thereafter by media]

* And a lot of really smart, wealthy people know that. And they are saying, hey, we need to do more to make the contributions we should be making to rebuild the middle class.

[Hillary, like Obama, puts words in mouths of make believe people, imagining her listeners will believe someone actually said that where it’s clear that nobody ever did say anything like that.]

*  I don't think top-down works in America. I think building the middle class, investing in the middle class, making college debt-free so more young people can get their education, helping people refinance their -- their debt from college at a lower rate. Those are the kinds of things that will really boost the economy. Broad-based, inclusive growth is what we need in America, not more advantages for people at the very top.

[Now this is an odd thing to say about economics by someone intending to direct a nation’s economy. Hillary has no concrete plan for “building the middle class” That’s just a phrase, an empty set in her mind. The middle class is something to be harnessed, something drained, something used, the place where votes come from. It’s something that needs to be set on the Democrat plantation. Otherwise the middle class is just numbers to her, some vague thing underneath her layers of operation. They are not real people she she knows and she talks to and when she does, say, with those closest, her own security detail, she makes her disrespect for them clear. They are beneath her. They’re too insignificant to matter for anything beyond their malinformed manipulated votes. Debt-free college again. She’s stuck on solving another problem created by government interference without mentioning or even recognizing government’s role in the problem. The heartening fact is the solution is nigh and without any government action at all. Business will take care of that problem, American ingenuity, American ambition, American liberty, American drive and unflappable American enthusiasm, American technology will solve the problem of certification with or without the help of traditional colleges and surpass anything government can do by sticking its nose where it does not belong. The best thing government can do is stand back and watch. But it won’t. It will watch for ways it can interfere by regulation and by taxation. It will watch for ways to stick its unworthy snotty nose into new areas developed by business, for business, to tap, to tax, to glom onto, to regulate, to slow down, to interfere with nonsense,  to force its own partnership with, its own ridiculous evolving social justice, and certainly not to help in any meaningful constructive way.]

* Well, I think you've seen another example of bait-and- switch here. For 40 years, everyone running for president has released their tax returns. You can go and see nearly, I think, 39, 40 years of our tax returns, but everyone has done it. We know the IRS has made clear there is no prohibition on releasing it when you're under audit.

So you've got to ask yourself, why won't he release his tax returns? And I think there may be a couple of reasons. First, maybe he's not as rich as he says he is. Second, maybe he's not as charitable as he claims to be.

[Much like “Ancient Aliens,” no, we don’t have to ask ourselves that. No matter how many times it’s repeated. No, this observer doesn’t care about Trump’s taxes. Hillary does. Taxes are central to Hillary’s thinking, central to her party’s attack on Trump. While of much greater importance in need of answering is Hillary’s illegal foundation activities and Hillary’s concealment of those activities, her destruction of evidence even after it being subpoenaed, her gross mishandling of public funds on an entire magnitude of order, Hillary’s State Department losing 6 billion dollars. Trump’s taxes will sort themselves and they’re none of Hillary’s business. She just thinks that Trump’s taxes are our concern. They’re not. Not when the IRS itself is corrupted to benefit the Democrat party and Obama’s reelection. Not when there are demands of IRS head impeachment for all that. Not when we’ve observed IRS own concealment of its own corruption for the benefit of Hillary’s party. No, Trump’s taxes are near bottom of our interests. No, we don’t have to ask any such thing. We’re still waiting for answers to much more serious IRS related corruption and Hillary’s party’s involvement.]

* Third, we don't know all of his business dealings, but we have been told through investigative reporting that he owes about $650 million to Wall Street and foreign banks. Or maybe he doesn't want the American people, all of you watching tonight, to know that he's paid nothing in federal taxes, because the only years that anybody's ever seen were a couple of years when he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license, and they showed he didn't pay any federal income tax.

[Hillary sure does what us to be concerned about Trump’s taxes. Wouldn’t do not to have those figures. Boy, we sure must know what Trump paid in taxes. Hillary sounds like this, “Taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes,” She wears me out with her focus on everyone paying their proper taxes. Taxes are Hillary’s lifeblood. Without knowing everyone’s level of taxes, their level of contribution, their location here or abroad, their disposition, then Hillary Clinton cannot live. Much as a vampire cannot exist without the blood of other people. It’s all that she has. It’s all that you mean to her, your vote and your taxes, you’re all simply numbers in aggregate to her. Your votes. Your taxes. That’s all. If Hillary could just STFU about taxes then it might get our minds off her being pure politician, and being pure politician purely for the sake of controlling you through your money. But she cannot. She imagines this harmful to Trump so she drives her own issues. While her own tax-obsession is more damaging to herself. The more she mentions taxes in any form for whatever reason the more disagreeable she becomes. Yet she cannot stay off the unhappy subject of everyone else’s taxes. Poor thing. One track mind, right there. It’s positively psychological.]

* So if he's paid zero, that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero for schools or health. And I think probably he's not all that enthusiastic about having the rest of our country see what the real reasons are, because it must be something really important, even terrible, that he's trying to hide.

[Hillary doesn’t understand taxes at all. Not one bit. It’s all “other peoples’ money that She must get her grubby mitts on” to her. And she knows that she’s lying here.]

* And the financial disclosure statements, they don't give you the tax rate. They don't give you all the details that tax returns would. And it just seems to me that this is something that the American people deserve to see. And I have no reason to believe that he's ever going to release his tax returns, because there's something he's hiding.

[Keep talking about other peoples’ taxes, Hillary. You sound exactly like Harry Reid. Keep hammering away with your plastic toy hammer. You sound like an obnoxious and silly little girl stuck on a single subject.]

* And we'll guess. We'll keep guessing at what it might be that he's hiding. But I think the question is, were he ever to get near the White House, what would be those conflicts? Who does he owe money to? Well, he owes you the answers to that, and he should provide them.

[We already know of too much that Hillary is hiding and don’t even have to guess at the rest. What we’ve discovered already would have her in prison were entire departments designed to check such activities not already been corrupted unacceptably by her reeking party. Hillary, don’t talk about money or we’ll drag your sorry ass over the coals so long so hard there’ll be nothing left of you. Hillary is in no position to speak on the subject of money, public or private, except to say, “I’m sorry for all that I’ve done in corruption of justice and abetted by my awful party so destructive of trust.” ]

* I do. You know, I made a mistake using a private e-mail.

[So that’s what you want us to believe it was … a mistake.]

* And if I had to do it over again, I would, obviously, do it differently. But I'm not going to make any excuses. It was a mistake, and I take responsibility for that.

[Of course not. She’d have hidden things more effectively. Corrupted more thoroughly. Well, live and learn, innit? And Hillary, of Watergate dismissal fame. Of all people Hillary would know about concealment of illegal activities and destruction of public property. And whereas the Republican president resigned from office when his contretemps became public and intractable, Hillary actually runs for the office expecting the same government departments involved, now well corrupted, to give her a pass on her high crimes and misdemeanors far more serious than Watergate ever was. Crimes that she girlishly dismisses as “a mistake.” ]

* And maybe because you haven't paid any federal income tax for a lot of years. (APPLAUSE)

And the other thing I think is important...

[Jesus Christ, this woman has a one track mind.]

*  ... is if your -- if your main claim to be president of the United States is your business, then I think we should talk about that. You know, your campaign manager said that you built a lot of businesses on the backs of little guys.

And, indeed, I have met a lot of the people who were stiffed by you and your businesses, Donald. I've met dishwashers, painters, architects, glass installers, marble installers, drapery installers, like my dad was, who you refused to pay when they finished the work that you asked them to do.

We have an architect in the audience who designed one of your clubhouses at one of your golf courses. It's a beautiful facility. It immediately was put to use. And you wouldn't pay what the man needed to be paid, what he was charging you to do...

[Indeed, we know a lot of people killed by Hillary’s careless government business, and their survivors lied to for her political ass-covering. Hillary repeats rumors by Trump detractors, not ever considering nor mentioning the obscene government intrusion into his business affairs, all levels of government actually riding on the back of his business, making business difficult where it’s not made business impossible. Just imagine the graft and payoffs and third world type activities that businesses in New York must engage just to keep grasping politicians at distance and away from disrupting progress, their hooks in everything that moves within their area of influence. Government is simply the worst business partner possible. The worst. One complaint from consumers is all they need to fly into acton obtrusively weighting down business. I’m not exaggerating. There are too many examples available. We can see this in real time as new business takes hold. Whatever your personal opinion, they’re still all examples of government being worst business partner imaginable. Choose any area that you care to examine and see government being poor business partner. Wedding cake bakers will have State social justice imposed. Pizza parlors driven from business for answering a casual question wrongly. Say, take the burgeoning marijuana industry, for example. Watch the rules State government applies as they learn as they go all the while imagining their participation crucial to effective governing. State sees any economic activity whatsoever and imagines it must jump on it immediately to coral it. I actually heard a state legislature representative dsay that. First to control it, to regulate it, to tax it, to discourage it, to kill it. I watched with fascination my own state, known for it level of liberty, go out of it’s collective mind trying to figure out how to control the industry with new regulations each week. Each week! Still the industry thrives. All the while taxing the living shitt out of it. To the extent of creating State surplus. Where it is none of their business at all, but they make it so by exploiting every little accident that occurs along the way, any mistake that any individual makes is cause for new regulation, new child proof containers, rules of packaging, array of offerings, often dropped the next month, as State continues to grapple with its own problems that it sets for itself as unwanted business partner, and all the while profiting itself to an unimaginable extent with no real contribution, and by doing nothing more than actually working contrary to business, by being anchor to business, by dragging it down and slowing business for its own wariness toward the business. It’s amazing. Some individual mistakes a brownie and in reaction every candy and every wrapper in production must now be altered. New rule! Sounds sensible. But is it? This same applies to cigarettes, to alcohol, to medicine. Open any box of any prescribed medication and it will be accompanied with 15 page disclaimer compressed onto one folded page listing every possible side affect that nobody ever reads, cannot read without a magnifying glass or a microscope, because government is partner in pharmaceuticals, imagining their role critical when the public can do just as well without them, making their own mistakes and learning their own lessons without them. This is what Hillary has chosen to nag about expecting listeners to go, “Right on, Hillary!” All the while ignoring the entire verticality of employment that Trump created with all that government interference “on his back” for government at all levels to tax. Tax, tax, tax, in satisfaction of Hillary’s obsession. Indeed, we’ve met a lot of people stiffed by Hillary. We can start a very long list with the women her husband abused sexually and we can continue obnoxiously with names of people stiffed by Hillary’s party, a lousy filmmaker used as scapegoat for example, taxpayer stiffed by Hillary destroying their property that she considers her own, people stiffed for access in favor of Hillary contributors, Business stiffed to foreign business that contributed, energy business stiffed for Hillary’s energy related conceits and for her energy related contributors, surviving families stiffed by her lying to them about their relatives killed in action. And so on, at this late juncture the list of parties “stiffed” by Hillary Clinton directly as public employee is far too long to enumerate here. A list of them would take at least 25 pages and yet here is Hillary Clinton mentioning the Donald Trump’s business activities that actually produced things and produced employment out of thin air where all Hillary has is misery to everything that she touches.]

* Do the thousands of people that you have stiffed over the course of your business not deserve some kind of apology from someone who has taken their labor, taken the goods that they produced, and then refused to pay them?

I can only say that I'm certainly relieved that my late father never did business with you. He provided a good middle-class life for us, but the people he worked for, he expected the bargain to be kept on both sides.

And when we talk about your business, you've taken business bankruptcy six times. There are a lot of great businesspeople that have never taken bankruptcy once. You call yourself the King of Debt. You talk about leverage. You even at one time suggested that you would try to negotiate down the national debt of the United States.

[Thousands. Pulling another figure from her ample ass expecting the exaggeration to go unnoticed. Hillary has this same question to answer herself before she dare pose it. Speaking for the dead again. Her father failed to install those same values in Hillary. Did her father teach her to lie easily as she farts? Did her father teach her to ride high on the labor of others? Did her father create her taxation fixation? Was it her father who got her to believe she’s worthy of the presidency of the United States without having actually created anything herself worth mentioning except misery for others on a massive scale? Was it her father who taught her how to corrupt an entire political party? Did her father teach Hillary how to corrupt government departments without going to prison?  Let’s see what any random Bernie Sanders supporter might say. Let’s look to Wikileaks for possible clues. As Hillary must know, maybe not, she’s never actually run anything close to real business like the father she mentons, bankruptcy is not a shame, it’s not a failure, it’s a legal means established to protect creditors, that is except when Democrat presidents interfere with that legal protection to prevent it and “stiff” investors to protect the party’s own Democrat voting unionized members. ]

*  Well, sometimes there's not a direct transfer of skills from business to government, but sometimes what happened in business would be really bad for government.

[And always and reliably a political class separated from American life is straight up unAmerican and political skill is nothing to brag about as Hillary imagines, and failing up carried aloft by party is nothing but damaging and destructive. See how that work? Of course she doesn’t. She’s entitled. Entitled to NY Senatorship by virtue of being First Wife. Entitled to Secretary of State by virtue of being NY Senator. Entitled to U.S. presidency by virtue of experience as S.O.S. Failure as wife, failure and NY Senator, failure as S.O.S., so of course, yes, qualified for president of U.S., in her mind. Qualified because she’d be the first female. All corruption and failures aside. In her mind. ]

* Well, you're right. Race remains a significant challenge in our country. Unfortunately, race still determines too much, often determines where people live, determines what kind of education in their public schools they can get, and, yes, it determines how they're treated in the criminal justice system. We've just seen those two tragic examples in both Tulsa and Charlotte.

And we've got to do several things at the same time. We have to restore trust between communities and the police. We have to work to make sure that our police are using the best training, the best techniques, that they're well prepared to use force only when necessary. Everyone should be respected by the law, and everyone should respect the law.

[Hillary’s party lives and breathes race and does everything that a party and their government can do to exacerbate problems with race and absolutely nothing to ameliorate them. Without racial division, at this point, the Democrat party would forfeit its reason for being. How many examples would you like me to produce covering just the last eight years? They’re terrible to recall. They’re worse to detail. So much party and government interference is not even covered by national media. So many details left undiscussed, starting with a careless professor in Boston, through Travon Martin and the administrations’ interference, through incidents in major Democrat run cities, up to present day BLM movement. None of that is organic. All of that was worsened by government interference and with taxpayer money and with the aim of advancing Democrat party. ]

* Right now, that's not the case in a lot of our neighborhoods. So I have, ever since the first day of my campaign, called for criminal justice reform. I've laid out a platform that I think would begin to remedy some of the problems we have in the criminal justice system.

But we also have to recognize, in addition to the challenges that we face with policing, there are so many good, brave police officers who equally want reform. So we have to bring communities together in order to begin working on that as a mutual goal. And we've got to get guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.

The gun epidemic is the leading cause of death of young African- American men, more than the next nine causes put together. So we have to do two things, as I said. We have to restore trust. We have to work with the police. We have to make sure they respect the communities and the communities respect them. And we have to tackle the plague of gun violence, which is a big contributor to a lot of the problems that we're seeing today.

[Hillary said the words, “criminal justice reform” and “platform” She thinks listeners accept that as some kind of concrete solution. Hillary delivers platitudes to brave police officers and “communication” and she says get guns out of the hands of the wrong people. How, Hillary? Hillary already said she’d use executive order to erase 2nd A Constitutionally protected uniquely American right. Hillary sees no difference between legal and responsible gun owners and “the wrong people’ Hillary is delivering poorly crafted campaign platitude in substitution of actionable policy and expects that to be accepted by listeners. She keeps doing this repeatedly, saying the same group-tested phrases over and over in practiced response to inquiry while actually saying nothing at all. How, Hillary, how will you determine the wrong people with guns, how will you get them out of their hands? How can Hillary come close to any solution without first identifying the places, the cities, the specific neighborhoods, the specific groups the specific persons that misuse firearms? We see for ourselves, even on t.v. these “wrong hands” don’t even know how to properly hold a firearm, much less how to carry one or store one, or clean one, or aim one. We see for ourselves these “wrong hands” never saw the inside of a proper firing range, and never received one minute of firearm instruction. Hillary blathers empty platitudes in substitution of solid solutions and she expects that to be accepted by voters. Again, splitting the problem into sub problems without offering a single concrete solution, or even a path to solution. Restore trust.(!) F.U. Can she get any more vapid than that? Her party has utterly destroyed trust. Respect communities (!) How, Hillary, how? That’s not a solution being offered, that’s an empty vapid subdivision of the problem without any path to solution. Tackle the plague of gun violence is the exact same thing as the epidemic of gun deaths. Saying the word “plague” in substitution of “epidemic” emphatically does not do one single thing toward solving the problem of gun violence among young black males raised in broken families that join gangs in Democrat controlled cities. Say that. Address that. Say precisely what you intend to do about that or STFU!]

* Well, I've heard -- I've heard Donald say this at his rallies, and it's really unfortunate that he paints such a dire negative picture of black communities in our country.

[(!?) Hillary is incapable of solving a g.d. thing until she identifies and address the problem directly and gives up her ridiculous ‘problem breaking down to smaller problems, but left unsolved entirely’ as substitution for real solution. Honestly, who is Hillary speaking to? Someone who merely needs to hear the right words in the right places about the problem and imagine she’s packed with solutions to intractable problems? Because listeners hear right through her gobbledegook. And that’s what failing upward though politics gets you. That is Hillary’s skill set she offers for the presidency. Businesspeople now much better than speak like that to anyone other than dopes and journalists and standard Democrat voters. It’s disgusting. ]

* You know, the vibrancy of the black church, the black businesses that employ so many people, the opportunities that so many families are working to provide for their kids. There's a lot that we should be proud of and we should be supporting and lifting up.

But we do always have to make sure we keep people safe. There are the right ways of doing it, and then there are ways that are ineffective. Stop-and-frisk was found to be unconstitutional and, in part, because it was ineffective. It did not do what it needed to do.

Now, I believe in community policing. And, in fact, violent crime is one-half of what it was in 1991. Property crime is down 40 percent. We just don't want to see it creep back up. We've had 25 years of very good cooperation.

But there were some problems, some unintended consequences. Too many young African-American and Latino men ended up in jail for nonviolent offenses. And it's just a fact that if you're a young African-American man and you do the same thing as a young white man, you are more likely to be arrested, charged, convicted, and incarcerated. So we've got to address the systemic racism in our criminal justice system. We cannot just say law and order. We have to say -- we have to come forward with a plan that is going to divert people from the criminal justice system, deal with mandatory minimum sentences, which have put too many people away for too long for doing too little.

We need to have more second chance programs. I'm glad that we're ending private prisons in the federal system; I want to see them ended in the state system. You shouldn't have a profit motivation to fill prison cells with young Americans. So there are some positive ways we can work on this.

And I believe strongly that commonsense gun safety measures would assist us. Right now -- and this is something Donald has supported, along with the gun lobby -- right now, we've got too many military- style weapons on the streets. In a lot of places, our police are outgunned. We need comprehensive background checks, and we need to keep guns out of the hands of those who will do harm.

And we finally need to pass a prohibition on anyone who's on the terrorist watch list from being able to buy a gun in our country. If you're too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to buy a gun. So there are things we can do, and we ought to do it in a bipartisan way.

[Racist. She puts on her black southern accent when she panders to them. She see them as different. She see them only as entities to tax. Tax, tax, tax, and have their votes, and that’s all. Hillary is the very last person in the United States to speak on the subject of multitiered justice system, having benefited from it herself by the injustice extended on her behalf, first by IRS, the DOJ, State Department, and ultimately even by FBI, leaving other lesser departments unmentioned. The very last person. She is disqualified from speaking unless she says outright, “as Democrat politician and party favorite and now as presidential candidate, I know by experience the unfairness of our justice system for I have benefitted more than anybody else in modern American history. So, as a white woman too, I can sure tell you that all you guys of color sure do get very unfair treatment. Even Martha Stewart didn’t receive the justice I received perverted to my advantage. So I’m top expert on how all this is all done. Too bad. La la la.”

Hillary Clinton doesn’t know what AR15 is. “Military style” means a gun looks scary. It’s empty description. Nobody is running the streets with a 50 caliber handgun. Nobody is using automatic weapons in car jacking. Gun lobby is another scare word that ignores it is comprised of U.S. citizens protecting their Bill of Rights. She’s using typical Democrat language here, “sensible” gun laws, of course, everybody is for sensible gun laws. Everyone! The repetition of the empty phrases is annoying. Who does she think she’s talking to? Who? Hillary Clinton has her internal axiom machine turned on to high and it’s flatly annoying. Listening to her speak is quite impossible and reading her nearly so.

She links the no-fly list, notoriously careless and impossible of challenge with gun purchases showing again that she’s completely nonchalant about protecting American rights. Even non gun owners, non gun enthusiasts are alarmed with the carelessness of shunting Constitutional protections off to unelected officials that cannot be challenged without a great deal of difficulty and known to be careless with their handling of data. She is simply not a serious woman. She doesn’t even pretend very well. She just iterates her own party’s axioms. The whole thing taken together wrenches one’s stomach.

* Lester, I think implicit bias is a problem for everyone, not just police. I think, unfortunately, too many of us in our great country jump to conclusions about each other. And therefore, I think we need all of us to be asking hard questions about, you know, why am I feeling this way?

But when it comes to policing, since it can have literally fatal consequences, I have said, in my first budget, we would put money into that budget to help us deal with implicit bias by retraining a lot of our police officers.

I've met with a group of very distinguished, experienced police chiefs a few weeks ago. They admit it's an issue. They've got a lot of concerns. Mental health is one of the biggest concerns, because now police are having to handle a lot of really difficult mental health problems on the street.

They want support, they want more training, they want more assistance. And I think the federal government could be in a position where we would offer and provide that.

[Racist! Hillary, I think that bias about people being naturally biased is another oversimplification and seriously damaging and trite product of race/gender studies. Democrat, of course. Designed for people who must attend college but without the chops for any worthwhile legitimate productive degree. People like Hillary. The ‘everybody’s biased, prejudiced, racist’ is flatly wrong and leads to no good whatsoever and indulging that malevolent conceit makes you biased, pre-judgemental and racist. And doing so blithely as this is just awful. Hillary you are an awful person. Now, go on, and tell us how it is you’ve become so biased. Too many Republican daddies kept you in check for too long? Piss off, racist. She met with police chiefs to discuss a very serious problem that her party and especially her president have worked very hard at worsening and now the evidence of all that rot and instigation all that awful ‘community organizing’ on a national scale is tallied in bodycounts, of imported protestors and policemen doing their job. These cities reap what your party has sown. Spare us your “everyone is biased” bullshit even as your party insists on making it so. You sicken me.]

* New York -- New York has done an excellent job. And I give credit -- I give credit across the board going back two mayors, two police chiefs, because it has worked. And other communities need to come together to do what will work, as well.

Look, one murder is too many. But it is important that we learn about what has been effective. And not go to things that sound good that really did not have the kind of impact that we would want. Who disagrees with keeping neighborhoods safe?

But let's also add, no one should disagree about respecting the rights of young men who live in those neighborhoods. And so we need to do a better job of working, again, with the communities, faith communities, business communities, as well as the police to try to deal with this problem.

[Need to come together. What does that mean exactly, Hillary? Your party works hard at setting people apart. Any coming together is in spite of your party’s activities not because of them. “One murder is too many.” Did you think that up on your own, is that part of your programming, or what? Do you imagine that resonates with anyone concerned with how much government supports Planned Parenthood to the extent abortions are now a proper industry, and the selling of fetal parts accepted business and all that to the advantage of Democrat party? Has Hillary any empty adages for that? Abortions are one thing and turning them into Democrat industry quite another. And now we’ve reached the point where women abort without thinking things through first without considering human life itself, without connecting it with murder, that is the separation with life that Hillay’s party has inculcated and advanced and done all that for its own advantage, so do, spare us the “one murder is too many” when Hillay’s party involves all of us in murder on a national scale. Hillary, you fart out both sides of your mouth and speak out of your ass, and stink up the place all directions. Hillary, you disrespect the rights of the not quite born, the nearly born. And once born you make sure they are born in debt to government, in essence you make sure American citizens are born into slavery. The slavery of unpayable debt. You specifically are unqualified to speak on the rights of young men anywhere, jobs, communities, faith, business, or police. They’re all just taxable votes to Hillary Clinton. ]

*  I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate. And, yes, I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that's a good thing.

[It’s quite clear that Hillary memorized Democrat axioms and adages. Committed to memory empty phrases. Adopted her husband’s style of breaking large problems into sub problems and presenting the subs as solutions. And that’s all. And no, it’s not a good thing. Hillary has practiced bullshitting. Even though her squad of clapping seals think otherwise, if they’re thinking at all.]

* And clearly, as Donald just admitted, he knew he was going to stand on this debate stage, and Lester Holt was going to be asking us questions, so he tried to put the whole racist birther lie to bed.

But it can't be dismissed that easily. He really  has started his political activity based on this racist lie that our first black president was not an American citizen. There was absolutely no evidence for it, but he persisted, he persisted year after year, because some of his supporters, people that he was trying to bring into his fold, apparently believed it or wanted to believe it.

But, remember, Donald started his career back in 1973 being sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination because he would not rent apartments in one of his developments to African-Americans, and he made sure that the people who worked for him understood that was the policy. He actually was sued twice by the Justice Department.

So he has a long record of engaging in racist behavior. And the birther lie was a very hurtful one. You know, Barack Obama is a man of great dignity. And I could tell how much it bothered him and annoyed him that this was being touted and used against him.

But I like to remember what Michelle Obama said in her amazing speech at our Democratic National Convention: When they go low, we go high. And Barack Obama went high, despite Donald Trump's best efforts to bring him down.

[The racist birther controversy was started by Hillary’s campaign. At this very late point that is well proven and well beyond denying. Worse, it was instigated by Obama himself by his bogus self-description, his own profile submitted for publication as author from exotic African land. (see Obama’s own profile that he submitted himself. https://pajamasmed.hs.llnwd.net/e1/eddriscoll/user-content/24/files/2012/05/obama_kenyra_pr_1991_drudge_5-17-12-2.jpg) Secondly there is no proof yet because Obama’s Columbia admission records are kept secret. Why? Why not simply release them? Obama himself can clear it all up but he refuses to be so ordinarily candid. Again, why be so secret when so much is at stake. This isn’t “Ancient Aliens” material, we really must ask ourselves, “Did Obama submit similar exotic credentials for entry into ivy league school?” It really is perfectly reasonable to ask that perfectly reasonable question given Obama’s dissimilation. It bears on “justice.” So easy to answer and yet so much difficulty overcome in keeping it secret. And incredible expense keeping his Hawaiian birth certificate secret. Upwards to $8,000,000.00 keeping a simple record out of public view. That’s a lot of money for something so ordinary as that. Why? Why punk the public this way? This is the Democrat party in action. And now Hillary brings up this subject again knowing full well it was her friend and confidant Blumenthal who promulgated the entire controversy when Hillary ran against Obama. Hillary then is instrumental in deteriorating trust of Democrat politicians. Their complicity and their continuing to lie, their continuing bringing up their own malfeasance and projecting it onto others is disgusting. Hillary is disgusting here. She is counting on malinformation of observers and especially on the ignorance and partisanship and straight up stupidity of journalists. But the public is not going to let them get away with it. She’s gone a bridge too far. But she’s too arrogant, too condescending, too conceited to know it. This is her her doom.]

* Well, I think cyber security, cyber warfare will be one of the biggest challenges facing the next president, because clearly we're facing at this point two different kinds of adversaries. There are the independent hacking groups that do it mostly for commercial reasons to try to steal information that they can use to make money.

But increasingly, we are seeing cyber attacks coming from states, organs of states. The most recent and troubling of these has been Russia. There's no doubt now that Russia has used cyber attacks against all kinds of organizations in our country, and I am deeply concerned about this. I know Donald's very praiseworthy of Vladimir Putin, but Putin is playing a really...

(CROSSTALK)

... tough, long game here. And one of the things he's done is to let loose cyber attackers to hack into government files, to hack into personal files, hack into the Democratic National Committee. And we recently have learned that, you know, that this is one of their preferred methods of trying to wreak havoc and collect information. We need to make it very clear -- whether it's Russia, China, Iran or anybody else -- the United States has much greater capacity. And we are not going to sit idly by and permit state actors to go after our information, our private-sector information or our public-sector information.

And we're going to have to make it clear that we don't want to use the kinds of tools that we have. We don't want to engage in a different kind of warfare. But we will defend the citizens of this country.

And the Russians need to understand that. I think they've been treating it as almost a probing, how far would we go, how much would we do. And that's why I was so -- I was so shocked when Donald publicly invited Putin to hack into Americans. That is just unacceptable. It's one of the reasons why 50 national security officials who served in Republican information -- in administrations...

[Blather. Hillary doesn’t care that that private information of 22.1 Office of Personnel workers were hacked. She cares about Democrat rat fink illegal and embarrassing activities were hacked. She cares about her private server is exposed. She cares about her own careless handling of government top level secrets exposed. She cares about her own malfeasance exposed, and that’s all. She deflects to Chinese and to Russians when it was her and her husband who sold information and U.S. property to both for party gain and for personal gain and laundered through her foundations. She is a very careless woman, and careless with exceedingly important material and worse, Obama knew about this and lied that he learned through the news when he actually engaged with the activity. In Washington the roof of Russian embassy is bristling with satellite dishes and listening devises aimed directly at the U.S. capitol building and the White House and there is Hillary with her private Blackberry (!) receiving and sending top secret information, having skipped required security debriefings, and against all advice to the contrary having insisted upon using her own personal cellphones. Hillary is flatly too incompetent to even discuss national security. Here she is reeling off the words provided her over three weeks of debate programming. And that’s all. Hillary is an incredibly self-absorbed and ridiculous woman, too inane for high office. ]

*  ... have said that Donald is unfit to be the commander- in-chief. It's comments like that that really worry people who understand the threats that we face.

[On the contrary. It is Hillary whose proven temperament is unfit for any office at all. She is carried aloft, first by marriage and second by party. There is nothing more to the woman besides gravely ill health.]

* Well, I think there are a number of issues that we should be addressing. I have put forth a plan to defeat ISIS. It does involve going after them online. I think we need to do much more with our tech companies to prevent ISIS and their operatives from being able to use the Internet to radicalize, even direct people in our country and Europe and elsewhere.

But we also have to intensify our air strikes against ISIS and eventually support our Arab and Kurdish partners to be able to actually take out ISIS in Raqqa, end their claim of being a Caliphate.

We're making progress. Our military is assisting in Iraq. And we're hoping that within the year we'll be able to push ISIS out of Iraq and then, you know, really squeeze them in Syria.

But we have to be cognizant of the fact that they've had foreign fighters coming to volunteer for them, foreign money, foreign weapons, so we have to make this the top priority.

And I would also do everything possible to take out their leadership. I was involved in a number of efforts to take out Al Qaida leadership when I was secretary of state, including, of course, taking out bin Laden. And I think we need to go after Baghdadi, as well, make that one of our organizing principles. Because we've got to defeat ISIS, and we've got to do everything we can to disrupt their propaganda efforts online.

[Do much more. Care to elaborate? Or is anything specific not possible because nothing is there beyond the empty phrase “do more” programmed into her 3 week training sessions, so much more important than her security training and blithely skipped, because Hillary! See, actually doing the job is far less important than getting the job. Air strikes and support, then why must this wait for Hillary? Her party’s president not up to the task? And then what? What comes after ISIS?  Our military wouldn’t have to assist Iraq in disposing of ISIS had Hillary and her party’s conceit not insisted our troops leave in haste. Had her party and her party’s supporters not hold such high sanctimonious contemptuous distaste for American influence and exerting American power. Her job is to see that through no matter how aversive American power is to her voters, but Hillary and her like-minded high level leaders are not up to the task. Not up to task of extending American power for the good of an important ally. Not up to the task of extending American values, too apprehensive of promulgating American values, too oikophobic to actually win any real war. Hillary’s voters will not allow the destruction of ISIS they’re repulsed by the very idea of Pas Americana. Every engagement is “quagmire” to them, a futile engagement and made positively a self-fulfilling prophesy. Hillary, Hillary’s leadership, Hillary’s party, Hillary’s voters will insist on making it so. And we have for prime example Iraq. So even mentioning Iraq is ridiculous on it face. I know Hillary’s voters. I know them too well. Disgustingly, they will not allow for any such thing. Their ossified conceits disallow any such thing. Any project massive as creating democracy where it does not exist undertaken and especially undertaken by Republicans is dead on arrival. Nothing even remote to that is possible. It will never be possible. Democrat voters will insist any progress must be undone. It must for their world view to be satisfied and they will not stop until any such project is ruined, even after declaring it a success, as Obama did with Iraq. Nothing will have their sustained support. And that is all well proven fact. Hillary is speaking hawkishly for show and to no avail. We notice her clapping seals choose not to applaud.]

* Well, I hope the fact-checkers are turning up the volume and really working hard. Donald supported the invasion of Iraq.

[Hillary is counting on her checkered “fact checkers” to distort the Howard Stern interview to put meaning to words in Trump’s mouth that he did not say. She’s counting on her fact checkers to misinterpret plainspoken language. She and they make lousy interpreters. Never let a Democrat explain what you mean especially when your own words speak clearly themselves. Never allow, “So what you mean is …” Smack that down immediately with “I said what I meant. Not what you want it to mean.” They’ll always prefer something they can argue. It’s such a slimy tactic even in normal ordinary everyday conversation. Just flat don’t let anyone do that. Yet they do. It’s amazing. I find myself going, “Are you thick of comprehension?” Over the simplest of things. Then I sound like the aggressive crackpot insistent on precise language and not them being language and meaning distorters. No, don’t bother with Hillary’s “fact checkers” they’ll pull the same crap. Let’s look at at what Trump actually said that one time on Howard Stern that Democrats have latched onto. Here goes:

“Well, I’m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy,” Trump said. “They’re getting a little bit tired of hearing ‘We’re going in, we’re not going in.’ Whatever happened to the days of Douglas MacArthur? Either do it or don’t do it.”

Then,

“Perhaps he shouldn’t be doing it yet. And perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations.”

Then later in Esquire,

“I would never have handled it that way…Two minutes after we leave, there’s going to be a revolution, and the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over. And he’ll have weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam [Hussein] didn’t have.”

They’re all just very stupid bastards deadset on mischaracterizing somebody’s statements when pressed on their opinion even though they’re only a plain citizen like yourself or like me. A perfectly inconsequential opinion that shifts as events unfurl. And that light superficial opinion is not available as excuse to government officials with a ton more top secret information and on whose decision lives are altered and forfeited. As official you stick with your decisions made with the best information available and follow through. It’s immoral to change midstream as if all those lives don’t matter anymore than feckless shifting opinion shaped by politically inclined comedians without the access to information that the officials had when thy made it, and the decision was critical. Again, officials in high office do not have “the woman’s prerogative to change her opinion” so breezily as when fashions change. Yet Hillary insists that she does. And that Donald Trump does not. And that Trump is lying as she mischaracterizes his plainspoken civic opinion. She, her party, their operatives, her media, her supporters are all ridiculous. And aren’t you tired of this argument? This style of argumentation where the basics of argument are argued? It pisses me off.]

* That is absolutely proved over and over again.

[She lies convincingly to herself. And I suppose to any dope who bothers to stick with her.]

* He actually advocated for the actions we took in Libya and urged that Gadhafi be taken out, after actually doing some business with him one time.

[Oh? Care to cite? YouTube, recorded interview, and unedited, or it didn’t happen. Your word, the word of your “fact checkers” doesn’t count. ]

*  But the larger point -- and he says this constantly -- is George W. Bush made the agreement about when American troops would leave Iraq, not Barack Obama.

And the only way that American troops could have stayed in Iraq is to get an agreement from the then-Iraqi government that would have protected our troops, and the Iraqi government would not give that.

But let's talk about the question you asked, Lester. The question you asked is, what do we do here in the United States? That's the most important part of this. How do we prevent attacks? How do we protect our people?

And I think we've got to have an intelligence surge, where we are looking for every scrap of information. I was so proud of law enforcement in New York, in Minnesota, in New Jersey. You know, they responded so quickly, so professionally to the attacks that occurred by Rahami. And they brought him down. And we may find out more information because he is still alive, which may prove to be an intelligence benefit.

So we've got to do everything we can to vacuum up intelligence from Europe, from the Middle East. That means we've got to work more closely with our allies, and that's something that Donald has been very dismissive of.

We're working with NATO, the longest military alliance in the history of the world, to really turn our attention to terrorism. We're working with our friends in the Middle East, many of which, as you know, are Muslim majority nations. Donald has consistently insulted Muslims abroad, Muslims at home, when we need to be cooperating with Muslim nations and with the American Muslim community.

They're on the front lines. They can provide information to us that we might not get anywhere else. They need to have close working cooperation with law enforcement in these communities, not be alienated and pushed away as some of Donald's rhetoric, unfortunately, has led to.

[The larger point is Hillary is liar and nothing she says can be trusted including “the” and “a”and “I had pneumonia” Obama pulled out precipitously and that led to ISIS. You must recognize that and take responsibility for that or forfeit your claim to leadership. Hillary keeps shifting blame for important matters off of herself that she never has responsibility for anything. Obama does this too. They’re simply responsibility averse. It’s a lie that Iraq wouldn’t give that, a lie extended to her malinformed voters who don’t care to know how these things work. Iraq demurred to boost concessions not expecting Obama such an incredible wimp. Iraq expected American too invested to turn tail, how wrong they were in not anticipating Obama doesn’t give a shit about American investment in lives and equipment and treasure, rather interested only in not allowing any Republican success. Not ever. And That more than anything is reason to never vote Democrat office again. They care more about their own party prestige than they do for America, for any given foreign region, for the world. To Democrats, their party is their entire world and everyone else be damned. That Hillary even speaks on this subject is incredible. Meaning, no credibility whatsoever. No credibility in first supporting it, we looked to her for her unique insights, no credibility for supporting it once started, no credibility in seeing the project through to success no matter how much invested, no credibility in withdraw, no credibility in even explaining the circumstance of withdraw. No credibility in describing the position of her opponent, then a plain citizen. No credibility whatsoever. She’s distorted every single aspect of the conflict imaginable. Her lies pour forth in torrent. Yes, it’s all quite incredible.

Intelligence on the ground is destroyed. She talks about vacuuming intelligence blithely, imagining that simple to collate and simple as foreign governments vacuuming her unsecured Blackberry that she used against instructions while traveling abroad. Then brags of the extent of her traveling. Meaning she brags about the high number of foreign governments that vacuumed information off her Blackberry revealing state secrets wherever she goes. People hear Hillary speak about intelligence gathering and thinks, “OFFS, there she goes again. She thinks we don’t know about her own outrageous indefensible carelessness” and that of her aides as well. She has no solutions to offer about how to prevent attacks nor how to protect our people. On the contrary, she invites attacks and endangers people and she does this because of the regional disruption that her policies created. More platitudes even as she invites more attacks through insecure southern border and increased immigration from troubled areas, regions she was instrumental in disrupting.

She’s proud of the work that other people did in spite of her efforts to confound them. NATO is dissolving before our eyes considered unsuited for today’s challenges. We have no “friends in the Middle East” and the groups that are friendly we are not assisting for other political reasoning. The Kurds for example are left to their own in favor of our association with Turkey who is now more aligned with Russia than with the U.S. Her description is vapid. She speaks of Trump’s rhetoric where Trump speaks concretely and definitely where Hillary is nothing but pure rhetoric speaking of frontline intelligence not available elsewhere while disavowing anything close to realistic safeguarding action.

* We've covered this ground.

[Shut up, Woman, the man is speaking. We’ve covered Hillary’s dissimilating repeatedly. We’ve covered her tax-obsession ad nauseam. ]

* Whew, OK.

[This is where we notice Hillary shake a bit and hoped for another full on seizure. But alas, it was just a dismissive shake. ]

* Let's talk about two important issues that were briefly mentioned by Donald, first, NATO. You know, NATO as a military alliance has something called Article 5, and basically it says this: An attack on one is an attack on all. And you know the only time it's ever been invoked? After 9/11, when the 28 nations of NATO said that they would go to Afghanistan with us to fight terrorism, something that they still are doing by our side.

With respect to Iran, when I became secretary of state, Iran was weeks away from having enough nuclear material to form a bomb. They had mastered the nuclear fuel cycle under the Bush administration. They had built covert facilities. They had stocked them with centrifuges that were whirling away.

And we had sanctioned them. I voted for every sanction against Iran when I was in the Senate, but it wasn't enough. So I spent a year-and-a-half putting together a coalition that included Russia and China to impose the toughest sanctions on Iran.

And we did drive them to the negotiating table. And my successor, John Kerry, and President Obama got a deal that put a lid on Iran's nuclear program without firing a single shot. That's diplomacy. That's coalition-building. That's working with other nations.

The other day, I saw Donald saying that there were some Iranian sailors on a ship in the waters off of Iran, and they were taunting American sailors who were on a nearby ship. He said, you know, if they taunted our sailors, I'd blow them out of the water and start another war. That's not good judgment.

[Let’s talk about Hillary being a liar. See how that works? Let’s talk about Hillary being pedantic. Let’s talk about Hillary spewing her three weeks of practice mechanically, obviously practicing with the girls. Let’s talk about Hillary’s boss veritably handing Iran the nuclear bomb with his strange idea that power will suddenly shake theocrats hell-bent on destruction suddenly into responsible regional “players.” Lets talk about her Party’s current SOS giving these theocrats everything they could ask for and more just to say, “we’ve successfully reached an agreement” rendering all the hard work and all the agony completely fruitless and worse, the whole world 10X more dangerous. She brags of diplomacy, “without firing a single shot” completely ignoring that Iran shoots though proxies. She brags! She brags about her diplomacy with Iran. The worst example since Troy. Here, Hillary is the perfect idiot and heavily tainted with unearned sanctimony. Hillary truly is quite incredible. She speaks of Trump’s judgement in not blowing Iranian taunters out of the water. She invites more taunting, more capture of sailors with her reticence to engage her Nation’s enemies. Hillary doesn’t have judgment to know which is good or bad and here her record proves it. Most specifically with Gaddafi. She hasn’t the first clue about how Middle Eastern men think. ]

* That is not the right temperament to be commander-in- chief, to be taunted. And the worst part...

[Hillary’ Secret Service security detail report Hillary threw a bible at one of them after he pushed things up the SS chain of command. Now why would an SS agent lie like that? Gary Byrne on duty during Bill’s stint as CIC reports that Hillary behavior is too erratic, uncontrollable and occasionally violent to even be considered for the position. Now why would a 29 year veteran SS agent lie like that? Friendly one moment and raging the next. Hillary are those dreadful menopause years behind you or what? Explain yourself. Why would agents lie about needing to protect Bill from you? It must have been his persistent sexual predation. Now I’m guessing here. Byrne also reports he walked into a room where the president was involved with a woman who was neither his wife nor Lewinsky. Byrne, a day in 1995 arriving at work following a loud fight by the Clintons the night before with a blue vase “smashed to bits” and Bill with very real black eye. Other books comport with Byrne’s accounts in “Crisis of Character. Ronald Kessler, “First Family Detail” for another, Edward Klein’s “Unlikeable: The Problem with Hillary. All this doesn’t sound like presidential character. Nor Hillary’s Twitterstorm following Trump’s 30 minute presser featuring American heroes. Then suddenly shifted to saying Obama was born in America. Demonstrating his ability to manipulate a hostile media. Here, if you care to see Hillary come unglued through a series of Tweets: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/wow-hillary-clinton-throws-temper-tantrum-trumps-brilliant-birther-presser/s. (terrible platform that place. It does bring out one’s worst.) Does all this sound like presidential temperament to you? Hillary’s distain for her own taxpayer funded security is well known and so natural that her distain even sinks through to her daughter. Such a nice seeming girl, such a shame that Hillary’s disregard for middle class workers is transferred to Chelsea. Does distain for middle class workers who pay taxes, taxes, taxes, even for presuming to live and breathe air and walk the ground sound like presidential temperament to you? The very last person on earth to chime in about someone else’s presidential temperament is Hillary Clinton. The last.]

* ... of what we heard Donald say has been about nuclear weapons. He has said repeatedly that he didn't care if other nations got nuclear weapons, Japan, South Korea, even Saudi Arabia. It has been the policy of the United States, Democrats and Republicans, to do everything we could to reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons. He even said, well, you know, if there were nuclear war in East Asia, well, you know, that's fine...

[Hillay’s party just gave Iran nuclear weapons with no intention of keeping them in check. What Trump said makes perfect sense in light of what Hillary’s  party has already done.]

*  ... have a good time, folks.

[Joking about nuclear holocaust? Does this sound like presidential temperament or like your little sister sniping following her mischaracterization of what someone else said? Hillary cannot get anything right. ]

* And, in fact, his cavalier attitude about nuclear weapons is so deeply troubling. That is the number-one threat we face in the world. And it becomes particularly threatening if terrorists ever get their hands on any nuclear material. So a man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes, as far as I think anyone with any sense about this should be concerned.

[How wearisome to be lectured by the first person in line to the administration who just did what she is condemning. Anyone who throws lamps at their husband and leaves the mess to be cleaned up by lesser mortals, throws bibles at their security detail, lies as she breathes, coughs constantly as she lies, falls to the pavement as she coughs, drops her shoe being tossed into a medi-van has her people explain, thrombosis, conk on the head, heat, dehydration, pneumonia has herself carried off to expose all this to her granddaughter instead of heading to the hospital where information on her health will be known, and within an hour appear on the NY street and embrace another child, most likely the child of an aide, before “I feel great!” And leaping into the van again should be wary of even mentioning nuclear codes. What’s the matter Hillary, the preprogrammed subroutine kick in automatically, or what? ]

* Well, let me -- let me start by saying, words matter. Words matter when you run for president. And they really matter when you are president. And I want to reassure our allies in Japan and South Korea and elsewhere that we have mutual defense treaties and we will honor them.

It is essential that America's word be good. And so I know that this campaign has caused some questioning and worries on the part of many leaders across the globe. I've talked with a number of them. But I want to -- on behalf of myself, and I think on behalf of a majority of the American people, say that, you know, our word is good.

It's also important that we look at the entire global situation. There's no doubt that we have other problems with Iran. But personally, I'd rather deal with the other problems having put that lid on their nuclear program than still to be facing that.

And Donald never tells you what he would do. Would he have started a war? Would he have bombed Iran? If he's going to criticize a deal that has been very successful in giving us access to Iranian facilities that we never had before, then he should tell us what his alternative would be. But it's like his plan to defeat ISIS. He says it's a secret plan, but the only secret is that he has no plan.

So we need to be more precise in how we talk about these issues. People around the word follow our presidential campaigns so closely, trying to get hints about what we will do. Can they rely on us? Are we going to lead the world with strength and in accordance with our values? That's what I intend to do. I intend to be a leader of our country that people can count on, both here at home and around the world, to make decisions that will further peace and prosperity, but also stand up to bullies, whether they're abroad or at home.

We cannot let those who would try to destabilize the world to interfere with American interests and security...

[They sure do matter and that’s why Hillary’s lies are so disturbing. It’s not possible for Hillary to speak on any subject at all without lying first and correcting to truth later if at all. She really is demonstrably pathologic when it comes to speaking plain simple truth. For some odd reason, most likely political, the truth is beyond her grasp at any given moment.

She claims the importance of America’s word be good even as she destroys trust in American word globally. She blathers about truth and the importance of truth in the same debate that she talks about electronically vacuuming intelligence from allies. In the same debate that she mischaracterizes the words, the motives, and deeds of friends, of opponents, of allies, and foes. Yes, truth is important. And the truth is Hillary is perfectly incapable of being trusted. Her word is no good at all. She exercises her woman’s prerogative to change her word at the drop of a dime.

* You know, he tried to switch from looks to stamina. But this is a man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs, and someone who has said pregnancy is an inconvenience to employers, who has said...

[The women Trump called pigs present themselves as such. Hillary has made abortion on par with a stop at the drive through. Hillary’s party leader said that he wouldn’t want his daughters “inconvenienced” with pregnancy. Hillary’s entire party regards pregnancy as inconvenience to women’s ambition. Hillary helped turn abortion from “safe, legal and rare” to unsafe (Kermit Gosnell) the distribution of their broken part profitable, and frequent on an industrial scale. Hillary has no ground to stand on here to condemn a remark, yet she takes it and condemns anyway. Her values here are not just inverted they’re twisted and tied into a Gordian knot, even Alexander couldn’t slash through them. The only people this crap works on is other Democrats similarly twisted in knots.

* Her name is Alicia Machado.

[Oh, her. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. The beauty contest winner who then became too fat to continue representing. The fat beauty contestant with sex videos, The fat beauty contestant complicit in murder and complicit in threats to a judge. The fat beauty contestant who makes fun of her own obesity. That one. Come on, Hillary, you’re killing me over here.]

* Well, I support our democracy. And sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But I certainly will support the outcome of this election.

And I know Donald's trying very hard to plant doubts about it, but I hope the people out there understand: This election's really up to you. It's not about us so much as it is about you and your families and the kind of country and future you want. So I sure hope you will get out and vote as though your future depended on it, because I think it does.

[No she doesn’t. Hillary supports corruption of our democracy so that no government department is trusted. Not even the Forest Service. Not even the border patrol. Wikileaks and Guccifer spelled it all out through Hillary’s own party’s emails. Hillary Clinton gives lip service to democracy while doing so much within her ample power to distort it. It’s not democracy she supports, far from it. It’s corrupted politics, it’s party infiltration of media that she engages and supports and buys. It’s all that she knows. ]

13 comments:

edutcher said...

You spent all day writing this, didn't you?

"we need to have smart, fair trade deals."

There's that word again. We all remember the last time she tried to be "smart"

"Donald was very fortunate in his life, and that's all to his benefit"

And she wasn't? Daddy put her through Wellesley and Yale Law, but she wants people to think she bent her back in the cotton fields alongside her Willie in Arkinsaw.

I could go on, but I haven't got Chip's stamina.

Leland said...

I never watched the debate. I used think I should, because how else would I be informed. But both sides, and particular the side on which the moderator and the jackass sit, speak only in platitudes about things that may interest others, but have little to do with their own agenda. For example, "smart, fair" anything requires honesty and openness; and neither of those things are inherent in a private server designed to hide deals from all.

Look, I know for whom I am voting. I know why. It's not for anything promised to me, but for my own calculation as to what their Presidency will cause others to do. I want Trump to win for one simple reason; to have the media go after the office of the Presidency. To have the media remind the public that no office should hold so much power. To try and set the brakes on globalization as it blows into Hoboken, NJ. That's why I'll vote for Trump. If he ends up doing better or worse; I'm certain he will at least be a smidgen better than Hillary.

ricpic said...

Trump's shooting himself in the foot again because he can't leave this Machado thing alone.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

Let surrogates go after Machado. Don't punch down.

Sixty Grit said...

Not sure that he has screwed up - think of all the times he has been proven correct "That face" and all of the others - he keeps winning because he refuses to back down when attacked.

Keep punching, Trump, do not become Romney.

edutcher said...

Sixty makes a good point.

the Khan man was supposed to be one of those people who could attack Trump with impunity, but The Donald wouldn't take it and we know where the Khan man is now.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

Trump should be Romney debate one, not Romney debates two and three.

But when Hillary throws bait out there respond back smart. He can dismiss it out of hand and then attack her on a more recent substantive point. And rolling in the mud with Ms. Piggy is best left to surrogates like Christie. He would like that.

He lost a couple of points and momentum after the election. He needs to close the gap in a couple of critical states to win. This latest tax disclosure and Machado are attempts to throw him off the offensive with Clinton, that and also an attempt to make a worse choice than Hillary.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

What does Nigel say...

edutcher said...

“Whatever abuse she throws at you, ignore her. Don’t defend yourself."

That was Rove's advice to Dubya IIRC.

Nail her, but do it quickly. Never let a lie go unchallenged, but you don't need a doctoral dissertation.

Keep in mind this headline from Legal Insurrection, one of the last NeverTrumper holdoutsNew York Times gives up on Ohio as Hillary's chances fade.

Not everybody thinks the debate was a disaster.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

ed, you can dismiss an attack as weak and pivot go in for the kill on substance. That is not leaving the issue unanswered. Nigel is telling Trump to ignore Hillary and speak directly to the American voters about change and what he will do for them as President.

Flailing around about Rosie O'Donnell and Sean Hannity is a waste of time.

I do not think the first debate was a disaster, but it was a lost opportunity to put Hillary away (he was pretty good in the first half hour). But It cost Trump momentum and a couple of points.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

I do not recall Legal Insurrection being #NeverTrump. It was pro Cruz/Rubio, but Professor Jacobson repeatedly said pretty friendly things about Trump all through the primaries. It is certainly Never Hillary.

edutcher said...

I'm pretty sure he is not going to put her away in the debates. The media is going to do whatever it takes to keep her going whether it's polls or spin or "fact checks" or just plain old lies.

What he needs to do is show he's the one on the side of the people. That won't be all that hard. Dr Crowley made that point in her Washington Times column this week.

As for Team Jacobson, I must have missed those days.

Evi L. Bloggerlady said...

ed, show me where Jacobson was #NeverTrump. You must have something to base it on.