Hilary, the Democrats, and the media

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Who ever said she was brilliant for calling it a bombing? The entire story is about Trump jumping the gun to play on people's fears.

I'm just glad they (likely) got the guy before he could kill any one.

So when Trump called it a bombing, all we knew was that it was an explosion, that's what you are saying? When he called it a bombing, there was no credible evidence to support that?

Can you back that up? I see a lot of general criticism here by you, but no facts to support said criticism. How do you know what Trump had been told about the event, at the time he called it a bombing? Or are you just assuming he screwed it up.

Also, since I don't think you responded on the other thread...you criticized Trump for profiting from other people's loss. How is that worse, than say, a defense lawyer cashing a nice paycheck, for defending someone who raped a child?

I just can't wait, to hear your explanation...

Have you ever been critical of her? Can you point to a specific time where you think she screwed up?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Also, since I don't think you responded on the other thread...you criticized Trump for profiting from other people's loss. How is that worse, than say, a defense lawyer cashing a nice paycheck, for defending someone who raped a child?

This was media crap; should Trump have been more careful with saying bombing, maybe. Is this a big deal, no, it shouldn't be. At least this time he didn't immediately tweet before even offering condolences and the bodies were still warm (thankfully no one died in these attacks) about 'thanks for telling me I was right about Islamic terrorism'

I have no idea what case you are referring to, but the jist is...?
She was a defense attorney, and her client was accused of rape.

Did he run up and down the courtroom aisle laughing about raping a child admitting he was guilty while she just danced and said 'hey look at me, making money off raped kids?'? Did he not deserve a fair trial? Public defenders get paid all the time to defend people like that, do you despise them as well? Sometimes #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people have funds and a private attorney is hired to defend them as their job. Sometimes those #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people go free, and yes, that sucks.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

This was media crap; should Trump have been more careful with saying bombing, maybe. Is this a big deal, no, it shouldn't be. At least this time he didn't immediately tweet before even offering condolences and the bodies were still warm (thankfully no one died in these attacks) about 'thanks for telling me I was right about Islamic terrorism'

I have no idea what case you are referring to, but the jist is...?
She was a defense attorney, and her client was accused of rape.

Did he run up and down the courtroom aisle laughing about raping a child admitting he was guilty while she just danced and said 'hey look at me, making money off raped kids?'? Did he not deserve a fair trial? Public defenders get paid all the time to defend people like that, do you despise them as well? Sometimes #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people have funds and a private attorney is hired to defend them as their job. Sometimes those #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people go free, and yes, that sucks.

She won one for the bad guy . She seems to be on the wrong side of right way too often . Some see this as a problem .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by buckman

She won one for the bad guy . She seems to be on the wrong side of right way too often . Some see this as a problem .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She was a lawyer, I don't hold her doing the best job she can for a client against her.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

She was a lawyer, I don't hold her doing the best job she can for a client against her.

She knew he was guilty when she took the case. She didn't have to take it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by buckman

She knew he was guilty when she took the case. She didn't have to take it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and then I think she married him....

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

She knew he was guilty when she took the case. She didn't have to take it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She was asked by the Judge to take the case. That's not something you'd refuse lightly...Aren't even rapists presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Wait, we're talking about Hillary Clinton. I forgot...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

She was asked by the Judge to take the case. That's not something you'd refuse lightly...Aren't even rapists presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Wait, we're talking about Hillary Clinton. I forgot...

Hilary certainly didn't break any laws in doing what she did. But as far as I know, neither did Trump in his business deals, bankruptcies, etc. So again, why the double standard? Why do you give Hilary a pass, but criticize Trump for profiting from the misery of others?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

She was asked by the Judge to take the case. That's not something you'd refuse lightly...Aren't even rapists presumed innocent until proven guilty?

Wait, we're talking about Hillary Clinton. I forgot...

Yes she is guilty but it hasn't been proven yet (At least to you ) 😁
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

This was media crap; should Trump have been more careful with saying bombing, maybe. Is this a big deal, no, it shouldn't be. At least this time he didn't immediately tweet before even offering condolences and the bodies were still warm (thankfully no one died in these attacks) about 'thanks for telling me I was right about Islamic terrorism'

I have no idea what case you are referring to, but the jist is...?
She was a defense attorney, and her client was accused of rape.

Did he run up and down the courtroom aisle laughing about raping a child admitting he was guilty while she just danced and said 'hey look at me, making money off raped kids?'? Did he not deserve a fair trial? Public defenders get paid all the time to defend people like that, do you despise them as well? Sometimes #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people have funds and a private attorney is hired to defend them as their job. Sometimes those #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people go free, and yes, that sucks.

"Is this a big deal, no, it shouldn't be. "

It's not a big deal that 95% of the media is in the bag for one political party?


"I have no idea what case you are referring to, but the jist is...?"

The jist is this (and I think you knew it already, because you are pretty sharp)...if Spence doesn't like it when Trump profits off of other people's losses, I would genuinely like to know how the heck he reconciles that, with the fact that Hilary profited off of the rape of a little girl. Unless she was this guy's court-appointed attorney, then there is nothing in the ethics of the bar (pretend lawyers have ethics for a minute) that obligates an attorney to agree to represent every client that walks in the door. She calls herself a feminist? i don' t think Gloria Allred would have defended the guy.

If Hilary can profit from the misery of others, why can't Trump? Is that an unfair question?

I despise Trump as a person. I am not defending him, so you don't need to list his ethical flaws. I am asking why there is such an obvious, glaring, double-standard between what she gets away with, and what he gets away with. Telling me he's a jerk, doesn't come close to answering the question I asked.


"Did he not deserve a fair trial? "

For the millionth time...boy, liberals have a really hard time responding to what others actually say. I never said we should execute the guy without due process. I said that as a result of this case, she profited from someone else's misery. So if Spence implies that such sleazy profiteering renders one unfit to be POTUS, why does Spence only apply that standard to the GOP?

"Sometimes those #^&#^&#^&#^&ty people go free, and yes, that sucks"

That's right. So there is nothing unfair, to hold the people who benefit from that, responsible for their actions. Or at least, to hold them to the same standard, regardless of their political party.

I don't have a huge issue with what Hilary did in that case. What I have an issue with, is saying that it's OK if she profits from someone else's pain, but it's wrong when Trump does it.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So when Trump called it a bombing, all we knew was that it was an explosion, that's what you are saying? When he called it a bombing, there was no credible evidence to support that?

Can you back that up? I see a lot of general criticism here by you, but no facts to support said criticism. How do you know what Trump had been told about the event, at the time he called it a bombing? Or are you just assuming he screwed it up.

Yes Jim, at the time Trump said that it was just a reported unknown explosion. He jumped the gun to promote fear then this morning congratulated himself for it.

He has a mental disorder.

Also, since I don't think you responded on the other thread...you criticized Trump for profiting from other people's loss. How is that worse, than say, a defense lawyer cashing a nice paycheck, for defending someone who raped a child?

Please do some homework on this subject.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Yes Jim, at the time Trump said that it was just a reported unknown explosion. He jumped the gun to promote fear then this morning congratulated himself for it.

He has a mental disorder.


Please do some homework on this subject.

"Yes Jim, at the time Trump said that it was just a reported unknown explosion."

Boy, the information sources you must have! When Hilary kept flip-flopping on the cause of the Benghazi attack, you somehow knew that she wasn't flip-flopping for political convenience...rather, you knew that she was always simply responding to the latest intelligence. That must be a secret source of information, because despite the fact that I asked you many times, you chose not to share that data with me.

And here, you somehow know what Trump was aware of, and what he wasn't aware of, when he said it was a bomb. It couldn't be that someone told him by then it was a bomb, because if that were the case, you couldn't accuse him of fear-mongering. Nope, you have a source inside the Trump camp that's as knowledgeable as your source inside the Hilary camp, who told you that he had no valid reason to believe it was a bomb when he said such.

Amazing. And so fortunate for you, that these amazing sources that you won't reveal, always seem to praise Hilary, and always seem to paint Trump as an idiot. What a coincidence.

It's a coincidence. Right?

MAYBE Trump has access to better information than what's reported on TV.