General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 383

The Difference Between the Trump and Clinton ‘Scandals’

Over the weekend I mentioned signs of the press beginning to “normalize” Donald Trump. This was especially so in equating “doubts,” “questions,” “clouds,” and the “atmosphere of entitlement” that surrounded Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, with the actual offenses, lawsuits, bankruptcies, unpaid contractors, anti-trust settlements, bogus-visa issues, and other legal problems surrounding Donald Trump and his enterprises. Paul Waldman of the WaPo has an eye-opening catalog of them here.

 

i think this is why different people in this thread can simultaneously complain that she's being treated unfairly and getting off easy.

 

I need to turn off the internet for a bit.

 

They're both corrupt. I think that's the answer. The press normalizes Trump, yes, and that is an issue. They've also normalized Hillary's transgressions, so let us not pretend that there isn't acceptance of evil on both ends. The so-called rational candidate supports coups that murders activists, for example.

 

I don't know how to answer that given that the premise just isn't true. Clinton has had plenty of stuff that hasn't been brought into the discussion at all. For instance, as mentioned in that article, her acceptance of for-profit education money.

This was the best news of the week, even though ITT only accounts for a small fraction of the billions of dollars of student loan debt that is acquired towards gaining useless fucking degrees. If a for-profit institution can't place graduate in a way comparable to state institutions, they shouldn't be eligible for federal student loans. For instance, Arizona Summit Law and Charlotte Law takes students who have no business being in any law program. As a result, only 25-60% even pass the bar and only half of those get jobs. That's all fine and dandy (it's not), but the average law student from these schools acquires $150,000 in student debt. That's criminal and I have no idea how it can possibly not be illegal.

 

I think there are evils on both sides. I just think one is light speed ahead of the other in that equation.

 

I think it depends on whether you prefer overt or covert evil.


Has Hillary commented on the Dakota pipeline? I wonder if her silence has anything to do with this:


"This comes as a new investigation has revealed that more than two dozen major banks and financial institutions are helping finance the Dakota Access pipeline. The investigation was published by the research outlet LittleSis. It details how Bank of America, HSBC, UBS, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase and other financial institutions have, combined, extended a $3.75 billion credit line to Energy Transfer, the parent company of Dakota Access LLC."


DN!

 

No, I think Trump is *far* more evil. Point blank. I truly do.

 

Ann Coulter got absolutely throttled in the latest Comedy Central roast.

 

She doesn't care. She's just happy people are giving her attention.

 

I truly believe Clinton represents the pinnacle of a shift within liberalism that made Trump possible. There's no doubt he is worse,but there's little reason to ignore the racialized, Nixonian appeal to law and order that characterized her career.

 

Bloody and disastrous coups and authoritarian regime changes in Hondorus, Lybia, Ukraine, and Hondorus all tied to Hillary. Silencing rape victims. Promoting policies that jail impoverished minorities. Pushing environmentally dangerous practices for corporate gain globally. She's plenty evil.
I couldn't tell you who's more "evil" but Clinton has more blood on her hands, and is responsible for more broken and impoverished minority communities than Trump. But of course I am afraid to see what Trump would do with that kind of political power. He's a walking disaster.

 

I don't see it as "ignoring" when we're asking media outlets to cover transgressions for each candidate equally. The focus on the Clinton foundation far outweighs the numerous issues related to Trump's groups and business ventures. To be informed voters, we should know that, I'm sure you can agree to that.

 

Owen Smith's Campaign Accidentally Tweeted Login Details To 16,000 People

lol

 

"Ann Coulter is one of the most repugant, hateful, hatchet-faced bitches alive. But it's not too late to change, Ann: you could kill yourself." - Jimmy Carr

She legitimately does look like an unhinged person every time I see her. Just an unsettling way about her.

 

OK this really needs to stop. You're comparing apples and oranges (pun intended). You can and rightfully should hate Hillary for the things she's done but you have no basis to say she is better or worse than another person who has never had the chance to do said things. It's common sense, you guys are smarter than this, don't be clouded by your hatred.

How about this. Trump absolutely loves Rudy Giuliani and vice versa. If we say they're comparable politicians and seeing how Rudy treated non white new Yorkers, i would say he's worse than Hillary at least on that end. Hillary said super predators but Rudy put any black man that wore baggy jeans in jail.

 

I don't agree with the premise that both candidates aren't being criticized to a significant extent. There are a number of outlets reporting on just that. The more unsettling thing to me is that, in the case of both candidates, their most dangerous ideas are considered legitimate.

 

Just a quick time out: I know we've been trying to get more comments from female posters but the b-word has been springing up in posts and in quotes, maybe we can censor that or... not say the word? Thanks.

 

No one is saying she is better or worse. They both represent opposite ends of a white supremacist and oligarchic spectrum. That Hillary HAS done such things, things that make her comparable to Trump in terms of their radical right-wing appeal, should give one pause.

 

Also, it's incredibly ironic how predictive that Intercept article was.

*article about people muting Clinton criticisms and claiming the media is against her and should be attacking Trump*
*responses muting Clinton criticisms and claiming the media is against her and should be attacking Trump*

 

My edit was:
But of course I am afraid to see what Trump would do with that kind of political power. He's a walking disaster.

So I did acknowledge that. But you're downplaying Hillary's role in pushing for laws that target and jail black people and that's dishonest on your part. It was much more of a role than "loving" Giuliani, which my Uncle is guilty of. And I'm serious about the impact Hillary has had on volatile countries oversees. She is responsible for an enormous amount death and destruction. I can't live with supporting anyone like her even in the smallest way.

 

And that's a fundamental issue with the acceptance of neoliberalism and capitalist politics, we agree on this. I just don't think it's implicit that we want to ignore issues with the Clinton foundation when we ask for similar coverage of what Trump has done.