In secretly recorded audio, Trump’s sister says he has ‘no principles’ and ‘you can’t trust him'

[jpn]

I think the biggest issue facing the Democrats right now is that their campaign seems to be running on the negative and on some strange idea that image is more of a priority than issues.

I hear you. The thing is, Democrats like me see Trump as something far worse that just someone they have policy disagreements with. I have policy disagreements with Mitt Romney but I don't see him as someone who is dangerous to our democracy. Trump and his Vichy Republicans are dangerous to our democracy. They threaten our democratic institutions.

It's hard to not spend a considerable amount of time noting this reality when discussing the next election.

 

[Torus34]

The Democrats cannot win on a smear campaign. Therein lies the problem. It doesn't matter how many recordings there are, or what a sister said or what a fired employee alleges. None of this matters in the voting booth. People who don't want Republicans in office have already made up their minds. All of this "tell all" is simply more than gossip within the clique. However, it doesn't convince the swing voters of anything. It simply reaffirms how awful Trump is to people who already think he's awful. If the Democrats want to win, they need to stop the pettiness and come up with a platform that is both appealing and sensible. Letting riots continue and placating criminals is neither sensible nor appealing. Across the board higher taxation is not sensible or appealing. And trying to narrow the parameters of freedom in this nation is a big red flag. If the Democrats want to win, they need to promote their platform in a positive light - whatever that may be - or at least DEFINE it. Thanks!!

Hi!

Thanks for your response. Round about November 4th, we'll have some sort of idea as to how this all shakes out.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

[jpn]

If the Democrats want to win, they need to stop the pettiness and come up with a platform that is both appealing and sensible. Letting riots continue and placating criminals is neither sensible nor appealing. Across the board higher taxation is not sensible or appealing. And trying to narrow the parameters of freedom in this nation is a big red flag. If the Democrats want to win, they need to promote their platform in a positive light - whatever that may be - or at least DEFINE it. Thanks!!

What you describe is a platform that is not "appealing" or "sensible" to you. The platform is there, and it's quite appealing and quite sensible.

Democrats aren't happy with mindless rioting, which is what conservatives wish to see. Democrats see peaceful protesters in reaction to relentless violence by the police despite decades of attempts to corral it. There is violence, sometimes by out-of-control protesters (and punk kids who are there just for the fun of it) and sometimes by out-of-control cops.

Please point to me the Democratic leader calling for "across the board higher taxation." The majority of Americans, not just Democrats, support higher taxes on the rich. For example, special tax treatment of capital gains is little more than a con by the rich to keep their taxes low. And the latest corporate tax cut was inexcusable.

Narrowing the parameters of freedom? What are you talking about? Are you referring to following the recommendations of health care professionals and wearing a mask so you don't infect others?

The Democrats' platform is right out there for anyone to view. Joe Biden's agenda is right out there for anyone to view.

If the Democrats spent less time on it this convention, it's because we're in the Time of Trump. In such times, mulling fine points of policy would be a bit like discussing the color of the drapes while the house burned down.

 

[rocket88]

Blind party loyalty is true on both sides, albeit it does seem mindless. I think the biggest issue facing the Democrats right now is that their campaign seems to be running on the negative and on some strange idea that image is more of a priority than issues. I don't hear a lot of policy defining, just a lot of Trump bashing or worrying about the color of people's skin. The current Democrat VP nominee was chosen in large part because of sex and skin color, or at least there was a lot of press touting the pressure to make it a mandate. Strikes me as terribly superficial, and frankly, kinda stupid. If they just chose somebody based on experience - no matter what color or sex - it would at least look like a genuine interest in aptitude. I think all of the negativity and superficiality is going to be an obstacle on election day unless the Democrats can get together a sincere, cogent way forward. Thanks!!

Neither campaign has any cogent policy proposals. Cons don't care as long as they are "owning the libs." Libs just want Trump gone. Welcome to America.

 

[Logophile]

What you describe is a platform that is not "appealing" or "sensible" to you. The platform is there, and it's quite appealing and quite sensible.

Democrats aren't happy with mindless rioting, which is what conservatives wish to see. Democrats see peaceful protesters in reaction to relentless violence by the police despite decades of attempts to corral it. There is violence, sometimes by out-of-control protesters (and punk kids who are there just for the fun of it) and sometimes by out-of-control cops.

Please point to me the Democratic leader calling for "across the board higher taxation." The majority of Americans, not just Democrats, support higher taxes on the rich. For example, special tax treatment of capital gains is little more than a con by the rich to keep their taxes low. And the latest corporate tax cut was inexcusable.

Narrowing the parameters of freedom? What are you talking about? Are you referring to following the recommendations of health care professionals and wearing a mask so you don't infect others?

The Democrats' platform is right out there for anyone to view. Joe Biden's agenda is right out there for anyone to view.

If the Democrats spent less time on it this convention, it's because we're in the Time of Trump. In such times, mulling fine points of policy would be a bit like discussing the color of the drapes while the house burned down.

I'll start with the parameters of freedom. Democrats are notoriously in favor of gun control. Even a lot of Democrats don't like THAT. Now, how gun control would shape itself is inconsequential to just the phrase "gun control." It terrifies people, and words like tyranny and totalitarianism, not to mention Communism, start floating around in people's heads. Across the board taxation is EXACTLY what the Democrats have historically done. All but the very poor - who are supposed to reap the benefits but somehow don't seem to - are subject to tax increases. Now I know this because I've been around for quite awhile and have seen Democratic administrations come and go, and inevitably, taxes go up with them, and down with the opposition, Mr. "read my lips, no new taxes" excluded. Capital gains tax was flagrantly abused. The Democrats decided - back in Bill's day - that the definition of a capital gain was so stringent that I knew of middle class farmers in their 70s who literally could not afford to sell their farm or assets so they could retire. The government wanted a huge percentage of their proceeds because they owned everything outright, which is usually what happens when you've worked all your life. Is that fair?? Now, a tax on the outrageously rich seems reasonable, but the outrageously rich will just move their base, and call some more obliging country home. So what will the Democrats do?? They will tax the you know what out of people who may have a couple of million stashed away for their kiddies or want to sell a piece of land. And income tax will go through the roof, because the Democratic platform is to tax more rather than pare down. Btw, before anybody is tempted to go there, we can't measure Trump's tenure on spending because we have an epidemic. I'm talking about general policy. Lastly, to your first point, Democratic governors and mayors parlaying with people who take over streets and tear down statues is a form of back slapping, and like it or not, the Democrats have to own it because so much of their leadership stood by and watched public property destroyed with a sympathetic smile. And they continue to do so. If a Democrat wants to win the White House, he has to boisterously support law and order. Independents are going to decide this election. The last thing people want to be is scared, and mob rule is becoming synonymous with Democratic leniency. That is why guns are flying off the shelves, and that does not bode well for a Democratic presidency. Thanks!!

 

[Citizen]

The Democrats cannot win on a smear campaign. Therein lies the problem. It doesn't matter how many recordings there are, or what a sister said or what a fired employee alleges. None of this matters in the voting booth. People who don't want Republicans in office have already made up their minds. All of this "tell all" is simply more than gossip within the clique. However, it doesn't convince the swing voters of anything. It simply reaffirms how awful Trump is to people who already think he's awful. If the Democrats want to win, they need to stop the pettiness and come up with a platform that is both appealing and sensible. Letting riots continue and placating criminals is neither sensible nor appealing. Across the board higher taxation is not sensible or appealing. And trying to narrow the parameters of freedom in this nation is a big red flag. If the Democrats want to win, they need to promote their platform in a positive light - whatever that may be - or at least DEFINE it. Thanks!!

But Hillary was ill and a criminal.....right?

 

[Citizen]

True. And Maryanne herself had to quit her position as a judge to stop an investigation into her tax evasion.

Tax evasion runs in the family

 

[jpn]

I'll start with the parameters of freedom. Democrats are notoriously in favor of gun control. Even a lot of Democrats don't like THAT. Now, how gun control would shape itself is inconsequential to just the phrase "gun control." It terrifies people, and words like tyranny and totalitarianism, not to mention Communism, start floating around in people's heads. Across the board taxation is EXACTLY what the Democrats have historically done. All but the very poor - who are supposed to reap the benefits but somehow don't seem to - are subject to tax increases. Now I know this because I've been around for quite awhile and have seen Democratic administrations come and go, and inevitably, taxes go up with them, and down with the opposition. Capital gains tax was flagrantly abused. The Democrats decided - back in Bill's day - that the definition of a capital gain was so stringent that I knew of middle class farmers in their 70s who literally could not afford to sell their farm or assets so they could retire. The government wanted a huge percentage of their proceeds because they owned everything outright, which is usually what happens when you've worked all your life. Is that fair?? Now, a tax on the outrageously rich seems reasonable, but the outrageously rich will just move their base, and call some more obliging country home. So what will the Democrats do?? They will tax the you know what out of people who may have a couple of million stashed away for their kiddies or want to sell a piece of land. And income tax will go through the roof, because the Democratic platform is to tax more rather than pare down. Btw, before anybody is tempted to go there, we can't measure Trump's tenure on spending because we have an epidemic. I'm talking about general policy. Lastly, to your first point, Democratic governors and mayors parlaying with people who take over streets and tear down statues is a form of back slapping, and like it or not, the Democrats have to own it because so much of their leadership stood by and watched public property destroyed with a sympathetic smile. And they continue to do so. If a Democrat wants to win the White House, he has to boisterously support law and order. Independents are going to decide this election. The last thing people want to be is scared, and mob rule is becoming synonymous with Democratic leniency. That is why guns are flying off the shelves, and that does not bode well for a Democratic presidency. Thanks!!

Oh, how the right obsesses with guns. Should the mentally ill be allowed to own guns? Maybe you think so. I don't. Are high volume magazines really necessary? You probably think so, I don't. We probably aren't that far apart on sensible gun regulation. Dropping the hysterics would be a good first step.

Taxes. Again the hysterics. Taxes "through the roof." You make lots of assertions, but point to no specific laws enacted. Over the past 40 years, the total tax burden in the US has declined from about 18 percent of GDP to about 16 percent of GDP. Most of that is the consequence of the wealthy paying less in tax. We're going to have to come to grips with the deficit once the adults are back in charge. Reversing the scandalous corporate tax cut of 2017 will be a good start, raising the capital gains tax to where regular income is taxed will be great, eliminating the cap on the payroll tax, increasing the tax rate on the highest incomes will all help reverse the deficit which once again, the Republicans blew up.

Are you owning police violence? Do you think it's imaginary? That's what the protests were about. Why do you avoid mentioning the whole reason behind the protests? You write that "the last thing people want to be is scared." Here's a clue: black people are afraid of jogging in their neighborhoods because of the risk of a cop gunning them down. Blacks have been complaining about this for decades and no one believed them until cell phones with cameras came along. The reaction by cops across the nation to peaceful protesters was a disgrace and opened the eyes of Americans. Well, many of us, anyway.

If you are concerned about guns flying off the shelves, you may want to ratchet down the hysterics a few notches.

 

[Citizen]

I'll start with the parameters of freedom. Democrats are notoriously in favor of gun control. Even a lot of Democrats don't like THAT. Now, how gun control would shape itself is inconsequential to just the phrase "gun control." It terrifies people, and words like tyranny and totalitarianism, not to mention Communism, start floating around in people's heads. Across the board taxation is EXACTLY what the Democrats have historically done. All but the very poor - who are supposed to reap the benefits but somehow don't seem to - are subject to tax increases. Now I know this because I've been around for quite awhile and have seen Democratic administrations come and go, and inevitably, taxes go up with them, and down with the opposition, Mr. "read my lips, no new taxes" excluded. Capital gains tax was flagrantly abused. The Democrats decided - back in Bill's day - that the definition of a capital gain was so stringent that I knew of middle class farmers in their 70s who literally could not afford to sell their farm or assets so they could retire. The government wanted a huge percentage of their proceeds because they owned everything outright, which is usually what happens when you've worked all your life. Is that fair?? Now, a tax on the outrageously rich seems reasonable, but the outrageously rich will just move their base, and call some more obliging country home. So what will the Democrats do?? They will tax the you know what out of people who may have a couple of million stashed away for their kiddies or want to sell a piece of land. And income tax will go through the roof, because the Democratic platform is to tax more rather than pare down. Btw, before anybody is tempted to go there, we can't measure Trump's tenure on spending because we have an epidemic. I'm talking about general policy. Lastly, to your first point, Democratic governors and mayors parlaying with people who take over streets and tear down statues is a form of back slapping, and like it or not, the Democrats have to own it because so much of their leadership stood by and watched public property destroyed with a sympathetic smile. And they continue to do so. If a Democrat wants to win the White House, he has to boisterously support law and order. Independents are going to decide this election. The last thing people want to be is scared, and mob rule is becoming synonymous with Democratic leniency. That is why guns are flying off the shelves, and that does not bode well for a Democratic presidency. Thanks!!

What you call parlaying with people who take over streets and tear down monuments is happening under Trump’s watch. Trump’s tax cuts helped the rich, not you. Your taxes won’t increase under Biden. Gun control does not mean taking away your guns. It means that if you are a crazy ass, you should not own one.

 

[Geoist]

She's officially a deep stater now.

Wasn't she appointed by Bill Clinton? Yeah, they'll start pointing to that.

 

[Geoist]

But there are Republicans who only voted for Trump due to party loyalty. The DNC had traditional Republicans speak at their event to lure these loyal traditionalists away from Trump.

Pretty sure 98% of the GOP base has already written those Republican speakers off as 'RINOs'.

 

[Geoist]

Hardly anyone from the Trumpcult has put in their 2 cents on this thread. Is it because it is still the weekend and we're waiting on the marching orders from conservative media figureheads?

 

[NWRatCon]

The Democrats cannot win on a smear campaign. Therein lies the problem. It doesn't matter how many recordings there are, or what a sister said or what a fired employee alleges. None of this matters in the voting booth. People who don't want Republicans in office have already made up their minds. All of this "tell all" is simply more than gossip within the clique. However, it doesn't convince the swing voters of anything. It simply reaffirms how awful Trump is to people who already think he's awful. If the Democrats want to win, they need to stop the pettiness and come up with a platform that is both appealing and sensible. Letting riots continue and placating criminals is neither sensible nor appealing. Across the board higher taxation is not sensible or appealing. And trying to narrow the parameters of freedom in this nation is a big red flag. If the Democrats want to win, they need to promote their platform in a positive light - whatever that may be - or at least DEFINE it. Thanks!!

Thanks for that. I was impressed with how many words one can use to say, basically, nothing. I suspect you haven't researched the issue at all, or even watched any of the ads.

 

[CaughtInThe]

you have to be a "mark" not to know this stuff.

 

[NWRatCon]

What you describe is a platform that is not "appealing" or "sensible" to you. The platform is there, and it's quite appealing and quite sensible.

Democrats aren't happy with mindless rioting, which is what conservatives wish to see. Democrats see peaceful protesters in reaction to relentless violence by the police despite decades of attempts to corral it. There is violence, sometimes by out-of-control protesters (and punk kids who are there just for the fun of it) and sometimes by out-of-control cops.

Please point to me the Democratic leader calling for "across the board higher taxation." The majority of Americans, not just Democrats, support higher taxes on the rich. For example, special tax treatment of capital gains is little more than a con by the rich to keep their taxes low. And the latest corporate tax cut was inexcusable.

Narrowing the parameters of freedom? What are you talking about? Are you referring to following the recommendations of health care professionals and wearing a mask so you don't infect others?

The Democrats' platform is right out there for anyone to view. Joe Biden's agenda is right out there for anyone to view.

If the Democrats spent less time on it this convention, it's because we're in the Time of Trump. In such times, mulling fine points of policy would be a bit like discussing the color of the drapes while the house burned down.

Yeah, that!

I am tired of even the erudite dissembling that passes for "debate" here. There is ample evidence, based upon detailed plans and rational discussion, to demonstrate that Democrats have an agenda, have an agenda that works, and have a vision for America's future. The rest is just whiny window dressing to disguise the lack of an agenda on the "conservative" side. There is simply no "there" there, and there hasn't been for decades. In this regard, Trump is a typical Republican, but the party faithful simply refuse to see it.

 

[Crosscheck]

He hasn't changed from yrs before he ran for prez.

"It is what it is".

 

[NWRatCon]

I'll start with the parameters of freedom.

Let's parse that bull**** a bit, shall we?

Democrats are notoriously in favor of gun control. Even a lot of Democrats don't like THAT.

Poll: Number Of Americans Who Favor Stricter Gun Laws Continues To Grow (NPR)

The percentage of Americans who favor stricter gun laws is on the rise, though significant partisan divisions persist. A Pew Research Center survey conducted in September found that 60% of Americans say gun laws should be tougher, up from 57% last year and 52% in 2017.

The study, released this week, indicates that while a solid majority of Americans favor stricter gun laws, support remains split down party lines. Eighty-six percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said gun laws should be stricter than they are today, compared with 31% of their Republican counterparts.

When one delves into specific measures one finds significant support for many of them, like closing the "gun show loophole", red flag laws, and universal licensing. Most Americans support these 4 types of gun legislation, poll says (PBS)

Policies with the strongest support include more funding for mental health screening and treatment, mandatory background checks and licensing for gun purchases, and passage of a national “red-flag” law,

Now, how gun control would shape itself is inconsequential to just the phrase "gun control."

That's just meaningless babble, to disguise the vacuity of the comment.

It terrifies people, and words like tyranny and totalitarianism, not to mention Communism, start floating around in people's heads.

A) "Indirect pronoun reference", B) Not people, your people, and really only a small slice of them. And I would beg to differ, anyway.

Those labels are thrown about constantly without any reference to specific policies. They are emotional labels intended to do, just as you have done, be "emotional" rather than thoughtful. In some cases - say for example, the police actions in Lafayette Square and Portland - they have resonance because they are accurate. Anyone with an ounce of respect for civil liberties would recognize that.

Across the board taxation is EXACTLY what the Democrats have historically done.

Absolute, partisan talking point BULL****. Of course you have no references for that, because it isn't true. Put up, or shove it.

Capital gains tax was flagrantly abused.

On this we agree, but not for the reasons you posit. Capital gains "tax breaks" are simply a way to transfer wealth to the wealthy. As a fiscal matter, they are meaningless. On this I can supply a good deal of information: Substantial Income of Wealthy Households Escapes Annual Taxation Or Enjoys Special Tax Breaks (CPBB)
The Rich are Happy with Capital Gains Taxes (Medium)
I can go on at length, but there are character limits.

The Democrats decided - back in Bill's day - that the definition of a capital gain was so stringent that I knew of middle class farmers in their 70s who literally could not afford to sell their farm or assets so they could retire.

More bull****.

The government wanted a huge percentage of their proceeds because they owned everything outright, which is usually what happens when you've worked all your life. Is that fair??

What is fair is to treat all income as income.... I love the sob story, if only it were true... It is just a more elaborate version of Reagan's "welfare queen" BS.

Now, can we get back to the actual topic of the thread? Which is: In secretly recorded audio, Trump’s sister says he has ‘no principles’ and ‘you can’t trust him'

 

[Logophile]

Let's parse that bull**** a bit, shall we?

Poll: Number Of Americans Who Favor Stricter Gun Laws Continues To Grow (NPR)When one delves into specific measures one finds significant support for many of them, like closing the "gun show loophole", red flag laws, and universal licensing. Most Americans support these 4 types of gun legislation, poll says (PBS)
That's just meaningless babble, to disguise the vacuity of the comment.
A) "Indirect pronoun reference", B) Not people, your people, and really only a small slice of them. And I would beg to differ, anyway.

Those labels are thrown about constantly without any reference to specific policies. They are emotional labels intended to do, just as you have done, be "emotional" rather than thoughtful. In some cases - say for example, the police actions in Lafayette Square and Portland - they have resonance because they are accurate. Anyone with an ounce of respect for civil liberties would recognize that.
Absolute, partisan talking point BULL****. Of course you have no references for that, because it isn't true. Put up, or shove it.
On this we agree, but not for the reasons you posit. Capital gains "tax breaks" are simply a way to transfer wealth to the wealthy. As a fiscal matter, they are meaningless. On this I can supply a good deal of information: Substantial Income of Wealthy Households Escapes Annual Taxation Or Enjoys Special Tax Breaks (CPBB)
The Rich are Happy with Capital Gains Taxes (Medium)
I can go on at length, but there are character limits.

More bull****. What is fair is to treat all income as income.... I love the sob story, if only it were true... It is just a more elaborate version of Reagan's "welfare queen" BS.

Now, can we get back to the actual topic of the thread? Which is: In secretly recorded audio, Trump’s sister says he has ‘no principles’ and ‘you can’t trust him'

How bout you get back to the thread and take your ill-mannered, meaningless discourse with you. As per the topic, I'm sure you enjoy all the pettiness you can present, stooping so low as to even to drool over a sibling's complaints about a brother, secretly taped of course. Assuredly, if the best you can do is be overtly rude, you have very little to offer. Thanks!!

 

[NWRatCon]

How bout you get back to the thread and take your ill-mannered, meaningless discourse with you. As per the topic, I'm sure you enjoy all the pettiness you can present, stooping so low as to even to drool over a sibling's complaints about a brother, secretly taped of course. Assuredly, if the best you can do is be overtly rude, you have very little to offer. Thanks!!

I guess the truth is painful, huh? Got caught out by reality. It would be simpler if you just :surrender

Oh, but that would be the honorable thing...

 

[digitusmedius]

I don't know if I agree with secretly recording someone like this.

What she says is exactly what so many others who have worked with him have said.

Trump has to be the biggest con man this country has ever seen.

Compared with trying to strongarm a foreign leader under threat from Russian attack to manufacture evidence against a political opponent this is the high road. Has Judge Barry commented on this?

 

[digitusmedius]

How bout you get back to the thread and take your ill-mannered, meaningless discourse with you. As per the topic, I'm sure you enjoy all the pettiness you can present, stooping so low as to even to drool over a sibling's complaints about a brother, secretly taped of course. Assuredly, if the best you can do is be overtly rude, you have very little to offer. Thanks!!

Remind me. Who are the snowflakes, again?

 

[NWRatCon]

And who are the snowflakes, again?

I was "ill-mannered" because I demonstrated (with citations!) the opposite of the vacuous claims.

 

[digitusmedius]

I was "ill-mannered" because I demonstrated (with citations!) the opposite of the vacuous claims.

How very rude!!!

 

[digitusmedius]

Well we all know.what a scumbag trump is. This is just more validation

Now.what.does this say about those.who continue to support him?

That they're "Very Fine People?"

 

[Plasmaball]

How bout you get back to the thread and take your ill-mannered, meaningless discourse with you. As per the topic, I'm sure you enjoy all the pettiness you can present, stooping so low as to even to drool over a sibling's complaints about a brother, secretly taped of course. Assuredly, if the best you can do is be overtly rude, you have very little to offer. Thanks!!

Low like making fun of a handicap reporter?
Low like makingnfun of a womans face?
Low like making fun of gold star families?

Sit down before you hurt yourself