Killary Clinton, The Donald, or Jill Stein: The US Election

[Laura]

I have a question and maybe it's already been addressed, if so, point me to the post.

Has Donald Trump ever been accused of killing people who got in his way climbing the ladder of success?

 

[Joe]

I have a question and maybe it's already been addressed, if so, point me to the post.

Has Donald Trump ever been accused of killing people who got in his way climbing the ladder of success?

Not that I am aware of.

 

[Ca.]

This is what's out there..Like father like son

Stephen Hawking Angers Trump Supporters with Baffling Array of Long Words
By Andy Borowitz , May 31, 2016
http://www.newyorker.com//borowitz-report/stephen-hawking-angers-trump-supporters-with-baffling-array-of-long-words

LONDON (The Borowitz Report)—The theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking angered supporters of Donald J. Trump on Monday by responding to a question about the billionaire with a baffling array of long words.

Speaking to a television interviewer in London, Hawking called Trump “a demagogue who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator,” a statement that many Trump supporters believed was intentionally designed to confuse them.

Moments after Hawking made the remark, Google reported a sharp increase in searches for the terms “demagogue,” “denominator,” and “Stephen Hawking.”

“For a so-called genius, this was an epic fail,” Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said. “If Professor Hawking wants to do some damage, maybe he should try talking in English next time.”

Later in the day, Hawking attempted to clarify his remark about the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee, telling a reporter,

“Trump bad man. Real bad man.”

Why The New Child Rape Case Filed Against Donald Trump Should Not Be Ignored
Updated Jul 01, 2016
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html
Snippet:

Mr. Trump has a long history of debasing women he’s worked with, crossing the line on a regular basis. He’s taken lifelong joy in objectifying women, including his proclamation:

“Women, you have to treat ‘em like shit.

Jane Doe says that Mr. Trump “initiated sexual contact” with her on four occasions in 1994. Since she was thirteen at the time, consent is not an issue. If Mr. Trump had any type sexual contact with her in 1994, it was a crime.

On the fourth incident, she says Mr. Trump tied her to a bed and forcibly raped her, in a “savage sexual attack,” while she pleaded with him to stop. She says Mr. Trump violently struck her in the face. She says that afterward, if she ever revealed what he had done,

Mr. Trump threatened that she and her family would be “physically harmed if not killed.”

She says she has been in fear of him ever since.

New York’s five year statute of limitations on this claim - the legal deadline for filing — has long since run. However, Jane Doe’s attorney, Thomas Meagher, argues in his court filing that because she was threatened by Mr. Trump, she has been under duress all this time, and therefore she should be permitted additional time to come forward. Legally, this is calling “tolling” - stopping the clock, allowing more time to file the case. As a result, the complaint alleges, Jane Doe did not have “freedom of will to institute suit earlier in time.” He cites two New York cases which I have read and which do support tolling

Two unusual documents (https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits#fullscreen) are attached to Jane Doe’s complaints - sworn declarations attesting to the facts. The first is from Jane Doe herself, telling her horrific story, including the allegation that Jeffrey Epstein also raped her and threatened her into silence, and this stunner:

Defendant Epstein then attempted to strike me about the head with his closed fists while he angrily screamed at me that he, Defendant Epstein, should have been the one who took my virginity, not Defendant Trump . . .

And this one:

Defendant Trump stated that I shouldn’t ever say anything if I didn’t want to disappear like Maria, a 12-year-old female that was forced to be involved in the third incident with Defendant Trump and that I had not seen since that third incident, and that he was capable of having my whole family killed.

The second declaration is even more astonishing, because it is signed by “Tiffany Doe”, Mr. Epstein’s “party planner” from 1991-2000. Tiffany Doe says that her duties were “to get attractive adolescent women to attend these parties.” (Adolescents are, legally, children.

Cher Accuses Donald Trump’s Son of Killing Her ‘Friend
22:54 29.04.2016
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160429/1038865670/cher-accuses-trump-son-murder.html
Snip:

At this point, her Twitter followers lost their minds, and journalists begged for someone who could explain what she was talking about.

It seems, however, that the music legend was referring to her animal friends, and the fact that Trump’s sons are big game trophy hunters, judging by the photos she subsequently tweeted.

https://twitter.com/cher/status/725927339092123648/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I found two articles. They are not directly accusing him, however describe tragic events, with him in the background.

"nytimes.com/1989/10/11/nyregion/copter-crash-kills-3-aides-of-trump.html"

"alternet.org/election-2016/3-ways-donald-trump-has-behaved-sociopath-toward-workers"

 

[Nević Nenad]

I found two articles. They are not directly accusing him, however describe tragic events, with him in the background.

"nytimes.com/1989/10/11/nyregion/copter-crash-kills-3-aides-of-trump.html"

"alternet.org/election-2016/3-ways-donald-trump-has-behaved-sociopath-toward-workers"

The first link describes the tragic crash with no indications that Trump was involved, just that his people killed. Plus, the helicopter wasn't from Trump's fleet but leased from Paramount.

For the second, just "usual" behavior for any big time contractor. Actually Trump is a sweet lullaby compared with any big European or even worse Asian contractor.

 

[Mal7]

In 1962 there were protests at the admission of the first black student to be admitted to the University of Mississippi, so we have progressed since then.

I would suggest that while the narratives about equality between races, sexes, etc have improved, little has substantially changed. While it is today universally considered outrageous to go around lynching blacks, all-too-many Americans have little or no problem with (largely) white mobs in uniforms shooting (usually poor) blacks dead in broad daylight.

In raw numbers, in 2015 the US police shot dead more white people than black people. That may surprise some people. Blacks are still being shot disproportionately high though, as blacks make up only 14.4% of the US population.

http://visualoop.com/infographics/965-fatal-police-shootings-in-2015

"A Guardian investigation found that in 2015, 7.3 per million black people in the US were killed by the police compared to 2.9 per million white people."
- https://www.theguardian.com/news/reality-check/2016/jul/11/study-finds-no-racial-bias-police-shootings-data

Of course, even one killing is too many. In an ideal society (utopia), things would no doubt be very different. Sometimes I wonder at what seems a technological anomaly, that we can land people on the Moon and bring them back to Earth again, but haven't yet figured out a way for law-enforcement to effectively non-lethally subdue a person.

 

[Mal7]

I found two articles. They are not directly accusing him, however describe tragic events, with him in the background.

"nytimes.com/1989/10/11/nyregion/copter-crash-kills-3-aides-of-trump.html"

Trump writes about this event in the first chapter "Now for the Hard Part" of his book Trump: Surviving at the Top (1990, co-authored with Charles Leerhsen, pp. 13-20).

To summarize, Trump writes about how great these three employees were (5 people died in total in the accident) and how tragic and sad it was that this happened.

The helicopter those men were on should never have been allowed to fly. As it turned out, the rotors had split apart in midair. We are now in court with Agusta, the aircraft's Italian manufacturer, and we expect to make them pay dearly. But, of course, no matter how much we win, Steve, Mark, Jon, and the two helicopter pilots are gone. That tragedy will be a waste of five young lives.

- page 19.

Something else I found interesting in this same book, was that Trump was presenting some of the same kinds of political arguments in this book from 1990 that he is talking about today, e.g.

Americans simply don't get the respect and deference we deserve as a great power, the undisputed leader in both military and economic strength. I thought it was brilliant when Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - countries in which many people live in mansions - stood by and allowed us to police the Persian Gulf for them (free of charge).

I think America should call on its corporate leaders, independent dealmakers, and other nonpolitical public figures who emerged during the past two decades to help us forge a new relationship with the rest of the world. [ . . .]
If I were selected to serve on this council, I know the first thing I'd propose: the imposition of a 20 percent tax on imports from Japan, Germany, and other countries that don't play by the rules. That money, which would amount to billions of dollars - could reduce the federal deficit and pay for education, housing and medical care in poor areas throughout America.

America has been weak not just in dealing with other nations but in dealing with our internal troubles, such as drug abuse and rampant crime.

Whenever I've taken a stand like that in public, people ask me if I have any plans to run for elective office. The answer is no. I'm not a politician. I wouldn't want to get involved in the compromises, the glad-handing, and all the other demeaning things you have to do to get votes. [. . .]

But do I think I could get elected? At one time I would have said yes, probably. But now, since my marital problems and business pressures have been dragged through the newspapers, I'm less sure. In any case, I'd have to face one big obstacle if I ever did make a serious run for public office: Americans have become so accustomed to professional politicians that when they are faced with a strong personality - a man or woman of action - they are afraid, or at least very wary.
[. . .]
When we fear leaders of great passion, though, what we often forget is that the other side fears them too. I remember reading that Hitler, as he rose to power during his early years, continually talked to the people around him about Winston Churchill. 'Keep an eye on that man,' he kept saying. 'He's going to be one of our biggest problems.' The English politicians criticized Churchill for calling Hitler a mad dog; it wasn't diplomatic - in fact, they said, it was downright inflammatory. Yet Hitler, in his way, respected Churchill, whom he recognized as not just another government official but rather an advocate for the English people - a man who would never stop pushing and pressuring until he got what he wanted. And Hitler was right about that, of course. When Hitler's people told him that Churchill was politically dead, no longer a problem, Hitler stated that Churchill would re-emerge - 'People like that never die.'

One of our biggest problems today is that we have too few advocates. What we have instead are too many weaklings and compromisers."

- quotes from Trump: Surviving at the Top (1990), pages 221-227.

 

[luc]

In raw numbers, in 2015 the US police shot dead more white people than black people. That may surprise some people. Blacks are still being shot disproportionately high though, as blacks make up only 14.4% of the US population.

Then why do you bring up the raw numbers? When comparing such things, the absolute numbers are utterly meaningless, worse yet, they are misleading and could lead to people excusing racist, pathological behavior.

Of course, even one killing is too many. In an ideal society (utopia), things would no doubt be very different. Sometimes I wonder at what seems a technological anomaly, that we can land people on the Moon and bring them back to Earth again, but haven't yet figured out a way for law-enforcement to effectively non-lethally subdue a person.

I don't know if you mean that seriously (i.e. you really wonder why they don't use non-lethal means even though the technology is available), but if so, the answer to that question is in Political Ponerology, Laura's writings and all over the forum. It's the same answer that explains why people fall for pathological "leaders" despite all the technological progress...

 

[Cosmos]

I have a question and maybe it's already been addressed, if so, point me to the post.

Has Donald Trump ever been accused of killing people who got in his way climbing the ladder of success?

Not that I am aware of.

Me neither, but there is this statement from his ex wife:

One of the things that stood out for me in this documentary is what Drumpfs Ex Ivana Trump had to say about Drumpf in part 7 at 02:15:

http://<iframe width="420" height="..._c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

But for all the smiles and glittering entrances at society events, this marriage was not as harmonious as it seemed:
[Ivana says]"If you are good to him he is incredible to you, if you are bad at him you are dead!"

Wonder if she meant that not only metaphorically... Guess how people will be treated that are against him, when he becomes präsident...

[/quote

 

[Mal7]

In raw numbers, in 2015 the US police shot dead more white people than black people. That may surprise some people. Blacks are still being shot disproportionately high though, as blacks make up only 14.4% of the US population.

Then why do you bring up the raw numbers? When comparing such things, the absolute numbers are utterly meaningless, worse yet, they are misleading and could lead to people excusing racist, pathological behavior.

Personally, I was surprised that police shot and killed more white people than black people in 2015. From the media (by which I mean mainly what I come across on YouTube, Facebook, and the internet) I was under the impression that there was practically an epidemic of black people being killed by police. One phrase I came across was "countless black bodies piling [up] in our streets". Now this is very alarming and something where we should want to know what the heck is going on? And then what if looking into statistics, it is found that more black people are dying from gun violence in Chicago from non-police shootings, than are being killed by police in the whole of the country? Or that, per-capita rather than in the raw numbers which you dislike, you are far, far more likely to be shot and killed by the police in Nicaragua or Brazil than in the USA?

Of course, even one killing is too many. In an ideal society (utopia), things would no doubt be very different. Sometimes I wonder at what seems a technological anomaly, that we can land people on the Moon and bring them back to Earth again, but haven't yet figured out a way for law-enforcement to effectively non-lethally subdue a person.

I don't know if you mean that seriously (i.e. you really wonder why they don't use non-lethal means even though the technology is available), but if so, the answer to that question is in Political Ponerology, Laura's writings and all over the forum. It's the same answer that explains why people fall for pathological "leaders" despite all the technological progress...

Well I don't know if the technology is available. Most police killings have involved the shooting of an armed person, so the present non-lethal methods like taser or pepper spray or rubber bullets or talking may not be seen as reliable enough. Of course if all confrontations could be solved by talking, communicating, that would be ideal. What I was thinking of was I guess something that might just be science fiction, a gas that instantly makes the suspect drop into a peaceful sleep so they can be safely disarmed, or an ultrasound thing that dissolves their bullets into water. Who knows? So I mean, we can go to the moon, but can't do something like that. Maybe an effective non-lethal technique just isn't a high research priority.

I do think statistics and facts and studies and actual results are important. We should be looking at the facts, what are the real problems? What solutions work? What is wrong with police culture? Which cops are good? Which are less bad? Instead, it seems like I bring some statistics into the discussion, and suddenly I'm excusing or apologizing for pathological behavior. I find this disheartening and will be the first to admit my word salad here will be helping nobody.

 

[Ca.]

Khizr Khan, Father of Fallen U.S. Soldier: Trump Lacks 'Moral Compass' Jul 31, 2016
_https://youtu.be/LLZEZqqtYh8

RT
Rumble - Does Trump Know What It Means to Sacrifice?
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLrmDw0pCGM

Trump's Response To Parents Of Killed Muslim Soldier: "Hillary Voted For The Iraq War, Not Me!"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-31/trumps-response-parents-killed-muslim-soldier-hillary-voted-iraq-war-not-me

With the media in full frenzy during the past three days over the public feud between the Pakistan-born Khizr Khan, who last week told the story of his son, a Muslim US army captain who received a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart after being killed in Iraq in 2004, and Donald Trump, earlier this morning the Republican presidential candidate refused to back down, defending his criticism of the parents by complaining on Twitter that the father "viciously attacked" him in his speech at the Democratic National Convention.
Snippet:
Donald J. Trump
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/759743648573435905
@realDonaldTrump
I was viciously attacked by Mr. Khan at the Democratic Convention. Am I not allowed to respond? Hillary voted for the Iraq war, not me!
6:32 AM - 31 Jul 2016
16,903 16,903 Retweets

https://twitter.com/MoveOn
In an interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos, Donald J Trump responded to bereaved Army fat
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFpJod9uqn4

 

[luc]

Mal7, I get the impression that you misrepresent what I was saying and that you shift the discussion to irrelevant side-topics, which divert from the problem at hand, in this case: 1) widespread, pathological racism among the police force 2) widespread brutality and psychopathic behavior by police officers.

Personally, I was surprised that police shot and killed more white people than black people in 2015. From the media (by which I mean mainly what I come across on YouTube, Facebook, and the internet) I was under the impression that there was practically an epidemic of black people being killed by police. One phrase I came across was "countless black bodies piling [up] in our streets". Now this is very alarming and something where we should want to know what the heck is going on? And then what if looking into statistics, it is found that more black people are dying from gun violence in Chicago from non-police shootings, than are being killed by police in the whole of the country? Or that, per-capita rather than in the raw numbers which you dislike, you are far, far more likely to be shot and killed by the police in Nicaragua or Brazil than in the USA?

I didn't say I "don't like" absolute numbers, and I didn't argue against using facts. But can't you see how misleading they are in this particular case? If you have a group of people, of which 30 are black and 500 are white, and the police shoots 30 black people and 40 white folks, and you just say "the police shot more whites than blacks", this is useless and misleading information. And all the racists will gladly use it to deny there is a problem.

The same for those other scenarios you cite. Again, it's shifting the discussion away from the problem. All that doesn't have to do anything with the problem at hand: racism and psychopathic violence in the police force. It's like saying "more black people die from the flu than from police violence, so where's the problem?"

Well I don't know if the technology is available. Most police killings have involved the shooting of an armed person, so the present non-lethal methods like taser or pepper spray or rubber bullets or talking may not be seen as reliable enough. Of course if all confrontations could be solved by talking, communicating, that would be ideal. What I was thinking of was I guess something that might just be science fiction, a gas that instantly makes the suspect drop into a peaceful sleep so they can be safely disarmed, or an ultrasound thing that dissolves their bullets into water. Who knows? So I mean, we can go to the moon, but can't do something like that. Maybe an effective non-lethal technique just isn't a high research priority.

Again, shifting the discussion. This has nothing to do with technology, guns or whatever. And it has nothing to do with being all-soft on criminals. You are shifting the discussion from the problem at hand (see above) to "should we always go soft on criminals?", which is not the question here. We are talking about widespread, totally cruel and irrational police brutality, especially against blacks.

And what do you mean by "rubber bullets or talking may not be seen as reliable enough", reliable for what? Killing people!? Geez, common sense and the law alike dictate that police officers should never even attempt to kill anyone except for a clear case of self-defense where they can't run away and avoid the confrontation and by their lives couldn't solve the problem by shooting the offender in the leg or something! But again, this discussion is about racism and police violence, and the myriad of incidences where the police was obviously acting unproportionally and criminally without a shred of a doubt, it is not about disputable cases.

 

[Mal7]

Mal7, I get the impression that you misrepresent what I was saying and that you shift the discussion to irrelevant side-topics, which divert from the problem at hand, in this case: 1) widespread, pathological racism among the police force 2) widespread brutality and psychopathic behavior by police officers.

Maybe you should check the thread title again? I am sure the problem of police brutality and racism could be discussed at very great length. I don't think this thread is the place for it.

And what do you mean by "rubber bullets or talking may not be seen as reliable enough", reliable for what? Killing people!?

Nope, I meant reliable enough for not getting killed. That is a concern of police officers in the line of duty. Do you know how common the view is among many radical socialist/communist "leftists" that police deserve to die? That it is fair game to shoot police? That police ("pigs") are not human?

I think this picture below could be fairly said to have gone viral on social media. In case you missed it though, it is a Facebook post made by Police Officer Montrell Jackson, three days after Alton Stirling was killed by police. 9 days later, Montrell Jackson was one of the three police officers shot dead in Baton Rouge.

 

[Mal7]

I do think Donald Trump is likely to be a topical subject for at least a few more months. If he loses to Hillary, he will go back to being a reality TV star and I doubt if there will be much more interest in him on the Forum.

Might I suggest that if anyone else is interested in continuing to debate as a separate issue the particular problem of US police brutality and racial discrimination, that they might start their own separate thread on it in some other part of the forum? (If such a discussion is started on another thread, I may or may not contribute to it. Most likely I personally am about done with the topic for the present. :) )

 

[Laura]

There is a laundry list of people the Clinton's are alleged to have had bumped off in their rise to power.

So, seems to me that Trump is pretty much a narcissist and Killary is a psychopath.

If somebody kidnapped one of my family members to make me vote, I'd vote for Trump on this point alone.