I've had people say it's a hardening, actually ~ US presidential election 2016 part 9/11 never forget

The selling of access with the Clintons pretty much hides in plain sight. There is no clear "corruption" in the sense of quid pro quos, there's just a modus operandi.

yeah i can't believe the clintons helped poor people

yeah they sure helped a lot of poor people in Haiti

Can't say I empathize about media "unfairness" to Clinton, i.e. the same candidate that they catapulted into the democratic nomination while nearly ignoring her rival.

Hillary's been in the public sphere for three decades while Bernie was basically an unknown who wasn't even a Democrat until very recently, so I don't know what you expected. Besides they spent half their time talking about her email server and Benghazi so it's not like it was very favorable coverage. The problem here is that Trump is routinely getting away with things that Hillary would be raked over the coals for - this email thing is being treated like an unforgivable sin by a large part of the electorate because the media treats it as such, while repeated corruption and scams by Trump are given barely any coverage at all. It's infuriating.

yeah they sure helped a lot of poor people in Haiti

The U.S. Agency for International Development supported the commission’s efforts, and Hillary Clinton led the U.S. response in Haiti as secretary of state. The Clinton Foundation raised more than $30 million for Haiti relief projects.

But there is no evidence that Hillary Clinton, through the Clinton Foundation, raised “hundreds of millions of dollars” for a hospital that was never built. We consulted groups that have been critical of recovery delays in Haiti, but they could not point to a specific Clinton Foundation-funded hospital project, either.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/13/did-the-clinton-foundation-raise-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-for-a-hospital-in-haiti-that-was-never-built/

yeah i can't believe the clintons helped poor people

lol v clearly their priority in abolishing AFDC

versus Trump, who uses charitable donations to buy portraits of himself

And the big scandal in the AP story was Clinton meeting with the guy who got a Nobel prize for doing micro loans to poor people.

thread restart was an attempt to stop it and kudos for the intention but we are slowly becoming the election

and the election is contentious

The real election would have 40% of thread participants huffing paint thinner

I'm doing my part, but few have the courage to join me

@joanwalsh
Why doesn't media dog Trump Foundation like they dog Clinton Foundation?

@DougHenwood
Does the Trump foundation raise hundreds of millions from Boeing and Saudi Arabia?

https://imgflip.com/s/meme/Creepy-Condescending-Wonka.jpg

thread restart was an attempt to stop it and kudos for the intention but we are slowly becoming the election

― thrusted pelvis-first back (ulysses), Monday, September 12, 2016 10:06 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"Slowly" lol. The US politics threads have reflected the election and the dire state of America for over a year now. A heartfelt "Good look USA" doesn't even cut it any more.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Too soon!

xp

fine, spit on Wonka's grave with yr non sequitur, nomar

‏@tinyrevolution
The funniest thing about Trump's endless grifts is that they're so consistently smarmy and smalltime

In a few cases, Trump seemed to solicit donations only to immediately give them away. But his foundation has also received a handful of bigger donations — including $5 million from professional-wrestling executives Vince and Linda McMahon — that Trump handed out a little at a time.....

But in many other cases, his biggest donors have not wanted to say why they gave their own money, when Trump was giving none of his.

“I don’t have time for this. Thank you,” said Richard Ebers, a ticket broker in New York City who has given the Trump Foundation $1.9 million since 2011.

“No. No. No. I’m not going to comment on anything. I’m not answering any of your questions,” said John Stark, the chief executive of a carpet company that has donated $64,000 over the years.

Vince and Linda McMahon declined to comment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-donald-trump-retooled-his-charity-to-spend-other-peoples-money/2016/09/10/da8cce64-75df-11e6-8149-b8d05321db62_story.html?

Yeah, because clearly Trump has never raised money from suspicious people. I bet Doug Henwood is all up in arms about the ties to Russian investments, right?

Is it too soon to point out that two separate ILXors are both running around with "cumstaun" as their display name

There's literally no area where Trump isn't massively worse than Clinton. None. You think she's too secretive? He won't even release tax records. You think she endangered national security? He called on Russia to hack her email. And so on and so on and so on. Not that Clinton is any good. But come on!

The inside story of Clinton's sick day

headline at politico right now

did she go to Wrigly Field and jump on a float during the Von Steuben Day parade?

Yeah, because clearly Trump has never raised money from suspicious people. I bet Doug Henwood is all up in arms about the ties to Russian investments, right?

― Frederik B, Monday, September 12, 2016 3:20 PM (nine minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Do liberals like you every jack off to anything besides "hypocrisy"? There's better porn out there.

The fact that Trump is worse than Clinton is mind-numbingly obvious. Do you have any politics beyond "Trump is worse than Clinton"?

does anyone have any trump porn

in F's defense, it's the only politics Clinton has.

TBF this is the election thread, I'm just starting to lose my shit after more than a year of the trump-is-hitler/everything-bad-about-Clinton-is-false dichotomy. I get that people sincerely don't want Trump to win, and I don't either, but Hillary is almost certainly going to win, so stop hyperventilating. And when she does there will be some new excuse about why now's not the time for criticism. It was already "not the time" when she didn't even have the nomination locked up, because it was too risky to even give another candidate a run at the virtually unelectable Trump.

"She was unwell omg!"
"They say it's pneumonia but obv that can't be right"
"Hey Hillary how are you today?"
"I'm great!"
"Hmm... Great eh? A person recovering from pneumonia wouldn't be feeling GREAT the day after. Lies! What is she hiding?"
"She must be deathly sick"
"Oh I'm sure."
"No she's not deathly sick you fools, she's fit to run for PERSIDETN! Fittest and more open about her medical recs EVER,"

How do you all not get tired from this? I can see the shit show US media making this the most important thing happening on earth right now, but ilx? It's not like she fucked a dead pig now is it?

lobster, pig what's the difference

Fair.

I have no idea what fucking a Bill Clinton is like

Can I be the first to say that man alive is a sexist pos?

;)

First of, 90% of the shit that is dumped on Hillary is untrue - though she's still bad. Secondly, Trump really is Hitler. As in literally. They are the same person.

in F's defense, it's the only politics Clinton has.

she seems to give policy speeches a lot that routinely get ignored. talking about Trump is the only way she can get any visibility. sorry just the way it works

"Secondly, Trump really is Hitler. As in literally. They are the same person."

I guess they really DID save Hitler's brain

Ok guys its ten pm here imma say we can get this one locked by midnight

Can I be the first to say that man alive is a sexist pos?

;)

― schwantz, Monday, September 12, 2016 3:56 PM (four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

You can say whatever you want, but I literally have no idea which of my post(s) this would have been in response to?

think schwantz was making a sarcastic frederik reference there

Trump really is Hitler. As in literally. They are the same person.

― Frederik B, Monday, September 12, 2016 10:56 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

QED. This is the level of "debate"? As in literally?

Manalivesplainig

man alive, I was responding to a tweet Morbs posted that seemed to say the Clinton foundation was worse than the Trump foundation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orar-V3y5Sk

Sorry man alive - I was referencing what happened in the last thread before we locked it and moved on... Bad joke. I totally agree with you.

"Clinton is down with millennial, the group also fueling Bernie Sanders. But the votes hasn't gone to Jill Stein, as the HuffPo says, but twice as many has gone to Gary Johnson."

Millennials don't know what Aleppo is either

Oh man, punked. I just spent la few minutes sincerely wondering whether I had said something horrible in the midst of my rage spiral.

Ok guys its ten pm here imma say we can get this one locked by midnight

― poor fiddy-less albion (darraghmac), Monday, September 12, 2016 5:01 PM (twelve minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^^^

"Clinton is down with millennial, the group also fueling Bernie Sanders. But the votes hasn't gone to Jill Stein, as the HuffPo says, but twice as many has gone to Gary Johnson."

Millennials don't know what Aleppo is either

― akm, Monday, September 12, 2016 4:09 PM (nine minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

https://theintercept.com/2016/09/08/what-aleppo-is-and-is-not/

As remarkable as that moment was, it was quickly followed by reports on Johnson’s cluelessness that included basic errors about who was fighting in the city and why the tragedy there matters to the rest of the world.

Taken together, those error-strewn reports suggest that American journalists and pundits have become so completely focused on the horse-race aspect of electoral politics that they are paying almost no attention to the biggest foreign policy crisis that will face the next president.

The tone was set by Christopher Hill, a former United States ambassador to Iraq who is now the dean of international studies at the University of Denver.

Asked by MSNBC for his response, Hill wrongly identified Aleppo as “the capital of ISIS,” apparently confusing it with Raqqa, another city in northern Syria that is held by Islamic State militants. Hill’s error baffled Jenan Moussa, who has reported on the war in Syria for Dubai’s Al Aan TV.

To make matters worse, Hill went on to complain that while there are a lot of “inside baseball” terms familiar to foreign policy experts like himself that he would not expect many people to know, it was remarkable for Johnson to draw a blank on a city that has been “very much in the news, especially in the last two days, but for the last two years.”

The Washington bureau of the New York Times then added to the confusion by rushing to publish a report on the reaction to Johnson’s ignorance that echoed Hill’s error by calling Aleppo “the de facto capital of the Islamic State.”

When that obvious mistake was spotted by readers — and, no doubt, the newspaper’s own foreign correspondents — the Times report was first edited to insert a new but still incorrect description of Aleppo as “the Syrian city that is a stronghold of the Islamic State.” That description was later removed, and a correction appended, but the article still includes a mistaken summary of Barnicle’s explanation to Johnson of why Aleppo matters.

Barnicle told Johnson that Aleppo is “the epicenter of the refugee crisis,” which is correct, since fighting in what was before the war the most heavily populated region of Syria, and its economic heartland, has driven millions of Syrians to seek refuge in neighboring countries and Europe. Barnicle did not, as the Times reports, ask Johnson “how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the war-torn Syrian city.”

Rather than deal with the question of how, exactly, the United States might help to bring this conflict to an end — which it has fueled by supporting rebel groups allied with al Qaeda’s proxy — political reporters covered Johnson’s blank stare as a process story, asking how his gaffe might affect his chances of getting into the upcoming presidential debates.

Here's that original quote from Jay Rosen about savviness:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/60411

And related to something he wrote four years ago that shockingly comes up again and again:

http://pressthink.org/2012/08/everything-thats-wrong-with-political-journalism-in-one-washington-post-item/

One camp, represented for the moment by Aaron Blake of The Fix, has drifted into a state of low grade nihilism in which complaining about truth, accuracy, fairness and missing context is beside the point because those very complaints have become another way of doing politics. Both sides pretend to get all worked up about it. Both sides rely on misleading claims when it’s convenient for them. Observing this, a smart reporter like Blake can’t fall for any of it. He stands between warring camps, reminding each side that they too are sinners. Here, “both sides” is a kind of magic phrase, putting partisans in their place and clearing the ground for the journalist to come in and settle matters.