Jump to content


The General Election

Moiraine

By Moiraine,
in Politics & Religion

Recommended Posts


TGHusker Offensive Coordinator

TGHusker

Posted
Posted

IIRC correctly the Ronald McDonald House is one of the few charities that Trump has actually given to, and lord knows Mr. "I'm going to remove FDA standards" loves to shove Mickey D's into his mouth, so... Doubtful he goes after Goofy Ronald.

 

Don Jr was probably just imbued with the good old Trump math gene. They don't understand the concepts of facts or numbers too well.

 

This is the guy who says Clinton wants to abolish the 2nd Amendment. Apparently the 2nd Amendment only applies to Donald's chosen people.

 

Once again Trump speaketh what he knoweth not.

 

'stop and frisk' was limited by the AZ supreme court

http://www.copamonitor.com/news/around_arizona/article_913efb34-1f32-11e4-a689-0019bb2963f4.html

Police cannot frisk someone they stop and question absent some “reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot,’’ the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In their unanimous decision affirming the right to carry a gun without interference, the justices rejected arguments by prosecutors that a simple belief someone is armed and dangerous is enough to justify a frisk, even without any evidence of criminal activity. They said the U.S. Constitution dictates otherwise.

US District Judge limits S&F in NYC

http://theweek.com/articles/461152/end-stopandfrisk

http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2013/08/judge-explains-why-new-yorks-stop-and-frisk-policy-is-unconstitutional/

some quotes

U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled on Monday that the New York City police department has violated the Constitution in how it implements a stop-and-frisk policy that targets certain groups of citizens.

In a 195-page opinion, Scheindlin said that she wasn’t banning stop-and-frisk searches, but she was ordering safeguards put into place to protect citizens from potential racial profiling.

“To be very clear, I am not ordering an end to the practice of stop and frisk,” Scheindlin said.

Scheindlin said she wanted “to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection.”

Scheindlin said the plaintiffs in the case had “suffered violations of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and that the prevalence of the practices leading to those violations creates a likelihood of future injury.”

“Plaintiffs established the City’s liability for the NYPD’s violation of their Fourth Amendment rights under two theories,” said Scheindlin. “First, plaintiffs showed that senior officials in the City and at the NYPD were deliberately indifferent to officers conducting unconstitutional stops and frisks; and second, plaintiffs showed that practices resulting in unconstitutional stops and frisks were sufficiently widespread that they had the force of law,” she said.

The ruling is a major blow to the tough-on-crime legacy of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has vigorously defended stop-and-frisk for helping bring down levels of violence in New York. Under stop-and-frisk, police can question anyone suspected of being involved in criminal behavior and frisk them for weapons, a policy that civil rights groups say encourages racial profiling and violates the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Stop-and-frisk can't be banned outright, however, because the Supreme Court previously found it to be permissible under certain conditions.

Link to comment


Danny Bateman Defensive Coordinator

Danny Bateman

Posted
Posted

Trump's credo at this point is not spending his own money because he can spend others' or use it to reimburse himself.

As far as this stop and frisk business goes, it's an idiotic stance if he's trying to court African American voters. It's racist, and they know it's racist. But it doesn't matter, because he's not trying to court African American voters.

 

This is a very important distinction to make:

Trump is not reaching out to African Americans in good faith and trying to earn their vote. What he's trying to do is convince enough white voters in places like suburban Philly and Cleveland and Orlando that he's not racist so they feel comfortable enough to pull the lever for him.

 

He's trying to offset his massive deficit in communities of color by making it up with white people who don't currently like him.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
mrandyk Travel Squad

mrandyk

Posted
Posted

Here's a great visual showing the HUGE difference in spending between the two campaigns. With the race being a statistical tie, I would say the businessman is getting the better ROI.

 

20160919_trumpads.jpg

 

Here's a great visual showing the HUGE difference in spending between the two campaigns. With the race being a statistical tie, I would say the businessman is getting the better ROI.

 

20160919_trumpads.jpg

Your beloved candidate is getting a "great ROI" but clearly is not at all prepared for a legitimate race here. That little 'R' next to his name - which is hilarious considering he is absolutely not a Republican - apparently is automatically worth tens of millions of votes on its own. Sad!

Link to comment
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...