Clinton Secretly Signaled Moderator during Debate

[Carl in Michigan]

That's quite a routine the two of you have going. One serious lib and one faux conservative. Great gimmick. Just like the fake news sites the left creates.

 

[Skylar]

That's quite a routine the two of you have going. One serious lib and one faux conservative. Great gimmick. Just like the fake news sites the left creates.

Wow. So you're just doubling down on the old conspiracy axiom 'anything that doesn't ape the conspiracy becomes part of it'.

Can you back any of your latest piece of batshit up with any actual evidence. Or is it once again just you offering us fact free assessments of 'likely'?

 

[S.J.]

He really is on Hillary's side there. It's interesting watching the playback. He drills Trump. Can't SHE hold him up on inaccuracies?

Is there anything that he held Trump to that Trump didn't actually say or do?

If no, then Lester appears to be biased in favor of the truth.

Yeah, he said Trump supported the invasion of Iraq. He didn't.

He did. He's on the record as saying as much. And there's no record anywhere of him opposing the war until long after the invasion.

Trump is trying to retcon his own history. Just like he did with the Birther conspiracy.

He also said "stop and frisk" was ruled unconstitutional and it wasn't.

Holt said this: "Stop-and-frisk” was ruled unconstitutional in New York because it largely singled out black and Hispanic young men."

It was held to be unconstitutional in New York. You can pretend otherwise, but history doesn't change just because Trump didn't prepare for the debate.

Here's an article in Esquire from 2004 showing his opposition.
Donald Trump: How I'd Run the Country (Better)

Stop and frisk was only ruled unconstitutional by a court whose decisions are not binding to other courts. It was under appeal and the mayor did not pursue the case (which means they would not have won it).
Holt Said Stop-And-Frisk Was Ruled Unconstitutional — The Truth Is More Complicated

 

[Skylar]

He really is on Hillary's side there. It's interesting watching the playback. He drills Trump. Can't SHE hold him up on inaccuracies?

Is there anything that he held Trump to that Trump didn't actually say or do?

If no, then Lester appears to be biased in favor of the truth.

Yeah, he said Trump supported the invasion of Iraq. He didn't.

He did. He's on the record as saying as much. And there's no record anywhere of him opposing the war until long after the invasion.

Trump is trying to retcon his own history. Just like he did with the Birther conspiracy.

He also said "stop and frisk" was ruled unconstitutional and it wasn't.

Holt said this: "Stop-and-frisk” was ruled unconstitutional in New York because it largely singled out black and Hispanic young men."

It was held to be unconstitutional in New York. You can pretend otherwise, but history doesn't change just because Trump didn't prepare for the debate.

Here's an article in Esquire from 2004 showing his opposition.
Donald Trump: How I'd Run the Country (Better)

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

Stop and frisk was only ruled unconstitutional by a court whose decisions are not binding to other courts. It was under appeal and the mayor did not pursue the case (which means they would not have won it).
Holt Said Stop-And-Frisk Was Ruled Unconstitutional — The Truth Is More Complicated

[/quote]

Holt's statement was accurate. He claimed that stop and frisk was found unconstitutional in New York. It was.

You insist it wasn't. Even your own article acknowledges that it was.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

He really is on Hillary's side there. It's interesting watching the playback. He drills Trump. Can't SHE hold him up on inaccuracies?

Hillary either was signaling to Holt as the video proves or she has crabs.

 

[S.J.]

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

On Howard Stern? Try again.

Holt's statement was accurate. He claimed that stop and frisk was found unconstitutional in New York. It was.

You insist it wasn't. Even your own article acknowledges that it was.

There was nothing final or enforceable about that sham ruling. Stop and frisk remained legal and constitutional. Stop lying.

 

[Skylar]

He really is on Hillary's side there. It's interesting watching the playback. He drills Trump. Can't SHE hold him up on inaccuracies?

Hillary with was signaling to Holt as the video proves or she has crabs.

The video proves she scratched her nose. And that's all that's necessary for you poor silly souls to start pinching out yet another steaming pile of insane conspiracy batshit.

What's next......Trump sniffling in Morse Code?

 

[Skylar]

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

On Howard Stern? Try again.

Why? He expresses support for the invasion before the war. Opposite about a year after. Demonstrating the absurdity of his claim that he 'always' opposed the war in Iraq.

Perhaps 'always' doesn't mean what Trump thinks it means. Alas, for anyone interested in truth, its meaning is quite relevant to Trump's horseshit claims.

There was nothing final or enforceable about that sham ruling. Stop and frisk remained legal and constitutional. Stop lying.

Lying? I don't think that word means what you think it means. Stop and Frisk was found to be unconstitutional in New York......exactly as Holt said it was.

Even your article acknowledges this. You have yet to cite any claim made by myself or by Holt that is inaccurate. Let alone a 'lie'.

You're just shucking excuses for Trump's embarrassingly bad performance at a debate he was clearly unprepared for. Just like Trump did with his laughably 'my mic was sabotaged' conspiracy.

 

[S.J.]

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

On Howard Stern? Try again.

Why? He expresses support for the invasion before the war. Opposite about a year after. Demonstrating the absurdity of his claim that he 'always' opposed the war in Iraq.

Perhaps 'always' doesn't mean what Trump thinks it means. Alas, for anyone interested in truth, its meaning is quite relevant to Trump's horseshit claims.

There was nothing final or enforceable about that sham ruling. Stop and frisk remained legal and constitutional. Stop lying.

Lying? I don't think that word means what you think it means. Stop and Frisk was found to be unconstitutional in New York......exactly as Holt said it was.

Even your article acknowledges this. You have yet to cite any claim made by myself or by Holt that is inaccurate. Let alone a 'lie'.

You're just shucking excuses for Trump's embarrassingly bad performance at a debate he was clearly unprepared for. Just like Trump did with his laughably 'my mic was sabotaged' conspiracy.

You don't read very well. You remind me of Jake, every time you're proven wrong you just repeat yourself over and over, looking more foolish each time.

 

[Skylar]

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

On Howard Stern? Try again.

Why? He expresses support for the invasion before the war. Opposite about a year after. Demonstrating the absurdity of his claim that he 'always' opposed the war in Iraq.

Perhaps 'always' doesn't mean what Trump thinks it means. Alas, for anyone interested in truth, its meaning is quite relevant to Trump's horseshit claims.

There was nothing final or enforceable about that sham ruling. Stop and frisk remained legal and constitutional. Stop lying.

Lying? I don't think that word means what you think it means. Stop and Frisk was found to be unconstitutional in New York......exactly as Holt said it was.

Even your article acknowledges this. You have yet to cite any claim made by myself or by Holt that is inaccurate. Let alone a 'lie'.

You're just shucking excuses for Trump's embarrassingly bad performance at a debate he was clearly unprepared for. Just like Trump did with his laughably 'my mic was sabotaged' conspiracy.

You don't read very well. You remind me of Jake, every time you're proven wrong you just repeat yourself over and over, looking more foolish each time.

And you've switched to ad hominems when your claims about Holt collapsed. As you have yet to cite a single claim made by the man that was inaccurate.

Try again....this time reading for comprehension.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Very interesting.

Is it?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

He won the debate.

Laughing......people who win debates don't start whining about how their microphones were sabotaged.

Trump blinked. He lost......as he didn't prepare. Clinton did.

Trump hammered Hillary.

Nope. Even Fox News acknowledges she won. And its not me you have to convince. Its the undecided voters. With every focus group of them soundly giving the victory to Clinton.

Ignore as you will. It won't matter.

Fox is for stooges.

Its a Trump fan club. And even they acknowledge that Trump lost and Clinton won.

Preparation matters. For debates....and for the presidency.

It was a draw. No knockouts and on a draw, the win goes to the challenger. Trump.

 

[Skylar]

Laughing......people who win debates don't start whining about how their microphones were sabotaged.

Trump blinked. He lost......as he didn't prepare. Clinton did.

Trump hammered Hillary.

Nope. Even Fox News acknowledges she won. And its not me you have to convince. Its the undecided voters. With every focus group of them soundly giving the victory to Clinton.

Ignore as you will. It won't matter.

Fox is for stooges.

Its a Trump fan club. And even they acknowledge that Trump lost and Clinton won.

Preparation matters. For debates....and for the presidency.

It was a draw. No knockouts and on a draw, the win goes to the challenger. Trump.

No it wasn't. Trump embarassed himself. Clinton soundly won. And given Trump's aversion to preparation I doubt he'll do much better.

Preparation matters.

 

[S.J.]

That's after the war started. He claimed that he opposed the war *before* it started.And he's on record saying the opposite.

On Howard Stern? Try again.

Why? He expresses support for the invasion before the war. Opposite about a year after. Demonstrating the absurdity of his claim that he 'always' opposed the war in Iraq.

Perhaps 'always' doesn't mean what Trump thinks it means. Alas, for anyone interested in truth, its meaning is quite relevant to Trump's horseshit claims.

There was nothing final or enforceable about that sham ruling. Stop and frisk remained legal and constitutional. Stop lying.

Lying? I don't think that word means what you think it means. Stop and Frisk was found to be unconstitutional in New York......exactly as Holt said it was.

Even your article acknowledges this. You have yet to cite any claim made by myself or by Holt that is inaccurate. Let alone a 'lie'.

You're just shucking excuses for Trump's embarrassingly bad performance at a debate he was clearly unprepared for. Just like Trump did with his laughably 'my mic was sabotaged' conspiracy.

You don't read very well. You remind me of Jake, every time you're proven wrong you just repeat yourself over and over, looking more foolish each time.

And you've switched to ad hominems when your claims about Holt collapsed. As you have yet to cite a single claim made by the man that was inaccurate.

Try again....this time reading for comprehension.

I backed up what I said with facts. You ignored the facts and refuse to address them and instead become a broken record of denial without making a case for it. You're hardly worth debating.