ADVERTISEMENT

Harris

To see Waltz just blow off the reporter’s question and walk away was sickening. If I saw someone on the right blow off a question like that I would say the same thing.
Team Trump is doing a terrible job of making these people talk. Kamala and Tim don't win on the issues. They win on Trump beating himself. In a nice scripted speech with no specific question Kamala was able to play both sides of the fence at the DNC on this issue. Get asked a question and she's royally screwed. She will lose one side. She will either lose the far left nutjobs who support Hamas or she will appease them and lose the moderates. I think she needs both groups to win.
 
Either of them saying that they recognize that it has gone too far and they will do better and focus on policy, would go a long way with people in the middle.

Lex Friedman has his podcast with Trump coming out today. That interview was a good opportunity for Trump to start. We'll see.

fwiw - I listened to the interview with Lex.

Trump did an ok job. Certainly missed on a few layups when Lex was offering him how to pitch to people who like his policies but don't like his antics. Certainly a net positive for him since Harris is incapable of an interview like this.
 
To see Waltz just blow off the reporter’s question and walk away was sickening. If I saw someone on the right blow off a question like that I would say the same thing.

I appreciate the frustration about Walz. He doesn't have a prepared answer so walks away which is weak.
That said, Trump has done the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
I appreciate the frustration about Walz. He doesn't have a prepared answer so walks away which is weak.
That said, Trump has done the same thing.
Yes not a good look for any politician but Trump has walked into the lions den essentially talking to almost anyone who wants to talk while Kamala and Walz only sat with Dana Bash so far.
 
I appreciate the frustration about Walz. He doesn't have a prepared answer so walks away which is weak.
That said, Trump has done the same thing.
Refresh my memory. When did Trump walk away when asked about a dead American hostage?

I have seen Trump walk away from other questions which is weak but never when asked about an American hostage.
 
Refresh my memory. When did Trump walk away when asked about a dead American hostage?

I have seen Trump walk away from other questions which is weak but never when asked about an American hostage.

Not hostages, but service members ambushed in Niger He didn’t comment on that for weeks and ignored a reporters ask for comments on it.
 
Let us know when a bullet comes within an inch of taking Harris’ life. Trump should turn down the rhetoric as well, but Harris knows exactly what she’s doing by using the same rhetoric that led up to the assasination attempt against Trump.

What will it take for her to drop the “Trump is a threat to democracy” BS? An actual assassination?
a bullet from his own party member. trump incites everyone and is the hands down unanimous king of fanning flames. its all he does. full stop. to deny or argue this just shows your true colors as a person. its pathetic to even have to argue this point. the guy is literally hosting a Jan 6 event at his club. crazy pills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
Not hostages, but service members ambushed in Niger He didn’t comment on that for weeks and ignored a reporters ask for comments on it.
dang gonna take a long time for them to figure out how to spin this
 
Hitler would be proud, all American Presidents being compared to him. Have to admit a lot of similarities of our political climate to fascism.
hitler was known to give simple answers to complex problems. to talk in simple words and repeating blatant lie after lie until it was seen as fact. he spoke with fervor about those he was against. he promised to essentially fix everything that was bad.

kamala is not a good candidate. nobody on this board will argue it. but these hitler characteristics were agreed on long ago before trump was even a speck and its uncanny how well they apply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
14 year old shooter was known of by the FBI. Yet crickets from the corrupt department.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09
hitler was known to give simple answers to complex problems. to talk in simple words and repeating blatant lie after lie until it was seen as fact. he spoke with fervor about those he was against. he promised to essentially fix everything that was bad.

kamala is not a good candidate. nobody on this board will argue it. but these hitler characteristics were agreed on long ago before trump was even a speck and its uncanny how well they apply.

Beginning to think you are delusional.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: silkcitypirate
hitler was known to give simple answers to complex problems. to talk in simple words and repeating blatant lie after lie until it was seen as fact. he spoke with fervor about those he was against. he promised to essentially fix everything that was bad.

kamala is not a good candidate. nobody on this board will argue it. but these hitler characteristics were agreed on long ago before trump was even a speck and its uncanny how well they apply.
You need to be unburdened by what has been.
 
Yes not a good look for any politician but Trump has walked into the lions den essentially talking to almost anyone who wants to talk while Kamala and Walz only sat with Dana Bash so far.
Every thing that is being done by either candidate is because of their political strategy. With Trump he goes into what you say are lions den because maybe he is trying to expand his base and get more votes. Harris strategy may be just playing it close to the vest and just wants to reinforce her base. Whatever the case the undecided vote will be the difference in the swing states to determine the winner .
 
14 year old shooter was known of by the FBI. Yet crickets from the corrupt department.
There was online threats in 2023 and law enforcement actually interviewed the kid. What would you like the FBI to do? What was the crime? Did they have probable cause to arrest or search? Apparently not. Or are you saying that we should now be arresting for thought crimes? How are you laying blame at the feet if the FBI?

Is this just a mental health issue? Ok then the laws of Georgia should be criticized now for not having any background checks or red flag laws at all.
 
  • Love
Reactions: silkcitypirate
There was online threats in 2023 and law enforcement actually interviewed the kid. What would you like the FBI to do? What was the crime? Did they have probable cause to arrest or search? Apparently not. Or are you saying that we should now be arresting for thought crimes? How are you laying blame at the feet if the FBI?

Is this just a mental health issue? Ok then the laws of Georgia should be criticized now for not having any background checks or red flag laws at all.
You're suggesting there's no preventative measures, it's either you have to arrest the kid or just move on and since he didn't actually do anything at that point you just let him go. There's nothing in between. How about stop and frisk on a kid like this? How about with a kid like this in the school metal detectors are required in the school. I wish we got this upset every time someone has a heart attack, we could stop even more deaths.
 
Last edited:
There was online threats in 2023 and law enforcement actually interviewed the kid. What would you like the FBI to do? What was the crime? Did they have probable cause to arrest or search? Apparently not. Or are you saying that we should now be arresting for thought crimes? How are you laying blame at the feet if the FBI?

Is this just a mental health issue? Ok then the laws of Georgia should be criticized now for not having any background checks or red flag laws at all.
Your first paragraph is a direct indictment of red flag laws.
 
You're suggesting there's no preventative measures, it's either you have to arrest the kid or just move on and since he didn't actually do anything at that point you just let him go. There's nothing in between. How about stop and frisk on a kid like this? How about with a kid like this in the school metal detectors are required in the school. I wish we got this upset every time someone has a heart attack, we could stop even more deaths.
Agree. We have terrorist watch lists; why not the same which would put some of the guardrails on the child and the parents if the show this kind of behavior?
 
Every thing that is being done by either candidate is because of their political strategy. With Trump he goes into what you say are lions den because maybe he is trying to expand his base and get more votes. Harris strategy may be just playing it close to the vest and just wants to reinforce her base. Whatever the case the undecided vote will be the difference in the swing states to determine the winner .
I like the way you spin K's hiding behind the couch act and not wanting to face tough or any questions for that matter as....... "playing it close to the vest" and "reinforcing her base"..............to quote Kamala......... "hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha"
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: silkcitypirate
a bullet from his own party member. trump incites everyone and is the hands down unanimous king of fanning flames. its all he does. full stop. to deny or argue this just shows your true colors as a person. its pathetic to even have to argue this point. the guy is literally hosting a Jan 6 event at his club. crazy pills.
Why does everything have to so personal with you man? Has to be a terrible existence to get this worked up by a message board. It’s not that personal, we’re talking politics.

Then again, you are the same guy who insults college kids IQ’s when they don’t play basketball as good as you want them to - if you want to talk about showing true colors.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HALL85
Well, after about 50 days, they finally put up a page on her website about her policies. Took them long enough.


Edited to add: Nothing new here, as far as I can tell. This is low effort, they have to do better than this.

 
Last edited:
Interesting story in the AP News, tried to link it here but when you copy the link[older] it sends you to a positive story instead. Media manipulation? Maybe just user error, but really appears the link has been changed. Copy and paste below, thinking she’s simply lazy or an empty suit. Apparently over 500 claims never answered or looked into of clergy abuse. Sounds like she’s a champion of the gridiron prosecutor on offense all the time.

Jun 26, 2019

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Joey Piscitelli was angry when Kamala Harris emerged as a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. It brought back the frustration he felt in the 2000s, when he was a newly minted spokesman for clergy sex abuse victims and Harris was San Francisco’s district attorney.
Piscitelli says Harris never responded to him when he wrote to tell her that a priest who had molested him was still in ministry at a local Catholic cathedral. And, he says, she didn’t reply five years later when he wrote again, urging her to release records on accused clergy to help other alleged victims who were filing lawsuits.

“She did nothing,” said Piscitelli, today the Northern California spokesman for SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.
Survivors of clergy abuse and their attorneys say that Harris’ record on fighting sex abuse within the Catholic Church is relevant as the U.S. senator from California campaigns for the presidency as a tough-on-crime ex-prosecutor who got her start prosecuting child sexual abuse cases. They complain that Harris was consistently silent on the Catholic Church’s abuse scandal — first as district attorney in San Francisco and later as California’s attorney general.
In a statement to The Associated Press, the Harris campaign underscored her record of supporting child sex abuse victims but did not address her silence regarding victims abused by Catholic clerics.
“Kamala Harris has been a staunch advocate on behalf of sexual assault victims, especially child sexual assault victims,” the statement said, noting that she “used her position as District Attorney to create the first unit focused on child sexual assault cases in the office’s history.”
The statement said she withheld documents regarding clergy sexual abuse from attorneys and news reporters to protect the identities of victims — reasoning faulted by victims and their lawyers.
Catholics make up large voting blocs in the city and the state, accounting for roughly a quarter of the population in both San Francisco’s metro area and across California.
“There’s a potential political risk if you move aggressively against the church,” said Michael Meadows, a Bay Area attorney who has represented clergy abuse victims. “I just don’t think she was willing to take it.”
Before Harris was elected district attorney in 2003, a U.S. Supreme Court decision made it impossible to pursue criminal prosecutions of child sexual abuse cases after statutes of limitation had expired. For many victims, that left lawsuits in civil court as the only path for seeking justice.

After Harris took office as DA in 2004, attorneys representing abuse survivors in civil cases asked her office to release church records on abusive priests that had been gathered by her predecessor, Terence Hallinan.
Harris refused, a decision her office said was intended to protect the identities of clergy abuse victims. “It would be virtually impossible to release records without compromising the identity of the victims,”two of her top aides said in a joint letter.
Victims and their attorneys scoffed at the explanation, contending it would be a simple matter to avoid identifying the victims. “What she was saying was utter nonsense,” said Meadows, the Bay Area attorney. “All she had to do was redact any identifying information.”
Victims’ lawyers said Harris’ office also resisted informal requests to help them with their cases, at a time when other district attorneys or their staff members were making themselves available.
“Of all the DAs in the Bay Area, she’s the only one who wouldn’t cooperate with us,” said Rick Simons, an attorney who was the court-appointed coordinator for clergy abuse cases filed in Northern California, as well as Piscitelli’s personal lawyer.
In 2006, Piscitelli won his civil suit against the Salesians of Don Bosco, a Catholic religious order that employed his abuser, the Rev. Stephen Whelan, after a jury trial. The verdict was upheld on appeal two years later.
By 2010, Harris was running for state attorney general, once again highlighting her work for victims of sexual abuse. With new urgency, Piscitelli wrote Harris his second letter, asking her to release the clergy personnel files her predecessor had obtained. “We all know you can redact the names of the children from the documents,” he wrote. “Nobody is being fooled.”
At about the same time, the SF Weekly renewed a previous public records request for the church documents on sexual abuse. Harris again refused to release them, her office still adamant that the decision had been made with the victims in mind. “We’re not interested in selling out our victims to look good in the paper,” her office said in a statement.
After Harris was elected California attorney general in 2010, she continued to avoid taking a stand on the Catholic Church’s abuse problem, according to Piscitelli and other advocates. They say that the state’s current attorney general, Xavier Becerra, has been more aggressive in dealing with the issue.
When Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro released an explosive grand jury report in August 2018 finding that 300 priests had molested more than 1,000 victims over 70 years, Piscitelli and other SNAP members staged a protest outside Becerra’s office, demanding he take similar action.
The next day, Piscitelli said, Becerra’s office invited him and others at the protest to a meeting where district attorneys from across the state joined a conference call and listened as victims and advocates suggested avenues for inquiry.
Although Becerra has not officially confirmed an investigation, his office has sent letters to dioceses throughout the state seeking church documents, and his website is soliciting tips from victims and other sources.
Anne Barret Doyle, co-director of the advocacy group BishopAccountability.org, attended the meeting at the attorney general’s office with Piscitelli and other SNAP members. “The current attorney general is showing an awareness of the ongoing problem of clergy sexual abuse in California that Kamala Harris didn’t exhibit at all,” she said.
https://apnews.com/united-states-pr...e2a388967a85?utm_source=copy&utm_medium=share
 
thinking she’s simply lazy or an empty suit. Apparently over 500 claims never answered or looked into of clergy abuse. Sounds like she’s a champion of the gridiron prosecutor on offense all the time.

There is some nuance there since the statue of limitations had passed, and the supreme court had just blocked states from modifying their laws to extend the statue of limitations. There was no criminal case should could bring by the time she got the job. The only outcome would have been civil cases (not by her office) in which you would need the victim to come forward hence her response about protecting victims.

She could have gone after a cover up by the church as a crime (which is what Shapiro did in PA) but I'm not sure if the same fact pattern existed.

I think I would tend to want all of the names out in public, but I'm not sure it's that easy when considering protecting victims and due process for those accused.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
Not hostages, but service members ambushed in Niger He didn’t comment on that for weeks and ignored a reporters ask for comments on it.
I agree that he should have addressed it immediately. He had his press secretary read the comments that he was supposed to deliver the next day. Sounded like a secret type mission gone awry.... but still. He did call the parents of the deceased and a report told about at least one of the parents who were appreciative of the call. It was 12 days before he himself addressed it publicly..... big difference than "for weeks". I got that from an LA Times report back in 2017.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUMatt
It was 12 days before he himself addressed it publicly..... big difference than "for weeks". I got that from an LA Times report back in 2017.

The point was that he was also asked about the attack a couple times and walked away without any public comments on it for 12 days.
2 days under "weeks" is still not a good look.

It was weak of Walz to walk away from the question. I just think if that moment is weighing in on how you will vote, then you're ignoring the character of Trump who did something very similar. I think there are much better policy arguments to support a vote for Trump instead of getting into character.
 
The point was that he was also asked about the attack a couple times and walked away without any public comments on it for 12 days.
2 days under "weeks" is still not a good look.

It was weak of Walz to walk away from the question. I just think if that moment is weighing in on how you will vote, then you're ignoring the character of Trump who did something very similar. I think there are much better policy arguments to support a vote for Trump instead of getting into character.
look.... I agree with you that Trump did not handle that right.... but MY point is that "some" posters overstate Trump's errors... if you said almost two weeks, I would have no problem.... that would have been accurate..... but "for weeks" leaves it open to readers' imagination.... and was actually incorrect ..... possibly purposefully.... am I wrong?
 
look.... I agree with you that Trump did not handle that right.... but MY point is that "some" posters overstate Trump's errors... if you said almost two weeks, I would have no problem.... that would have been accurate..... but "for weeks" leaves it open to readers' imagination.... and was actually incorrect ..... possibly purposefully.... am I wrong?

I mean, yeah. 12 days not commenting on that from POTUS is not a good look already.

I didn’t have the exact number of days off hand so I said weeks. I don’t think that changes anything and wasn’t trying to overstate it.
 
I mean, yeah. 12 days not commenting on that from POTUS is not a good look already.

I didn’t have the exact number of days off hand so I said weeks. I don’t think that changes anything and wasn’t trying to overstate it.
LOL at your inability to admit your mistake
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT