• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Hillary physically violent on Election Night, Mook and Podesta targets (Breaking)

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
Many people believe incorrect things.
"Mexican" being a race is one of them.
There are Mexicans of Spanish, indigenous, & European descent living there.
A blonde haired blue eyed one lives just down the street from me.
Majority of Mexicans are Mestizo (indigenous mixed with Spaniards). Spain last time I checked is also European? I'd say there's a case there for at least being largely bi-racial despite our race options on our census.

Point being though, I don't think being Mexican and being Muslim are really equatable as far as dismissing on a racial basis, since Muslims are defined by a religion. Being Mexican is more tied in to your ethnic background.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Majority of Mexicans are Mestizo (indigenous mixed with Spaniards). Spain last time I checked is also European? I'd say there's a case there for at least being largely bi-racial despite our race options on our census.

Point being though, I don't think being Mexican and being Muslim are really equatable as far as dismissing on a racial basis, since Muslims are defined by a religion. Being Mexican is more tied in to your ethnic background.
One might point to race more than another,
but at least we agree they aren't races.
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
One might point to race more than another,
but at least we agree they aren't races.
I wouldn't say that. Mexicans aren't currently defined that way on the census. I don't think it's a very strong argument though, more of a technicality.

Probably best saved for another discussion, however.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
All I took from this quote, correcting spelling mistakes is:
Of course that's all you 'got' from it. You're a hatriot and will distort anything and everything to win your petty little points. You're not going to see my surprise face over that. :D
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
All I took from this quote, correcting spelling mistakes is:

6MkjAQc.jpg
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
um, I don't know quite how to say this. But don't you think you are getting a little old to have an imaginary friend?
No one is ever too old for an imaginary friend.
But this one is buying an existing tenant's business,
& will be paying me rent. Woo hoo!
Minority types who run businesses don't vote quite
the same way as gov employees or those on the dole.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
His quote being incompatible with the rules here, I'll
just say that Josh expressed a colorful opinion of you.
As is his right to not see my, er 'dark humor'. However, it's great that he's renting from you since his soon to be BFF in the White House would not have accommodated him.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
As is his right to not see my, er 'dark humor'. However, it's great that he's renting from you since his soon to be BFF in the White House would not have accommodated him.
I'm sure Trump would've been willing to do business with Josh.
But getting paid by Trump is another matter.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
CNN reporter told Todd Kincannon that Hillary Clinton became physically violent towards Robby Mook and John Podesta around midnight last Tuesday as the presidency was slipping away!

Whew! We dodged a bullet with that cracked Hillary, thank God she lost! Per the reporter, she was in a "psychotic drunken rage" and a doctor added sedatives to the mix.

This explains why she didn't come on stage after being buried by Trump who won big time.


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-election-night-tore-robby-mook-john-podesta/

The Gateway Pundit is a sensationalist fake news site. Get a life.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
I'm sure Trump would've been willing to do business with Josh.
But getting paid by Trump is another matter.
That was one of his first run ins... discriminatory housing. He marked the applications "C" for "Colored". Pretty sleazy, but then: he's your president.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That was one of his first run ins... discriminatory housing. He marked the applications "C" for "Colored". Pretty sleazy, but then: he's your president.
No, he's yours.

Btw, I'd ask for evidence, but I'll bet your left one that you have none.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
ReoS5NZ.jpg

Btw, I'd ask for evidence, but I'll bet your left one that you have none.
I would take the bet, but most people who voted for Trump simply don't have the balls to do what's right! :D :D :D

Citations (and they are legion)

http://www.nytimes.com/1973/10/16/a...black-bias-in-city-us-accuses-major.html?_r=0

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-...sing-discrimination-largest-in-history-228741

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...illary-clinton-says-federal-government-sued-/

 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'm willing to acknowledge whatever you can demonstrate.
But all you've done so far is make a very specific claim,
& then post some links. If you've read them, then you've run
across evidence which you can vet & present. If you haven't
read them, then don't expect me to do your homework.

You said.....
"He marked the applications "C" for "Colored". "
Shirley, you can present evidence for this.
Quoted text from a court ruling?
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'm not at all worried about Trump's history.
He will do what he will do, no matter what I learn about his past.
But again, you provide a lot of links without making an argument of your own.
If you don't read your own linked articles to provide the evidence, then it's not
reasonable to expect me to find it for you. I've been thru this before, when
I scan articles only to find that a claim isn't supported....time has been wasted.
You claim that Donald put the "C" for "colored" there.
Have you seen anything proving this?
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Repeating a denial doesn't make it so... I am forced to call this:

IbaBRlB.jpg

First, the claim was that he discriminated against blacks. That he used the "C" to do this is as ancillary as it is documented. After all, writing a "C" on someone's application is hardly noteworthy much less illegal, unless there's a deeper meaning to it, which there was. First, last and most importantly, he discriminated against blacks in providing housing and had to pay a fine, even though he never admitted to it.

But from the articles, which you have apparently not read:

first article said:
Trump Employees Marked Applications Of Minorities With Codes And Allegedly Directed Blacks And Puerto Ricans Away From Buildings With Mostly White Tenants. According to Washington Post, “Federal investigators also gathered evidence. Trump employees had secretly marked the applications of minorities with codes, such as ‘No. 9’ and ‘C’ for ‘colored,’ according to government interview accounts filed in federal court. The employees allegedly directed blacks and Puerto Ricans away from buildings with mostly white tenants, and steered them toward properties that had many minorities, the government filings alleged.” [Washington Post, 1/23/16]

I did make the mistake that the first article quoted the second article. So a quote from it would read the very same as the first quote.

third article said:
In the federal lawsuit, a superintendent for a Trump building in Cincinnati told the Justice Department that he was instructed by Trump managers to attach a “C” for “colored” to all applications from blacks.
 
Top