Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[DeadmanWalking]

No i don't really know whatever the information is correct or not, there's a huge amount of disinfo on both sides.
What i do know however is that i loathe globalists and their open borders agenda and Hillary should be in prison for breaking federal law with her private email server.
You vote hillary if you want a banana republic where people with power are above the law.
If it was Trump instead of Hillary, he would been in prison long ago.

This is America jack and in America you are innocent until proven guilty and if you don't like it then get the F out.

[Captain N]

This is America jack and in America you are innocent until proven guilty and if you don't like it then get the F out.

You know what the funniest part about that statement. When you apply it towards our Conservative posters with evidence that they did something wrong they will hand-wave it away and blame being taken out of context or bias. However if they point at something without evidence and "feel" like someone should be guilty they must obviously be because...ya know...reasons.

[Breccia]

Hillary should be in prison for breaking federal law with her private email server.

Remind me again which law she broke? Because that's news to the FBI, who didn't recommend charges. Or the DoJ, who didn't press charges. Or the Attorney Generals, who didn't move forward either. Or Congress, who didn't censure her. And she doesn't even technically need to break a law for that! I mean, you're going to have a really hard time convincing me that the GOP-led House and Senate were somehow biased for Clinton after all those investigations they conducted that resulted in nothing. If they really were convinced she was guilty of a crime, you'd think they'd take official action. Maybe introduce a bill in the Senate to remove her security clearance, something like, I dunno, let's just make up a number...S 3135 or something. Then vote, just to show how the GOP stands on the issue, and to force Democrats to...

...what? You mean, they did? And that was four months ago and it was never brought up for a vote by the people who introduced it? Didn't even make the token effort needed to call for a floor vote?

Well the Senate is 54/44/2. Maybe they just didn't want to force the issue due to the filibuster. I'm sure they had better luck in the House. I'm guessing HR 1054 at least came up for a vote, seeing as how it didn't ever come up for a vote. And that was in February. Of 2015. And it's just kind of sitting there, not being voted on for a year and a half. Plus.

Well...shit. The GOP-led House and Senate won't even make token moves against her. So...what, exactly, do you have that makes you either more informed, or more qualified to discuss, Hillary Clinton's situation? Because there are 535 people who disagree with that.

Also Code 793.

[Varvara Spiros Gelashvili]

Democrats seem to take it quite seriously considering they fired the guys in the video.

They fired the guy in the acorn video but he still won a 100,000 dollar lawsuit. I mean this could be O'keefe first real video but I want unedited footage before I believe anything that comes from Veritas. I honestly think this just show how depressed Trump supporters are if they latch on to O'keefe.

[Breccia]

I think this show how depressed Trump supporters are if they latch on to O'keefe.

If you're worried now, I recommend you pass any mention of Alex Jones. Just...don't.

[Deleted]

Remind me again which law she broke? Because that's news to the FBI, who didn't recommend charges. Or the DoJ, who didn't press charges. Or the Attorney Generals, who didn't move forward either. Or Congress, who didn't censure her. And she doesn't even technically need to break a law for that! I mean, you're going to have a really hard time convincing me that the GOP-led House and Senate were somehow biased for Clinton after all those investigations they conducted that resulted in nothing. If they really were convinced she was guilty of a crime, you'd think they'd take official action. Maybe introduce a bill in the Senate to remove her security clearance, something like, I dunno, let's just make up a number...S 3135 or something. Then vote, just to show how the GOP stands on the issue, and to force Democrats to...

...what? You mean, they did? And that was four months ago and it was never brought up for a vote by the people who introduced it? Didn't even make the token effort needed to call for a floor vote?

Well the Senate is 54/44/2. Maybe they just didn't want to force the issue due to the filibuster. I'm sure they had better luck in the House. I'm guessing HR 1054 at least came up for a vote, seeing as how it didn't ever come up for a vote. And that was in February. Of 2015. And it's just kind of sitting there, not being voted on for a year and a half. Plus.

Well...shit. The GOP-led House and Senate won't even make token moves against her. So...what, exactly, do you have that makes you either more informed, or more qualified to discuss, Hillary Clinton's situation? Because there are 535 people who disagree with that.

Also Code 793.

18 U.S Code 2071

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

[DeadmanWalking]

18 U.S Code 2071

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

And yet no guilty charge in a court of law... even after over a dozen hearings... does not compute!

[Blur4stuff]

republicans in congress hate hillary more than anyone in this thread

they spent years of time and millions of taxpayer money trying to get her and couldn't

it's time to let it go, but i have a feeling that won't happen

but deleted emails

which were personal and you have to prove intent anyways

oh, and you'd then have to bring charges against some big republican names as well

[DeadmanWalking]

This is hilarious https://youtu.be/aMqhoYjY2X0

Wait for the end.

[Endus]

18 U.S Code 2071

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

The FBI investigation clearly concluded there was no evidence of this that would warrant charges being filed.

Those bits in bold are really important parts of the law, and you folks have no evidence to back that claim up.

[Enthusiastic Steward]

you being "fairly certain" doesn't mean shit - and you have the audacity to call me a liar based on your "fairly certain' OPINION? LOL, what a fucking joke.

The 'fairly certain' was obviously sarcastic, since I was referring to the demographic that simply votes straight ticket Democrat. There are the people who will always vote straight Democrat regardless of who the candidate is. Clinton has their vote simply by being the Democratic candidate. Nothing else matters. Their vote is guaranteed. And, I don't believe you don't get that, so you trying to turn that around on me 'doesn't mean shit.'
You know perfectly well that there are voters for both parties who will vote straight ticket. Both candidates have always had those demographics locked up. They are guaranteed. So yes, saying she has 'nothing' locked up is a lie. She has had the straight ticket Democrats locked the moment she became the official nominee. Trump has had the straight ticket Republicans locked the moment he became the official nominee.
You know this. You also know that my saying 'fairly certain' was sarcastic, and you also know that its not an opinion. You know those demographics exist for both parties. I am confused as to why you are trying to pretend you don't know this.

Also:

Look at this thread - it is basically the same 20-30 people spouting the same idiotic anti-Trump rhetoric over and over again. Any time anyone says anything remotely in favor of Trump they get shouted down and piled on by the usual suspects and their smarmy, smug, and sanctimonious "opinions". You people are doing the same thing as the media - you are trying to make it seem as though Trump has no chance, so again, why bother to vote for Trump, right?

This is true. But how is you simply hopping in here and posting "Trump is going to win in a landslide lol!" every day different? Its just the same self-congratulatory rhetoric over and over, exactly what you're complaining about other people doing.

[Breccia]

18 U.S Code 2071

Whoever willfully

Aaaaaaaaaaand we're done here.

[Vago]

Anyone who doesn't believe, at this point, that Hillary was in the wrong and there was a huge cover up for her is just absolutely blind

[May90]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-r...american-vote1

Is this a joke? Shouldn't he have presented this plan a year ago, rather than a bit over two weeks before the election day?

[Endus]

Anyone who doesn't believe, at this point, that Hillary was in the wrong and there was a huge cover up for her is just absolutely blind

1> Clinton's admitted she made poor decisions, and apologized. That's where that ends; there's nothing more to push for there.

2> There was no "cover up", and an FBI investigation is the opposite of one.

[Breccia]

Is this a joke?

No.

Trump was never about term limits until the GOP turned against him. Now he's bitter and wants revenge.

[Belize]

Will they are on to benghazi adds on TV, Trump is done.

B-b-b-but BENGHAZI!!!!!

Meanwhile Bush more or less dismissed any chances there would be a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

[Shadowferal]

*shrugs*

There's plenty to suggest that Clinton was never the best candidate. Had it been anyone but Trump, this race would have been very different.
Sadly, our current choices for president are a pair of shit sandwiches. One just has a lot more breading so it tastes a little less like shit.

[Vago]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-r...american-vote1

Is this a joke? Shouldn't he have presented this plan a year ago, rather than a bit over two weeks before the election day?

He has some good ideas, or I should say the people giving him the information does, to bad Trump is the one standing in front of the people saying the stupid shit that he does. But to answer your question, yes he should have but I highly doubt he had this a year ago

[Vago]

But you have the truth right? So show us.

- - - Updated - - -

Will they are on to benghazi adds on TV, Trump is done.

You have been showed the proof in over 30000 emails, if you choose to ignore them like the FBI did that is your choice and frankly it doesn't matter to me