The official Presidential debate thread

This is it.

Why has Donald Trump said, repeatedly, that the moderator is a Democrat when he is, in fact, a registered Republican?

Q. a bomb goes off onstage during the debate.....who survives?

A. 'Murica!

Will Hillary say anything, and I mean anything, that isn't a lie?

Honestly, no joking, what is the deal with calling HILLARY a liar, when the other candidate is a person who has absolutely no familiarity with the truth and who rips off everyone who does business with him and who now backtracks on virtually everything he said in the primary campaign?

Obvious Stater wrote:

Honestly, no joking, what is the deal with calling HILLARY a liar, when the other candidate is a person who has absolutely no familiarity with the truth and who rips off everyone who does business with him and who now backtracks on virtually everything he said in the primary campaign?

We have entered the post-fact age of American politics.

Obvious Stater wrote:

Honestly, no joking, what is the deal with calling HILLARY a liar, when the other candidate is a person who has absolutely no familiarity with the truth and who rips off everyone who does business with him and who now backtracks on virtually everything he said in the primary campaign?

His acolytes simply do not care

Many of us remember the classic line from the “Seinfeld” show, that “it’s not a lie if you believe it.” Applying that theme to the evolution of Hillary Rodham, then Hillary Rodham Clinton, and now just plain Hillary Clinton, here are the notable accomplishments of her “public service” career:

• Flunked the D.C. Bar Exam.

• Was removed from her House Judiciary Committee staffer job because of incompetence and lying.

• The Whitewater scandal.

• Married a serial liar and cheater, who occasionally had sexual encounters with nonconsenting partners.

• Lied about “sniper fire” in an attempt to simulate exposure to danger in a war zone.

• The subject of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” that led to the impeachment and disbarment of her husband

• Took crockery, furniture, artwork and other items from the White House — had to return and/or pay for them.

• Said “what difference, at this point, does it make” about four brave people killed in Libya as a direct result of her failure to protect them on the anniversary of 9/11.

• Totally ignored the structure and rules for the handling of sensitive national security information.

• Amassed a personal fortune with “speaking fees” and payments from private sector political donors and foreign governments into transparent “foundations” in obvious exchange for future political favor.

Two conclusions emerge from this nefarious list of “accomplishments”:

First, Hillary’s brief solo “professional” career [without Bill] was a total failure, and of her own doing. This despite high-level political sponsorship to get her a key “entry level” job as a legal staffer on the Nixon Impeachment investigation in the early 1970s. But she flunked the D.C. Bar Exam [perhaps the easiest in those days] and got fired from her staff job.

Second, she is identified today in friendly media solely by her “career” post-marriage to Bubba. This is the part that Barack Obama recently described as making her “probably the best qualified person ever to run for president.” This is both laughable and ironic, as she is better qualified than was Mr. Obama, arguably the most unqualified person ever elected president. And, as presidential aspirants go, they had one professional “qualification” in common: Neither had ever worked in a “real job.”

After she and Bill left the White House [along with the furniture, crockery and art work they took with them] she simply punched her ticket with two more political gigs that were handed to her. Neither of which identify her as anything but an opportunist, saying and doing whatever necessary to perpetuate her “new” political career, this while biding her time until she could run for president — twice.

Her time as a senator from New York was purely a block-checking exercise to stay “relevant.” Best illustrating this is the question: Why didn’t they go back to Arkansas? Easy, returning to Arkansas would have been the political — and financial — end for them and they knew it. It’s the same reason the Obamas are not returning to Chicago. And in this context, look for an “Obama Foundation” that rakes in money and a series of Hillary-style political appointments for Michelle — after all, she flunked the Bar Exam too.

More than anything else, Hillary’s campaign is counting on the “newer” American voters to simply not remember her and Bill’s checkered political and legal past. Accordingly, we can expect a Republican campaign replay of the 1990s: Bill’s Impeachment, the Star investigation, Bill’s disbarment for lying, her Rose Law Firm partner going to jail — and on and on and on — as supplemented by her latest scandals: Benghazi, “speaking” fees and classified emails.

So, is Hillary “really” qualified to be president, or is it just a lie she believes after so many years with “slick Willy” and a series of political jobs?

Sadly, her flakey “qualifications” may not matter at all — because if she wins, it will likely be a repeat of the 1992 election debacle: Remember that Bill would never have been elected had it not been for the third party “spoiler” candidacy of H. Ross Perot, who took 20 million votes away from George H.W. Bush — literally giving the election away and beginning the Clinton protracted political soap opera we are still dealing with.

Will it happen again? Will the latest rupture in the Republican Party work to elect “crooked Hillary,” the other half of the Clinton sleaze team? Will horny old Bill — again — be on “intern patrol” in the White House and “feeling our pain”?

These are the “truthful” parts of the lie that have most of us saying: “is this really the best we can do?”.

• Daniel Gallington frequently writes about national security.

Some Things Should be Obvious wrote:

Obvious Stater wrote:

Honestly, no joking, what is the deal with calling HILLARY a liar, when the other candidate is a person who has absolutely no familiarity with the truth and who rips off everyone who does business with him and who now backtracks on virtually everything he said in the primary campaign?

We have entered the post-fact age of American politics.

Polls show that of the various demographics, Hillary supporters are the group least likely to consider the debates to have value. They have already made up their minds.

RossiCheated wrote:

Why has Donald Trump said, repeatedly, that the moderator is a Democrat when he is, in fact, a registered Republican?

Because that is the beauty of having millions of re-programmable minions who only believe something if it comes from Breitbart or Drudge. Now that Trump has cast doubt on Holt's political affiliations, it no longer matters that he is, in fact, a registered Republican. If he tries to point out that Trump is lying his ass off during the debate, or if Trump winds up looking like a buffoon, the entire right wing propaganda machine will accuse him of being an obvious closet democrat and NBC of being in the tank for Hillary. It's a preemptive excuse as well as an attempt to ward off any potentially embarrassing checking of facts.

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

RossiCheated wrote:

Why has Donald Trump said, repeatedly, that the moderator is a Democrat when he is, in fact, a registered Republican?

Because that is the beauty of having millions of re-programmable minions who only believe something if it comes from Breitbart or Drudge. Now that Trump has cast doubt on Holt's political affiliations, it no longer matters that he is, in fact, a registered Republican. If he tries to point out that Trump is lying his ass off during the debate, or if Trump winds up looking like a buffoon, the entire right wing propaganda machine will accuse him of being an obvious closet democrat and NBC of being in the tank for Hillary. It's a preemptive excuse as well as an attempt to ward off any potentially embarrassing checking of facts.

So can Clinton add Holt to the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" or would blaming others make her look weak?

Which debate is this for?

Trump can't possibly restrict his debate lies to the actual debate. He's got a head start on it. Vote for him if you like being played the fool.

I'm fact checking your claims.

She did fail the bar in D.C. while passing it in Arkansas.

However, she was not fired from the Judiciary Committee for unethical behavior. She was not supervised by the source, who therefore could not fire her, and her job ended only when the committee had completed its job:

"The problem is that Hillary Clinton remained on the Watergate Committee until Richard Nixon resigned and the Committee was shut down. Hillary Clinton did not work directly for Jerry Zeifman, and so he had no authority to fire her. There is no evidence she was fired, so this story is false."

Continuing the fact checking, about 551 of 800 something passed that D.C. bar exam. But it was hardly considered the easiest in the nation.

From snopes.com:

"As Bernstein noted, although the D.C. bar examination was "hardly one of the toughest in the nation," it was "far more difficult than the Arkansas exam."

Even if everything you claim here is true (and it is not), a Donald Trump presidency would be far worse for America. The man literally has no redeeming qualities at all.

At least under Bill Clinton the economy was strong and we actually balanced the budget.

The Plain Truth wrote:

Even if everything you claim here is true (and it is not), a Donald Trump presidency would be far worse for America. The man literally has no redeeming qualities at all.

At least under Bill Clinton the economy was strong and we actually balanced the budget.

Bill Clinton is not running for president. The candidate is he who must not be named. We know exactly what we are getting if we vote for her....at least with trump it is possible (albeit remotely) that POTUS will act in the best interest of the country.

RossiCheated wrote:

Why has Donald Trump said, repeatedly, that the moderator is a Democrat when he is, in fact, a registered Republican?

Donald has said so many lies that people just ignore many of them like this one.

he is a fraud wrote:

RossiCheated wrote:

Why has Donald Trump said, repeatedly, that the moderator is a Democrat when he is, in fact, a registered Republican?

Donald has said so many lies that people just ignore many of them like this one.

Should Lester call him on this bold face lie?