Producer Says There's Footage of Trump Saying the N-Word

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: UKTruth

This is why Snopes isn't worth reading: You have to factcheck everything they claim.

From now on, I'll be skipping them and doing my own factchecking of rumors. Which, btw, is all this OP is, right now.

The whole notion that human beings even exist without bias and that such mythical creatures could set up a website to be the arbiter of truth is totally ridiculous. Some seem to like them though, and I guess it was fun for them whilst the deception lasted.

I agree with you. Use your own ears and eyes and use several sources. The best you can hope for is to come up with a reasoned position, but when someone tries to post something like snopes to back up their views, you should always smell a rat.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

The head of the Clinton campaign is telling people he will pay for them to commit crimes. You are ok with that?

I am going to need folks to at least attempt to say truthful and accurate stuff in order to have rational discussion.

WHO? What head of the Clinton Campaign is telling people to commit crimes?

originally posted by: Dragoon01

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: Grambler

Thing is pointing out both candidates bad things is the correct thing to do.....I just can not understand how you all have not burnt it all down yet? I mean really Trump and Clinton? hang em and start again.

As far as burning it down, thats why Trump is getting my vote. I am tired of the establishment. Hillary Trump seems bad, but so was Obama Romney, Bush Kerry, Clinton Bush, etc.

Honest story - I knew an alcoholic that got diagnosed with Cirrhosis of the Liver. His doctors told him he would have to get a liver transplant, but first he would have to sober up for 3 months to be eligible. He decided instead to double down and began each day with a rum and coke for breakfast. He spent his last weeks yellow and puffed up in his easy chair on morphine. His liver unable to process anything, everything he drank or ate was poisoning him. I watched him die.

Explain to me how you go from being unhappy with dishonesty and corruption in gov. to electing Trump as a "solution".

Trump is not a candidate, he is a murder weapon.

We agree there...it's who the victim is that might be hazy here...

He will damage the United States of America in every way that matters.

Trump as the solution to moral decay, corruption or dishonesty in politics..is the guy with the failing liver choosing to drink the problem away...aka...living.

Not happy with DC, not ready to murder the USA though.

To full-on Dems, Hillary is a liver transplant
To Middle of the road Dems and Sane GOP...Hillary is life support until a transplant donor is available
Trump is eff-it...let's drink ourselves to death. Corruption got us here...let's elect the most sociopathic, corrupt idiot we can find.

Why doesn't the C word ever come up? Cracker

a reply to: Indigo5

When Trump gets in, that will be the straw that breaks the Govt's back.

originally posted by: Indigo5
To full-on Dems, Hillary is a liver transplant
To Middle of the road Dems and Sane GOP...Hillary is life support until a transplant donor is available

Not when the winner will very likely seat 4 SCOTUS justices, she isn't. She's the death sentence. That SCOTUS process would represent a wholescale shift of the court to one which would not respect the 2nd Amendment, would bless further handouts and mandates, would give the EPA, CIA, and any other alphabet agency carte blanche to carry forward ANY program blessed by the establishment Democrat party.

If that's a liver transplant, the liver was donated from Charlie Sheen.

a reply to: Indigo5

I'm not suggesting Trump is not a complete and utter racist xenophobic sexist pig but lets face it just about everyone has used the N word at some point in there life derogatorily or otherwise just like everyone has used the F word in there time.

Probably best not to combine the two all the same.

a reply to: andy06shake

All depends on the context in what he is using it.
We will see.
I think it is worth seeing also gives people a better judge of his character.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

Context or not people hear that word they are generally none to pleased and immediately take the moral high ground. End of the day it's simply a word.

Christ i remember it used to be on the side of every type of Black pigmented boot polish tin but it was a not intended as a racial slur.

Trump's character is pretty much beyond redemption by his own hand, that's a given these days if you ask me.

a reply to: andy06shake

So fun this election though. Thing is If we had those two we would have brought it down without guns just fists...I can't believe the most armed nation hasn't just said "nope" shot em all dusted themselves off and said right lets make a better couple of choices.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Grambler

No...The girl was examined by a Psychiatrist at the University of Ark. whose determination was that she had made accusations against older men in the past and had engaged in fantasies about older men.

Hillary didn't "get" that psychiatrist to come to those conclusions..nor did she say that, the psychiatrist did.

Haha! For one that keeps touting your source and the court documents, apparently you haven't read them.

I don't know how to post PDF but I will give the page numbers for you.

www.scribd.com...

Here is the site with the court documents (but you already read them so you knew that)

On page 33 it starts the beginning of the issue with her and a psychiatrist. It is a form that is Hillary recommending that the girl undergo a pysch eval at the university of Arkansas on the date of Jul 31, 1975.

Now the next page, page 34, give Hillary rational for that decision. She says

I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing. I have also been informed that she has also in the past made false accusations about persons claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.

First, no matter who told her that, she is introducing to the court her belief that this girl fantasizes about sex with older men. This wasn't a witness that she had on the stand, this is her introducing the argument. She also mention how stubborn the girl can be. You know, those stubborn twelve year olds that don't like being raped.

No where in that does she say a psychiatrist told her that. IN fact we can assume by her next paragraph that indeed this wasn't a psychiatrist that told her that.

I have also been told by an expert in child psychology that children in early adolescence tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences and that adolescents with disorganized families such as the complainants are even more prone to such behavior.

She directly references a psychologists here, unlike the first paragraph, implying it wasn't a psychologist that told her this. If it had been a psychiatrist or psychologist that investigated the girl and told Hillary this, why would she then ask the judge to make the girl undergo an examination?

She goes on in this document to request that she be evaluated based on the above. In other words, she has yet to be evaluated.

And here is the kicker, this document is signed July 28, 1975. Thats right, the girl was to undergo her first evaluation at the University of Arkansas on July 31 1975.

So you are llat wrong. No psychiatrist said this, she did, and then she tried to get a psychiatrist to back these claims up.

So this is proof that a psychiatrist didn't say something that Hillary didn't see coming. When Hillary brought up that this girl fantasized about older men, she hadn't even been seen by a psychiatrist yet. Not only did hillary accuse this girl of fantasizing about sex with an older man, she accused her of being stubborn when not getting her way, and forced her to relive her rape by being examined by a psychiatrist.

But you knew this right, because you read the court documents.

So now that the documents show that it was Hillary that brought the argument to the court about a twelve year old rape victim fantasizing about sex with older men, are you ready to denounce her?

Now that you have read the SNOPES and presumably the court Docs?

Do you dispute either of the following?

Hillary repeatedly said she did not want to represent the defendant, made calls and tried to get out of it, but was obligated to.

She got her client (defendant) to admit guilt and plead guilty.

Either of those things not true in your world?

Nope, and in a way that makes it even worse. She knew her client was guilty and got him to admit guilt, but still attacked this little girl and claimed she fantasized about having sex with older men.

a reply to: Grambler

Nice work!

Come on now, you know they don't actually read anything. There is an assumption that because Snopes said it, they don't have to do any work.

I also noted that in the Snopes waffle they also were confused... they said that an eval. had been done, then Clinton asked for an eval. based on the first one. But nowhere do the court documents back up that conclusion. Sounds to me like the lawyers investigating and digging up some dirt and then insisting on an eval.

This is what is also said by someone actually defending Clinton:

In terms of what’s good for the little girl? It would have been hell on the victim. But that wasn’t Hillary’s problem.

Like I said - Clinton and people like her simply dont care about who they smear and destroy as long as they win.

Here is the actual section of the document to the court from Clinton herself:

...the next video leak on Trump is supposed to land in 5 minutes time....

a reply to: UKTruth

Ooo where?.
I hope you guys in the states have one of these elections every year now it is so much fun.

a reply to: UKTruth

Post it please UKTruth ive had a hard day and could do with a chortle or three.

I think only Clinton supporters believe Trump saying the N-word will damage him. I am sure most of Trumps supporters throw around that term all the time.

originally posted by: primespickle
I think only Clinton supporters believe Trump saying the N-word will damage him. I am sure most of Trumps supporters throw around that term all the time.

Sure, just like I am sure Hillary supporters blame 12 year old rape victims of fantasizing about older men all of the time.

originally posted by: Grambler


First, no matter who told her that, she is introducing to the court her belief that this girl fantasizes about sex with older men. This wasn't a witness that she had on the stand, this is her introducing the argument.

Again...No...Not "her belief"...she clearly states "I have been told"..and then asks the court to approve a psychological evaluation.

Who told her that? The defendant..

In her book, Clinton writes that she visited Taylor in the county jail and he “denied the charges against him and insisted that the girl, a distant relative, had made up her story.”

Clinton filed a motion to order the 12-year-old girl to get a psychiatric examination. “I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing … [and] that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body,” according to an affidavit filed by Clinton in support of her motion.

Interestingly enough...she had the defendant take a Polygraph...and he passed..

Clinton: Of course he claimed he didn’t. All this stuff. He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.

www.factcheck.org...

At that point...as a defense attorney...she is obligated to have the girl talked to by psychologist to see if she made up the story...

Again, all of this said...she got the man she was appointed to defend to admit guilt and plead guilty...despite him having passed a polygraph and despite the prosecutor not having any physical evidence...they erroneously threw it out.

Back to your original claim "I have been told"...means just that...

"I believe"...?? Your claim?...she never said that.

He is on now .
At a rally.

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: UKTruth
...the next video leak on Trump is supposed to land in 5 minutes time....

???????????????

Where are you hearing that?