Somebody summarize the debate for me

[snfaulkner]

@Merneith

Probably. But that’s no reason not to make her feel bad about it.

Sure it is. Wait, do you need a reason to make people on facebook feel bad?

[truthSeeker2]

@Chronos

I’d like to thank GulfTiger and truthSeeker2 for making the Democrats’ point so clearly: Yes, what Trump did is just business. And that’s why “just business” is what’s bad for America, and needs to be reined in.

Business should be done like business. Imagine a bank manager sanctioning loans of people who are not credit worthy because she/he is not interested in ‘just business’.

Providing the best service to clients in least money among competition, following all rules, paying all taxes is all part of ‘just business’. U can do a lot of good for society doing ‘just business’ when u aren’t in politics.

There are things like corporate social responsibility (csr) etc. which are also part of business btw.

[JohnT]

I still think that Eric Trump looks like what would happen if Nosferatu fucked Draco Malfoy.

[Chronos]

And you can make “just business” a lot less bloody by changing the rules, and by making sure that businesses really do follow all of the rules. Neither of those is anything Trump is remotely interested in.

[JohnT]

The number of crimes, the vast differences in jurisdictions, the persistancy of these crimes and the fact that others are ensnared in them makes both Trump organizations, company and foundation, ripe RICO targets.

So I wouldn’t base arguments upon Trump’s business acumen just yet, TruthSeeker.

[elucidator]

@truthSeeker2

…There are things like corporate social responsibility (csr) etc. which are also part of business btw.

Now, this is an excellent idea!

[Jragon]

@JohnT

The number of crimes, the vast differences in jurisdictions, the persistancy of these crimes and the fact that others are ensnared in them makes both Trump organizations, company and foundation, ripe RICO targets.

So I wouldn’t base arguments upon Trump’s business acumen just yet, TruthSeeker.

He’s already being RICO’d for the Trump University thing

Federal District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel has ruled that Donald J. Trump, founder of Trump University, must face civil trial for fraud and racketeering under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). Trump had moved for summary judgment in a last-ditch effort to block a class-action trial scheduled to begin right after the national election.

Denying the motion, Judge Curiel ruled that there were genuine issues of material fact for trial as to whether Trump had personally committed fraud and racketeering. If Trump loses, he is liable for three times the damages suffered by the students who paid tuition. That is the bite of the RICO statute — triple damages. This could amount to many tens of millions of dollars.

E: I don’t know when the next trial date is, but I’d like to drive home that our country is in a position where a sitting president may, shortly after inauguration (meaning: for a scandal not discovered post-election), have to sit in and defend themselves in a RICO trial.

[Gyrate]

@Jragon

I don’t know when the next trial date is, but I’d like to drive home that our country is in a position where a sitting president may, shortly after inauguration (meaning: for a scandal not discovered post-election), have to sit in and defend themselves in a RICO trial.

November 28 for the California case. It might be over before Inauguration Day, or shortly thereafter, depending on any holiday breaks and other delays. Of course, there’s also the New York cases to come.

The Economist has done a little data crunching on which moments of the debate received the most repetition in news coverage. There appear to be three big points that are getting the most airplay:

• Clinton hits Trump on income tax (about 35 minutes in)
• Trump is questioned on “birther” controversy (about 55 minutes in)
• Clinton says Trump calls women “pigs, slobs and dogs” (near the end)

Note that these are all points that make Trump look bad. The Economist has anticipated the predictable response:

“Mainstream media conspiracy!”, Trumpistas may harrumph. But it is hard to argue that even Mr Trump’s most stinging attack—his denunciation of Mrs Clinton’s wishy-washy stance on trade deals—carried the same punch as Mrs Clinton’s well-rehearsed zingers. Mr Trump and his campaign surrogates have hinted that he may take off the gloves and invoke Bill Clinton’s marital infidelities in the second debate. Such a tactic would surely receive heavy media coverage—but could easily sour voters on Mr Trump, rather than his opponent.

[BigT]

@DigitalC

She’s still going to vote for Trump.

Yeah, probably. But my point is that she still considers herself undecided. If she were polled, she would have said undecided. She’s unlikely to opt out as the post I was quoting said. That was my point.

[truthSeeker2]

@elucidator

Now, this is an excellent idea!

Agreed.

[Gyrate]

@truthSeeker2

Agreed.

Of course they’re not actually part of Trump’s business, as the various revelations about his Foundation and business practices are making clear.

[truthSeeker2]

@Gyrate

Of course they’re not actually part of Trump’s business, as the various revelations about his Foundation and business practices are making clear.

If you say so sir.

Btw it doesn’t matter but I am not supporting any particular candidate anymore.

[Totenfeier]

@JohnT

I still think that Eric Trump looks like what would happen if Nosferatu fucked Draco Malfoy.

(mic drop)