Hal 9000

Well, lets face it, what we're seeing is an attempted coup d'etat. I'm quite curious what the Trump supports will do if it works. The 2nd amendment protect people's right to bear arms in case of a government takeover. This might be just be the beginning of that takeover.

Nothing you say is nearly as dramatic as you think, you do know that...right? You must be surprised every morning at seeing the sun come up.

Really! I don't see anybody twisting or turning. And, since when did Ivanka do anything remotely close to the corruption around Hillary?

This may be an honest response, but will get trolled by the not so bright but... First lady's are almost expected to take on a pet project in this day and age. Melania prefers to stay out of the limelight while Ivanka (first daughter) has some very real causes that she'd like to assist - mainly women's issues, and helping working/entrepreneurial women. I think it's good cause regardless of her "hotness". Women should be applauding her.

Oh, I see, you're still butthurt over Ivanka's foundation. Well, i guess if you don't see a difference between different types of trade deals and don't see any difference between foundations and people, then I guess you'd be confused.

Would you get off your "ethics" high horse. There is not one single Hillary supporter that can talk about "ethics". Sorry if I don't think anything Brennan said was earthshaking, his testimony amounted to "don't ask me, ask the FBI".

Did you watch the testimony? I did, it wasn't explosive, it was just meh. Same old "evidence of Russia interference", "there was contact by someone", "didn't see any collusion", "passed the info off".

I guess i'll have to slow it down for you! I- Couldn't -Give -A -Rats -ASS-Who- HILLARY -Took money -FROM, MY- Issue -with -HILLARY -Is- Where -The- MONEY- Went. And, when did I ever say anything about ethics? The only ethics I care about is where the money goes. Now, if Ivanka suddenly ends up able to account for only less than 10% of the money, then it's question time, until then - It's awesome.

I see how this is being spun, but does this mean that Trump asked them to bury evidence or did Trump ask them to confirm what many in the intelligence community were saying - that there was no evidence of collusion?

The Clintons (and their friends/relatives) took every dollar they could from Haiti and left them destitute. No, it would not take a criminal conviction to be against Ivanka, it would take something close to the despicable actions of the Clintons. However, for you people, all you need to crucify her is the knowledge that she is starting a foundation - right?

I don't give a good god damn who they took money from, sure there is hypocrisy from the Clintons but that wasn't and still isn't my argument.

From what I understand, she won't be handling the money. Whatever...The Clintons and their foundations are corrupt - only a no-mind disputes that. Ivanka has done nothing to show that she is corrupt.

Well, I don't compare Hillary and Bill with Ivanka, so if Ivanka turns out to be corrupt as the Clintons surely are, then it will not be awesome. If she puts the money - all of it towards helping women, then that will be awesome. At this point, you'd have to be totally bias to already be against her. Also, I don't think Ivanka needs to bilk people out of money.

^^^Personally, I think it's awesome.

I hardly think it was an "oops", we all know who the parties involved were. There is no "cat of the bag" moment here -- sorry!

Society gets their cues from media. And as long as movies and TV are made this way and people like Sharon Osbourne are allowed to laugh hysterically when a guy gets his junk thrown in a blender, it will never change. Not one woman who has murdered her husband has not used the abuse excuse - because frankly, we all simply accept that, conversely, any man accused of assaulting a woman is clearly "controlling". A man getting assaulted by a women is always considered justified by society.

But it is more acceptable. Just watch any movie or TV show, even if a video goes viral on the news they make it ok for women to abuse men in all sorts of ways. If it's a drama, you'll see a punch to the face, kick to the nads and we know that he had it coming - he's a real bastard after all. If it's a comedy, same thing... the male antagonist always takes a punch to the face and kick to the nads - this time we're all supposed to laugh - and many do. I laugh at the notion that it's not acceptable, in many movies and TV shows, it's often the big finale.

^^So? What do you think, Netanyahu is gonna play hardball with Trump - I seriously doubt it?

I would be willing to bet that the SA deal had some stipulations toward the treatment of Israel. Trump deals usually have many facets and ties attached, that's why there are multi deals involved with the signing of the arms deal.

I have no idea, I wasn't there. That's why I said "might have".

^^Yeah, that's what I thought! I guess we'll just have to wait until Maddow tells you why you should be against it.

I want to know your opinion on why you don't think he should've made a deal with Saudi Arabia. You do have an opinion...Right?

Why would he do that?

Is this allowed? Wow!

I don't think there's anything new or unusual about what you witnessed. I think I'd have a hard time finding a guy who hasn't been hit by a women because she knew "the rules". With that said, the comment about her being a minor?...Who knows what the guy was saying, he might have had it coming. And yes, sometimes people do have it coming.