[AMV] Amerikaanse verkiezingen 2016 #208 Keizer Trump

Actions as Maricopa County Sheriff[edit]
Changes to jail operations[edit]
During his term as Sheriff, Arpaio began to serve inmates spoiled food and has limited meal times to twice a day.[33]

He banned inmates from possessing "sexually explicit material" including Playboy magazine after female officers complained that inmates openly masturbated while viewing them, or harassed the officers by comparing their anatomy to the nude photos in the publications. The ban was challenged on First Amendment grounds but upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[34]

In February 2007, Arpaio instituted an in-house radio station he calls KJOE.[35] Arpaio's radio station broadcasts classical music, opera, Frank Sinatra hits, patriotic music and educational programming. It operates from the basement of the county jail for five days a week, four hours each day.

In March 2007, the Maricopa County Jail hosted "Inmate Idol",[36] a takeoff on the popular TV show American Idol.

Starting in July 2000, the Maricopa County Sheriff's website hosted “Jail Cam”, a 24-hour Internet webcast of images from cameras in the Madison Street Jail, a facility which processed and housed pretrial detainees. The goals of the broadcasts were the deterrence of future crime and improved public scrutiny of jail procedures. The cameras showed arrestees being brought in handcuffed, fingerprinted, booked, and taken to holding cells; with the site receiving millions of hits per day.[37] Twenty-four former detainees brought suit against the Sheriff's office, arguing that their Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process had been violated.

Under Arpaio, the Maricopa County Jails have lost accreditation multiple times.[38] In September, 2008, the National Commission on Correctional Health Care terminated the accreditation of all Maricopa County Sheriff's Office jails for failure to maintain compliance with national standards, and providing false information about such compliance.[dead link][39][40] In October, 2008, a U.S. district court judge ruled that grossly inadequate conditions at the Maricopa County Jail, overseen by Arpaio, are unconstitutional and jeopardize the health and safety of prisoners.[41]

Tent city[edit]
Arpaio set up a "tent city" as an extension of the Maricopa County Jail (33�25′40″N 112�07′26″W). Tent City is located in a yard next to a more permanent structure containing toilets, showers, an area for meals, and a day room.[42] It has become notable particularly because of Phoenix's extreme temperatures. Daytime temperatures inside the tents have been reported as high as 150 �F (65 �C) in the top bunks.[43] During the summer, fans and water are supplied in the tents.[44]

During the summer of 2003, when outside temperatures exceeded 110 �F (43 �C), which is higher than average, Arpaio said to complaining inmates, "It's 120 degrees in Iraq and the soldiers are living in tents, have to wear full body armor, and they didn't commit any crimes, so shut your mouths."[45] Inmates were given permission to wear only their pink underwear.

"Mesa Hilton"[edit]
Arpaio also maintains a facility called The Maricopa County Southeast Jail Facility. According to a news report from the Phoenix New Times, this facility has been in use since 2004 as an alternative to the Tent city. This facility has been alleged by the Phoenix New Times to be for celebrities and friends of Arpaio only. This facility is full of amenities and dubbed the "Mesa Hilton" as it is in stark contrast to the Tent City set up for normal inmates. It is where Adam Stoddard, Deputy of Arpaio's who stole confidential documents from an Attorney's file spent his time for contempt of court.[46]

Volunteer chain gangs[edit]
In 1995, Arpaio reinstituted chain gangs. In 1996, Arpaio expanded the chain gang concept by instituting female volunteer chain gangs.[47] Female inmates work seven hours a day (7 a.m. to 2 p.m.), six days a week. He has also instituted the world's first all-juvenile volunteer chain gang; volunteers earn high school credit toward a diploma.[48]

Pink underwear[edit]
One of Arpaio's most visible public relations actions was the introduction of pink underwear, which the Maricopa County Sheriff's website cites as being "world famous." despite a man being forced to wear them until he died. His family sued and the court found that it was punishment before his hearing.[49] Arpaio subsequently started to sell customized pink boxers (with the Maricopa County Sheriff's logo and "Go Joe") as a fund-raiser for Sheriff's Posse Association. Despite allegations of misuse of funds received from these sales, Arpaio declined to provide an accounting for the money.[50]

Arpaio's success in gaining press coverage with the pink underwear resulted in him extending the use of the color. He introduced pink handcuffs, using the event to promote his book, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, America's Toughest Sheriff.[51]

Selective Service registration and organ donors[edit]
In 2001, Arpaio required all inmates 18 years and older to register for the Selective Service System. Such registration is mandatory for all U.S. males between 18 and 26 years of age, as well as for resident aliens of the same age regardless of their immigration status. Since 2001, a total of 28,000 inmates (including 9,000 illegal aliens) have registered for Selective Service.[52][53]

The Sheriff also started the "Have a Heart" program in which inmates may volunteer to be organ donors.[53]

Arresting critics[edit]
In 2008, when Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon called for a federal investigation into Arpaio's immigration enforcement tactics, Arpaio's office responded by demanding the mayor's emails and phone logs. Arpaio also had his critic Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley, a Republican, arrested on suspicion of failing to properly disclose business interests.[54] Stapley agreed to a $3.5 million settlement in his lawsuit against Arpaio, Thomas and the County for false arrest.[55]

Immigration enforcement[edit]
In 2005, the Arizona state legislature passed a state law making it a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison, to smuggle illegal aliens across the border. While already a federal crime, Arizona’s law, also known as the “Coyote law”, made it legal for local police to enforce immigration law and also classified persons being smuggled as co-conspirators subject to penalties as laid out in the law.[56]

Arpaio has instructed his sheriff's deputies and members of his civilian posse to arrest illegal aliens. Arpaio told the Washington Times, "My message is clear: if you come here and I catch you, you're going straight to jail.... I'm not going to turn these people over to federal authorities so they can have a free ride back to Mexico. I'll give them a free ride to my jail."[57]

On March 3, 2009, the United States Department of Justice "notified Arpaio of the investigation in a letter saying his enforcement methods may unfairly target Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people"[15] Arpaio denied any wrongdoing and stated that he welcomed the investigation, and would cooperate fully.[58] By May, 2009, Arpaio had hired a Washington D.C. lobbyist, who wrote to Obama administration officials suggesting that the decision to probe Arpaio had been driven by political rivalries and score settling.[59] In July, 2009, Arpaio publicly stated that he would not cooperate with the investigation.[60]

In October 2009, the Department of Homeland Security removed the authority of Arpaio's 160 federally trained deputies to make immigration arrests in the field. Despite the actions of the Department of Homeland Security, Arpaio has maintained that he will still pursue illegal aliens under Arizona state law.[61] As of 2012 and beyond, he continued to do so.[62]

Improper clearance of MCSO cases[edit]
Reports claim that, under Arpaio, the MCSO may be improperly clearing as many as 75% of cases without arrest or proper investigation.[63][64][65][66] The sheriff's office has failed to properly investigate serious crimes, including the rape of a 14-year-old girl by classmates,[67][68] the rape of a 15-year-old girl by two strangers,[69][70] and the rape of a 13-year-old girl by her father.[69][71] These cases were "exceptionally cleared" without investigation or even identifying a suspect in one case which are not in accordance with the FBI standards for exceptional clearance.[69][72] In the case of the 15-year-old girl, the case was closed within one month and before DNA testing was even complete, the 13-year-old's because her mother did not want to "...pursue this investigation," and the 14-year-old's because a suspect declined to come in for questioning.[67][69] In a statement to ABC15, the Sheriff's Office claimed, "The Goldwater Institute’s report cites the FBI’s Uniform Code Reporting handbook, which is a voluntary crime-reporting program to compile statistical information and reports. The UCR is not intended for oversight on how law enforcement agencies clear cases...The Sheriff’s Office has its own criteria for clearing cases."[68]

In an interview on the ABC Nightline news program, when asked to explain why 82 percent of cases were declared cleared by exception, Arpaio said "We do clear a higher percentage of that. I know that. We clear many, many cases – not 18 percent." Nightline contacted the MCSO after the interview and was told that of 7,346 crimes, only 944, or 15%, had been cleared by arrest.[73]

Webcasts of pretrial detainees[edit]
Starting in July 2000, the Maricopa County Sheriff's website hosted Jail Cam, a 24-hour Internet webcast of images from cameras in the Madison Street Jail, a facility which processed and housed only pretrial detainees. The stated goals of the broadcasts were the deterrence of future crime and improved public scrutiny of jail procedures. The cameras showed arrestees being brought in handcuffed, fingerprinted, booked, and taken to holding cells; with the site receiving millions of hits per day.[37] Twenty-four former detainees brought suit against the Sheriff's office, arguing that their Fourteenth Amendment rights of due process had been violated.

U.S. District Court Judge Earl H. Carroll held in favor of the former detainees, issuing an injunction ending the webcasts. By a 2 to 1 vote, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction, with the majority opinion stating:

... Second, Sheriff Arpaio argues that the cameras are justified by the County’s interest in having its pretrial detention centers open to public scrutiny. We have given prison officials wide latitude in administering pretrial detention facilities, in guaranteeing detainees’ attendance at trial, and in promoting prison safety. But we fail to see how turning pretrial detainees into the unwilling objects of the latest reality show serves any of these legitimate goals. As the Supreme Court has recognized, "[i]nmates . . . are not like animals in a zoo to be filmed and photographed at will by the public or by media reporters, however ‘educational’ the process may be for others.[74][75]
In his dissenting opinion, Circuit Judge Carlos Bea wrote:

... What the majority avoids—perhaps because of the all-too-predictable result—is to ask the question basic to any review questioning the validity of governmental action under a rational basis analysis: were the webcasts reasonably related to the purpose of deterring public behavior that could result in pretrial detention? The answer clearly is Yes. ... Similarly unexamined is the Sheriff’s purpose of providing transparency of jail operations as a civic good.
Sheriff Arpaio’s methods to achieve his purposes of public deterrence and governmental transparency may not suit the fine sensibilities of some group advocates and jurists. But absent a violation of the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs—and I see none—such differences of opinion must be vindicated, if at all, in the ballot box, not in the courtroom.[75]
The US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the case. Ultimately, Maricopa County was required to pay the detainees' legal costs and damages.[76]

Inmate complaints and lawsuits[edit]
From 2004 through November 2007, Arpaio was the target of 2,150 lawsuits in U.S. District Court and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts, with more than $50 million in claims being filed,[77] 50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as the New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.[78] Allegations of cruel treatment of inmates as well as living conditions have been cited by Amnesty International in a report issued on the treatment of inmates in Maricopa County facilities.[79]

Recidivism[edit]
In 1998, Arpaio commissioned a study, by Arizona State University criminal justice professor Marie L. Griffin, to examine recidivism rates based on conditions of confinement. Comparing recidivism rates under Arpaio to those under his predecessor, the study found "there was no significant difference in recidivism observed between those offenders released in 1989–1990 and those released in 1994–1995."[80]

Inmate deaths and injuries[edit]
Family members of inmates who have died or been injured in jail custody have filed lawsuits against the sheriff’s office. Maricopa County has paid more than $43 million in settlement claims during Arpaio's tenure.[81]

Charles Agster[edit]
In August 2001, Charles Agster, a 33-year-old mentally handicapped man, died in the county jail three days after being forced by sheriff's officers into a restraint chair used for controlling combative arrestees. Agster's parents had been taking him to a psychiatric hospital because he was exhibiting paranoia, then called police when he refused to leave a convenience store where they had stopped en route. Officers took Agster to the Madison Street jail, placed a spit hood over his face and strapped him to the chair, where he had an apparent seizure and lost consciousness. He was declared brain dead three days later. A medical examiner later concluded that Agster died of complications of methamphetamine intoxication. In a subsequent lawsuit, an attorney for the sheriff's office described the amount of methamphetamine in Agster's system as 17 times the known lethal dose. The lawsuit resulted in a $9 million jury verdict against the county, the sheriff's office, and Correctional Health Services.[82]

Scott Norberg[edit]
One major controversy includes the 1996 death of inmate Scott Norberg, a former Brigham Young University football wide receiver, who died while in custody of the Sheriff's office.[83] Norberg was arrested for assaulting a police officer in Mesa, Arizona, after neighbors in a residential area had reported a delirious man walking in their neighborhood.[84] Arpaio's office repeatedly claimed Norberg was also high on methamphetamine, but a blood toxicology performed post-mortem was inconclusive. According to a toxological report, Norberg did have methamphetamine in his urine, though "there would be no direct effect caused by the methamphetamine on Norberg's behavior at the time of the incident".[85] During his internment, evidence suggests detention officers shocked Norberg several times with a stun-gun. According to an investigation by Amnesty International, Norberg was already handcuffed and face down when officers dragged him from his cell and placed him in a restraint chair with a towel covering his face. After Norberg's corpse was discovered, detention officers accused Norberg of attacking them as they were trying to restrain him. The cause of his death, according to The Maricopa County Medical Examiner, was due to "positional asphyxia". Sheriff Arpaio investigated and subsequently cleared detention officers of any criminal wrongdoing.[86]

Norberg’s parents filed a lawsuit against Arpaio and his office. The lawsuit was settled for $8.25 million (USD).[87]

Richard Post[edit]
Richard Post was a paraplegic inmate arrested in 1996 for possession of marijuana and criminal trespass. Post was placed in a restraint chair by guards and his neck was broken in the process. The event, caught on video, shows guards smiling and laughing while Post is being injured.[citation needed] Because of his injuries, Post has lost much of the use of his arms.[88] Post settled his claims against the Sheriff's office for $800,000.[89]

Brian Crenshaw[edit]
Brian Crenshaw was a legally blind and mentally disabled inmate who suffered fatal injuries while being held in Maricopa County Jail for shoplifting. The injuries that led to his death were initially blamed on a fall from his bunk but were later discovered to have been the result of a brutal beating by jail guards on March 7, 2003. A lawsuit filed in The Maricopa County Superior Court of Arizona by the lawyer for Crenshaw's family stated:

An external examination report of The Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office concluded that Brian's death was caused by "complications of blunt force trauma due to a fall." This conclusion was reached largely on the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office's relation of their "history" of Brian's injuries to the Medical Examiner's Office; a history that included the MCSO's implausible story that all of Brian's injuries were caused by a fall from his cell bed. The Maricopa County Medical Examiner conducted no autopsy; nor was the Maricopa County Medical Examiner informed by MCSO or The Maricopa County Correctional Health Services about Brian's beating on March 7, 2003 and/or related events. An independent autopsy report later narrowed the cause of Brian's death to peritonitis and sepsis secondary to the duodenal perforation. A fall from Brian's 4-foot, 2 inch bunk could not have simultaneously caused a broken neck, broken toes, and a duodenal perforation.[90]

The lawsuit against Arpaio and his office resulted in an award of $2 million.[91] As in the Scott Norberg case, it was alleged that Arpaio's office destroyed evidence in the case. In the Crenshaw case, the attorney who represented the case before a jury alleged digital video evidence was destroyed.[92]

Conflicts with local news media[edit]
In July 2004, The Phoenix New Times published Arpaio's home address in the context of a story about his real estate dealings. In October, 2007, a Maricopa County special prosecutor served Village Voice Media, the Phoenix New Times' corporate parent, with a subpoena ordering it to produce "all documents" related to the original real estate article, as well as the IP addresses of all visitors to the Phoenix New Times website since January 1, 2004. The Phoenix New Times then published the contents of the subpoena on October 18.[93] Phoenix New Times editors Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin were arrested and jailed by Maricopa Sheriff's Deputies on misdemeanor charges of revealing grand jury secrets after the publication of the subpoena.[94] On the following day, the county attorney dropped the case and fired the special prosecutor.[95][96] In a subsequent lawsuit, Lacey and Larkin won $3.75 million in damages for false arrest.[97]

On November 28, 2007, it was ruled that the subpoenas were not validly issued[98] and in April 2008, the New Times editors filed suit against Arpaio, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Special Prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik.[99]

In 2009, The East Valley Tribune ran a series of articles that criticized the Maricopa County sheriff for a decline in normal police protection due to an increased focus towards arresting illegal immigrants.[9] The five-part series titled “Reasonable Doubt,” which received a Pulitzer Prize for Local Reporting, described "slow emergency response times and lax criminal enforcement."[100]

On December 23, 2009, The Arizona Republic published an editorial titled “The Conspiracy that won’t stop.”[101] The Editorial Board referenced a published letter written by the Yavapai County Attorney, Sheila Polk, titled “Arpaio, Thomas are abusing power” ”[102] in which Polk was critical of Arpaio. The Editorial Board claimed that “As a result of stepping forward, Polk now may join the fast-growing list of Arizona public officials forced to defend themselves against criminal investigations for the "crime" of having upset Arpaio and Thomas.”[101]

Critical organizations[edit]
Arpaio's practices have been criticized by organizations such as Amnesty International,[79] the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee,[103] and the Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League.[104] The editorial board of The New York Times called Arpaio "America's Worst Sheriff".[105]

Lawsuits filed by Joe Arpaio and the MCSO[edit]
On December 2, 2009 County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Arpaio filed a federal lawsuit alleging racketeering charges against four judges, as well as various private attorneys, all current members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and some county managers.[106]

On March 11, 2010, Arpaio announced that “the Department of Justice Office of Public Integrity in Washington, D.C. has agreed to review allegations of corruption involving the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and judicial officials and others. RICO complaints previously filed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office were formally withdrawn so as not to duplicate or hinder the Department of Justice review or any additional investigation necessary.”[107]

On March 13, 2010, in a letter sent to Arpaio’s lawyer, Robert Driscoll of Alston & Bird LLP, Raymond N. Hulser, Acting Chief, Department of Justice, Office of Public Integrity Section, responded that he was "dismayed to learn that (the Sheriff's Office's) mere referral of information to the Public Integrity Section was cited and relied upon in a pleading in federal court, and then used as a platform for a press conference." Mr. Husler also noted in this letter that no review of the materials would be undertaken by the Public Integrity Section.[108][109]

In a subsequent lawsuit filed by the targets of the RICO action, U.S. District Judge Neil Wake called the RICO action "patently frivolous" and ruled that Arpaio and Thomas were not immune from civil liability.[110] Several millions of dollars in awards and settlements resulted from this lawsuit including $1.27 million to retired Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe and $975,000 to former County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox.[111][112]

KoosVogels	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 13:51
	De Republikeinse kandidaat Donald Trump - New York Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 De Democratische kandidaat Hillary Clinton - New York Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016 De libertarische kandidaat Gary Johson - New Mexico Gary Johnson presidential campaign, 2016 De groene kandidaat Jill Stein - Massachusetts Jill Stein presidential campaign, 2016 United States presidential election, 2016 Amerikaanse presidentsverkiezingen 2016 Poll: Op welke kandidaat zou jij stemmen? • Donald Trump • Hillary Clinton ^Tussenstand: ^{Ook een poll maken? Klik hier} Poll: Op welke kandidaat zou jij stemmen? • Donald Trump • Hillary Clinton • Gary Johnson • Jill Stein ^Tussenstand: ^{Ook een poll maken? Klik hier} Bij welke kandidaat pas jij? De Amerikaanse stemwijzer http://www.isidewith.com/ Het Amerikaanse kieskompas https://usa.kieskompas.nl/nl/#/ https://docs.google.com/s(...)HEBdO2Xsg/edit#gid=0 https://www.theguardian.c(...)ap&type=presidential Update van alle andere races en referenda SPOILER: STREAMS Sky Sky News Live Fox LIVE Election Day Coverage Fox News - LIVE Election Day 2016 - Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton 2016 CNN CNN live news Election day / Who will win the 2016 presidential election VICE Election 2016 Live! Presented by Vice News, Slate, and Vote Castr BLOOMBERG Global News and LIVE Coverage of U.S. Election on Bloomberg TV Vindt Den Haag Trump nog steeds een mafketel? - RTL NIEUWS
KoosVogels	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 13:55
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 13:50 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] En hoe is 'de vlag uit bij de KKK' relevant voor Trump? Wat heeft hij daarmee te maken? Ging bij de Black Panthers de vlag uit toen Obama president werd? En wat heeft Obama daarmee te maken? Juist, niets. Haal die kop toch eens uit het zand. De reden dat de KKK, Alt-Right en andere nazistische types weglopen met Trump, is vanwege de taal die de beste man de afgelopen uit heeft lopen slaan. Zijn supporters hier op FOK! houden vol dat er niets racistisch is aan zijn uitspraken, maar daar denken de genoemde haters toch net iets anders over. Trump gaat in hun ogen weliswaar niet ver genoeg, maar het is in ieder geval een stap in de goede richting. Zelfs als je Bannon op de een of andere vrij zou kunnen pleiten, dan kan dat niet wordt gezegd van Breitbart, Die website is een magneet voor boze white power-figuren. En nee, ik zeg daarmee niet dat alle aanhangers van Trump racisten zijn.
antiderivative	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:00
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 13:26 schreef KrappeAuto het volgende: [..] Was die Bannon ook die man die door CNN et al. werd neergezet als anti-semiet voordat meerdere prominente joden daartegen opkwamen? Zijn er voorbeelden waaruit ondubbelzinnig blijkt dat Bannon een racist is? Hij werkt samen met de Kushners op het moment...en met David Horowitz. Dat moet dan wel een hel voor hem zijn en daar kiest ie ook nog zelf voor!! Maar serieus, dit soort beschuldigingen passen in het rijtje 'roepen omdat het kan'. Simon Schama riep bij Newsnight dat Trump zelf een antisemiet is. Maar hij vergat even dat Ivanka Joods is, zijn schoonfamilie, Netanyahu noemt hem een vriend van Israel, en Trump heeft allerlei 'Joodse onderscheidingen' waaronder: The Jewish National Fund's Tree of Life Award for outstanding contributions to Israel–United States relations.(1983) The Algemeiner Liberty Award for contributions to Israel–United States relations. (2015)
KrappeAuto	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:14
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 13:43 schreef KoosVogels het volgende: [..] Dit spelletje kunnen we nog heel lang spelen. Het is ook weer typisch. Alt-Right profileert zich duidelijk als een beweging voor white supremacists, maar als de volgelingen daarmee worden geconfronteerd, weten ze plots van niets. Waarom je schamen voor je ideologie? ‘Can you name one white nationalist article at Breitbart?’ Challenge accepted! quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 13:48 schreef Xa1pt het volgende: [..] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Bannon Ik doe niet aan link dumps. Je kunt je eigen argumenten verwoorden en eventueel een link plaatsen als bron, maar een discussie met link dumps ga ik niet aan. Laat eens concreet zien waaruit blijkt dat Bannon blanke mensen boven anderen ziet staan.
#ANONIEM	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:16
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:14 schreef KrappeAuto het volgende: [..] [..] Ik doe niet aan link dumps. Je kunt je eigen argumenten verwoorden en eventueel een link plaatsen als bron, maar een discussie met link dumps ga ik niet aan. Laat eens concreet zien waaruit blijkt dat Bannon blanke mensen boven anderen ziet staan. Dat is natuurlijk wel een zwaktebod aangezien uit die links het wel duidelijk naar voren komt maar goed typisch struisvogelgedrag natuurlijk weer. Gokje bij gebruik eigen woorden dan is natuurlijk de opmerking waar de onderbouwing met bronnen is [ Bericht 10% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 17-11-2016 14:18:16 ]
OMG	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:18
	Vragen waarom er zoveel Hanukkah boeken in een school te vinden zijn en melden dat je een school niet geschikt vind om je kind naar toe te sturen vanwege het aantal joodse leerlingen heeft al een vrij aparte inslag. Maar dat zal ook wel weer recht geluld worden.
KoosVogels	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:19
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:14 schreef KrappeAuto het volgende: [..] [..] Ik doe niet aan link dumps. Je kunt je eigen argumenten verwoorden en eventueel een link plaatsen als bron, maar een discussie met link dumps ga ik niet aan. Laat eens concreet zien waaruit blijkt dat Bannon blanke mensen boven anderen ziet staan. Hoho, ik weet niet wat de persoonlijke denkbeelden zijn van Bannon. Ik gaf alleen aan dat hij de voorman was van Breitbart, en daarom de held van Alt-Right, een beweging wel degelijk van mening is dat blanken superieur zijn. [ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door KoosVogels op 17-11-2016 14:26:51 ]
Maxerazzi	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:22
	Wel bijzonder: alles wat ook maar in z'n geringste aan Clinton gelinkt was, werd direct aan haar vastgeplakt, alsof het de duivel zelf was, zij d�rect verantwoordelijk was, maar nu gaat men hier wel een schijndiscussietje voeren over Steve Bannon, die gewoon voorman was van Breitbart en daarmee overduidelijk medeverantwoordelijk was voor de inhoud van die website. Tering, wat sneu weer eigenlijk.
skysherrif	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:31
	Weer moslim familie door Trump supporter aangevallen SPOILER
antiderivative	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:31
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:22 schreef Maxerazzi het volgende: Wel bijzonder: alles wat ook maar in z'n geringste aan Clinton gelinkt was, werd direct aan haar vastgeplakt, alsof het de duivel zelf was, zij d�rect verantwoordelijk was, maar nu gaat men hier wel een schijndiscussietje voeren over Steve Bannon, die gewoon voorman was van Breitbart en daarmee overduidelijk medeverantwoordelijk was voor de inhoud van die website. Tering, wat sneu weer eigenlijk. Clinton was/is ook de duivel, want in tegenstelling tot Bannon als hoofd van een website, was zij daadwerkelijk vriendelijk met dubieuze figuren zoals KKK'er Robert Byrd: http://observer.com/2010/(...)-mentor-robert-byrd/
Ludachrist	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:34
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:31 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] Clinton was/is ook de duivel, want in tegenstelling to Bannon als hoofd van een website, was zij daadwerkelijk vriendelijk met dubieuze figuren zoals KKK'er Robert Byrd: http://observer.com/2010/(...)-mentor-robert-byrd/ Ik denk dat je je wat beter moet verdiepen in Byrd.
Mike	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:34
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:31 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] Clinton was/is ook de duivel, want in tegenstelling to Bannon als hoofd van een website, was zij daadwerkelijk vriendelijk met dubieuze figuren zoals KKK'er Robert Byrd: http://observer.com/2010/(...)-mentor-robert-byrd/ Dat verhaal is hier nu al een aantal keer behandeld en toch blijft dit maar opduiken.
Maxerazzi	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:35
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:31 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] Clinton was/is ook de duivel, want in tegenstelling to Bannon als hoofd van een website, was zij daadwerkelijk vriendelijk met dubieuze figuren zoals KKK'er Robert Byrd: http://observer.com/2010/(...)-mentor-robert-byrd/ Deze discussie is al een keer in dit topic gevoerd. Waarschijnlijk ook met jou: dus kom op, flauw weer dit. Byrd heeft dat verleden heel duidelijk afgezworen in de jaren zestig (hier profiel uit jaren 70) en heeft zich continu ingezet voor de civil rights. De NAACP nota bene rouwde om zijn dood. quote: “Senator Byrd reflects the transformative power of this nation,” stated NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous. “Senator Byrd went from being an active member of the KKK to a being a stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act and many other pieces of seminal legislation that advanced the civil rights and liberties of our country.
antiderivative	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:36
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:34 schreef Ludachrist het volgende: [..] Ik denk dat je je wat beter moet verdiepen in Byrd. Ik heb absoluut geen behoefte om mij te verdiepen in dat soort figuren..
Ludachrist	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:37
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:36 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] Ik heb absoluut geen behoefte om mij te verdiepen in dat soort figuren.. Dat blijkt, het is schijnbaar zelfs te veel moeite om het artikel te lezen dat je zelf linkt.
Euribob	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:38
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:36 schreef antiderivative het volgende: [..] Ik heb absoluut geen behoefte om mij te verdiepen in dat soort figuren.. Een van de weinige figuren die daadwerkelijk zijn KKK-verleden achter zich heeft gelaten en een sterk voorstander van de burgerrechtenbeweging is geworden, met woorden en daden, bedoel je?
skysherrif	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:38
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:35 schreef Maxerazzi het volgende: [..] Deze discussie is al een keer in dit topic gevoerd. Waarschijnlijk ook met jou: dus kom op, flauw weer dit. Byrd heeft dat verleden heel duidelijk afgezworen in de jaren zestig (hier profiel uit jaren 70) en heeft zich continu ingezet voor de civil rights. De NAACP nota bene rouwde om zijn dood. [..] Dit zijn toch wel heftige uitspraken die zelfs na je excuses wel een beetje naar blijven. quote: In December 1944, Byrd wrote to segregationist Mississippi Senator Theodore G. Bilbo: I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds. — Robert C. Byrd, in a letter to Sen. Theodore Bilbo (D-MS), 1944 Maargoed Clinton was pas in contact met hem, nadat hij zich inzette voor rechten van donkere mensen en zijn oprechte excuses. Ik denk dat de meneer eerder bij de Klan ging uit politieke/carriere gerichte redenen dan haat naar zwarte mensen.
Xa1pt	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:40
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:14 schreef KrappeAuto het volgende: [..] [..] Ik doe niet aan link dumps. Je kunt je eigen argumenten verwoorden en eventueel een link plaatsen als bron, maar een discussie met link dumps ga ik niet aan. Laat eens concreet zien waaruit blijkt dat Bannon blanke mensen boven anderen ziet staan. quote: Stephen Kevin "Steve" Bannon (born November 27, 1953) is an American businessman and media executive. He is the executive chairman of Breitbart News, a politically conservative American news, opinion and commentary website noted for its connection to the alt-right.[1][2] He became chief executive officer of the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump in August 2016.[3][4] Bannon will be chief strategist and Senior Counselor for the Presidency of Donald Trump.[5] quote: Bannon became a member of the board of Breitbart News.[19] In March 2012, after founder Andrew Breitbart's death, Bannon became executive chairman of Breitbart News LLC, the parent company of Breitbart News.[20][21][22] Under his leadership, Breitbart took a more alt-right and nationalistic approach towards its agenda.[23] Bannon declared the website "the platform for the alt-right" in 2016.[24]
Maxerazzi	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:40
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:38 schreef skysherrif het volgende: [..] Dit zijn toch wel heftige uitspraken die zelfs na je excuses wel een beetje naar blijven. [..] Maargoed Clinton was pas in contact met hem, nadat hij zich inzette voor rechten van donkere mensen en zijn oprechte excuses. Ik denk dat de meneer eerder bij de Klan ging uit politieke/carriere gerichte redenen dan haat naar zwarte mensen. O, dat ben ik met je eens. En Byrd ook. Het is niet zo dat-ie net alsof deed dat het er nooit was geweest, hij beschouwde het als een fout die hij zijn hele leven goed moest proberen te maken.
antiderivative	donderdag 17 november 2016 @ 14:41
	quote: Op donderdag 17 november 2016 14:35 schreef Maxerazzi het volgende: [..] Deze discussie is al een keer in dit topic gevoerd. Waarschijnlijk ook met jou: dus kom op, flauw weer dit. Byrd heeft dat verleden heel duidelijk afgezworen in de jaren zestig (hier profiel uit jaren 70) en heeft zich continu ingezet voor de civil rights. De NAACP nota bene rouwde om zijn dood. [..] Het is wat, hij heeft het later afgezworen... Maar je wilt wel Bannon fileren omdat hij hoofd van een website was en hem veroordelen zonder enig bewijs inzake 'white supremacy'. Die gedachtenspinsels toch op dit forum..