From the Wall Street Journal Published on 7/23/16 Editorial :

" Don`t look now but Democrats may be having second thoughts about donor disclosure .
At least when it applies to them . On Thursday the Democratic National Convention host committee asked a Pennsylvania Judge to allow them to with-hold donor names until after the Convention" .
.......... " This is hilarious given that Democrats and their progressive allies have spent years demanding donor disclosure so that they can intimidate conservatives from engaging in political speech " .
" The July draft of the Democratic Party platform says " we need to end secret , unaccountable money in politics " .
" Hillary Clinton promised Netroots Nation only last Saturday that she would press for more political disclosure ".
" Put this one in the file for Democrats and their double standards ".

The above will not attract many comments because the Libs on this site would rather ignore reality and spit their emotional vile at everyone who sees the world and our domestic and foreign situation for what they really are --- a dangerous mess from any perspective .

Yes. Notice how they stop , look and quietly move on .

Tipical lefty democrats, do as I say not as I do! Madam the Queen of denial leads the pack.

What can they say? The facts are there, so why should they argue the point? I see no reason to use their tactics and bait them. And don't expect them to make a comment on here that they agree with you. But, there is also no reason to bait them into an argument. This is our forum for discussion, and it has gone a bit awry, mostly because of a liberal troll or two. Lets not lower ourselves to that level.

On the other hand, if you wish to pick an argument with them, it is your prerogative. I am just suggesting that we have enough material to argue without this.

I disagree if this is supposed to be a discussion forum then this is a worthy issue .
It has to do with veracity in both words and deeds and complete lack thereof .

Hoe can the Dems defend this ?

Originally Posted by Guest

I disagree if this is supposed to be a discussion forum then this is a worthy issue .
It has to do with veracity in both words and deeds and complete lack thereof .

Hoe can the Dems defend this ?

I am a registered Republican, but I don't have any problem defending what they are doing. Where does it say that the DNC wants to withhold their donors names forever. All the posts above imply that. If you don't respond two minutes after the start of the thread, the statements made in the thread are gospel.

They are asking the Philly judge to allow them to withhold the names until after the convention. There are three plus months until the election. What difference does one week make?

You know that our party is going to do everything they can to disrupt the DNC Convention. All the DNC is doing is defending themselves against an attack.
Who the hell cares, who the donors are to the DNC?

Here are the guild lines for donations to each party.
http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php
The big money isn't going directly into the parties.

The heavy donors aren't sending most of their money to the DNC/RNC party headquarters. They are sending them to Pacs. Most of these Pacs are charitable organizations, and they don't have to make their donors known.

Go ahead. Start with the comments, you are not a true Republican. That is right I wanted John Kasich as the nominee. He is someone that would have tried to fix Washington. Our party doesn't want to fix Washington. We just want to make it worse. Go Trump Go!

Originally Posted by Guest

I am a registered Republican, but I don't have any problem defending what they are doing. Where does it say that the DNC wants to withhold their donors names forever. All the posts above imply that. If you don't respond two minutes after the start of the thread, the statements made in the thread are gospel.

They are asking the Philly judge to allow them to withhold the names until after the convention. There are three plus months until the election. What difference does one week make?

You know that our party is going to do everything they can to disrupt the DNC Convention. All the DNC is doing is defending themselves against an attack.
Who the hell cares, who the donors are to the DNC?

Here are the guild lines for donations to each party.
2016 Campaign Contribution Limits | OpenSecrets
The big money isn't going directly into the parties.

The heavy donors aren't sending most of their money to the DNC/RNC party headquarters. They are sending them to Pacs. Most of these Pacs are charitable organizations, and they don't have to make their donors known.

Go ahead. Start with the comments, you are not a true Republican. That is right I wanted John Kasich as the nominee. He is someone that would have tried to fix Washington. Our party doesn't want to fix Washington. We just want to make it worse. Go Trump Go!

I almost believed you until you got to that revealing point of pushing Kasich again. When the campaign first started, Kasich was my focus and might have gotten my vote. The more I learned of him and saw how peevish and childish he became, the more I changed my mind about him. He didn't even show up at the RNC convention in his OWN state. When asked why, he came up with a lame excuse. THere was no excuse for him not to go. No one was hard on him. No one called him names and Trump didn't even bother with him. And yet, for some reason he actually thought he deserved to be president. Wow, he won in his own state. He broke his promise to support the winning candidate. He said his promise didn't matter. Does that mean that if things don't go his way, he can freely void his oath of office? I bet he would have been all over Trump if Trump had lost the nomination and went third party. Is Kasich thinking of a third party run? If so, he is stupid because he probably wouldn't even win his own state now. I lost all respect for Kasich after his immature excuse for not attending the convention in his OWN state.

Originally Posted by Guest

I almost believed you until you got to that revealing point of pushing Kasich again. When the campaign first started, Kasich was my focus and might have gotten my vote. The more I learned of him and saw how peevish and childish he became, the more I changed my mind about him. He didn't even show up at the RNC convention in his OWN state. When asked why, he came up with a lame excuse. THere was no excuse for him not to go. No one was hard on him. No one called him names and Trump didn't even bother with him. And yet, for some reason he actually thought he deserved to be president. Wow, he won in his own state. He broke his promise to support the winning candidate. He said his promise didn't matter. Does that mean that if things don't go his way, he can freely void his oath of office? I bet he would have been all over Trump if Trump had lost the nomination and went third party. Is Kasich thinking of a third party run? If so, he is stupid because he probably wouldn't even win his own state now. I lost all respect for Kasich after his immature excuse for not attending the convention in his OWN state.

You almost believed me! So, there is hope.

Kasich is a man of principles. He doesn't believe Trump's policies are good for America. When you sign a pledge, you make the assumption that the winner of the primary with win based upon policies put forward by the candidate. Trump won by calling his opponents names, and telling people what to hear. He flipped 180 degrees on policies, because of the people he was talking to at the time.

There are a lot of high ranking Republicans that want nothing to do with Trump. Kasich has plenty of company.

Trump-Kasich Feud Has GOP Worried About Ohio | RealClearPolitics

Kasich is far from a soar loser. If Kasich went attended the convention, he would have been the only adult in the room. Trump is a petty little child that cries every time he doesn't get his own way. If Trump gets elected, he better get use to not getting his own way in one big hurry. He has elected officials in both parties that will oppose many of his off the wall stupid ideas.

Originally Posted by Guest

You almost believed me! So, there is hope.

Kasich is a man of principles. He doesn't believe Trump's policies are good for America. When you sign a pledge, you make the assumption that the winner of the primary with win based upon policies put forward by the candidate. Trump won by calling his opponents names, and telling people what to hear. He flipped 180 degrees on policies, because of the people he was talking to at the time.

There are a lot of high ranking Republicans that want nothing to do with Trump. Kasich has plenty of company.

Trump-Kasich Feud Has GOP Worried About Ohio | RealClearPolitics

Kasich is far from a soar loser. If Kasich went attended the convention, he would have been the only adult in the room. Trump is a petty little child that cries every time he doesn't get his own way. If Trump gets elected, he better get use to not getting his own way in one big hurry. He has elected officials in both parties that will oppose many of his off the wall stupid ideas.

Kasich lost all credibility when he childishly was absent from his OWN state's convention. He had no credible excuse when asked. He is too liberal for me anyway. I have enjoyed hearing his interviews on FOX for years and thought he would make a good candidate until his terribly anemic campaign and his lazy attitude. He must have lost his motivation in his old age. He should change parties, since he has no loyalty to the GOP. I have no use for those without loyalty. He is dead to me, other than a minor fragment of thought.

I am not worried about what a bunch of dependent liberals have to say about Trump. He is not a disloyal criminal that would put our country in jeopardy due to total disregard for laws. He does not put himself above others when it comes to his country. He does not need to lower himself to the position of president. He is doing it because like some of us, he is concerned about how off track D.C. has become. If you think his language is harsh, apparently you haven't listened to Hillary lately. She is attempting to do what Trump has been successful at, harsh rhetoric. But, in her case, every promise she makes is a lie. Trump has a record of backing his promises. Hillary has a record of disloyalty and deceit. I actually thought that it could not get any worst than Obama, but now I am not so sure. Hillary is a nasty, evil person with no cares for anyone but herself. Nixon was a light weight compared to the despicable Clinton.