Posted on 10/01/2016 6:36:12 AM PDT by detective
In the recently concluded presidential debate, Donald Trump said that Chicago's soaring murder rate could be cut by implementing a stop and frisk policy and that such a policy did wonders to reduce New York City's crime rate. Thereupon, debate moderator and liberal media fact checker Lester Holt interjected and informed the 100 million views watching the debate that stop and frisk is unconstitutional.
Sorry, but the Holt was wrong.
To begin with, Trump was correct in noting that stop and frisk was effective in reducing crime, particular violent gun related crime in New York City. Looking at the evidence, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani claims that this policy played a major role in reducing crime in the Big Apple by 85% from 1994 to 2014. As Giuliani says, stop and frisk helped transform New York from being the crime capital of America to one of the safest city in the country. And since six out of ten murder victims in New York tend to be black, stop and frisk saved the lives thousands of African-Americans.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Only Trump told the truth.
It is clear that Holt and Clinton were working together against Trump.
I think this was one of the best moments for Trump. He showed that they were wrong, he had a handle on the issue and he put Holt in his place.
If anything, Holt helped Trump by asking the question.
Holt was far worse than Crowley. I expect the next “debate” will be even worse than Holt with planted audience questions, ec.
BTW, Trump was very knowledgeable on the topic and it showed. His demeanor is totally different when he knows the topic well...he is in complete control. I watched his speech in front of a construction group and he really killed it because he knew the topics in and out.
If he only would have spent more time studying up on other topics, he would be walking away with this election.
Republicans should stop participating in the debates, it’s just one thing after another from the moderators.
Hillary would be toast if it wasn’t for the debates. She has almost disappeared from the campaign scene and the debates are the only thing keeping her in the public eye. It was a major mistake for Trump to do the debates, he should have announced at the beginning of the year he wasn’t going to take part.
This article states almost exactly what Giuliani said on Fox the next day, the only difference is in the specific terminology used.
Rudy said it was the application that was in question in New York, not the law itself, same thing this article says. In other words, how they went about it, not the fact that they did it.
The unfortunate part is that 90% of the low info voters who watched it will never get the truth, and will still believe Trump was lying. How many mainstream media stations will report that Holt was proven wrong?
Holt made a black mockery of fairness
and used planted questions, shared questions, biased
questions, different lecterns, different mikes,
face signals with Clinton, the NBC pickup operative,
and even lying to spoil a Presidential Debate.
Why is this different from being patted down at the airport? (That’s not a rhetorical question) I got the treatment last time I flew. I was tempted to tell the guy that the only place he missed was 4:00 IWB which is where I carry.
Stop and frisk w/o probable cause is IMHO a violation of the 4th/5th amendments. First and foremost, giving the government MORE power is prolly not a very good idea. Why not just queue people up before allowing them to enter a particular part of town? Hey, you look kinda thuggy, step over here.
How bout capture and screen? In other words, allow the government to access your private emails and pull screen captures without probable cause? You know, in the interest of security.
Let's see, how bout placing automatic license plate scanners all along the highways with speed radar in an effort to just automatically send a ticket in the mail for speeding. Better yet, an ALPR capturing your plate in a part of town at 2am, the cops then call your cell phone to ask what it is your doing in this part of town so early in the a.m.
Cops come to your door, “excuse me sir, we would like to take a look around, please step back”. Cops putting up roadblocks all around town, stopping folks...you know, just to make sure all is in order.
It could go on and on and on.
Lester Dope is just that...a dope.
The USA needs less Holt.
‘Rats need to be working on closing the Gun Burglary Loophole.
uhn, huh but, FU.
Stop and Frisk was effective but, wholly unconstitutional, IMO.
It worked but, that doesn’t make it right.
Reasonable Suspicion??? That is soHHH subjective and beyond “PROOF” which, at a minimum, for it genesis, requires “Probable Cause”.
That is; Any sane and reasonable person could and would conclude this person is or has committed the crime purported, accused or observed.
“Reasonable people can disagree”
Lester (Candy Crowley) Holt should be ashamed of himself and NEVER moderate another debate!
Where does he get off correcting Trump? And Holt was WRONG!
These Urinalists need to just ask their questions and then STFU.
WHAT THE HELL was going on at Hillary’s lectern? Grand Central Station. No one was at Trump’s lectern.
Inquiring minds want to know, what was “the cleaner” doing exactly?
Trump should demand a real time fact-checker for the moderators.
Lester Holt needs to be locked up.
Along with Hillary!.
Unless one is absolutely ignorant of the 4th Amendment, “stop and frisk” is very very very obviously unconstitutional - regardless of what any corrupted court may say.
Effective sure. Constitutional no way.
I don’t care how many deputy dog catchers say that it is you can never square it with the words in the Constitution.
Trump should start the next debate that if Anderson Cooper is going to constantly interrupt and debate him he is walking off. He shouldn’t have to debate two people on the same side.
Pray America wakes
Why was Holt entering into the debate anyway. That should be only for the debaters. This was another debate where the moderator thought it was their job to speak for their candidate against the other candidate. Crowley, Kelly and now Holt. Something really smells here. I can’t believe that they were not paid off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.