Matt Lauer Washes Out In Commander-In-Chief Forum

[MollyMalone]

No Matt Lauer indeed, but perhaps fearful of criticism from the Hillary camp. He asked about taxes and the birther situation but not the Clinton Foundation and pay for play? I wonder if emails were on the list of questions as it didn't originate with him. Holt fact checked but got it wrong, just like Candy Crowley with Romney. Holt jumped in insisting that stop and frisk is unconstitutional. Done away with in NYC, but not unconstitutional.
However, Trump did much more damage to himself. He did introduce the emails but could have done more with it, and he should have brought in the Foundation pay for play himself. Wasted a lot of time. Clinton did well putting him on defense.
It will be interesting if he can recover like others before him. I have my doubts. He's no Reagan or Obama.

Stop-and-frisk is not per se unconstitutional, and it's actually not been discontinued here in NYC. But neither the NY State nor the US Constitution permit the police to willy-nilly subject any of us to a pat-down or a more invasive frisk. And discriminatory adherence to the constitutional standards is also impermissible under both the NYS and federal constitutions. Mayor Bloomberg's administration recognized that when it entered into a stipulation in 2003, which halted litigation initiated in 1999 when Guiliani was still mayor, agreeing to implement fair policies, greater training, etc.:
http://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/Daniels_StipulationOfSettlement_12_03_0.pdf
It was the alleged failure of the City and NYPD to live up to that agreement that prompted the more recent litigation, and yes, the federal judge did find, based on the evidence adduced at trial, that the NYPD had been engaging in stop-and-frisk conduct in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment & the Fourth Amendment's guarantee to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.
http://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/Floyd-Remedy-Decision-Summary-8-12-13.pdf

Trump was flatly wrong when he subsequently declared:

TRUMP: I think maybe there's a political reason why you can't say it, but I really don't believe -- in New York City, stop-and-frisk, we had 2,200 murders, and stop-and-frisk brought it down to 500 murders. Five hundred murders is a lot of murders. It's hard to believe, 500 is like supposed to be good?

But we went from 2,200 to 500. And it was continued on by Mayor Bloomberg. And it was terminated by current mayor. But stop-and- frisk had a tremendous impact on the safety of New York City. Tremendous beyond belief. So when you say it has no impact, it really did. It had a very, very big impact.

CLINTON: Well, it's also fair to say, if we're going to talk about mayors, that under the current mayor, crime has continued to drop, including murders. So there is...

TRUMP: No, you're wrong. You're wrong.

CLINTON: No, I'm not.

TRUMP: Murders are up. All right. You check it.

CLINTON: New York -- New York has done an excellent job. And I give credit -- I give credit across the board going back two mayors, two police chiefs, because it has worked. And other communities need to come together to do what will work, as well.

The stats for murder -- indeed for 6 of the 7 "index crimes" (murder, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft) reported in NYC -- continued to fall in 2014-2015 after new Mayor DiBlasio's administration decided to withdraw an appeal from the federal judge's 2013 orders.
http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimnet/ojsa/indexcrimes/Regions.pdf
The stats show a big jump in the rape category for 2015, but that's because all the police agencies in New York agreed that the sex offenses included within the classification should be expanded to correspond to the FBI's definition.

 

[AnnaH]

No Matt Lauer indeed, but perhaps fearful of criticism from the Hillary camp. He asked about taxes and the birther situation but not the Clinton Foundation and pay for play? I wonder if emails were on the list of questions as it didn't originate with him. Holt fact checked but got it wrong, just like Candy Crowley with Romney. Holt jumped in insisting that stop and frisk is unconstitutional. Done away with in NYC, but not unconstitutional.
However, Trump did much more damage to himself. He did introduce the emails but could have done more with it, and he should have brought in the Foundation pay for play himself. Wasted a lot of time. Clinton did well putting him on defense.
It will be interesting if he can recover like others before him. I have my doubts. He's no Reagan or Obama.

Stop-and-frisk is not per se unconstitutional, and it's actually not been discontinued here in NYC. But neither the NY State nor the US Constitution permit the police to willy-nilly subject any of us to a pat-down or a more invasive frisk. And discriminatory adherence to the constitutional standards is also impermissible under both the NYS and federal constitutions. Mayor Bloomberg's administration recognized that when it entered into a stipulation in 2003, which halted litigation initiated in 1999 when Guiliani was still mayor, agreeing to implement fair policies, greater training, etc.:
http://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/Daniels_StipulationOfSettlement_12_03_0.pdf
It was the alleged failure of the City and NYPD to live up to that agreement that prompted the more recent litigation, and yes, the federal judge did find, based on the evidence adduced at trial, that the NYPD had been engaging in stop-and-frisk conduct in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment & the Fourth Amendment's guarantee to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.
http://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/09/Floyd-Remedy-Decision-Summary-8-12-13.pdf

Trump was flatly wrong when he subsequently declared:

TRUMP: I think maybe there's a political reason why you can't say it, but I really don't believe -- in New York City, stop-and-frisk, we had 2,200 murders, and stop-and-frisk brought it down to 500 murders. Five hundred murders is a lot of murders. It's hard to believe, 500 is like supposed to be good?

But we went from 2,200 to 500. And it was continued on by Mayor Bloomberg. And it was terminated by current mayor. But stop-and- frisk had a tremendous impact on the safety of New York City. Tremendous beyond belief. So when you say it has no impact, it really did. It had a very, very big impact.

CLINTON: Well, it's also fair to say, if we're going to talk about mayors, that under the current mayor, crime has continued to drop, including murders. So there is...

TRUMP: No, you're wrong. You're wrong.

CLINTON: No, I'm not.

TRUMP: Murders are up. All right. You check it.

CLINTON: New York -- New York has done an excellent job. And I give credit -- I give credit across the board going back two mayors, two police chiefs, because it has worked. And other communities need to come together to do what will work, as well.

The stats for murder -- indeed for 6 of the 7 "index crimes" (murder, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft) reported in NYC -- continued to fall in 2014-2015 after new Mayor DiBlasio's administration decided to withdraw an appeal from the federal judge's 2013 orders.
http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimnet/ojsa/indexcrimes/Regions.pdf
The stats show a big jump in the rape category for 2015, but that's because all the police agencies in New York agreed that the sex offenses included within the classification should be expanded to correspond to the FBI's definition.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-presidential-debate-fact-check/2016/09/hillary-clinton-murder-new-york-city-228731

Year by year, Trump is correct that there were more murders. Looking at only recent months (not entire year), Clinton is correct.