Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

FightBack Forums _ The Flame Pit _ Donald Trump

Posted by: MFM Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 16:11
Post #1225955

The next US president. happy.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 16:25
Post #1225961

I'll be following Colin Furze's guide to installing my own Nuclear shelter.

Trump is completely unsuited to the role, HRC is pretty deplorable but while the lesser of two evils is still evil I'd take her over that moronic sociopath any day.

What an irony that the two parties picked (based on the peculiarities of their membership base and the primary system) the two least electable candidates possible.

Montgomery Brewster had it right!

Right now HRC has a narrow lead overall but her advantage in the 10 crucial swings states is holding, and the Mormon vote in Ohio could kill Trumps chances by giving their EC votes to McMullin leaving him to have to take more swing states to make up for that loss.

Posted by: MFM Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 16:32
Post #1225966

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 16:25) *
I'll be following Colin Furze's guide to installing my own Nuclear shelter.

Trump is completely unsuited to the role, HRC is pretty deplorable but while the lesser of two evils is still evil I'd take her over that moronic sociopath any day.

What an irony that the two parties picked (based on the peculiarities of their membership base and the primary system) the two least electable candidates possible.

Montgomery Brewster had it right!


I think Trump will make a great president. What has he ever done wrong apart from call people names? That psycho Clinton is the biggest threat to US and international security and should never be allowed anywhere near the white house.

Posted by: Oscar21 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 17:11
Post #1225995

To add some balance - GO TRUMP.

Posted by: Broadsman Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 19:45
Post #1226062

Oscar,

I just have, it was loud. biggrin.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:27
Post #1226077

QUOTE (MFM @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 17:32) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 16:25) *
I'll be following Colin Furze's guide to installing my own Nuclear shelter.

Trump is completely unsuited to the role, HRC is pretty deplorable but while the lesser of two evils is still evil I'd take her over that moronic sociopath any day.

What an irony that the two parties picked (based on the peculiarities of their membership base and the primary system) the two least electable candidates possible.

Montgomery Brewster had it right!


I think Trump will make a great president. What has he ever done wrong apart from call people names? That psycho Clinton is the biggest threat to US and international security and should never be allowed anywhere near the white house.

Hmm, see if you can find C4s documentary "the mad world of Donald Trump" he's a sociopath who can't brook any contradiction or disagreement , he's been asking the security advisors why they can't use Nuclear weapons, he has no real policies other than getting Mexico to build that wall (which won't happen) and he's promised to commit war crimes if elected. He's also an incompetent businessman.

Posted by: glasgow_bhoy Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:47
Post #1226090

I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:57
Post #1226096

QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:47) *
I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.


Dont forget racist!

Being mentally challenged maybe you could enlighten us whats so great about being in the EU?

Maybe im missing it.

Doctors
hospitals
Schools
Housing
Jobs

Are all pretty much like the roads,crumbling and full of holes.

Posted by: sgtdixie Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:58
Post #1226098

QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:47) *
I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.

Ah, the arrogance of youth. So much certainty so little experience. What a shame so few could be bothered to vote.

Posted by: glasgow_bhoy Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:13
Post #1226113

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:57) *
QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:47) *
I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.


Dont forget racist!

Being mentally challenged maybe you could enlighten us whats so great about being in the EU?

Maybe im missing it.

Doctors
hospitals
Schools
Housing
Jobs

Are all pretty much like the roads,crumbling and full of holes.


I don't think its great being in the EU. But its worse being out of it.

Don't know if you've been on holiday recently, but I'm glad I bought a substantial number of Euro's at the start of the year!

We've got prices shooting up everywhere- the supermarkets and fuel being the most obvious.

Maybe I'm over sensitive, but I had a mortgage in principle agreed months before Brexit. It ended up expiring, and despite the only difference being a higher salary than I was on for the first application, the amount I was offered when I refreshed it in September was lower- something my broker said he'd noticed with a few applications. Can't directly attribute that one though.

Jobs- I'm confused about what you think Brexit has done for jobs. There are firms have been laying people off, not taking them on.

I wasn't going to bring up racism, but look at the number of racially motivated crimes reported.

Construction- we've had plenty from the EU to help fund major projects and regenerations.

Doctors and hospitals- how many doctors in your local hospital come from EU countries? The voters of this country seem to want to make it harder for EU citizens to come here. So how has Brexit helped the EU? Remember- Farage admitted his big NHS bus advert was a mistake/bare faced lie.

Education- don't you live in a country where university students pay massive tuition fees, where massive numbers of new school teachers can't hack it for more than 5 years? I don't see what being out of the EU is doing for education.

The only things which would have been good about Brexit would have been getting out of some of the crazy agreements we have (for instance emissions rules and fisheries quotas) but we're going to end up being stuck with most of them if we want any chance of continued free trade!

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:58) *
QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:47) *
I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.

Ah, the arrogance of youth. So much certainty so little experience. What a shame so few could be bothered to vote.

Up here voting amongst the younger generations is widespread- it became fashionable during the Scottish referendum, although most people I know did it anyway. But we voted to stay part of the EU up here (although I accept the decision as we were voting as part of the UK)

Perhaps its an arrogant approach, but everyone is entitled to vote for who they want to. And everyone is entitled to judge the poor choices others make.

Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:37
Post #1226133

The sweaty socks are just pished that they lost their independence referendum, but we won ours. And they failed to learn the obvious lesson - if they want independence, they should let the English vote.

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:38
Post #1226135

whenever the media ramp up hysteria the media sheep follow. Look at what they did to BMW drivers! So it doesnt come as a suprise that supposed reported numbers of racism went up.
I remember the case just after the vote where a laminated card with polish racism remark was supposedly popped through a letter box. Being the sceptic are racists now that creative? I would have thought there is nothing better than laminate to get fingerprints or dna from. I remember no real police investigation.
Alot of things were made up in the media before during and after the vote.The mentally challenged believed it and still do.Im still waiting for WW3.

As for food and fuel,of course they will use the excuse to put prices up,the ones of us that arnt mentally challenged saw it coming.Keep an eye on profit amounts from the same companys.My guess is they go up,not down.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/23/uk-economic-surveys-defy-brexit-fears

"Pro-Brexit campaigners have taken these figures as a sign that the warnings of an economic collapse after a no vote were alarmist and misleading."

As for doctors from other countrys,im sick of them.If they cant understand what patients say,or what patients say to them,then they leave them in a dangerous position.I can assure you its pretty dire,but what would you know,just being brand new? I see nothing wrong with trainingg people here after all were the fifth richest economy arnt we? Others seem to manage! we seem to be much better at handing out wages top ups instead of using the money to good use.

Why do you think we need to pay into a pot,for someone else to allocate,what bit we get back is spent on? Whats wrong with managing our own finances? Do you not think were capable?
Its like giving your ex your credit card with no control over spending,yet being forced to pay the bill.

If You want further education then YOU should pay for it.Its a lifestyle choice just as any other trainingg programmes are.
Maybe you think i should get ADI training for free too? Maybe a Transport managers CPC? Whats that to do with the EU?

What i notice about pro eu folk is they have no vision.I have and i can tell you the EU is bad enough as it is,in ten years the prospect is dam right scary.Had the vote gone the otherway,then things would have accelerated at a rapid rate before long,we would have been told what sort of shoes to wear on sundays by Germans.NO THANKYOU!!

Its no good guessing what the outcome is going to be,nobody knows so stop being all negative and high and mighty and try and give the BB c a miss,You will get old before your time!

Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:45
Post #1226142

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:38) *
What i notice about pro eu folk is they have no vision.


Not always true. For example, the Kinnocks are pro-EU and they have vision - pound signs and millions of them.

Most pro-EU campaigners are simply anti-democratic. The EU is generally significantly more socialist than our own elected government. The pro-EU campaigners want policies imposed on us that our own elected government would not otherwise implement. Our democracy is far from perfect, but it is far better than the bureaucracy of the EU.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:52
Post #1226147

Trump sings

https://youtu.be/vZnlz-b2NnY

Posted by: Kickaha Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:56
Post #1226150

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 21:58) *
QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 20:47) *
I compare Trump voters to Brexit voters.

Mentally challenged, selfish and easily led.

Ah, the arrogance of youth. So much certainty so little experience. What a shame so few could be bothered to vote.

Without getting into "sides", this is the most disappointing aspect. My daughter was furious as none of her mates voted as they "could not be bothered going to the station". As far as she knows only three out of circle of about fifty students voted.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:01
Post #1226153

Reasons not to vote for trump.

1) Unstable thin-skinned bully as Commander in Chief and in charge of nuclear weapons

What, how could anyone need more? Well OK then, loads of reasons why he’d be devastating for the world as a whole:

2) Would surrender to Putin on anything and everything, from Ukraine to invasion of the Balts to sanctions, and has continually attacked Nato and America’s Nato allies

3) He would overturn the Paris climate treaty and actively try to wreck the US renewables industry while giving fossil fuel industries anything they want

4) Happy for nuclear proliferation to Saudi etc

5) Eager to start conflict with Iran, make war on Middle East countries to “take all their oil”, has his own childish fantasies about crushing ISIS while ignoring the advice of generals

6) Wants soldiers to commit war crimes, murder terrorists and their families, and torture non-terrorists because they probably deserve it anyway

7) Would wreck the US economy, and with it damage the rest of the world economy, causing poverty and death for unknown numbers in the US and elsewhere. Suggested the US should default on its debt.

8. Deportation force to round up immigrants, put them in custody and deport them

9) Direct racist who seeks support from white supremacists and the KKK, wants to discriminate against African Americans and Hispanic Americans, including new police powers, stop and frisk and capital punishment for alleged rapists if they are black, even if later found innocent. Plus a delightful sprinkling of anti-Semitism

10) Direct Islamophobe who wants special surveillance and registers of Muslims, plus random nonsense about banning Muslims entering the country

11) A proven sexist who wants to discriminate against women in the workplace, particularly pregnant women

12) Wants “power of veto” over the media, loosening of libel laws, generally attacks free speech

13) Has called for special prosecutor to override law and the FBI and lock up his political opponent, and generally is obsessed with revenge and wants to use state institutions to pursue personal vendettas. Admires dictators and loves to threaten/encourage violence at his rallies, including hinting that gun nuts should assassinate his opponent. Suggested American civilians could be tried by military commissions at Guantanamo. Wants his thugs to “monitor” polling booths in “certain communities” to ensure “they” don’t rig the election

14) Wants to appoint extreme right wingers to the Supreme Court, including going along with Republican anti-abortion policies

15) Continual liar who is addicted to conspiracy theories, making him dangerously unpredictable

His sexual assaults on women, and his boasting about sexually assaulting women, doesn’t even make the top 15. That’s just damage to individuals, rather active damage to the entire world and destruction of the USA.

Further reasons that didn’t make the top 15 involving the damage he has done to individuals:

- Sexually assaults women
- Voyeurism against young women, including under 18s
- Attacked the Muslim parents of a dead solider
- Personally insults distinguished public servants, generals, etc
- Mocks veterans and POWs, mocks the disabled, mocks women for their personal appearance, uses racist insults, uses belittling insults

Reasons that show he’s nearer a fraudster than a successful businessman:

- Cheats on his taxes
- Uses his “charitable” foundation for personal benefit and lies about his charity donations
- Business failures and bankruptcies
- Lies about how much money he’s got and how much his father gave him
- Trump University fraud
- Cheats small businesses out of the money he owes them
- Actively sought illegal immigrants to employ
- Ties to mafia
- Lied about offering child care to his employees
- Financial links to Russia, Colonel Gadhafi, China

Reasons to do with him being a pathetic individual who’s basically a nasty little ****:

- Obsession with TV ratings, how much applause his speech gets, size of rallies, uses fake polls to claim he’s winning or won debates
- Boasted during a debate about the size of his *****
- Lied about 9/11 and boasted it made his building the tallest
- Congratulated himself over terrorist attacks and again after an African American was murdered
- False boasts about predicting Brexit
- Dodged the draft
- Used pseudonyms to pretend to be his own press spokesman
- When introducing his own running mate, just talked about himself
- Called avoiding STDs his own personal Vietnam
- Lied about opposing Iraq war
- Family and close supporters retweet and spread extreme rightwing memes, lies and abuse, while Trump himself refuses to disown and occasionally join in
- Chose as his first campaign chief someone who got arrested for grabbing a reporter, second had close links to Russia and Ukraine dictator, third makes anti-Semitic comments and has been accused of domestic abuse
- Talks bollocks about a fantasy wall that Mexico will pay for
- Talks bollocks about ISIS and how scary it is
- Urged hacking by Russia of Democrats emails
- Probably fixed his Florida Trump University lawsuit by bribing the state AG


Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:05
Post #1226155

However, there is one compelling reason to vote for Trump.

Posted by: Oscar21 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:13
Post #1226158

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:01) *
Reasons not to vote for trump.

1) Unstable thin-skinned bully as Commander in Chief and in charge of nuclear weapons

What, how could anyone need more? Well OK then, loads of reasons why he’d be devastating for the world as a whole:

2) Would surrender to Putin on anything and everything, from Ukraine to invasion of the Balts to sanctions, and has continually attacked Nato and America’s Nato allies

3) He would overturn the Paris climate treaty and actively try to wreck the US renewables industry while giving fossil fuel industries anything they want

4) Happy for nuclear proliferation to Saudi etc

5) Eager to start conflict with Iran, make war on Middle East countries to “take all their oil”, has his own childish fantasies about crushing ISIS while ignoring the advice of generals

6) Wants soldiers to commit war crimes, murder terrorists and their families, and torture non-terrorists because they probably deserve it anyway

7) Would wreck the US economy, and with it damage the rest of the world economy, causing poverty and death for unknown numbers in the US and elsewhere. Suggested the US should default on its debt.

8. Deportation force to round up immigrants, put them in custody and deport them

9) Direct racist who seeks support from white supremacists and the KKK, wants to discriminate against African Americans and Hispanic Americans, including new police powers, stop and frisk and capital punishment for alleged rapists if they are black, even if later found innocent. Plus a delightful sprinkling of anti-Semitism

10) Direct Islamophobe who wants special surveillance and registers of Muslims, plus random nonsense about banning Muslims entering the country

11) A proven sexist who wants to discriminate against women in the workplace, particularly pregnant women

12) Wants “power of veto” over the media, loosening of libel laws, generally attacks free speech

13) Has called for special prosecutor to override law and the FBI and lock up his political opponent, and generally is obsessed with revenge and wants to use state institutions to pursue personal vendettas. Admires dictators and loves to threaten/encourage violence at his rallies, including hinting that gun nuts should assassinate his opponent. Suggested American civilians could be tried by military commissions at Guantanamo. Wants his thugs to “monitor” polling booths in “certain communities” to ensure “they” don’t rig the election

14) Wants to appoint extreme right wingers to the Supreme Court, including going along with Republican anti-abortion policies

15) Continual liar who is addicted to conspiracy theories, making him dangerously unpredictable

His sexual assaults on women, and his boasting about sexually assaulting women, doesn’t even make the top 15. That’s just damage to individuals, rather active damage to the entire world and destruction of the USA.

Further reasons that didn’t make the top 15 involving the damage he has done to individuals:

- Sexually assaults women
- Voyeurism against young women, including under 18s
- Attacked the Muslim parents of a dead solider
- Personally insults distinguished public servants, generals, etc
- Mocks veterans and POWs, mocks the disabled, mocks women for their personal appearance, uses racist insults, uses belittling insults

Reasons that show he’s nearer a fraudster than a successful businessman:

- Cheats on his taxes
- Uses his “charitable” foundation for personal benefit and lies about his charity donations
- Business failures and bankruptcies
- Lies about how much money he’s got and how much his father gave him
- Trump University fraud
- Cheats small businesses out of the money he owes them
- Actively sought illegal immigrants to employ
- Ties to mafia
- Lied about offering child care to his employees
- Financial links to Russia, Colonel Gadhafi, China

Reasons to do with him being a pathetic individual who’s basically a nasty little ****:

- Obsession with TV ratings, how much applause his speech gets, size of rallies, uses fake polls to claim he’s winning or won debates
- Boasted during a debate about the size of his *****
- Lied about 9/11 and boasted it made his building the tallest
- Congratulated himself over terrorist attacks and again after an African American was murdered
- False boasts about predicting Brexit
- Dodged the draft
- Used pseudonyms to pretend to be his own press spokesman
- When introducing his own running mate, just talked about himself
- Called avoiding STDs his own personal Vietnam
- Lied about opposing Iraq war
- Family and close supporters retweet and spread extreme rightwing memes, lies and abuse, while Trump himself refuses to disown and occasionally join in
- Chose as his first campaign chief someone who got arrested for grabbing a reporter, second had close links to Russia and Ukraine dictator, third makes anti-Semitic comments and has been accused of domestic abuse
- Talks bollocks about a fantasy wall that Mexico will pay for
- Talks bollocks about ISIS and how scary it is
- Urged hacking by Russia of Democrats emails
- Probably fixed his Florida Trump University lawsuit by bribing the state AG


So whats the bad points then?

Posted by: Richy_m_99 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 23:32
Post #1226185

The problem that politicians in both this country and the US are facing, is the the general population are sick to the back teeth of the corruption and pedling of power to the highest bidder.

The US presidency has always been bought by lobbyist, pressure groups and the big industrials who contribute millions to campaigns and expect preferential treatment in return.

Trump, and his primarily self funded campaign is offering a way for the US average man in the street to finally give the establishment the kicking they probably deserve. The Clinton smear campaign if Trump is having the same effect as Project Fear did. People question where all these stories are coming from, and how they are conveniently appearing in the last few weeks before the vote. Of course, Clinton's own goal of having the FBI investigating her further, despite initial protection by the AG has also helped. Do you really want to elect somebody who may be impeached before even taking office.

Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 23:48
Post #1226191

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:01) *
1) Unstable thin-skinned bully as Commander in Chief and in charge of nuclear weapons


Which, absent a confirmed nuclear attack on the US he can't order the use of alone.

QUOTE
6) Wants soldiers to commit war crimes, murder terrorists and their families, and torture non-terrorists because they probably deserve it anyway


I doubt US troops will follow an unlawful order.

QUOTE
8. Deportation force to round up immigrants, put them in custody and deport them


A bit like https://www.ice.gov

QUOTE
12) Wants “power of veto” over the media, loosening of libel laws, generally attacks free speech


The First Amendment might be a bit of a speed bump.

Just a few caveats there.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 01:01
Post #1226198

oh and ...........

" Farage admitted his big NHS bus advert was a mistake/bare faced lie.!!


The lie was it was HIS bus when it was nothing to do with him at all and they knew it.

Farage was questioned after being up all night through the voting and poorly defended it .Of course the mentally challenged ran with the media lies but conveniently ignored the facts.

"When it was pointed out that Vote Leave emblazoned the £350 million claim onto the side of a tour bus and drove it around the country, Mr Farage said: “It wasn’t one of my adverts – I can assure you! I think they made a mistake in doing that. "

Something YOU can now remember?







Posted by: sgtdixie Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 05:48
Post #1226205

Interesting how some points made here show a very narrow view uninformed view.

Anyone who actually watched leaders of the leave campaign discussing our financial contributions in serious interviews will have heard them talk of the £350M as a headline figure and that the amount we will actually have to spend is closer to £200M. Of course those who got their information about the issues from twitter or the headlines would miss that detail. The claims of a 47% rise in race hate crime post vote has been totally discredited. The only people who believe it are again the twitter generation and those who just look at headlines.


Criticising Trump for having been bankrupt shows a clear lack of understanding of US culture. Over there they do not look down on or denigrate businessmen who fail, especially if like Trump they eventually become successful. Similarly what candidates appear to promise when campaigning bears no relation to their time in office. Obama got a Nobel prize shortly after being elected because they thought he would be a great President. He isn't, he is generally regarded in the US as a poor president.

Sexual and personal flaws are utterly irrelevant. JFK was a sexual predator, George W was a cocaine and alcohol abuser, Reagan had dementia when elected for his 2nd term, Bill Clinton...... need we say more.

What the referendum and the US elections prove is that the mainstream public are frustrated with the existing political classes. I could list 15 reasons Clinton is a danger to the safety of the world not to mention personality flaws the equal of Trump. Like Brexit you just have to get on in a democracy and deal with the result. Crying about it won't help.

Posted by: Richy320 Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 08:59
Post #1226242

Welcome back Sarge.

The most sensible post I've read in ages.

Posted by: Churchmouse Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 13:19
Post #1226332

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:01) *
Reasons not to vote for trump.

1) Unstable thin-skinned bully as Commander in Chief and in charge of nuclear weapons

What, how could anyone need more? Well OK then, loads of reasons why he’d be devastating for the world as a whole:

2) Would surrender to Putin on anything and everything, from Ukraine to invasion of the Balts to sanctions, and has continually attacked Nato and America’s Nato allies

3) He would overturn the Paris climate treaty and actively try to wreck the US renewables industry while giving fossil fuel industries anything they want

4) Happy for nuclear proliferation to Saudi etc

5) Eager to start conflict with Iran, make war on Middle East countries to “take all their oil”, has his own childish fantasies about crushing ISIS while ignoring the advice of generals

6) Wants soldiers to commit war crimes, murder terrorists and their families, and torture non-terrorists because they probably deserve it anyway

7) Would wreck the US economy, and with it damage the rest of the world economy, causing poverty and death for unknown numbers in the US and elsewhere. Suggested the US should default on its debt.

8. Deportation force to round up immigrants, put them in custody and deport them

9) Direct racist who seeks support from white supremacists and the KKK, wants to discriminate against African Americans and Hispanic Americans, including new police powers, stop and frisk and capital punishment for alleged rapists if they are black, even if later found innocent. Plus a delightful sprinkling of anti-Semitism

10) Direct Islamophobe who wants special surveillance and registers of Muslims, plus random nonsense about banning Muslims entering the country

11) A proven sexist who wants to discriminate against women in the workplace, particularly pregnant women

12) Wants “power of veto” over the media, loosening of libel laws, generally attacks free speech

13) Has called for special prosecutor to override law and the FBI and lock up his political opponent, and generally is obsessed with revenge and wants to use state institutions to pursue personal vendettas. Admires dictators and loves to threaten/encourage violence at his rallies, including hinting that gun nuts should assassinate his opponent. Suggested American civilians could be tried by military commissions at Guantanamo. Wants his thugs to “monitor” polling booths in “certain communities” to ensure “they” don’t rig the election

14) Wants to appoint extreme right wingers to the Supreme Court, including going along with Republican anti-abortion policies

15) Continual liar who is addicted to conspiracy theories, making him dangerously unpredictable

His sexual assaults on women, and his boasting about sexually assaulting women, doesn’t even make the top 15. That’s just damage to individuals, rather active damage to the entire world and destruction of the USA.

Further reasons that didn’t make the top 15 involving the damage he has done to individuals:

- Sexually assaults women
- Voyeurism against young women, including under 18s
- Attacked the Muslim parents of a dead solider
- Personally insults distinguished public servants, generals, etc
- Mocks veterans and POWs, mocks the disabled, mocks women for their personal appearance, uses racist insults, uses belittling insults

Reasons that show he’s nearer a fraudster than a successful businessman:

- Cheats on his taxes
- Uses his “charitable” foundation for personal benefit and lies about his charity donations
- Business failures and bankruptcies
- Lies about how much money he’s got and how much his father gave him
- Trump University fraud
- Cheats small businesses out of the money he owes them
- Actively sought illegal immigrants to employ
- Ties to mafia
- Lied about offering child care to his employees
- Financial links to Russia, Colonel Gadhafi, China

Reasons to do with him being a pathetic individual who’s basically a nasty little ****:

- Obsession with TV ratings, how much applause his speech gets, size of rallies, uses fake polls to claim he’s winning or won debates
- Boasted during a debate about the size of his *****
- Lied about 9/11 and boasted it made his building the tallest
- Congratulated himself over terrorist attacks and again after an African American was murdered
- False boasts about predicting Brexit
- Dodged the draft
- Used pseudonyms to pretend to be his own press spokesman
- When introducing his own running mate, just talked about himself
- Called avoiding STDs his own personal Vietnam
- Lied about opposing Iraq war
- Family and close supporters retweet and spread extreme rightwing memes, lies and abuse, while Trump himself refuses to disown and occasionally join in
- Chose as his first campaign chief someone who got arrested for grabbing a reporter, second had close links to Russia and Ukraine dictator, third makes anti-Semitic comments and has been accused of domestic abuse
- Talks bollocks about a fantasy wall that Mexico will pay for
- Talks bollocks about ISIS and how scary it is
- Urged hacking by Russia of Democrats emails
- Probably fixed his Florida Trump University lawsuit by bribing the state AG

I wouldn't vote for Trump in a million years, but it's also obvious from screeds such as this that opposing an idiot like Trump doesn't necessarily require intelligence... huh.gif

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 13:47
Post #1226340

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 00:48) *
QUOTE
6) Wants soldiers to commit war crimes, murder terrorists and their families, and torture non-terrorists because they probably deserve it anyway


I doubt US troops will follow an unlawful order.

Abu Ghraibe?

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16
Post #1226521

Trump is a lousy businessman, he started with a multi million pound gift from his father snd blew it, his father gave him more.
Apart from a few hotels and golf resorts he has failed at every business venture he has undertaken.
Trump Airline, he bought a profitable airline and drove it in to the ground. Trump Casino. He bought a casino in Atlantic City and then built another one. He had them competing against each other and the existing casinos. He ignored all the advice of the industry advisors he was paying because he knew better (Just like he claims to know more about the military and how to defeat ISIS thwn the Generals and DOD) busted and lost everything. Trump University, bust and the subject of a big fraud case. Trump Wine, Trump Steaks, Trump Water in fact Trump everything.

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 3 Nov 2016 - 00:10
Post #1226530

Meet the Horde of Neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and Other Extremist Leaders Endorsing Donald Trump


http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-supporters-neo-nazis-white-nationalists-kkk-militias-racism-hate

Posted by: Steve_999 Thu, 3 Nov 2016 - 00:17
Post #1226532

"Top Trumps" was very popular at one time I seem to recall.

Posted by: Ocelot Thu, 3 Nov 2016 - 20:49
Post #1226874

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 1 Nov 2016 - 22:01) *
2) Would surrender to Putin on anything and everything, from Ukraine to invasion of the Balts to sanctions, and has continually attacked Nato and America’s Nato allies


Most of them deserve being attacked for their support of the terrorist opposition groups in Syria.

QUOTE
5) Eager to start conflict with Iran, make war on Middle East countries to “take all their oil”, has his own childish fantasies about crushing ISIS while ignoring the advice of generals


I think Clinton is far more into illegal oil wars and invading middle eastern countries than Trump.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:03
Post #1226970

It should be noted that in the list of 15 facts, virtually all were simply theories.

I suspect that if Trump wins you will see a much calmer performance in office than campaigning.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:33
Post #1226976

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:03) *
I suspect that if Trump wins you will see a much calmer performance in office than campaigning.

It does seem curious, though, that people are prepared to vote for somebody who promises to do stupid and/or dangerous things, on the basis that the candidate is lying about what they'll do so that's all right then.

Posted by: andy_foster Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 10:46
Post #1227005


Posted by: MFM Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:24
Post #1227026

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:28
Post #1227030

QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:33) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:03) *
I suspect that if Trump wins you will see a much calmer performance in office than campaigning.

It does seem curious, though, that people are prepared to vote for somebody who promises to do stupid and/or dangerous things, on the basis that the candidate is lying about what they'll do so that's all right then.

That level of incredulity at what the electorate actually thinks was why the establishment didn't see brexit coming.

Posted by: DancingDad Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:28
Post #1227031

QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.


Given the choice between someone who has successfully run a major business empire or a career politician to run the country, to me it is a no brainer.
Then you look at the actual choices and I'd want a box on the ballot paper that says "Neither" ?

Posted by: MFM Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:34
Post #1227035

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:28) *
QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.


Given the choice between someone who has successfully run a major business empire or a career politician to run the country, to me it is a no brainer.
Then you look at the actual choices and I'd want a box on the ballot paper that says "Neither" ?


As 'ludicrous' as it may seem to vote for Trump to become president, you can't shy away from all the atrocious things Hilary Clinton did and lied about. She is totally untrustworthy and dangerous and should be in jail. I mean, she's being investigated by the FBI for breaching national security, which she has blatantly done, yet she's still in the running?

You watch, if Trump becomes president, she will be the first person he goes after.

Posted by: Lucifa Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 13:24
Post #1227050

QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 13:24) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.


My understanding of this, and i'm sure you can find more detailed accounts, is that he inherited a fortune from his father - about 500m and today he's worth about 3.6b.

However if he had simply put that entire fortune in the bank and earned standard interest off it, he would now be worth far far more - hence the claims of a lousy businessman.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 14:55
Post #1227085

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:28) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:33) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 09:03) *
I suspect that if Trump wins you will see a much calmer performance in office than campaigning.

It does seem curious, though, that people are prepared to vote for somebody who promises to do stupid and/or dangerous things, on the basis that the candidate is lying about what they'll do so that's all right then.

That level of incredulity at what the electorate actually thinks was why the establishment didn't see brexit coming.

I would say that "seems curious" displays a very low level of incredulity, and if you read my posts made during the referendum campaign I think you'd conclude that I wasn't surprised at all that people were prepared to vote for the riskier option, against the views of the establishment. However I don't think anybody voted for Brexit while thinking that if the vote was to leave that we wouldn't leave; yet in the case of Trump we have people arguing that it's OK voting for him because he'll behave in a completely different way from what he's said he will and in some cases has a prior record of doing. That's the aspect I find curious.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 16:00
Post #1227114

I had not intended to make a personal link re you and brexit fredd, I apologise if that was the impression given.

My point was simply that most establishment figures believed that the apocalyptic forecasts of the vote to leave meant no sane person would actually do so. Similarly most mainstream commentators take Trumps pronouncements at literal face value which most people agree are somewhat extreme. But I have many friends in the US who believe that Trump is in fact posturing to make a point on issues such as illegal immigration, the dangers of radical Islam and the corruption of establishment figures. His Mexico wall is a metaphor for toughened border control for instance. Given no US president has been free to pursue his own agenda unfettered there is no reason to believe Trump would be allowed to go rogue and press the button.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 18:15
Post #1227169

QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:34) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:28) *
QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.


Given the choice between someone who has successfully run a major business empire or a career politician to run the country, to me it is a no brainer.
Then you look at the actual choices and I'd want a box on the ballot paper that says "Neither" ?


As 'ludicrous' as it may seem to vote for Trump to become president, you can't shy away from all the atrocious things Hilary Clinton did and lied about. She is totally untrustworthy and dangerous and should be in jail. I mean, she's being investigated by the FBI for breaching national security, which she has blatantly done, yet she's still in the running?

You watch, if Trump becomes president, she will be the first person he goes after.


What atrocious things? Republicans have spent decades trying to find something, they have had numerous congressional investigations costing many millions and have found nothing. After decades of drip, drip, drip of innuendo and lies people believe it.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 18:40
Post #1227174

QUOTE (Lucifa @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 13:24) *
QUOTE (MFM @ Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 13:24) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 2 Nov 2016 - 23:16) *
Trump is a lousy businessman


I find it amusing when people keep saying this. He's a lousy businessman, yet one of the richest people in the world?

Ok then.


My understanding of this, and i'm sure you can find more detailed accounts, is that he inherited a fortune from his father - about 500m and today he's worth about 3.6b.

However if he had simply put that entire fortune in the bank and earned standard interest off it, he would now be worth far far more - hence the claims of a lousy businessman.



Informed speculation is that he is worth considerably less. His hotels and resorts are all funded by loans and mortgaged to the hilt. He won't release his Tax Returns so we can find out.

As for 'Oil Wars' Trump has said several times that the US should have tsken the oil from Iraq, actually occupy the oil fields and steal the oil as 'payback' .

To think that this man will actually chang if he is elected president is deluded.
He can't let any perceived contradiction, insult or gainsaying pass. He can never be wrong, he denies saying things that are a matter of public record, he even gainsays himself.
He won't take advice because he is already the greatest expert. He has daid numerous times he knows more about the military than the generals because when he was expelled from his private school he was sent to a Military Academy for a year.
He is going to 'put them right' and replace those that disagree. He knows more about 'nuclear' he is going to update the 'nuclear' because it's old and wants to know why he can't use them He knows more about 'cyber'. He is going to put the CIA and DOD right on it. It goes on and on, he won't learn because he already knows because he is so smart. His brain is the best, just the best.
He has always been surrounded by yes men and has always got his way, that's why his forays in to any business other than property has been a disaster.
Any foreigner leader will be able to play him like a piano.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 20:03
Post #1227187

Is this personal knowledge or simply what you have read. I ask because if you go to the USA you will find completely the opposite views as well.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 20:11
Post #1227189

Based on his own words and promises. Trumps first 100 days.

Among things to can expect: a trade war with China and Mexico, a restarting of Iran’s nuclear program, millions losing their health insurance, the start of mass deportations, a possible military standoff with China in the South China Sea and North Korea, the resumption of waterboarding, the use of federal agencies to go after Hillary Clinton and other Trump critics, the spectacle of the commander in chief suing women who have accused him of sexual misconduct and a constitutional crisis as the president of the United States attempts to disqualify the federal judge in a fraud suit against him because the judge is Latino.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-first-100-horrific-days-of-a-trump-presidency/2016/11/04/1abca4d2-a286-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html

Posted by: southpaw82 Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 21:28
Post #1227207

So, if you were eligible to vote, you'd be voting for Trump?

Posted by: peterguk Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 22:45
Post #1227218

Trump is like Boris.

Fun to have around but you'd never want him in charge.

Posted by: andy_foster Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 23:00
Post #1227222

Boris is a very intelligent man who plays to the image of an amiable buffoon.
The closest Trump has to a saving grace is that he isn't Hillary.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 4 Nov 2016 - 23:17
Post #1227227

Trump is in it for Trump. He's switched political affiliation so many times it's simply absurd. It's tough to gauge what he actually believes on many issues, he really doesn't think very much about most issues. He's admitted that he doesn't really read much and that he doesn't take advice from experts. He has no attention span, he even has special cuts of movies made that last about half an hour and just have the highlights. By the time the election is over and the inauguration next year if he wins there's no guarantee he would have the same ideas or even any interest in being president.

Posted by: kommando Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 09:16
Post #1227254

And Hillary is not in it for Hillary ?

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:15
Post #1227296

QUOTE (kommando @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 09:16) *
And Hillary is not in it for Hillary ?


I never claimed she wasn't but, Hilary also has over thirty years of public service, she was active in the civil rights movement in the 60s as a student and newly qualified lawyer, she campaigned on housing issues, served in the Senate and as Secretary of State.

The Toronto Star has compiled a database of all Donalds false claims from the campaign.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/uselection/2016/11/04/donald-trump-the-unauthorized-database-of-false-things.html

Posted by: southpaw82 Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:40
Post #1227305

You do seem rather biased. A bit like most Americans I know!

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:44
Post #1227307

OK, think about the fact that a Canadian newspaper is motivated to monitor the lies of the Republican nominee. Then, realize this is just a spot of mud in the ----storm that will follow if he wins. 

AP has dug into Melania's immigration status. There's going to be a whole lot more digging in the future. His tax returnswill leak, and the IRS will be merciless if an audit reveals wrongdoing. The Trump U trial will covered wall-to-wall, many Americans (and financial institutions) will see their retirement accounts thrown into disarray due to continuing jitters about his unpredictability. He will have no control over his assets and the "blind trust" arrangements will be subject to scrutiny. (That also might require public disclosure of just what his net worth really is). Melania, who may have been humiliated by infidelities, will IMO not be a terribly supportive first lady. She already has seemed a bit subversive to me - saying he's easily manipulated? If Dems get the Senate, he may not be able to get Supreme Court appointments confirmed. In fact, I doubt if he'll have much luck finding nominees that fit his campaign promises. He's insulted the federal judiciary and basically has promised to nominate judges who will do as he says, which is another insult to their integrity. He does not come in with a loyal cadre of past aides; outside of his family only a handful of suck-ups support him. Meanwhile his voting base may well turn on him if he fails to build the wall, put Hillary in jail or bring back manufacturing jobs. 

And his own party might resist him on some proposals. Do they really want to throw Obamacare out with no plan to replace it? It might make some in Congress think twice about whether it's wise to suddenly make many Americans uninsurable. When he tries to amend the constitution to end birthright citizenship he might face opposition. And when he rolls over on Russia he'll be criticized. When he slaps on tariffs there will be retaliation and fewer countries will want to do business with the U.S. He won't have any clue about how to improve education. He will aggressively roll back progress on cleaner energy, keep ignoring climate change and do away with as much environmental protection as he can. And, of course, tax the rich while reaching deeper into middle-class pockets.

Damn right I am biased

Posted by: southpaw82 Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 13:14
Post #1227319

Can you do a post like the above focused on Clinton?

Posted by: sgtdixie Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 14:11
Post #1227327

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:44) *
OK, think about the fact that a Canadian newspaper is motivated to monitor the lies of the Republican nominee. Then, realize this is just a spot of mud in the ----storm that will follow if he wins. 

AP has dug into Melania's immigration status. There's going to be a whole lot more digging in the future. His tax returnswill leak, and the IRS will be merciless if an audit reveals wrongdoing. The Trump U trial will covered wall-to-wall, many Americans (and financial institutions) will see their retirement accounts thrown into disarray due to continuing jitters about his unpredictability. He will have no control over his assets and the "blind trust" arrangements will be subject to scrutiny. (That also might require public disclosure of just what his net worth really is). Melania, who may have been humiliated by infidelities, will IMO not be a terribly supportive first lady. She already has seemed a bit subversive to me - saying he's easily manipulated? If Dems get the Senate, he may not be able to get Supreme Court appointments confirmed. In fact, I doubt if he'll have much luck finding nominees that fit his campaign promises. He's insulted the federal judiciary and basically has promised to nominate judges who will do as he says, which is another insult to their integrity. He does not come in with a loyal cadre of past aides; outside of his family only a handful of suck-ups support him. Meanwhile his voting base may well turn on him if he fails to build the wall, put Hillary in jail or bring back manufacturing jobs. 

And his own party might resist him on some proposals. Do they really want to throw Obamacare out with no plan to replace it? It might make some in Congress think twice about whether it's wise to suddenly make many Americans uninsurable. When he tries to amend the constitution to end birthright citizenship he might face opposition. And when he rolls over on Russia he'll be criticized. When he slaps on tariffs there will be retaliation and fewer countries will want to do business with the U.S. He won't have any clue about how to improve education. He will aggressively roll back progress on cleaner energy, keep ignoring climate change and do away with as much environmental protection as he can. And, of course, tax the rich while reaching deeper into middle-class pockets.

Damn right I am biased

Biased and somewhat uninformed. If you get your information from populist media who hate Trump and slant every article to that agenda you end up making hysterical claims. Just like project fear. If you do a bit of research you will find that Obamacare is not universally liked and faced huge opposition from both houses and many Americans. Judges have never been independent. If you do just a little bit of research you will find that presidents have always picked supreme court judges who would support the presidents political and personal views. I also think you will find a lot of people willing to work for Trump if he wins. The attraction of power is what runs Washington DC.

There are also many sections of the press who consider Hillary to be just as dangerous as Trump. In fact her record of supporting war in the middle east should make all of us wary.

In short CS, Trump may be a somewhat odious individual with popularist ideas, but like brexit you can't dismiss the desire of half a country to stick it to the current establishment.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:00
Post #1227379

Somewhat uninformed? I have bern following the csmpaign closely and form my opinions based on information from a range of sources across the political spectrum and wide discussions on seversl US based Forums.

Presidents nominate judges, Congress appoints them. Appointees always end up being a compromise by both sides. Trump seems to think he is going to have dictatorial powers, his understanding of the US Constitution and political process is that of a child.

I am happy not to supporting the chosen candate of both the KKK snd American Nazi Party.

Posted by: southpaw82 Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:33
Post #1227400

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:00) *
Presidents nominate judges, Congress appoints them.

The US Senate ratifies the appointment.

Posted by: Ocelot Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:34
Post #1227402

To each his own - it's Hobson's Choice. If Trump wins he'll need reigning in. If Clinton wins it'll be more of the same, with a more aggressive foreign policy than Obama.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:45
Post #1227408

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:33) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 18:00) *
Presidents nominate judges, Congress appoints them.

The US Senate ratifies the appointment.


Sorry, meant the Senate.

Posted by: Churchmouse Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 20:25
Post #1227429

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:15) *
QUOTE (kommando @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 09:16) *
And Hillary is not in it for Hillary ?


I never claimed she wasn't but, Hilary also has over thirty years of public service, she was active in the civil rights movement in the 60s as a student and newly qualified lawyer, she campaigned on housing issues, served in the Senate and as Secretary of State.

The Toronto Star has compiled a database of all Donalds false claims from the campaign.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/uselection/2016/11/04/donald-trump-the-unauthorized-database-of-false-things.html

Hillarybots are clearly just as nauseating as Donnybots. I hold both in roughly equal contempt--especially when they simply repeat things from the Innernet.

Who are you trying to convince, anyway? There aren't many eligible US voters on PePiPoo. dry.gif

--Churchmouse

Posted by: southpaw82 Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 23:53
Post #1227494

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 20:25) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 12:15) *
QUOTE (kommando @ Sat, 5 Nov 2016 - 09:16) *
And Hillary is not in it for Hillary ?


I never claimed she wasn't but, Hilary also has over thirty years of public service, she was active in the civil rights movement in the 60s as a student and newly qualified lawyer, she campaigned on housing issues, served in the Senate and as Secretary of State.

The Toronto Star has compiled a database of all Donalds false claims from the campaign.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/uselection/2016/11/04/donald-trump-the-unauthorized-database-of-false-things.html

Hillarybots are clearly just as nauseating as Donnybots. I hold both in roughly equal contempt--especially when they simply repeat things from the Innernet.

Who are you trying to convince, anyway? There aren't many eligible US voters on PePiPoo. dry.gif

--Churchmouse

You, sir, get a +1.

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 00:46
Post #1227499

Maybe not but US elections have repercussions for us.

Posted by: «THÖMÅS®©™» Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23
Post #1227504

After I saw footage of Donald Trump saying he wants to "ban all Muslims from the U.S"... I agree and I have believed that Donald Trump is a racist bigot and a bit "anti-Muslim" of him.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution allows for and guarantees the right to free speech and opinion. Surprisingly, we Brits have similar if not identical rights under Article 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998. (?)

While there is a fine line between free speech and opinion in either countries, what is said if known to be false and defamatory can result in action from an injured party for libel/defamation and/or slander. I welcome any corrections here since the above is how I understand what the law says. I do have a habit of seeing things in "black and white" after all.

In summary, if I were an American Citizen, I would definitely never vote for Donald Trump. What he says is utter nonsense, and should be disregarded.

NOTE: What he said is understandable in principle, but does not invalidate the fact that he is a racist bigot. That's my 2 cents.

Posted by: sgtdixie Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:31
Post #1227506

I think you will find freedom of speech in the US means exactly that. unless your comments are libelous to an individual you can say it. In this country generation snowflake means there is no freedom of speech as some people take offence at anything and the authorities have meekly fallen in line behind them.

As I said before, incredulity at anyone voting for Trump mirrors the Brexit vote where many remainers simply could not comprehend how anyone could vote for leaving. If you go to America's old heartland you will see why Trump resonates.

Posted by: facade Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:57
Post #1227511

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:31) *
I think you will find freedom of speech in the US means exactly that. unless your comments are libelous to an individual you can say it. In this country generation snowflake means there is no freedom of speech as some people take offence at anything and the authorities have meekly fallen in line behind them.


In the US, a rally actively promoting Racial hatred is perfectly legal. ohmy.gif

There were a couple of documentaries about this a while ago*, almost laughable at the start, then you realise how fortunate you are to live in a society where you do find these ideas pathetic, and the whole thing becomes very disturbing.


*Donal Macintyre's - Nazi Hate Rock is one that I was able to find.

Posted by: kommando Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 11:25
Post #1227531

QUOTE
Maybe not but US elections have repercussions for us.


And posting on Pepipoo achieves what in terms of votes.

If you have been to middle America and seen the hollowed out towns, where all the manufacturing jobs have gone overseas in the name of global trade, you can understand Trumps appeal. Him winning will do nothing for these towns but they get to kick the elite and make them think twice. Even if Trump loses then the right wins, he has moved the goalposts and even Hillary has softened her support of global trade and he has also set up the scene for a more moderate version to win next time.

I watched a sister manufacturing plant in Ohio to our one in the UK slowly die the death of a 1000 cuts over 10 years until it was finally closed, it was the biggest employer in the town, nothing has come to replace it. With the fall in the pound the UK plant now has another chance as it was going the same way.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 18:56
Post #1227635

Ironically that is the same Trump who's companies in the past have been caught employing illegal immigrants, whose buildings are built with cheap Chinese steel and who's official campaign merchandising has 'made in China' labels......but then you only have to fact check him to see his message is whatever works that day even if it's the complete opposite of something said only a few days or weeks ago.

For example Mexico is no longer paying to build the wall, the US will pay and Mexico 'will' pay them back.

Posted by: sgtdixie Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 21:06
Post #1227679

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 18:56) *
Ironically that is the same Trump who's companies in the past have been caught employing illegal immigrants, whose buildings are built with cheap Chinese steel and who's official campaign merchandising has 'made in China' labels......but then you only have to fact check him to see his message is whatever works that day even if it's the complete opposite of something said only a few days or weeks ago.

For example Mexico is no longer paying to build the wall, the US will pay and Mexico 'will' pay them back.

Kind of the definition of a politician then

Posted by: MFM Mon, 7 Nov 2016 - 11:05
Post #1227820

QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
Donald Trump is a racist bigot


Based on what evidence? The race card has been played to death by the left so that it doesn't have an effect anymore. It seems whenever anyone says anything a liberal doesn't like, he's a racist or a bigot.

Posted by: Atomic Tomato Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 07:12
Post #1228536

Its looking a bit like a Trump win.

Brexit now (possibly) Trump

When will the politicians get the message that the electorate are totally disillusioned with them? Perhaps its the curse of Obama, he told us Brits how to vote and he told his people how to vote, perhaps he should just keep his trap shut.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 07:18
Post #1228538

It does indeed, shame the DNC backed 'poisoned' Hilary as Sanders was also anti-establishment but Polls say he would have romped it (at the same time Polls said Hilary only had 1% over trump Sanders head to head was +10&% - 1% was well within the Polls margin for error).

Posted by: sgtdixie Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 09:10
Post #1228558

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:31) *
As I said before, incredulity at anyone voting for Trump mirrors the Brexit vote where many remainers simply could not comprehend how anyone could vote for leaving. If you go to America's old heartland you will see why Trump resonates.

I rest my case.

The establishment and media simply don't appear to understand the anger at the them. I suspect they still don't.

Posted by: Gan Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:24
Post #1228593

After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32
Post #1228600

QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?


Posted by: Gan Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:30
Post #1228626

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:39
Post #1228629

QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations


Many have the dilemma of where the next pint of milk is coming from.Im sure they will be sympathetic.

Posted by: Kickaha Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:28
Post #1228655

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations


Many have the dilemma of where the next pint of milk is coming from.Im sure they will be sympathetic.

And that is the direct fault of the EU?

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:52
Post #1228670

QUOTE (Kickaha @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:28) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations


Many have the dilemma of where the next pint of milk is coming from.Im sure they will be sympathetic.

And that is the direct fault of the EU?


Of course it is.Millions on millions of EU immigrants have come into this country.They are either on the dole or working.

If they are working then they are not only doing jobs Uk workers desperately want,but have allowed company's to drop wages to minimum wage but stop offering proper jobs ESPECIALLY to UK residents,advertising their work ONLY abroad..Of course you could be a believer that they are all working in the fields.The only problem is,sod all is being grown in them.
The real situation is,many workers now cant get proper jobs and are living via test message with agencys doing what they can,when they can of course for wages a dog couldnt live on but i guess its their own lazy fault right?
I get access to alot of places country wide,the general public never see and will never be allowed to see.You need a translator,but i know im racist,a bigot and im thick,whats worse is i voted out thinking the NHS was going to get £350 million cos i saw it referenced on some bus.
I for one am sick and tired of the im alright jacks,winging and moaning.Part of me hopes they get real reason to winge.Welcome to the real world............

Posted by: PASTMYBEST Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:01
Post #1228677

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:52) *
QUOTE (Kickaha @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:28) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations


Many have the dilemma of where the next pint of milk is coming from.Im sure they will be sympathetic.

And that is the direct fault of the EU?


Of course it is.Millions on millions of EU immigrants have come into this country.They are either on the dole or working.

If they are working then they are not only doing jobs Uk workers desperately want,but have allowed company's to drop wages to minimum wage but stop offering proper jobs ESPECIALLY to UK residents,advertising their work ONLY abroad..Of course you could be a believer that they are all working in the fields.The only problem is,sod all is being grown in them.
The real situation is,many workers now cant get proper jobs and are living via test message with agencys doing what they can,when they can of course for wages a dog couldnt live on but i guess its their own lazy fault right?
I get access to alot of places country wide,the general public never see and will never be allowed to see.You need a translator,but i know im racist,a bigot and im thick,whats worse is i voted out thinking the NHS was going to get £350 million cos i saw it referenced on some bus.
I for one am sick and tired of the im alright jacks,winging and moaning.Part of me hopes they get real reason to winge.Welcome to the real world............


Shouldn't you be delivering milk, not ranting

Posted by: kezzy Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:05
Post #1228679

QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting



And why would you call it suicide voting ?.

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:06
Post #1228680

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:52) *
I for one am sick and tired of the im alright jacks,winging and moaning.Part of me hopes they get real reason to winge.Welcome to the real world............

Irony, much?

Brexit happened on the back of 'wannabe' I'm alright Jacks, quite happy to deny fellow European citizens the same opportunities they have (and often didn't exploit), in the vain hope that it might possibly have a positive impact on their lot.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:21
Post #1228686

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 15:06) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:52) *
I for one am sick and tired of the im alright jacks,winging and moaning.Part of me hopes they get real reason to winge.Welcome to the real world............

Irony, much?

Brexit happened on the back of 'wannabe' I'm alright Jacks, quite happy to deny fellow European citizens the same opportunities they have (and often didn't exploit), in the vain hope that it might possibly have a positive impact on their lot.


How is advertising jobs abroad ONLY giving people the SAME opportunities? How is filling Factorys and warehouses with immigrants other than one or two workers that the public have contact with,giving same opportunities? They dont employ english workers now because they couldn't communicate.
How is ring fencing housing for them,giving everyone the same opertunaties? Think it isnt happening? Try somewhere else than the BBC for your info.Its been happening since the Kosovans came.

How is giving someone from another country,while at the same time throwing people here on the scrap heap which tax payers have to pay for,helping people here? I think that if people are so keen on immigrants then they should personally subsidize them and the services they inevitability,overload to the point where many are failing everyone.

As for delivering milk,do we actually produce any of that any more? Isnt it cheaper to bring it across the continent,like everything else? Maybe its the wrong shade of white? smile.gif

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:28
Post #1228690

I am more than happy to deny workers from countries with far lower living standards the right to bring our living standards down to theirs. We currently have advantages that they don't, and I am happy to be selfish enough not to want to give them all away. In a similar vein, I am sufficiently amoral to walk past beggars without giving them the money in my pocket.

The labour market is subject to the principles of supply and demand. When demand exceeds supply, prices go up. When supply exceeds demand, prices go down. With a virtually unlimited supply of cheap labour, unskilled jobs will never pay a living wage. If that supply is cut off, wages will go up when demand exceeds supply. That is simple economics, not a "vain hope".

Posted by: sgtdixie Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 15:09
Post #1228707

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:21) *
As for delivering milk,do we actually produce any of that any more? Isnt it cheaper to bring it across the continent,like everything else? Maybe its the wrong shade of white? smile.gif

I hope we do still produce milk. If not in going to ask Mrs Dixie what we are paying a dairy manager to do with her 200 milking cows. Hopefully the price will go up when we aren't importing millions of pints of European milk. She also has a policy of paying well above the living wage but demands that all workers speak good English and live on the estate. Curiously enough we have very few foreign workers.

Posted by: cabbyman Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 17:37
Post #1228756

Lee Harvey Oswald, your country needs you! icon_redface.gif

Posted by: albert2008 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 17:40
Post #1228758

QUOTE (cabbyman @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 17:37) *
Lee Harvey Oswald, your country needs you! icon_redface.gif


but he is 8 years too late,

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:41
Post #1228794

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:21) *
How is advertising jobs abroad ONLY giving people the SAME opportunities? How is filling Factorys and warehouses with immigrants other than one or two workers that the public have contact with,giving same opportunities? They dont employ english workers now because they couldn't communicate.
How is ring fencing housing for them,giving everyone the same opertunaties? Think it isnt happening? Try somewhere else than the BBC for your info.Its been happening since the Kosovans came.

But I didn't suggest things were perfect, or the opportunities equal prior to Brexit.

I made the point that there is an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Brexit, without which we would have 'Remain'ed. I just think you missed the irony of your own opinion, and possibly still do.

Andy's post is at least refreshingly honest and pretty much demonstrates my point. I'd suggest any hope that unskilled jobs will pay a living wage without state support, is fairly vain. (Unless you're willing to compromise on the standard of living that that wage is compared against... oh hang on...)

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:57
Post #1228801

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:41) *
I made the point that there is an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Brexit, without which we would have 'Remain'ed.

There's also an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Remain, perhaps because they're competing with well paid skilled workers from other EU countries. So what's your point? It would be pretty remarkable if most people didn't vote in their own self interest, would it not?

Posted by: Atomic Tomato Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:02
Post #1228822

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:28) *
With a virtually unlimited supply of cheap labour, unskilled jobs will never pay a living wage.

Not forgetting that that cheap labour is only possible as it is subsidised by benefits like tax credits etc. which of course are paid out of taxes paid by workers in better paid jobs.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:13
Post #1228831

That went well.

 “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”

Posted by: kezzy Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:14
Post #1228833

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:41) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 14:21) *
How is advertising jobs abroad ONLY giving people the SAME opportunities? How is filling Factorys and warehouses with immigrants other than one or two workers that the public have contact with,giving same opportunities? They dont employ english workers now because they couldn't communicate.
How is ring fencing housing for them,giving everyone the same opertunaties? Think it isnt happening? Try somewhere else than the BBC for your info.Its been happening since the Kosovans came.

But I didn't suggest things were perfect, or the opportunities equal prior to Brexit.

I made the point that there is an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Brexit, without which we would have 'Remain'ed. I just think you missed the irony of your own opinion, and possibly still do.

Andy's post is at least refreshingly honest and pretty much demonstrates my point. I'd suggest any hope that unskilled jobs will pay a living wage without state support, is fairly vain. (Unless you're willing to compromise on the standard of living that that wage is compared against... oh hang on...)



Ah, bm1957,
I can assume that you are what the majority of people and the media are calling remoaners, and that you may be a person of substance, whereas indirectly you are being affected by the outcome of the Referendum.
I think you have just knocked your debate on the head by calling all those, and bearing in mind they were the majority at the time, you end up calling them I'm alright Jacks.
That basically tells me that you definately do not believe in the democratic process. So I ask you why don't you just stop your whinging, and get on and make the best of what you have. If you want to support all of these economic migrants that just happen to be flooding into this country, then I suggest you you dip your hand in your own pocket. If the vote on the referendum had gone the other way and remain had won, do you really think that the exit campaigners would have done what all the scaremongers are trying to do now, and get it changed, No they would not they would accept it for what it was, and tried to make the best of it. Just because you may be wealthy, probably off the backs of some one less fortunate than yourself. I suggest you read up on the democratic process, and at least try to understand it.
The referendum, was offered to the people of this nation, by the then Government, and it basically backfired on them, so the working class people of this country have now spoken, and the Government must abide by the democratic process, and see what it can now do for it's people, and not the elitist who think they had unreserved control.

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:30
Post #1228848

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:57) *
QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:41) *
I made the point that there is an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Brexit, without which we would have 'Remain'ed.

There's also an 'I'm all right Jack' demographic that voted for Remain, perhaps because they're competing with well paid skilled workers from other EU countries. So what's your point? It would be pretty remarkable if most people didn't vote in their own self interest, would it not?

Come on Fredd - don't try to tell me that a single Leave vote was made for altruistic reasons! Of course most people vote in self interest - but pretty much every one who didn't, voted to Remain.

There was a clear (minority) demographic which was racist and simply didn't want foreigners. Without this demographic the result would have been different.

The Leave result hasn't had nearly the negative impact I thought it might... I'm really not 'bemoaning'.



QUOTE (kezzy @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:14) *
Ah, bm1957,...


FFS kezzy, at least read what I wrote and stop chasing scarecrows laugh.gif

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:48
Post #1228857

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:30) *
Come on Fredd - don't try to tell me that a single Leave vote was made for altruistic reasons! Of course most people vote in self interest - but pretty much every one who didn't, voted to Remain.


I have always envied the liberal elite. Perhaps if I started reading the Guardian I too could feel smug while coming up with patronising bullsh*t..

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:55
Post #1228861

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:30) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 19:57) *

Come on Fredd - don't try to tell me that a single Leave vote was made for altruistic reasons! Of course most people vote in self interest - but pretty much every one who didn't, voted to Remain.

What an exceptionally patronising comment - only Remain voters could possibly have voted for altruistic reasons?

OK, try wrapping your reality distortion field around this. A favourite moan is to point out (correctly) that the elderly were far more likely to have voted Leave than the young (who it seems couldn't be bothered to vote on this vital issue at the same rate), and thus those with very little future remaining have selfishly chucked the young under the proverbial bus. However, logically and acting in their own self interest surely the elderly should have voted Remain? They've nothing to gain by reducing competition in the workforce, everything to lose from cutting off a source of cheap labour for nursing etc, and much to lose from short-term economic instability without any prospect of benefitting from any long-term opportunities. Perhaps those voters were actually best placed to take a principled decision and yes, voted altruistically for the benefit of younger generations?

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:05
Post #1228868

Sorry - I just don't buy that line of reasoning. And I'm not sure now if you're telling me everyone voted in self interest or if the older demographic voted Leave for the benefit of all the youngsters? Leave the strawmen to kezzy

Anyway, apologies if it was patronising... I genuinely don't get your point of view and didn't realise the point I made was controversial. My bad.

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:12
Post #1228871

Getting back on topic for a moment, it's a shame that we don't have any politicians who Trump respects who could possibly persuade him to reverse Obama's decision that we must stand at the back of the queue for trade deals with the USA.

Posted by: sgtdixie Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:12
Post #1228872

There is in fact a very strong argument that those who voted for brexit/Trump were in fact the altruistic public who were prepared to take the hit for a greater purpose. In the case of brexit my view is that far from being ignorant racists everyone i know who voted to leave did so expecting a short term financial hit but felt issues of sovereignty and nationality were more imporant than short term financial gain. It is in fact those voting to remain who think their own personal situation is worse. This is exemplified by younger voters who scream that the leave vote has destroyed their futures. In reality it appears all they care about is themselves not the nation. I believe leave voters in fact acted in the "spirit of the blitz" rather than selfishly.

For years mainstream politicians have courted the coloured/ minority vote believing that the white working class vote could be ignored. After Brexit and Trump i suspect they reconsidering.

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:18
Post #1228875

Sovereignty? Isn't that racist, like the Union flag and St George's cross (but not the Welsh flag, or the Saltire)?

Posted by: PASTMYBEST Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:25
Post #1228876

What did we actually vote for. To stop immigration it is worth giving up the free market????

So the prime minister goes to India to pave the way for a free trade deal, and what is she met with. "Any deal needs to include it being easier for Indians to come to Britain"

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:28
Post #1228879

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:25) *
What did we actually vote for. To stop immigration it is worth giving up the free market????

So the prime minister goes to India to pave the way for a free trade deal, and what is she met with. "Any deal needs to include it being easier for Indians to come to Britain"


Few voted to STOP immigration,just the right to choose who and how many.

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:36
Post #1228880

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:18) *
Sovereignty? Isn't that racist, like the Union flag and St George's cross (but not the Welsh flag, or the Saltire)?

I'll bite - genuine question.

Do you think the racist vote did or didn't swing the result from Remain to Leave?

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:38
Post #1228881

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:36) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:18) *
Sovereignty? Isn't that racist, like the Union flag and St George's cross (but not the Welsh flag, or the Saltire)?

I'll bite - genuine question.

Do you think the racist vote did or didn't swing the result from Remain to Leave?


There wasnt any,it was made up.

Few leave voters have issues with immigrants on a personal level,its the numbers. Turn the BB,C off.

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:48
Post #1228885

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:36) *
Do you think the racist vote did or didn't swing the result from Remain to Leave?


The majority was 1,269,501. If you could notionally disqualify the votes of 1,269,502 Leave voters on whatever arbitrary grounds you felt were appropriate to a democratic referendum, and nobody else was allowed to tinker with the results, the result would have been different.

Perhaps a more pertinent question might be how big the margin would have been if Project Fear had been prevented from telling lies.

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:07
Post #1228890

Both sides told lies.

I was simply interested in your opinion of whether the number of people who voted based on hatred was bigger or smaller than the majority. I have so far taken for granted that it's bigger, and that affects how well the democratic result sits with me, morally.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:10
Post #1228891

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 00:07) *
Both sides told lies.

I was simply interested in your opinion of whether the number of people who voted based on hatred was bigger or smaller than the majority. I have so far taken for granted that it's bigger, and that affects how well the democratic result sits with me, morally.


It really doesnt matter that they told lies.If the truth is known,most leavers knew what they were going to vote long long before the charade started and many predicted it would be just that.

When and what made the call for you??

Posted by: andy_foster Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:20
Post #1228894

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:07) *
I was simply interested in your opinion of whether the number of people who voted based on hatred was bigger or smaller than the majority. I have so far taken for granted that it's bigger, and that affects how well the democratic result sits with me, morally.


Based solely on how well the result sits with you, and with no reference to any demographic or statistical data, it was all racism. Nothing to do with corruption in the EU. Nothing to do with the EU's inevitable head towards a federal superstate. Nothing to do with the prospect of future generations not being able to earn enough to buy a home. Just racism.

Posted by: bm1957 Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:33
Post #1228896

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:10) *
When and what made the call for you??

Better the devil you know.

I'd be more than happy to Leave, but I think free movement of capital is foundational to our economy. If my perception of the feeling of the nation during the referendum was right, then Leave is almost synonymous with far greater controls on the free movement of people - which isn't compatible with keeping the free movement of capital.

I started as a Leaver, but if it meant losing free movement of people and therefore capital, that the risk to the economy was too great. Staying meant a stable economy, and that would have been fine with me cos I'm alright Jack wink.gif

Posted by: kezzy Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 01:31
Post #1228916

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:12) *
Getting back on topic for a moment, it's a shame that we don't have any politicians who Trump respects who could possibly persuade him to reverse Obama's decision that we must stand at the back of the queue for trade deals with the USA.



Since when has Britain had a trade deal with the US, There is'nt one, Business conclude trade deals, what Obama was doing was backing Camerons, ignorance of the British public, thinking he knows best, and Obama thought we would buy it. but there has never been a trade deal with the US. That is why the Single market with the EU was in fact falsely keeping prices high. to prevent us from having a trade deal with the US. Obama was speaking out the back of his trousers. he thought he could influence the British public, but it did'nt work. If these single minded EU lovers want to stay in the EU I would suggest that they move over there, they obviously do not want to live in a democratic country, they want to be where money talks, You only have to look at the EU gravy train, and see who wants to Jump on it as that traitorous Blair and Kinnock did. You can bet your bottom dollar that is where Cameron and Co. will finish up. Rant over.

Posted by: Atomic Tomato Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 07:25
Post #1228932

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:12) *
In the case of brexit my view is that far from being ignorant racists everyone i know who voted to leave did so expecting a short term financial hit but felt issues of sovereignty and nationality were more imporant than short term financial gain. ............. I believe leave voters in fact acted in the "spirit of the blitz" rather than selfishly.

+1 That sums up my vote perfectly.

Posted by: nigelbb Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:17
Post #1228941

QUOTE (kezzy @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 21:14) *
If the vote on the referendum had gone the other way and remain had won, do you really think that the exit campaigners would have done what all the scaremongers are trying to do now, and get it changed, No they would not they would accept it for what it was, and tried to make the best of it.

Do you seriously believe if the vote had been to remain that UKIP would have said "Sorry we were obviously wrong all along & must heed the voice of the people so now we'll just shut up shop & never campaign to leave the EU again"?

Posted by: sgtdixie Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:33
Post #1228942

I see there are demonstrations in the US against Trump being elected president. So much for the great democracy. How similar the remainers doing the same here.

Having spent a large part of the last 2 years in the US I stand by my previous comment that President Trump will be a different animal to Trump on the stump.

To all those who claim leavers are racist I would point out that generation snowflake have a very different definition of racist to people of my generation.

Posted by: bm1957 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:56
Post #1228947

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:33) *
To all those who claim leavers are racist I would point out that generation snowflake have a very different definition of racist to people of my generation.

I hope that's not the impression I gave? To suggest there was a clear motivation behind a minority of voters which was racist, wasn't intended to brand every Leave voter as racist. I am surprised that some posters deny that minority exists... perhaps I'm simply wrong.

Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:24
Post #1228951

It is virtually certain that some people voted leave on racist (actually racist, not Goldsmith University racist) grounds. What is far from certain is the number of those that did and without that data it is impossible to say whether removing that number of leave votes (illegally) would change the result.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:42
Post #1228954

Nor is it clear what the justification for ignoring their votes would be, even if they could be quantified - any more than it would be justified to eliminate the votes of those who've benefited from from EU grants, or are employed by the EU, or have a second home in another EU country, or had voted for Scotland to leave the UK, say.

Posted by: bm1957 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:53
Post #1228957

Stop with the strawman arguments! Nobody suggested they could or should be ignored.

Posted by: emanresu Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 10:40
Post #1228970

QUOTE
or had voted for Scotland to leave the UK, say.


People do leave all the time - and this is where they land up. #24 out of 45.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Americans#Presidents_of_Scottish_or_Scotch-Irish_descent

Posted by: sgtdixie Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 10:49
Post #1228972

I was under the impression from both the US and brexit vote that it was the"I'm alright jack" brigade that voted for both Hilary and remain. The revelation for the establishment was that those who have in fact lost out because of the EU and the liberal establishment in the US didn't do what they were told and voted for, in their view, apocalypse. The fact that a majority in both countries want change should tell the liberal classes that they are in a minority now.

BTW, many people have commented on the support for Trump from the KKK, what they singularly fall to mention is that Trump has condemned them time and again. Just because some ultra right wing nut jobs support a right wing candidate doesn't make the candidate a bedsheets wearing psycho.

Posted by: nigelbb Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 11:17
Post #1228986

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:33) *
I see there are demonstrations in the US against Trump being elected president. So much for the great democracy. How similar the remainers doing the same here.

Those who voted for Clinton could be excused some disgruntlement given that as with Al Gore back in 2000 the new president has been elected despite the fact that his opponent received a majority of the popular vote. So much for the great democracy.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 12:47
Post #1229018

QUOTE (nigelbb @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 11:17) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 08:33) *
I see there are demonstrations in the US against Trump being elected president. So much for the great democracy. How similar the remainers doing the same here.

Those who voted for Clinton could be excused some disgruntlement given that as with Al Gore back in 2000 the new president has been elected despite the fact that his opponent received a majority of the popular vote. So much for the great democracy.

Well, it's a form of representative democracy, and as such it works as designed; whether all-or-nothing electoral college votes are a sensible way of representing the electors is a different issue. If you want an example of blatant anti-democratic perversion of their electoral system take a look at the post-2010 gerrymandering of districts for elections to the House of Representatives!

Posted by: sgtdixie Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 13:03
Post #1229027

It appears to me that people are quite happy with their style of democracy when they win.

Posted by: andy_foster Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 13:22
Post #1229040


Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 15:41
Post #1229102

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:53) *
Stop with the strawman arguments! Nobody suggested they could or should be ignored.

Ok but are you in agreement that without data it's not possible to say with any conviction that the leave vote was won by racist voters?

Posted by: chris_NE Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:12
Post #1229112

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 11:49) *
BTW, many people have commented on the support for Trump from the KKK, what they singularly fall to mention is that Trump has condemned them time and again. Just because some ultra right wing nut jobs support a right wing candidate doesn't make the candidate a bedsheets wearing psycho.


Has he? I must have missed that part. I was too busy him feigning ignorance on who David Duke was, and yet still when told he was a Grand Wizard in the KKK and prominent violent racist, he still refused to disown his support.


Posted by: bm1957 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:15
Post #1229115

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 15:41) *
QUOTE (bm1957 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:53) *
Stop with the strawman arguments! Nobody suggested they could or should be ignored.

Ok but are you in agreement that without data it's not possible to say with any conviction that the leave vote was won by racist voters?

Yes, absolutely.

I had held the view that it probably was, and was interested in other views. I still tend towards that view, but I don't hold it as a fact.

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:26
Post #1229119

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 13:30) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 11:32) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 12:24) *
After Brexit and Trumpquake it looks like electorates have adopted a new weapon against The Establishment - Suicide Voting


What was so good about being in the EU for you?

I provide services for companies coping with European safety and environmental regulations

After Brexit I'll have a home market for my services to exporters coping with European safety and environmental regulations


Many have the dilemma of where the next pint of milk is coming from.Im sure they will be sympathetic.


I think the point of the quip was that if Brexit has the "expected" effect on the British economy, many more will have to deal with that dilemma.

Trump's election was similar, but his actual effect on the US economy is much less predictable. He's said some things that would cause great financial disruption, but also some things that would probably benefit the US economy. However, which of these things he is actually able to do once he takes office is much less clear. Congress could roll over, or they could block him entirely.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Spenny Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:34
Post #1229124

It strikes me that both the vote for Trump and for Brexit was a vote against perceived disenfranchisement (which includes the feeling that the Scots, Welsh, blacks, Asians, East Europeans are all being made special cases to be looked after at the expense of the white English majority).

The sad thing is that Brexit has ended up putting power even more into the hands of those responsible for the government that has systematically created that perception. "The people" apparently wanted the power and sovereignty and we now have a de facto dictator who is secretly concocting a solution that parliament is not privy to, let alone the populace, and the whole focus of Brexit is trade, not people.

Similarly, Trump has played up to the disaffected white American male who has had to give up his dominance over blacks, women and foreigners, yet is a character who apparently believes that you get everything by looking after number 1, so number 1 disaffected white American male is going to be quickly become disillusioned when the Republican freedom movement leaves him hanging in the wind, while the rest of the population are going to be literally up in arms when their hard won rights are withdrawn.

What we are seeing is a political system that has forgotten that it is supposed to be representing people. Do you feel your council is working for you or are you running around after it? Cameron's Localism just deregulated planning and stopped local people being able to say no to inappropriate developments (when did a democratic system only allow you to say what development you wanted without being able to have rules about things that you felt was wrong?). NHS - the people clearly expect that the deal that they have free health care for life to be held to, and without an honest debate on what the rules are to be if it is unaffordable (rather than incompetently managed and being milked by private industry) then how do we trust a government which seems tobe doing its best to break it and blame someone else. Add that into the revolution of social media that rapidly disseminates emotion, but seems to struggle to disseminate education, it is hardly surprising that we are in a mess. Then we have a growing culture of rights without responsibilities. Then again we have the asset stripping of the poor through pay day loans, deregulated gambling, and the systematic destruction of the provision of subsidised affordable housing under the guise of personal choice and freedom.

I'm sure we need some form of political revolution, the current system represents nobody but the interests of the 1% who are able to bribe and coerce a cooperative Government, but I am also sure the one we are getting is the wrong one. When someone proposes something that puts power into an accountable local council that reacts to the wants and needs of local people rather than being forced to rubber stamp actions based on a centralised framework that will be a step forward. When we have a central government who treats people as the focus of who they are trying to do the best for rather than treating business success as a proxy for the contentment and happiness of the people then we might get somewhere.

Both Trumpism and Brexit wins were based on big cons. It doesn't mean that Clinton and Remain are the right solutions either, but the means of victory were fundamentally immoral, promising a naive population things that they could not possibly deliver, and the ends have not justified the means.

Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:35
Post #1229125

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:15) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 15:41) *
QUOTE (bm1957 @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 09:53) *
Stop with the strawman arguments! Nobody suggested they could or should be ignored.

Ok but are you in agreement that without data it's not possible to say with any conviction that the leave vote was won by racist voters?

Yes, absolutely.

I had held the view that it probably was, and was interested in other views. I still tend towards that view, but I don't hold it as a fact.

My view is "don't know".

Posted by: sgtdixie Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 17:35
Post #1229144

QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:34) *
Both Trumpism and Brexit wins were based on big cons. It doesn't mean that Clinton and Remain are the right solutions either, but the means of victory were fundamentally immoral, promising a naive population things that they could not possibly deliver, and the ends have not justified the means.

I'm sorry but this statement is fundamentally flawed. There were far more lies told on the remain side than the leave side (try warnings of war, recession, ISIS comforting, Putin supporting £4500 out of your pocket, FTSE crash and a punishment budget), and Hilary lost mainly because people simply didn't believe what she was saying. Every election is won by the side the public believe, and no winner ever does everything they say. The biggest serious criticism of Trump was he actually gave out no policies. Thus how can he be accused of making false promises. What he promised was the disenfranchised would be listened to.

Posted by: Spenny Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28
Post #1229219

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 18:35) *
QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 16:34) *
Both Trumpism and Brexit wins were based on big cons. It doesn't mean that Clinton and Remain are the right solutions either, but the means of victory were fundamentally immoral, promising a naive population things that they could not possibly deliver, and the ends have not justified the means.

I'm sorry but this statement is fundamentally flawed. There were far more lies told on the remain side than the leave side (try warnings of war, recession, ISIS comforting, Putin supporting £4500 out of your pocket, FTSE crash and a punishment budget), and Hilary lost mainly because people simply didn't believe what she was saying. Every election is won by the side the public believe, and no winner ever does everything they say. The biggest serious criticism of Trump was he actually gave out no policies. Thus how can he be accused of making false promises. What he promised was the disenfranchised would be listened to.

No, Trump did make big promises - never explained how he was going to do them, but he was voted in on the "I am going to make America great again" with lots of sound-bite offers of doubling GDP, building walls, defeating ISIS, ignoring the law to achieve what he felt was right. If I say I am going to make you a millionaire but never explain how I am going to do it, does that somehow abrogate my responsibility to make good on that offer? And when the disenfranchised discover that they aren't listened to? - as the disenfranchised people of Scotland who live next to his golf course have found to their cost, what isn't in Donald Trump's personal interest doesn't happen, even when the law is involved. I think Hilary's problem was not that she wasn't going to be believed, it's that she never really claimed she was going to do anything other than maintain the status quo (which in reality is pretty much all anyone manages to achieve on a good day as President).

Similarly, Brexit was built on some quite specific suggestions of what could be achieved - money to the NHS, the claim that we could waltz out and make trade deals and any suggestion that there would be problems on the way was dismissed as scaremongering, as if the Europeans were somehow being unreasonable if they sought to protect what they perceive as their own interests in keeping Europe together above Britain's self-interest in leaving.

I'm not really bothered about the balance sheet of quality and quantity of lies, simply that the referendum was not a rational decision based on facts but an emotional decision based on fabrications. When there was factual rebuttal on either side, most people seemingly didn't want to listen because it didn't suit them. We tend not to examine the claims closely of the side we are supporting and dismiss the claims of the other, so it is hardly surprising that the two different sides of the referendum will have differing opinions of the quality and quantity of lying on either sides.

As far as I am concerned, the Remain warnings were not scaremongering, I am noticeably poorer and am particularly concerned for my financial future and don't see that Brexit has anything tangible to offer that will benefit me in my lifetime, and my children have lives based on strong European links, so risks to free travel around Europe are of real concern and will directly impact me in a way that notional ideals about sovereignty (which seems to reside with Rupert Murdoch rather than within the UK) have not. That is not to say I was enamoured with the Remain case either.

What concerns me is that because poor decisions are being made based on disinformation, then eventually those chickens will come home to roost. I'll take a bit of pain for gain, but there is nothing I can see that those in charge of Brexit are offering that seems worth the disruption because the one thing we are not going to get out of Brexit is a resolution to the issues that apparently are the reasons why people voted for Brexit as a protest.

Posted by: dramaqueen Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:30
Post #1229283

Careful Spenny. Your arrogance is showing.

Quite a few of us who voted for Brexit did so after a great deal of careful thought. Please give us credit for NOT being fooled by the slogan on the side of the bus. Certainly we were fed a great deal of misinformation. So were the Remainers.

I did not vote for Brexit as a protest. I am not a racist. My decision was not an emotional one. I am also tired of trying to explain my reasons to people who refuse to listen because anyone who disagrees with them is an idiot. I am tired, in fact, of being insulted.

As Nanny used to say: a) respectful disagreement is the essence of good debate; and b) arrogance is the enemy of respect.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:42
Post #1229284

QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28) *
one thing we are not going to get out of Brexit is a resolution to the issues that apparently are the reasons why people voted for Brexit as a protest.

I think you have misunderstood why people voted out. The campaign was simple and clear. Bring back law making to the UK, withdraw from the ECJ, stop uncontrolled migration get out of the internal market so we could make trade deals with the world and direct money spent on EU to the UK.

The protest was that the wealthy liberal elite appeared to be happy to give away sovereignty and allow public services to be swamped by immigrants because it didnt affect them negatively. Just as in the US the white working class vote was ignored because the Washington elite never came into contact with them or any pressure groups pushing their agenda.

What most leavers i know get annoyed about is remainers now claim to know exactly what leavers meant by their vote when the reality is they had and have no idea what they were thinking so resort to saying they were racist and thick. Just like Trump supporters in the US

Posted by: dramaqueen Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:55
Post #1229287

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:42) *
QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28) *
one thing we are not going to get out of Brexit is a resolution to the issues that apparently are the reasons why people voted for Brexit as a protest.

I think you have misunderstood why people voted out. The campaign was simple and clear. Bring back law making to the UK, withdraw from the ECJ, stop uncontrolled migration get out of the internal market so we could make trade deals with the world and direct money spent on EU to the UK.

The protest was that the wealthy liberal elite appeared to be happy to give away sovereignty and allow public services to be swamped by immigrants because it didnt affect them negatively. Just as in the US the white working class vote was ignored because the Washington elite never came into contact with them or any pressure groups pushing their agenda.

What most leavers i know get annoyed about is remainers now claim to know exactly what leavers meant by their vote when the reality is they had and have no idea what they were thinking so resort to saying they were racist and thick. Just like Trump supporters in the US



Yes! That's exactly it.

Posted by: Spenny Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 08:26
Post #1229290

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 08:42) *
QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28) *
one thing we are not going to get out of Brexit is a resolution to the issues that apparently are the reasons why people voted for Brexit as a protest.

I think you have misunderstood why people voted out. The campaign was simple and clear. Bring back law making to the UK, withdraw from the ECJ, stop uncontrolled migration get out of the internal market so we could make trade deals with the world and direct money spent on EU to the UK.



What I am saying is fine, bring law making back to the UK, but what do get from that? In my view, the problems in the UK are mainly of Westminister's making over a couple of decades, so the illusion that people will be re-enfranchised in some way will result in discovering that our Government really isn't interested in anyone but the 1%. The suggestion that our fundamental issues stem from the EU rather than Westminster has been one of the big lies on both sides.

I don't believe in free trade and i don't believe unfettered free speech (as in the assertion that magically people can tease understanding from misinformation) but I look at the supermarket shelves full of beans from Peru and apples from Australia and struggle to see where the EU is driving the decline in our ability to produce at home. I started my career with a classic blue chip FTSE manufacturing company that no longer exists aside from as a few brand names, and I live near Birmingham and see the swathes of abandoned land and the shopping centres disguised as regeneration. We need to change, but the EU is not the primary source of problems in this country - the EU has not been the source of policies that drive us to import cheap goods from China in preference to the UK or buy BMW's over Rovers.

Similarly, I have issues with the conflict between trying to have a decent society where we don't let the inadequate and underprivileged starve and a system that lets people, both native and immigrant, take advantage. For example, without migrant labour my impression is that many Lincolnshire farmers would shut up shop - these are not jobs that our Jeremy Kyle watching unemployed are prepared to do.. Yet I see Spalding which used to be a simple English market town and the place has been transformed into a track-suited East European enclave and I don't like the results and I don't know whether these people are subsidised by the state or causing others issues.

So I don't think it is arrogant to say that Brexit is a big diversion and what people have been voting in is a referendum about one thing on the assumption that it will resolve issues that ultimately are caused elsewhere. Europe has been a scapegoat for Westminster incompetence and corruption. Within the context of the referendum people may have made considered choices but they are answering the wrong question, the question they've been asked not what the problem is..

Posted by: bm1957 Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 09:06
Post #1229293

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:42) *
withdraw from the ECJ,

While this looks to be a possible outcome of withdrawing from the EU - due to the process being proposed, was it really a foregone conclusion that leaving the EU meant withdrawing from the ECJ?

Happy to be corrected, but the consensus of opinion here was that leaving EU => leaving ECJ was a fundamentally flawed proposition. And that anybody voting to Leave on the basis that they wanted to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the ECJ had been misinformed.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 09:16
Post #1229296

Are you perhaps confusing the European Court of Human Rights (not an EU institution) and the European Court of Justice (EU)?

Posted by: bm1957 Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 09:33
Post #1229301

QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 09:16) *
Are you perhaps confusing the European Court of Human Rights (not an EU institution) and the European Court of Justice (EU)?

It looks likely.

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 15:57
Post #1229431

I seem to remember that during the run up to the election Trump and his supporters were accused of being fascists who wouldn't respect the result if Hilary won and they would be rioting on the streets against Hilary winning. Great play made of this by the 'peaceful democratic' supporters. It appears there was a degree of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37946231 going on.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 16:17
Post #1229435

We can't "withdraw" from the ECJ in any practical sense; it will simply cease to be relevant at the same time the UK leaves the EU. huh.gif

--Churchmouse

Posted by: sgtdixie Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 16:23
Post #1229438

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 16:17) *
We can't "withdraw" from the ECJ in any practical sense; it will simply cease to be relevant at the same time the UK leaves the EU. huh.gif

--Churchmouse

In essence this is correct. Just as leaving the EU automatically means we cease to be in the internal market and free movement of goods, capital and people ceases. AKA what the majority voted for.

Posted by: andy_foster Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 17:17
Post #1229461

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 07:42) *
QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28) *
one thing we are not going to get out of Brexit is a resolution to the issues that apparently are the reasons why people voted for Brexit as a protest.

I think you have misunderstood why people voted out.


With respect, I fear that you have misunderstood the root of all Bremoaners' comments.
His side lost. However, that is not because their arguments were in any way flawed, it was because everybody who supported the other side are idiots, or racists, or whatever, so at the end of the day they are the real winners because they are better than everybody who voted to leave.

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 22:12) *
Getting back on topic for a moment, it's a shame that we don't have any politicians who Trump respects who could possibly persuade him to reverse Obama's decision that we must stand at the back of the queue for trade deals with the USA.


It appears I was wrong ;p http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/10/nigel-farage-to-be-donald-trumps-go-between-amid-claims-special/

Posted by: Ocelot Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 19:00
Post #1229494

QUOTE (Spenny @ Thu, 10 Nov 2016 - 20:28) *
As far as I am concerned, the Remain warnings were not scaremongering, I am noticeably poorer and am particularly concerned for my financial future and don't see that Brexit has anything tangible to offer that will benefit me in my lifetime, and my children have lives based on strong European links, so risks to free travel around Europe are of real concern and will directly impact me in a way that notional ideals about sovereignty (which seems to reside with Rupert Murdoch rather than within the UK) have not. That is not to say I was enamoured with the Remain case either.


Brexit may affect you personally adversely, but many people may be affected positively (no longer having to compete with migrants driving the local wage down etc). The main reason for voting out was concern over unfettered migration. For many (EU or otherwise) it is the sheer size of it - a city the size of Leicester, net, each year, and the environmental concerns this brings.

The other reason people voted out was because they were being told to do so by the Government and big business (so they could continue to have a revolving supply of cheap migrant labour).

I suspect people voted for Trump for similar reasons.

Posted by: Churchmouse Sat, 12 Nov 2016 - 12:56
Post #1229642

The deportation trains, once they begin running, will run both ways... huh.gif

It is unfortunate that the EU refused to recognise that the right to free movement of labour affected the UK in a detrimental and disproportionate way, due to various cultural, linguistic and economic factors. If they had, and had allowed the UK to restrict such movement in some reasonable way in response, the Referendum may never have been approved. However, the UK's refusal to accept that the refugee problem affected the rest of the EU detrimentally and disproportionately probably contributed to their hard-line position. It is sad, because there was probably a negotiated settlement to be had that would have (mostly) satisfied both sides--and avoided the years of uncertainty that we now face.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: sgtdixie Sat, 12 Nov 2016 - 13:16
Post #1229650

I believe the reason Cameron got such a rubbish deal was that EU leaders simply could not comprehend that the UK would vote to leave.

If they thought things were bad with brexit they have no idea how bad it will get with nationalists looking to take control of several EU countries and Trump in the White House.

Posted by: emanresu Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 07:45
Post #1229806

There is a known issue with democracy termed tyranny of the majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority). Trump's call for unity is an attempt to allay fears that he will be divisive.

The US Constitution has checks and balances on the "majority" - the first three articles I've been told are the main ones. As regards Brexit, it's Parliament - Cromwell and all that.

So the first few months/years will all be about these checks/balances being tested as is happening here already at the Supreme Court.

Posted by: Ocelot Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 09:00
Post #1229815

There's still a theoretical hope for Clinton, according to the Sun (of all papers), but as she has conceded I don't see how this would work:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2160545/hillary-clinton-could-still-beat-donald-trump-to-the-white-house-in-one-possible-scenario-that-could-shake-america/

Posted by: Fredd Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 09:46
Post #1229819

QUOTE (emanresu @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 07:45) *
There is a known issue with democracy termed tyranny of the majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority). Trump's call for unity is an attempt to allay fears that he will be divisive.

Which of Trump's so-called policies could reasonably be described as so oppressive of a minority group it would constitute "tyranny of the majority"? Not just policies that some groups don't like, or think will be detrimental to their interests, but are actually oppressive.

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 09:00) *
There's still a theoretical hope for Clinton, according to the Sun (of all papers), but as she has conceded I don't see how this would work:

The same applies after ever US Presidential Election, and it never happens.

Posted by: sgtdixie Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 10:47
Post #1229826

QUOTE (Fredd @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 09:46) *
QUOTE (emanresu @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 07:45) *
There is a known issue with democracy termed tyranny of the majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority). Trump's call for unity is an attempt to allay fears that he will be divisive.

Which of Trump's so-called policies could reasonably be described as so oppressive of a minority group it would constitute "tyranny of the majority"? Not just policies that some groups don't like, or think will be detrimental to their interests, but are actually oppressive.

I'm afraid you don't understand fredd. You must agree with every minority group or you are bigoted.

The claim Trump only won because of a white sense of grievance is somewhat idiotic. Can you imagine in an African country the same politicians complaining at a president voted in with the support of the black population. The liberal elite seem to forget that both the US and Europe are predominantly white so it is actually quite correct for that groups opinions to take precedence over minority groups.

Posted by: DancingDad Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:13
Post #1229831

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 10:47) *
......I'm afraid you don't understand fredd. You must agree with every minority group or you are bigoted.
.......

Ooh, shocked ohmy.gif
You are a bad man Sgt biggrin.gif

As a white male, happily married (for many years to my first and only wife) with kids, decent career (before I retired) and a small but comfortable income, I must resist all thoughts that I have earned my lifestyle.
It is obviously simply down to privilege of birth and instead of feeling smug about my life, I should be beating my breast, wailing from the rooftops and ensuring that no perceived slight to those less fortunate goes unpunished.

On the other hand, I could simply say b0ll0cks when the local LGBT/minority/single parent/whatever group asks for my support or tries to make a case for special treatment.


Posted by: Tartarus Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:29
Post #1229834

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Fri, 11 Nov 2016 - 19:00) *
Brexit may affect you personally adversely, but many people may be affected positively (no longer having to compete with migrants driving the local wage down etc). The main reason for voting out was concern over unfettered migration. For many (EU or otherwise) it is the sheer size of it - a city the size of Leicester, net, each year, and the environmental concerns this brings. The other reason people voted out was because they were being told to do so by the Government and big business (so they could continue to have a revolving supply of cheap migrant labour).

I await all the locals here to now do the work that many of the migrant workers coming in were doing (picking crops, stalking shelves, cleaning toilets etc)... oh look, I bet they won't because they consider it "beneath them" and just stay on benefits and moan about the situation. It's one thing lowering net migration, but if the people here won't be filling those now supposedly vacant positions...

We have a number of EU workers in our dev team at work. Romania, Hungary, France, Spain, Portugal. Why have we hired them? We couldn't find people from the UK (at the time) up to the same standard that we needed! Now admittedly a couple of them were already in the UK, but the Romanian guy and the Spanish guy both moved here definitely.

Also, migration into the UK from outside the EU has been higher than inside the EU since records began. So even if you stopped all EU migration, you're still only cutting total people coming in by half.

Posted by: Atomic Tomato Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:30
Post #1229835

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:13) *
On the other hand, I could simply say b0ll0cks when the local LGBT/minority/single parent/whatever group asks for my support or tries to make a case for special treatment.

That's so cruel, we should all go out of our ways to make these minorities feel loved by all. Now where did I put the sarcasm off button?

Posted by: Fredd Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 12:08
Post #1229840

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 10:47) *
I'm afraid you don't understand fredd. You must agree with every minority group or you are bigoted.

Or in this case nearly a minority of a minority. I've little time for any group that complains about an election result when their turnout is only about 55%, whether it be righteous liberal social democrats in the US, or young citizens of the world deprived of all opportunity in the UK by Brexit. If you care that much then turn out and vote, don't sit on your backside and then whine about it later!

Posted by: sgtdixie Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 12:31
Post #1229846

As someone who (via Mrs Dixie whose late father left her the estate) farms I can tell you that it very possible to get uk workers in agriculture. Many of the farms who only use migrant labour deliberately pay low wages as they know migrants would work for a wage far in excess of what they could earn at home but which is unattractive to UK workers.

One argument is that massive EU subsidies make many farmers lazy. If they paid higher wages more locals would work there. Yes, prices will go up. But, those left behind by globalisation blame it for depressed wages and high house prices that those doing well simply don't care about.

Posted by: StuartBu Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 12:46
Post #1229848

QUOTE (Tartarus @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:29) *
I await all the locals here to now do the work that many of the migrant workers coming in were doing (picking crops, stalking shelves, cleaning toilets etc)... oh look, I bet they won't because they consider it "beneath them" and just stay on benefits and moan about the situation. It's one thing lowering net migration, but if the people here won't be filling those now supposedly vacant positions...


Aaah... that's what those in the supermarket I see skulking and creeping about are doing...Stalking shelves !!!! biggrin.gif biggrin.gif

Posted by: Ocelot Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 15:10
Post #1229864

QUOTE (Tartarus @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 11:29) *
I await all the locals here to now do the work that many of the migrant workers coming in were doing (picking crops, stalking shelves, cleaning toilets etc)... oh look, I bet they won't because they consider it "beneath them" and just stay on benefits and moan about the situation. It's one thing lowering net migration, but if the people here won't be filling those now supposedly vacant positions...


I'm sure some won't do it, but they won't do anything. The migrants will do it for less pay thus driving down wages, as many live 10 to a house, spending nothing, saving all their money before returning.

Besides, who did those jobs before we were in the EU?

Posted by: facade Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 16:28
Post #1229879

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 15:10) *
Besides, who did those jobs before we were in the EU?


The Government encouraged immigration from the Colonies to resolve labour shortages from 1948.

Posted by: sgtdixie Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 16:50
Post #1229884

QUOTE (facade @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 16:28) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 15:10) *
Besides, who did those jobs before we were in the EU?


The Government encouraged immigration from the Colonies to resolve labour shortages from 1948.

It is true that a lot of colonial immigrants came here working in traditional jobs, but Curiously farming want one of them. They almost exclusively stayed in the cities. In truth it wasn't a labour shortage, it was the consequence of millions killed in the war. One thing we are not short of is people to work. Massive employment of eastern Europeans only began following Blairs decision to encourage mass immigration.

Posted by: 666 Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 17:27
Post #1229898

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 16:50) *
QUOTE (facade @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 16:28) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 15:10) *
Besides, who did those jobs before we were in the EU?


The Government encouraged immigration from the Colonies to resolve labour shortages from 1948.

It is true that a lot of colonial immigrants came here working in traditional jobs, but Curiously farming want one of them. They almost exclusively stayed in the cities. In truth it wasn't a labour shortage, it was the consequence of millions killed in the war. One thing we are not short of is people to work. Massive employment of eastern Europeans only began following Blairs decision to encourage mass immigration.


British casualties in WW2 were in fact considerably less than a million (388,000), and that includes children and the elderly. Even if all of those 388,000 had been able-bodied men of working age, it is vastly less than the number who were unemployed pre-war. This suggests that war casualties had a negligible effect on the available labour pool.

Posted by: «THÖMÅS®©™» Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 04:15
Post #1230005

QUOTE (MFM @ Mon, 7 Nov 2016 - 11:05) *
QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
Donald Trump is a racist bigot


Based on what evidence? The race card has been played to death by the left so that it doesn't have an effect anymore. It seems whenever anyone says anything a liberal doesn't like, he's a racist or a bigot.

QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
After I saw footage of Donald Trump saying he wants to "ban all Muslims from the U.S"...

Posted by: sgtdixie Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 06:47
Post #1230011

QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 04:15) *
QUOTE (MFM @ Mon, 7 Nov 2016 - 11:05) *
QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
Donald Trump is a racist bigot


Based on what evidence? The race card has been played to death by the left so that it doesn't have an effect anymore. It seems whenever anyone says anything a liberal doesn't like, he's a racist or a bigot.

QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
After I saw footage of Donald Trump saying he wants to "ban all Muslims from the U.S"...


Selectively and incorrectly quoting someone out of context doesn't proves your point. Try quoting what he actually said and why.

This is one reason Trump and Leave won. Mainstream liberal politicians and the media brand as racist anything which they disagree with. There is no discussion of the issues just a knee jerk soundbite reaction. Ordinary people have concerns and fears. They want discussion and explanation leading to a solution. Trump may have been wrong and OTT in his solution, but he was the only candidate who had any proposal to protect US citizens from Islamic terrorism.

Jeremy Corbyn was railing against Trumps Mexican wall yesterday. Using the usual racist rhetoric. The fact that the wall is to prevent illegal immigration and drugs trafficking seems to have passed him by.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 10:46
Post #1230047

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 06:47) *
QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 04:15) *
QUOTE (MFM @ Mon, 7 Nov 2016 - 11:05) *
QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
Donald Trump is a racist bigot


Based on what evidence? The race card has been played to death by the left so that it doesn't have an effect anymore. It seems whenever anyone says anything a liberal doesn't like, he's a racist or a bigot.

QUOTE («THÖMÅS®©™» @ Sun, 6 Nov 2016 - 07:23) *
After I saw footage of Donald Trump saying he wants to "ban all Muslims from the U.S"...


Selectively and incorrectly quoting someone out of context doesn't proves your point. Try quoting what he actually said and why.

This is one reason Trump and Leave won. Mainstream liberal politicians and the media brand as racist anything which they disagree with. There is no discussion of the issues just a knee jerk soundbite reaction. Ordinary people have concerns and fears. They want discussion and explanation leading to a solution. Trump may have been wrong and OTT in his solution, but he was the only candidate who had any proposal to protect US citizens from Islamic terrorism.

Jeremy Corbyn was railing against Trumps Mexican wall yesterday. Using the usual racist rhetoric. The fact that the wall is to prevent illegal immigration and drugs trafficking seems to have passed him by.

A few days earlier, some prominent politician whose name I have thankfully already forgotten lamented that Trump had been "ironically" elected exactly 27 years from the date the Berlin Wall fell--without apparently noticing that one is intended to protect a country's citizens from outside threats, and the other to imprison them. Or perhaps they actually believed that the Berlin Wall (officially, the "Antifaschistischer Schutzwall") was an "anti-fascist protective wall" and the hundred or so GDR defectors killed attempting to leave the country were a fabrication.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 11:38
Post #1230075

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 07:47) *
Jeremy Corbyn was railing against Trumps Mexican wall yesterday. Using the usual racist rhetoric. The fact that the wall is to prevent illegal immigration and drugs trafficking seems to have passed him by.

I think it was Trumps claim that all the illegal Mexicans were rapists, murderers and drug traffikers (not migrant labour) that got him branded as racist, not building a wall - if it's what JC said then he was an idiot to say that.

Noting that the Big, Beautiful, Powerful wall is now apparently going to be a fence with double fencing in places, (which is what Hiliary had said she was going to do) as a wall would be too expensive.

Noting also that the current net migration of illegals is FROM the US back to Mexico (as far as anyone can deduce) as the undocumented are now doing an 'Eastern Europe' and taking their money home where they are allowed to buy a home.

Posted by: Tartarus Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 11:52
Post #1230079

QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 13 Nov 2016 - 12:31) *
Yes, prices will go up.

And therein lies the problem, people won't want to pay increased prices, because they've had it "good" for as long as they can recall.

Posted by: emanresu Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 13:05
Post #1230114

Back to tyranny of the majority. It seems there has been an emphasis on tyranny and an ignoring of the comments on checks and balances.

If Trump is a racist bigot - with a majority - there are checks on this. If May is a megalomaniac and wants to ignore Parliament, there are checks which are being applied now.

The majority will get their way as that is how our system works but it can't railroad over the minorities either.

We'll see how far (literally) he will get with his wall but public opinion or more likely cash will run out long before that. And given his heritage, wonder if he got this idea from a certain installation between Newcastle and Carlisle.

Posted by: sgtdixie Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 13:30
Post #1230119

QUOTE (emanresu @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 13:05) *
The majority will get their way as that is how our system works but it can't railroad over the minorities either.

The main problem has been the majority have been ignored and minorities have railroaded all over them for years.

Posted by: bama Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 18:17
Post #1230249

now all the numbers are in it shows that Trump also got the popular vote (where I read it anyway, who knows what the actual ones are) i.e. his vote total exceeded Hillary's

Posted by: Fredd Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 18:29
Post #1230251

QUOTE (bama @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 18:17) *
now all the numbers are in it shows that Trump also got the popular vote (where I read it anyway, who knows what the actual ones are) i.e. his vote total exceeded Hillary's

Yes, but some people are always inclined to https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/14/googles-top-news-link-for-final-election-results-goes-to-a-fake-news-site-with-false-numbers/ rather than boring old well-sourced data, aren't they?

Posted by: Atomic Tomato Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 19:04
Post #1230259

Just heard from one of the sprogs that a teacher at their school has told them that only uneducated people voted for Trump.

Heaven help us when those who we entrust with our kids education see fit to force there own political views on them.

Posted by: DancingDad Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 19:57
Post #1230284

QUOTE (Atomic Tomato @ Mon, 14 Nov 2016 - 19:04) *
........Heaven help us when those who we entrust with our kids education see fit to force there own political views on them.


They've been doing that for years.

Bet your sprog has more teaching about Diwali or Ede then Easter.
Or that biology includes healthy eating and that fat is bad, bad bad.
Geography, any answer regarding agriculture, manufacturing, mining (and probably lots more) has to include something about carbon offset and global warming else lose marks.


Posted by: MFM Tue, 15 Nov 2016 - 13:00
Post #1230531

QUOTE (bm1957 @ Wed, 9 Nov 2016 - 23:33) *
I'd be more than happy to Leave, but I think free movement of capital is foundational to our economy.


You couldn't possibly know that. Not even the so called economists have a clue on what will happen. But you know what, I as a leave voter(and I suspect the vast majority of other leave voters) don't care. No matter how 'bad' it gets and how long it stays like this, we should always have left the EU. What we do know is the EU is unsustainable and dying a slow death and it's going to collapse.

Why on earth would anyone not want their sovereignty back? Why would anyone willingly be ruled by a bureaucratic dictatorship where their vote has no effect? People joke about it being treason voting remain, but that is essentially what it comes down to.

Posted by: albert2008 Tue, 15 Nov 2016 - 13:15
Post #1230539

If our soldiers had not won WW2, we would have a German in charge of our country,

OOOH, hang on a minute, biggrin.gif

Posted by: emanresu Wed, 16 Nov 2016 - 05:45
Post #1230812

QUOTE
Why would anyone willingly be ruled by a bureaucratic dictatorship where their vote has no effect?


Been to a local council meeting recently?

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 00:34
Post #1251154

Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans, and people of the world: thank you.
We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its promise for all of our people.
Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for years to come.
We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But we will get the job done. Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power, and we are grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition. They have been magnificent.
Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.
For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.
Washington flourished – but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered – but the jobs left, and the factories closed.
The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation’s Capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.
That all changes – starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you! It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America. This is your day. This is your celebration. And this, the United States of America, is your country.
What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.
The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.
Everyone is listening to you now. You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement the likes of which the world has never seen before. At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction: that a nation exists to serve its citizens.
Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for themselves.
These are the just and reasonable demands of a righteous public. But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists: Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system, flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.
This American carnage stops RIGHT HERE and stops RIGHT NOW. We are one nation – and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.
The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans. For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry;
Subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military; We've defended other nation’s borders while refusing to defend our own;
And spent trillions of dollars overseas while America's infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay.
We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength, and confidence of our country has disappeared over the horizon.
One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores, with not even a thought about the millions upon millions of American workers left behind.
The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed across the entire world.
But that is the past. And now we are looking only to the future.
We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power.
From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.
From this moment on, it’s going to be America First. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength.
I will fight for you with every breath in my body – and I will never, ever let you down.
America will start winning again, winning like never before. We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams.
We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.
We will get our people off of welfare and back to work – rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor.
We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and Hire American.
We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world – but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.
We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow.
We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones – and unite the civilized world against Radical Islamic Terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.
At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.
When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.
The Bible tells us, “how good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity.”
We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. When America is united, America is totally unstoppable. There should be no fear – we are protected, and we will always be protected.
We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement and, most importantly, we are protected by God.
Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger. In America, we understand that a nation is only living as long as it is striving.
We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action – constantly complaining but never doing anything about it.
The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.
Do not let anyone tell you it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America.
We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again. We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the Earth from the miseries of disease, and to harness the energies, industries and technologies of tomorrow.
A new national pride will stir our souls, lift our sights, and heal our divisions. It is time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget: that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American Flag. And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams, and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty Creator.
So to all Americans, in every city near and far, small and large, from mountain to mountain, and from ocean to ocean, hear these words: You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your hopes, and your dreams, will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.
Together, We Will Make America Strong Again. We Will Make America Wealthy Again.
We Will Make America Proud Again.
We Will Make America Safe Again....
and Yes, Together, We Will Make America Great Again. Thank you, God Bless You, And God Bless America.
Donald J. Trump
45th President of the United States




Time will tell i guess....................................

Posted by: ford poplar Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 02:16
Post #1251171

There was also a cr*p rendition of 'Land of the Free' - enuf said.

Posted by: emanresu Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 07:12
Post #1251181

Does this compare with the Gettysburg Address (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address)

QUOTE
Abraham Lincoln's carefully crafted address, secondary to other presentations that day, was one of the greatest and most influential statements of national purpose. In just over two minutes, Lincoln reiterated the principles of human equality espoused by the Declaration of Independence[6] and proclaimed the Civil War as a struggle for the preservation of the Union sundered by the secession crisis,[7] with "a new birth of freedom"[8] that would bring true equality to all of its citizens.[9] Lincoln also redefined the Civil War as a struggle not just for the Union, but also for the principle of human equality.[6]


It'll be an interesting comparison especially the bit about human equality.

Posted by: Gan Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 09:14
Post #1251193

George Soros described him this week as an imposter, a con-man and would-be dictator who will be checked by Congress and The Constitution

Ladbrokes is only quoting Evens against an impeachment

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 11:14
Post #1251213



"People that wernt so nice to me,were saying we did a really good job today "



I suspect theres going to be quite a few wishing they hadn't been quite so vocal. Sort of reminds me of the sucking up in the store scene in Pretty woman.

Interesting times smile.gif







Posted by: whjohnson Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 16:05
Post #1251268

George Soros is one of the principle causes of much of the disquiet around the world.

George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and other organisations were revealed to have funded the Black Lives Matter movement in the U.S., various initiatives promoting the image of migrants in Europe, and even sought to use the migrant crisis to raise more money.

In his native Hungary, Soros is incredibly unpopular and a member of the ruling Fidesz party has vowed to “sweep away” organisations funded by the billionaire.

He labelled the rise of populist parties like the German Alternative for Germany (AfD) or France’s Front National as “anti-European” and claimed that Europe was currently going down the wrong path."

There is no such thing as 'Europe'. It exists only as a fictional description of a geographic area. What he means is that people are anti-EU but he daren't say it because he knows that the EU is a political faction that the people want to overthrow.

He is a financial 'card sharp' who peddles his ideas by trying to sell the EU as Europe.. No one is buying it any more.

Have a read of his book 'Soros on Soros'.
The man is as evil as Blair.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 21:07
Post #1251346

People may not remember his inauguration speech but they will remember these.

“I did try and **** her. She was married… I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn't get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she's not got the big phony **** and everything... I've got to use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her. You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful. I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the *****. You can do anything.” 

Donald Trump, 45th President of the USA

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 21 Jan 2017 - 21:26
Post #1251349

Apparently he is going to have the Whitehouse bathroom refurbished. He's having a Golden Shower installed.

Posted by: Churchmouse Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00
Post #1251438

Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse

Posted by: AscotGuy Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25
Post #1251497

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.

Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:40
Post #1251504

QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.


You see what you want to see!

Posted by: southpaw82 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:59
Post #1251511

QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.

It's alleged that CNN (or some other news agency) showed contrasting photos of Obama's inauguration at the height of the event vs Trump's some hours before it began. True or not?

It's also alleged that attendance was down due to increased security, including the use of magnetometers at the gates and the heightened risk of having one's skull caved in by a rabid anarchist protester with a legitimate grievance. True or not?

Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:12
Post #1251519

Like sheep they are .........................

Posted by: AscotGuy Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:22
Post #1251524

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:59) *
QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.

It's alleged that CNN (or some other news agency) showed contrasting photos of Obama's inauguration at the height of the event vs Trump's some hours before it began. True or not?

It's also alleged that attendance was down due to increased security, including the use of magnetometers at the gates and the heightened risk of having one's skull caved in by a rabid anarchist protester with a legitimate grievance. True or not?


But according to Trumps team the attendance wasn't down. The press got it wrong.

"There were no official estimates. Mr Trump said during a visit to the CIA on Saturday that it "looked like a million and a half people", but provided no evidence."


Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:26
Post #1251527

QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:22) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:59) *
QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.

It's alleged that CNN (or some other news agency) showed contrasting photos of Obama's inauguration at the height of the event vs Trump's some hours before it began. True or not?

It's also alleged that attendance was down due to increased security, including the use of magnetometers at the gates and the heightened risk of having one's skull caved in by a rabid anarchist protester with a legitimate grievance. True or not?


But according to Trumps team the attendance wasn't down. The press got it wrong.

"There were no official estimates. Mr Trump said during a visit to the CIA on Saturday that it "looked like a million and a half people", but provided no evidence."


Who cares? Does it matter? Isnt it what he does that matters not who waved to him? Stop being a media sheep,it will shorten your life.

Posted by: AscotGuy Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:32
Post #1251529

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:26) *
QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:22) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:59) *
QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

You can see why he is friends with Putin.

It's alleged that CNN (or some other news agency) showed contrasting photos of Obama's inauguration at the height of the event vs Trump's some hours before it began. True or not?

It's also alleged that attendance was down due to increased security, including the use of magnetometers at the gates and the heightened risk of having one's skull caved in by a rabid anarchist protester with a legitimate grievance. True or not?


But according to Trumps team the attendance wasn't down. The press got it wrong.

"There were no official estimates. Mr Trump said during a visit to the CIA on Saturday that it "looked like a million and a half people", but provided no evidence."


Who cares? Does it matter? Isnt it what he does that matters not who waved to him? Stop being a media sheep,it will shorten your life.


I work in the media

Posted by: DancingDad Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 20:47
Post #1251554

QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 19:32) *
..........I work in the media


As long as you wash your hands after work, no problem biggrin.gif

Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 20:54
Post #1251555



"I work in the media"


Well heres some media for you...........


http://www.lbc.co.uk/opinion/katie-salutes-leave-voters-who-dared-to-dream-1328/


Posted by: Churchmouse Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 21:33
Post #1251562

QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 13:00) *
Unlike most people here in the UK, I could have but didn't vote for Trump (and wouldn't in a million years vote for him), but I can't help but find some of the "outrage" now being exhibited about his inauguration rather pathetic. Surely the time to oppose and fight him was before his election, not after... Which suggests that all this "right on" opposition to his government is probably going to be even less effective than that deployed against his election. [Slow clap]

--Churchmouse


People did, he lost the popular vote.

We are starting to see the true colours of Trump after day 1. Look at the reports of the attendance at his swearing in, he now claims it is the best attended ever. No facts to back it up. If the press doesn't report his version, they are rotten and the problem.

As you certainly know, the popular vote was irrelevant.

I, for one, will not be surprised if Trump ends up doing some of the things he said he would do, and doesn't do others. Fortunately, he's only the President...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 22:23
Post #1251590

There are photos taken 45 minutes before the inaugurations of Trump and Obama, the Obama photo shows a packed area, the Trump half empty, however a White House spokes person (name of Goebbels perhaps) says they should look at the 'alternate facts' which in this case seems to mean 'the facts as we wanted them to be but they weren't'.

Trump already has worse disapproval ratings than Nixon as he was leaving after Watergate, and the lowest approval ratings for an incoming president ever seen.

Posted by: mickR Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 22:30
Post #1251594

Are any bookies giving odds on how long before hes assassinated?

Posted by: emanresu Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 07:00
Post #1251627

QUOTE
Are any bookies giving odds on how long before hes assassinated?


A Utopian dream?

http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/utopia/section12.rhtml

Posted by: Gan Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 08:56
Post #1251644

QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 22:30) *
Are any bookies giving odds on how long before hes assassinated?

I tried to find them but Ladbrokes is only giving odds on him not completing his term of office, 50:50

Posted by: 666 Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 09:02
Post #1251647

QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 22:30) *
Are any bookies giving odds on how long before hes assassinated?


It won't happen. All the gun owners voted for him.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 09:17
Post #1251654

QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 09:02) *
QUOTE (mickR @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 22:30) *
Are any bookies giving odds on how long before hes assassinated?


It won't happen. All the gun owners voted for him.

That didn't exactly help Reagan...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Dwain Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 10:21
Post #1251680

What do the secret service guys shout if someone tries to shoot Donald Trump?


"Donald Duck"

Sorry.........it made me smile.

Posted by: fedup2 Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 20:02
Post #1251843

Sean Spicer.......

Sort of made me wish i was American.

If only the British press would take heed of his advice instead of the constant negative crap pumped out day after day causing nothing but destruction.

I think there will be many eat their words regarding Trump and May is meeting up soon.Hopefully some will rub off on her and she will grow a pair and get on with things.


Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 08:46
Post #1251971

Well if Trump wasn't stupid/arrogant/delusional (delete as you see fit) enough to claim he had the biggest attendance ever then the press wouldn't have felt the need to correct that 'alternate fact' with the real ones (shame they didn't do that during the election campaign a bit more rather than letting him get away with his preposterous alternatives to the truth), in this case he reaped what he sowed, had he not claimed it it would never have been an issue.

Still using a Snipers scope to ensure the projectile strikes the foot is a tried and tested Trump technique once he gets on twatter.

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 09:09
Post #1251977

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 08:46) *
Well if Trump wasn't stupid/arrogant/delusional (delete as you see fit) enough to claim he had the biggest attendance ever then the press wouldn't have felt the need to correct that 'alternate fact' with the real ones (shame they didn't do that during the election campaign a bit more rather than letting him get away with his preposterous alternatives to the truth), in this case he reaped what he sowed, had he not claimed it it would never have been an issue.

Still using a Snipers scope to ensure the projectile strikes the foot is a tried and tested Trump technique once he gets on twatter.


But he DID have the biggest audience if you include other methods of viewing.You have fallen for the classic media brainwashing.There was so much said by spicer most positive and i believe open and honestly yet the only thing the media have clung to is twisting of words regarding some comment about audience numbers.Im sitting here wondering what the hell it matters anyway.It doesnt unless your wanting to use anything possible to smear others and unfortuantly that crap is rife in the media followed by its followers who cant see past what the media wants them to see.

Just for info clinton paid the media millions of dollars.makes you wonder why it was one sided.

You should be ashamed!

Lets take todays crap the media are peddling,were all dumping plastic bottles in the sea,bad people.
Yesterday it was nuclear weapons going in the sea,yet no one even mentioned the problems it may cause .The worlds gone mad i tell yer.........

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 11:49
Post #1252047

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 09:09) *
Yesterday it was nuclear weapons going in the sea,yet no one even mentioned the problems it may cause .The worlds gone mad i tell yer.........

If you're referring to the Trident missile test firing, no nuclear weapons were involved.

Posted by: ItchyCrakus Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 15:11
Post #1252150

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 20:02) *
Sean Spicer.......

Hopefully some will rub off on her and she will grow a pair and get on with things.


She wants to watch out he doesn't rub off on her.

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 17:22
Post #1252200

QUOTE (ItchyCrakus @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 15:11) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 20:02) *
Sean Spicer.......

Hopefully some will rub off on her and she will grow a pair and get on with things.


She wants to watch out he doesn't rub off on her.



What is it you think he will do wrong?

Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 17:29
Post #1252205

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 17:22) *
QUOTE (ItchyCrakus @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 15:11) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 23 Jan 2017 - 20:02) *
Sean Spicer.......

Hopefully some will rub off on her and she will grow a pair and get on with things.


She wants to watch out he doesn't rub off on her.



What is it you think he will do wrong?

Call her the Prime Minister of England? President of the Euw-Kay? Ask her if she knows his mate Bob, "he only lives round the corner from you, Bristol or something, you must know him"?

Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 18:14
Post #1252223

If he wants to upset Mrs May, all he needs to do is talk about his mate Nigel.

Posted by: Hippocrates Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 22:23
Post #1252313

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 24 Jan 2017 - 18:14) *
If he wants to upset Mrs May, all he needs to do is talk about his mate Nigel.

Over a glass of Florida orange juice.

Posted by: MFM Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 10:43
Post #1252396

Trump has already done more in 4 days than Obama did in 8 years. Greatest president ever! biggrin.gif

Posted by: Mortimer Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 10:57
Post #1252402

I'd rather see a president do a few good things than a lot of bad things.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 11:09
Post #1252408

QUOTE (Mortimer @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 10:57) *
I'd rather see a president do a few good things than a lot of bad things.

Me too. The first of those options doesn't look likely, though.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 12:14
Post #1252434

So a summary of his first few days in office
1/ Lied on twitter
2/ Got the official Whitehouse spokesperson (who represents the country not just the presidency) to lie in a press conference in support of DJT's lie.
3/ Gave a speech at the CIA with circa 40 imported 'rented cheerleaders' to make it look like he had the CIA's support (despite haranguing them over the last few months) when he didn't.
4/ Committed an impeachable (unlikely though) offence by signing an executive order on the DAP which he is an investor in - creating a clear and unambiguous conflict of interest as he still has taken no measures to 'blind' himself from his business interests.
5/ Approached congress for the money to build the Mexico wall when his clear and unambiguous election promise was that Mexico would pay

He has scrapped the TPP which despite being a great idea was stupid in its execution.

Posted by: MFM Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 12:55
Post #1252452

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 12:14) *
So a summary of his first few days in office
1/ Lied on twitter
2/ Got the official Whitehouse spokesperson (who represents the country not just the presidency) to lie in a press conference in support of DJT's lie.
3/ Gave a speech at the CIA with circa 40 imported 'rented cheerleaders' to make it look like he had the CIA's support (despite haranguing them over the last few months) when he didn't.
4/ Committed an impeachable (unlikely though) offence by signing an executive order on the DAP which he is an investor in - creating a clear and unambiguous conflict of interest as he still has taken no measures to 'blind' himself from his business interests.
5/ Approached congress for the money to build the Mexico wall when his clear and unambiguous election promise was that Mexico would pay

He has scrapped the TPP which despite being a great idea was stupid in its execution.


Yeah sure, crimes of the year. Who cares. Come back with some valid reasons to dislike him when he's destroyed another country and millions of lives like his predecessors.

The fact is, this is the beginning of the end of this politically correct hell hole we live in. First Brexit, now Trump. And it's only going to gain momentum and continue, hopefully until liberalism is wiped from the face of the earth.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 13:19
Post #1252457

What liberals? name the last liberal president? the last 2 democrats (so that takes you back a long way) were corporatist establishment candidates, they were NOT liberals.

You have a billionaire (ish) filling the Whitehouse with other billionaires and you expect him to help the common man?

The swamp has only be drained sufficiently to make it transportable into the Oval office, wake up and smell the coffee!

Posted by: Ocelot Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 18:41
Post #1252583

Wikipedia seems to think that 'Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.' Let's wipe it from the face of the earth!

Posted by: southpaw82 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 20:44
Post #1252625

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 18:41) *
Wikipedia seems to think that 'Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.' Let's wipe it from the face of the earth!

I don't think that classical view is what MFM meant. I think the more modern version was intended.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:14
Post #1252640

Creating jobs already..........


Trump signed executive orders ordering the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:28
Post #1252644

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 20:44) *
I don't think that classical view is what MFM meant. I think the more modern version was intended.

Actually the Wikipedia description of liberalism is the more recent interpretation. The classical definition of liberalism, now sometimes referred to as neoliberalism (the Adam Smith version), is much more red in tooth and claw and very corporate-friendly.


QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:14) *
Creating jobs already..........
Trump signed executive orders ordering the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations.

Meanwhile, in the https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-25/trump-plan-for-wall-with-mexico-pushes-builders-shares-higher...

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:39
Post #1252655

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:28) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 20:44) *
I don't think that classical view is what MFM meant. I think the more modern version was intended.

Actually the Wikipedia description of liberalism is the more recent interpretation. The classical definition of liberalism, now sometimes referred to as neoliberalism (the Adam Smith version), is much more red in tooth and claw and very corporate-friendly.


QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:14) *
Creating jobs already..........
Trump signed executive orders ordering the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations.

Meanwhile, in the https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-25/trump-plan-for-wall-with-mexico-pushes-builders-shares-higher...


Im not sure what your point is? A Mexican company COULD provide the cement? Whats wrong with that? Am i missing something?

He isnt anti Mexican,hes anti ILLEGAL immigrants.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 22:24
Post #1252672

So why build the wall when the net flow of illegals is currently from the USA back to Mexico, surely it's not mindlessly playing to a 'redneck' crowd contrary to the facts, or maybe it's more alternative facts?

Posted by: mickR Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 22:30
Post #1252673

And theMexicans will just build more tunnels under it . Which they seem to be quite good at!
Maybe we shojld hire them tobuild the new dartford crossing rolleyes.gif

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 22:40
Post #1252676

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 22:24) *
So why build the wall when the net flow of illegals is currently from the USA back to Mexico, surely it's not mindlessly playing to a 'redneck' crowd contrary to the facts, or maybe it's more alternative facts?


Where are you getting that info from?

I lock my door at night as a matter of course to keep out undesirables,with country's it seems some think we should leave our doors open to all.I find that a little strange.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:00
Post #1252680

Statistics and research from America, where else.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:20
Post #1252687

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:00) *
Statistics and research from America, where else.


Lets see them then,you obviously have.

Posted by: Tartarus Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:28
Post #1252688

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:20) *
Lets see them then,you obviously have.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

TL;DR = last five years, way more Mexicans have been going back to Mexico than coming into the US. In fact, two of the growing demographics coming to the US are Cubans and Chinese...

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:46
Post #1252692

QUOTE (Tartarus @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:28) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:20) *
Lets see them then,you obviously have.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

TL;DR = last five years, way more Mexicans have been going back to Mexico than coming into the US. In fact, two of the growing demographics coming to the US are Cubans and Chinese...


Its late and im not doing 11 pages. Ive had a quick scan but cant put my finger on the numbers of ILLEGALS in and out of Mexico.The thing looks like a projection to me but im no expert.
If someone is illegal and come in under the radar,how are accurate figures formed?

Maybe someone could spell it out for me and paste the relivent parts,you know being a Brexiter, im a bit thick.

Maybe Trump is building the wall to stop them escaping?

Posted by: Mat_Shamus Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 04:47
Post #1252709

It's never going to end well when you have someone who is illiterate in science making up rules that regular science.
He's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published if he / his team likes them, regardless if they're factual or not.



Posted by: Fredd Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 08:02
Post #1252715

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:39) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:28) *

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:14) *
Creating jobs already..........
Trump signed executive orders ordering the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations.

Meanwhile, in the https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-25/trump-plan-for-wall-with-mexico-pushes-builders-shares-higher...


Im not sure what your point is? A Mexican company COULD provide the cement? Whats wrong with that? Am i missing something?

He isnt anti Mexican,hes anti ILLEGAL immigrants.

My point is that the "creating jobs" claim doesn't look that great if it ends up being Mexican jobs that are created supplying materials and building whatever the wall turns out to be, with the American jobs being a host of border patrol and immigration officials who are a cost that doesn't contribute any economic gain.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 09:47
Post #1252733

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 00:46) *
QUOTE (Tartarus @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:28) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 23:20) *
Lets see them then,you obviously have.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

TL;DR = last five years, way more Mexicans have been going back to Mexico than coming into the US. In fact, two of the growing demographics coming to the US are Cubans and Chinese...


Its late and im not doing 11 pages. Ive had a quick scan but cant put my finger on the numbers of ILLEGALS in and out of Mexico.The thing looks like a projection to me but im no expert.
If someone is illegal and come in under the radar,how are accurate figures formed?

Maybe someone could spell it out for me and paste the relivent parts,you know being a Brexiter, im a bit thick.

Maybe Trump is building the wall to stop them escaping?

Well by definition the illegals are not tracked, which is why you have to look at the secondary statistics that provide you with the extra information, that is what that research did. Additionally bear in min that the research was triggered by significant anecdotal evidence that it was already happening. Undocumenteds that have done well in the US cannot buy a house, they are going back to Mexico relatively well off and able to buy one.

Why would Trump build the wall to stop them escaping when he's promised to put extra resources into deporting them is beyond me, as your clearly much smarter perhaps you could explain that logic.

the wall was never a considered economic or security move, it was crowd surfing appeasement to those who want to blame someone 'outside' for their woes (rather than the less palatable fact its greedy American corporations), I think someone in Europe did similar, in the 1930's I think it was.

Posted by: fedup2 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 10:56
Post #1252769

I think you need to leave posting until you've woke up a little more.

I obviously wasn't serious about Trump building a wall to stop them escaping,He has made it very clear why the walls going up.Maybe you could post them the projections so he doesnt have to build it after all.

I may not be a smart as some but im smart enough not to make baa baa noises when the media peddle negative crap.I am also smart enough to know it doesn't matter what May or Trump does,NOTHING will be ever be right.
Thats because we live in times where folk have got too much time on their hands and now think they are all smarter than everyone else and have all the answers.Funny really cos the same 'experts' couldnt even predict which way either vote was going to go but did think that paid for media could change peoples view.It hasnt worked now TWICE.Maybe were smarter than were given credit for?

I do note that no figures to back up claims have been pasted,i think theres a pattern forming.............

QUOTE (Fredd @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 08:02) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:39) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:28) *

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 25 Jan 2017 - 21:14) *
Creating jobs already..........
Trump signed executive orders ordering the construction of a wall on the US-Mexico border, boosting border patrol forces and increasing the number of immigration enforcement officers who carry out deportations.

Meanwhile, in the https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-25/trump-plan-for-wall-with-mexico-pushes-builders-shares-higher...


Im not sure what your point is? A Mexican company COULD provide the cement? Whats wrong with that? Am i missing something?

He isnt anti Mexican,hes anti ILLEGAL immigrants.

My point is that the "creating jobs" claim doesn't look that great if it ends up being Mexican jobs that are created supplying materials and building whatever the wall turns out to be, with the American jobs being a host of border patrol and immigration officials who are a cost that doesn't contribute any economic gain.


We keep talking about economys,to most its something people only hear about on the news.To the rest of us,what matters is stable jobs with reasonable pay,good schools,local ,job training and an NHS system that works for all legal residents.Add to that affordable housing and a road network that isnt being designed to be a car park.
The 'economy' means nothing to the people who havnt got a clue if they have work tommorrow or when they have work,its 7 quid an hour!

Lots of jobs will be created through building the wall,good solid jobs.They wont give 2 hoops that the cement is being supplied via Mexico,they will just get up in a morning with a purpose and the abilty to feed their kids

Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:24
Post #1252800

QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 04:47) *
It's never going to end well when you have someone who is illiterate in science making up rules that regular science.
He's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published if he / his team likes them, regardless if they're factual or not.

I think the First Amendment may have something to say about that.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:52
Post #1252813

The predictions on the US vote were pretty much spot on with Clinton getting the popular vote by a small but significant (as in reliably predicted) percentage, what they didn't get quite right was the critical (and relatively small at 780,000 votes) votes in the swing states that decided the electoral college position. (noting that the way the EC was originally set up and how it worked for a while it would have returned HRC as president and DJT as her VP if you want to check your history).

Building the wall won't create jobs, it will provide a number of short term jobs, then they are gone, creating jobs is about economic growth and stable employment, something the last two presidents have failed to achieve.

Posted by: fedup2 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 12:21
Post #1252828

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:52) *
The predictions on the US vote were pretty much spot on with Clinton getting the popular vote by a small but significant (as in reliably predicted) percentage, what they didn't get quite right was the critical (and relatively small at 780,000 votes) votes in the swing states that decided the electoral college position. (noting that the way the EC was originally set up and how it worked for a while it would have returned HRC as president and DJT as her VP if you want to check your history).

Building the wall won't create jobs, it will provide a number of short term jobs, then they are gone, creating jobs is about economic growth and stable employment, something the last two presidents have failed to achieve.


I wouldnt spit on the last few presidents,especially the bush's.What i find hilarious is no one gave them the treatment Trump is receiving,yet all they did was fill their own barrels at great great expense in money and life.Were still fighting the fallout they caused,apparently.

As for the last one,ive almost forgot his name,other than than threaten to make us back of the queue,what did he actually do?

As for Clinton,she paid million and millions of dollars to the media to get in the whitehouse,but shes another one learning that money cant buy everything and everyone and the look on her face a few days ago would have been worth paying good money for.Had she got in it would have been the same old,thats great for some,not for most.

What i never get about the whingers,is they can never explain what it is they have a beef about,its just seems that they have one but what about is never clear.Maybe its just what they saw on the telly.






Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 12:59
Post #1252853

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 12:21)
As for Clinton,she paid million and millions of dollars to the media to get in the whitehouse

Money donated by salubrious countries such as Saudi Arabia. I find it curious that two people (Bill and Hillary), who have had no employment other than government service (that I know of) are worth millions of dollars. I'm sure it's all completely legitimate.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 18:42
Post #1253019

Your missing all the directorships and speeches, also the 'expenses' from the charitable foundation, not really government service?

Bills chairmanship of the consultancy (Teneo) that was funnelling money into the Clinton foundation from donors was paying him circa $3.5M a year (from memory, need to check) the consultancy was paid by the foundation for the fund raising but Bill never took any money from the foundation honest he didn't.......

Hilary was aid $675k for just three speeches to Goldmann Sachs, there were others of course.

Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 19:34
Post #1253031

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 18:42) *
Your missing all the directorships and speeches, also the 'expenses' from the charitable foundation, not really government service?

Bills chairmanship of the consultancy (Teneo) that was funnelling money into the Clinton foundation from donors was paying him circa $3.5M a year (from memory, need to check) the consultancy was paid by the foundation for the fund raising but Bill never took any money from the foundation honest he didn't.......

Hilary was aid $675k for just three speeches to Goldmann Sachs, there were others of course.

That was kind of my point.

Posted by: fedup2 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 19:53
Post #1253039


I like him,Can he come here and sort this rabble out when hes done there? smile.gif

Bunch of back stabbing, self feeding,useless.............


Theres a scene in the Gladiator film,where commodus refers to the senate:

What uses? All they do is talk.

And thats where were at,riddled in red tape and crap no one can understand or do anything with without massive costs trying to unravel the mess.

All they do is talk.The whole thing is a joke.


Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 21:28
Post #1253068

Cutting through red tape is great, having a sociopathic facist less so.

Posted by: southpaw82 Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 23:26
Post #1253091

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 21:28) *
facist

So, what is a fascist and what makes Trump one?

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 06:59
Post #1253108

adjective
1.
relating to fascism.
synonyms: authoritarian, totalitarian, dictatorial, despotic, draconian, autocratic, Nazi, undemocratic, anti-democratic, illiberal, extreme/far right-wing, rightist, militarist;

Seems to cover many of his bases, authoritarian, yes, dictatorial, yes (gagging order he's signed applying to scientific research release by gov't agencies), draconian yes (wants to bring back torture), undemocratic, lost the popular vote and ignoring the will of the people, illiberal, obviously.........the rest are tick boxes!

Posted by: southpaw82 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 08:51
Post #1253124

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 06:59) *
adjective
1.
relating to fascism.
synonyms: authoritarian, totalitarian, dictatorial, despotic, draconian, autocratic, Nazi, undemocratic, anti-democratic, illiberal, extreme/far right-wing, rightist, militarist;

Seems to cover many of his bases, authoritarian, yes, dictatorial, yes (gagging order he's signed applying to scientific research release by gov't agencies), draconian yes (wants to bring back torture), undemocratic, lost the popular vote and ignoring the will of the people, illiberal, obviously.........the rest are tick boxes!

You said he was fascist, not any of the synonyms. I asked you to define fascism, not give me synonyms. Once you've done that, it'd be nice to see how Trump fits in with the definition of fascism, not the synonyms.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 09:15
Post #1253133

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 08:51) *
I asked you to define fascism

Well that would make for a very, very long thread in itself, particularly since it started being bandied around as a general term of abuse. Not that dissimilar to "populism" in that respect.

Posted by: emanresu Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 09:29
Post #1253136

QUOTE
Theres a scene in the Gladiator film,where commodus refers to the senate:


Interesting historical reference to the decline of a power or an empire. Perhaps history does repeat itself (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caligula)

Or perhaps a better reference might be Hadrian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian)

It would all be funny from a historical reference, if it wasn't so serious.

Who would Theresa be? Not Boudica as she fought the empire.

Posted by: southpaw82 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 09:43
Post #1253143

QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 09:15) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 08:51) *
I asked you to define fascism

Well that would make for a very, very long thread in itself, particularly since it started being bandied around as a general term of abuse. Not that dissimilar to "populism" in that respect.

I guess that's the point - it's a lazy term often used as shorthand for "because I don't agree with you". Unfortunately, it's a lazy term that carries inherent connotations of Hitler, and as such is a nasty little word if used inaccurately. I'm sure DJT can be legitimately criticised for many things, and should rightly be held to account. Lazily branding him a fascist (other lazy words are available) when he's most likely not just detracts from legitimate criticism.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 12:37
Post #1253215

Of course Mussolini was the Facist, Hitler was a National Socialist, I think the only time he referred to himself as a fascist was when he was expressing support for Mussolini.

As Fredd says defining it is next to impossible as its never been a formalised term, its often bandied as an insult but as Mussolini was the person that pioneered its use in modern times I'll use him as the example, the synonyms fit his behaviour so as a defining someone who is (or is not) a Fascist doesn't seem unreasonable.

Posted by: kommando Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 13:04
Post #1253227

Read some interesting analysis of Trump yesterday.

1. He is a negotiator not a politician, so he at the start of a negotiation will set out 2 extreme final outcomes and plan to negotiate to meet somewhere in between and nearer his preferred extreme than another. This results in him flip flopping between 2 opposite positions as he outwardly negotiates with himself to find the preferred outcome, unlike a politician he is not concerned with how that looks.

2. He makes the outlandish comments as a way to set the dogs running off in the wrong direction and then can in the background get away with the real work undisturbed.

No idea if its right but it will be interesting to see if its true as this presidency progresses.

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 15:12
Post #1253277

What is a politician nowadays anyway?

When trump made his speech yesterday i heard every word.Yeh theres some drama,but i heard what he said and to the end.

When may started speaking soon after id drifted fed up with trying to keep up with the arse licking and waffle. Is that what makes a politician nowadays? Waffle,evasiveness and no real balls to say anything?

Whats outlandish comments do you mean?

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 16:33
Post #1253318

That Mexicans are all rapists thieves and drug dealers perhaps, that's pretty outlandish.

Or the comments about the disabled reporter, outlandish and should be offensive to any decent human being.

Or the comments about the parents of the Muslim American soldier killed in Iraq?

Or his comment that Megyn Kelly must have 'blood coming out her whatever' as he didn't like what she said.

Then there are the comments about Rosie O'Donnell

Don't forget the biggest inauguration crowd ever (apart from all the bigger ones that is of course).

I can't be bothered to go and find all the stupid/objectionable/outlandish/offensive things he's said, it would take too long.

Posted by: StuartBu Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 17:18
Post #1253346


QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
People did, he lost the popular vote


I dont know how that panned out in any previous Presidential elections but that's the way the U.S. system works . That's not his fault. Anyway there is an electoral system very much closer to home that isn't exactly democratically fair when you compare what party wins with number/ percentage of votes cast for them but thats how the current system works.

Posted by: mickR Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 18:39
Post #1253375

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 16:33) *
That Mexicans are all rapists thieves and drug dealers perhaps, that's pretty outlandish.

Or the comments about the disabled reporter, outlandish and should be offensive to any decent human being.

Or the comments about the parents of the Muslim American soldier killed in Iraq?

Or his comment that Megyn Kelly must have 'blood coming out her whatever' as he didn't like what she said.

Then there are the comments about Rosie O'Donnell

Don't forget the biggest inauguration crowd ever (apart from all the bigger ones that is of course).

I can't be bothered to go and find all the stupid/objectionable/outlandish/offensive things he's said, it would take too long.


But aren't they all alternative facts?

Posted by: freddy1 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 19:40
Post #1253388

May vs Trump session .....

British press corp is locked outside the White House because our birthdates were submitted in UK format and secret service don't get it. ????

Also May's name spelled Teresa - as in the well known DC Lady of the Night 03

Those of us born after the 12th day of the month have been let through. This full military welcome is awaiting Theresa May at White House.


Couldnt make it up

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 21:21
Post #1253414

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 16:33) *
That Mexicans are all rapists thieves and drug dealers perhaps, that's pretty outlandish.

Or the comments about the disabled reporter, outlandish and should be offensive to any decent human being.

Or the comments about the parents of the Muslim American soldier killed in Iraq?

Or his comment that Megyn Kelly must have 'blood coming out her whatever' as he didn't like what she said.

Then there are the comments about Rosie O'Donnell

Don't forget the biggest inauguration crowd ever (apart from all the bigger ones that is of course).

I can't be bothered to go and find all the stupid/objectionable/outlandish/offensive things he's said, it would take too long.


Isnt free speech great?
Such a refreshing change.Other than Farage i cant imagine theres a person on earth that hasn't taken more ridicule and name calling than Trump.Why should it be a surprise when it pisses him off and he drops to the same levels.Lets face it,its not about some petty name calling its about the people who have just had their nose popped out of joint.
I over took a car the other day and they gave me the w anker sign,should i have gone home and rang the police? Hopefully we haven't got to that,just yet!

Posted by: southpaw82 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 22:42
Post #1253429

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 21:21) *
I over took a car the other day and they gave me the w anker sign,should i have gone home and rang the police? Hopefully we haven't got to that,just yet!

No but if someone tells you about a speech the Home Secretary made that you don't like the sound of you should complain to the police about a hate crime. Actually listening to the speech yourself isn't necessary.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 23:07
Post #1253442

QUOTE (StuartBu @ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 - 18:18) *
QUOTE (AscotGuy @ Sun, 22 Jan 2017 - 18:25) *
People did, he lost the popular vote


I dont know how that panned out in any previous Presidential elections but that's the way the U.S. system works . That's not his fault. Anyway there is an electoral system very much closer to home that isn't exactly democratically fair when you compare what party wins with number/ percentage of votes cast for them but thats how the current system works.

It's not the system as was originally put in place, but yes it is now (check your US history).

Posted by: Mat_Shamus Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 14:29
Post #1253545

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:24) *
QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 04:47) *
It's never going to end well when you have someone who is illiterate in science making up rules that regular science.
He's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published if he / his team likes them, regardless if they're factual or not.

I think the First Amendment may have something to say about that.


He's already ordered the National Park Service to stop tweeting / posting anything to social media and now his team have done this.

https://thenextweb.com/politics/2017/01/25/trump-administration-climate-page-epa/

One of them was quoted saying "sometimes we can dispute the facts" and the term "alternate facts"

They seem to be under the belief if you think 1+1=3 then it's just as valid as the real answer.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 16:11
Post #1253559

Classic sociopath behaviour, the truth is what I think it should be, and I believe that so strongly I can tell that alternative to the truth in a totally believable manner. Trump is now instigating his own version of political correctness, it has parallels with the first users of the terminology (but not the phraseology).

I see the suggestion is that Mexico will pay for the wall through import tariffs on goods......but wait, doesn't that mean the people actually paying will be the US consumers of those goods?

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 16:44
Post #1253565

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 16:11) *
Classic sociopath behaviour, the truth is what I think it should be, and I believe that so strongly I can tell that alternative to the truth in a totally believable manner. Trump is now instigating his own version of political correctness, it has parallels with the first users of the terminology (but not the phraseology).

I see the suggestion is that Mexico will pay for the wall through import tariffs on goods......but wait, doesn't that mean the people actually paying will be the US consumers of those goods?


If theres a choice between American goods and Mexican goods then they dont have to pay the 'tax'. They also have the choice to buy the goods or not.Its hardly a forced payment for the wall.They can then put the money into their own pockets buying American instead and everyone reap the benefits.Is that bad?

From what ive seen there is a 60 billion trade deficit on Mexican goods.Maybe the Mexicans have had it too good for far too long? Trump thinks its time to look at the deal which isn't favoring HIS country by far.












Posted by: southpaw82 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 17:21
Post #1253569

QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 14:29) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:24) *
QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 04:47) *
It's never going to end well when you have someone who is illiterate in science making up rules that regular science.
He's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published if he / his team likes them, regardless if they're factual or not.

I think the First Amendment may have something to say about that.


He's already ordered the National Park Service to stop tweeting / posting anything to social media and now his team have done this.

https://thenextweb.com/politics/2017/01/25/trump-administration-climate-page-epa/

One of them was quoted saying "sometimes we can dispute the facts" and the term "alternate facts"

They seem to be under the belief if you think 1+1=3 then it's just as valid as the real answer.

So a more accurate criticism would be "he's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published by government agencies if he/his team likes them". What proportion of scientific papers are published by government agencies (under executive control of the federal government) vs state agencies or private institutions? Most US universities are either private or state bodies (i.e. not federal bodies) aren't they? What proportion of the scientific papers do they publish?

Posted by: Mat_Shamus Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 18:52
Post #1253593

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 17:21) *
QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 14:29) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 11:24) *
QUOTE (Mat_Shamus @ Thu, 26 Jan 2017 - 04:47) *
It's never going to end well when you have someone who is illiterate in science making up rules that regular science.
He's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published if he / his team likes them, regardless if they're factual or not.

I think the First Amendment may have something to say about that.


He's already ordered the National Park Service to stop tweeting / posting anything to social media and now his team have done this.

https://thenextweb.com/politics/2017/01/25/trump-administration-climate-page-epa/

One of them was quoted saying "sometimes we can dispute the facts" and the term "alternate facts"

They seem to be under the belief if you think 1+1=3 then it's just as valid as the real answer.

So a more accurate criticism would be "he's only going to allow scientific papers and facts to be published by government agencies if he/his team likes them". What proportion of scientific papers are published by government agencies (under executive control of the federal government) vs state agencies or private institutions? Most US universities are either private or state bodies (i.e. not federal bodies) aren't they? What proportion of the scientific papers do they publish?


That's a more accurate criticism indeed, yes.
He's doing what's known as confirmation bias. He'll allow the publishing of any "facts" that support his views and policies and the ones that contradict his views and policies, regardless if they're factual will likely not be allowed to see the light of day. Government agencies only thankfully,

QUOTE
The Environmental Protection Agency is under siege. On Monday, the Trump administration ordered the EPA to freeze all grants and cease public communications. ... The day after the initial orders came down, EPA employees told Jalopnik that the agency is “under siege” and there's “a real sense of dread.”


http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/1/27/14395978/donald-trump-lamar-smith

The good news is, his antics have enraged so many scientists in the USA that they've decided to become a bit more active in politics.

Posted by: kommando Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 19:03
Post #1253597

He is shutting down the Govt scientists from posting on the internet as some of them spent more time posting on blogs and forums as activists than actually doing any work on studies.

This is an example of who he is after

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Schmidt

Gavin A. Schmidt is a climatologist, climate modeler and Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, and co-founder of the award winning climate science blog RealClimate.[2]

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 20:11
Post #1253611

Maybe he knows that 'climatologists' Are about as valuable as having someone predicting lottery numbers this time next year.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 21:14
Post #1253619

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 17:44) *
If theres a choice between American goods and Mexican goods then they dont have to pay the 'tax'. They also have the choice to buy the goods or not.Its hardly a forced payment for the wall.They can then put the money into their own pockets buying American instead and everyone reap the benefits.Is that bad?

Still not paying for that wall though is it, neatly avoided the issue in your reply.

You really have fallen for his BS haven't you!

Posted by: mickR Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 22:04
Post #1253629

At least you know what yoyre getti g with him good or bad as opposed to the usual double talking afraid to say it how it is lying bstards .

He will shake things up plenty and the fact hes got in says a lot for just how pi $$ed off many were with the establishment.

Posted by: Hippocrates Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 22:43
Post #1253631

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 16:11) *
Classic sociopath behaviour, the truth is what I think it should be, and I believe that so strongly I can tell that alternative to the truth in a totally believable manner. Trump is now instigating his own version of political correctness, it has parallels with the first users of the terminology (but not the phraseology).

I see the suggestion is that Mexico will pay for the wall through import tariffs on goods......but wait, doesn't that mean the people actually paying will be the US consumers of those goods?

Can you mix guacamole with a certain chemical to provide the mortar?

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 23:06
Post #1253639

QUOTE (mickR @ Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 23:04) *
He will shake things up plenty and the fact hes got in says a lot for just how pi $$ed off many were with the establishment.

I agree, but he IS the establishment, he just claimed not to be.....look at his cabinet.

Now this nutty executive order (which may even be illegal) banning anyone from certain Mulsim countries (including dual nationality) from entering the US, like the Iraqui who works for the American government who was jailed at the border....

Posted by: mickR Sat, 28 Jan 2017 - 23:37
Post #1253642

Well its not like its the first time the yanks have done something stupid!

Rookie i would look at his cabinet.... if only i could stop looking at his hair! icon_scratch.gif

Posted by: Hippocrates Sun, 29 Jan 2017 - 22:29
Post #1253806

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjUvr_lsujRAhXMyRoKHWR8DBIQqUMIGjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fsport%2Fathletics%2F38788910&usg=AFQjCNG0gDRKSOzdFkuodALNQotfskannQ

Posted by: DastardlyDick Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 15:19
Post #1255913

Well, Trump now has 5 states engaged in legal action over this one executive order. He "only" won the Electoral College vote, but lost the popular vote. Given that the Americans say that their Government is "of the people, by the people" I am surprised that they decided on this system where a few people can over-ride the democratically expressed will of the majority.

I believe Paddy Power are only offering evens on him completing his term.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 4 Feb 2017 - 16:13
Post #1255924

The electoral college was originally set up to vote inline with the wishes of their people, so they would roughly split their vote on the same percentage lines, usually the losing candidate was elected Vice President, but partisan politics soon wrecked that idea.

It's clear that Trump only lost the popular vote due to all the fraudulent voting going on (it must be true, he says so) but fortunately for democracy those extra 3.5million voters (who must therefor have all voted for Clinton) all voted in non swing states so didn't affect the proper outcome of the election.

Posted by: whjohnson Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:38
Post #1256059

May I ask a wholly pertinent question here?

Why should the leader of a country be pilloried for introducing security measures in order to protect his people from those who wish to do him (and them) harm?

Personally, I would call this good stewardship of his responsibilities, so why the fuss?

The time is long overdue whereby similar measures should have been adopted here in the UK..

As for the Clinton's, Google 'Clinton cash' and watch the movie.

http://time.com/4328254/clinton-cash-movie-hillary-clinton-peter-schweizer-breitbart/

Posted by: Unzippy Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 08:45
Post #1256067

QUOTE (whjohnson @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:38) *
May I ask a wholly pertinent question here?

Why should the leader of a country be pilloried for introducing security measures in order to protect his people from those who wish to do him (and them) harm?

Personally, I would call this good stewardship of his responsibilities, so why the fuss?

The time is long overdue whereby similar measures should have been adopted here in the UK..

As for the Clinton's, Google 'Clinton cash' and watch the movie.

http://time.com/4328254/clinton-cash-movie-hillary-clinton-peter-schweizer-breitbart/


The order cites as part of its rationale the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. But most of the 19 hijackers on the planes were from Saudi Arabia; the rest were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon.

So explain how is Trump ptotecting his country?

Posted by: Churchmouse Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 10:08
Post #1256076

QUOTE (whjohnson @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:38) *
May I ask a wholly pertinent question here?

Why should the leader of a country be pilloried for introducing security measures in order to protect his people from those who wish to do him (and them) harm?

Personally, I would call this good stewardship of his responsibilities, so why the fuss?

The time is long overdue whereby similar measures should have been adopted here in the UK..

The US President does have very broad powers in the specific areas involved in this Executive Order: the treatment of refugees and the control of the borders. So, had Trump gone through the usual steps in drafting and executing this one, he could have had a much better result. However, the (thoughtful, as opposed to mindless, of which there is plenty) criticism of this EO relates to the way he went about it, which has resulted in a truly unprecedented amount of chaos and international opprobrium directed against himself and the USA.

It was pointed out (in a source I can sadly no longer locate) that EOs are normally drafted after consultation with the relevant executive branch departments--especially the ones charged with enforcement--and revised during a process that includes having lawyers opine on its legality. This one was drafted unusually quickly and apparently without going through the normal procedures. And it shows. It shows that Trump is more in favour of "doing things" than "doing things right". The poorly conceived and drafted OE immediately caused massive confusion, several "official" interpretations, judicial intervention and justifiable resentment about its abrupt implementation.

The choice of countries has made Trump an absolute laughing stock. His argument is that he's "concerned about terrorism", and yet not concerned enough about it to select his own list of countries. You've undoubtedly heard by now that nationals of the countries he included in this EO were responsible for approximately zero terrorist attacks on US soil, while the countries where nearly all of those who were responsible for Islamic terrorism on US soil came from were left off the list. Regardless of the "reasoning" that went into just acting against "the usual suspects", the appearance of total incompetence in this collossal error has been devastating. That Trump has personal significant financial interests in many of those countries left off the list certainly hasn't helped. But that's not the main problem. The main problem is that this EO's bumbling trageting of the wrong countries leaves the US people just as exposed to Islamic terrorism as it was before the President foolishly wrecked his moral and intellectual standing with the rest of the world's leaders.

So, while Trump could have done something like this had he gone through the usual process, the process he followed was reckless, flawed and self-defeating. Keep up the good work, Donald!

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Fredd Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 10:30
Post #1256082

QUOTE (whjohnson @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:38) *
Why should the leader of a country be pilloried for introducing security measures in order to protect his people from those who wish to do him (and them) harm?

Personally, I would call this good stewardship of his responsibilities, so why the fuss?

Because the law - even Presidents have to abide by the law, although that seems to be news in the White House ATM. And that's leaving aside the fact that the measures he's taking wouldn't do much to improve security anyway.

QUOTE (whjohnson @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 01:38) *
As for the Clinton's, Google 'Clinton cash' and watch the movie.

http://time.com/4328254/clinton-cash-movie-hillary-clinton-peter-schweizer-breitbart/

What does that have to do with Trump's actions? That's the same logic as he's employed today to make out that http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38872328.


QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 10:08) *
EOs are normally drafted after consultation with the relevant executive branch departments--especially the ones charged with enforcement--and revised during a process that includes having lawyers opine on its legality. This one was drafted unusually quickly and apparently without going through the normal procedures.

Not much chance of that when http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/donald-trump-immigration-order-department-of-justice/ due to doubts about it's legality, and http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/04/politics/donald-trump-attacks-federal-judge-travel-ban/ for deciding the same thing.

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 10:08) *
You've undoubtedly heard by now that nationals of the countries he included in this EO were responsible for approximately zero terrorist attacks on US soil

Precisely zero, of course, unless you count http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/conway-bowling-green/ just made up by his advisers.

Posted by: Gan Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 11:08
Post #1256094

American psychiatrists have broken with their convention not to comment on the mental health of presidents and candidates

Worse than a sociopath; he shows classic malignant narcissist behaviour and the reports of his conversation with the Australian PM are alarming
No doubt Putin has been well briefed by his own experts

Theresa May is seriously deluded about the nature of her relationship as she will quickly discover if she refuses a request


Posted by: DBC Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 11:46
Post #1256101

QUOTE (Gan @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 12:08) *
American psychiatrists have broken with their convention not to comment on the mental health of presidents and candidates

Worse than a sociopath; he shows classic malignant narcissist behaviour and the reports of his conversation with the Australian PM are alarming
No doubt Putin has been well briefed by his own experts

Theresa May is seriously deluded about the nature of her relationship as she will quickly discover if she refuses a request


I though I would google that phrase:-

Kernberg described malignant narcissism as a syndrome characterized by a narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), antisocial features, paranoid traits, and egosyntonic aggression. Other symptoms may include an absence of conscience, a psychological need for power, and a sense of importance (grandiosity).

You can see that narcissism trait in his obsession with those inauguration crowd numbers where he deluded himself in believing his crowd was larger than Obama's . Evidently he was going on about those crowds in those phone calls to both the Australian and Mexican prime ministers.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 12:30
Post #1256107

Kellyanne Conway has defended the actions by comparing them to Obamas six month ban on Iraqi refuges (that wasn't a ban) and the 'Bowling green massacre' (which was actually two Iraqui refugees collecting money to send back to Iraq to fund terrorism)........just two more interesting Alterntive facts...... When Obi Wan could have said 'these are not the facts you are looking for' I'm sure he would have had better success then KAC.

Posted by: Hippocrates Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 20:54
Post #1256266

When he meets the new French leader, will this be on the menu?

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjUi_bR6vnRAhXEuBQKHe7AAfQQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpresidentcheese.com%2F&psig=AFQjCNGj7-ujc0hB8opXkfiJVf22VRVzNQ&ust=1486414171415829

Posted by: DancingDad Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 21:39
Post #1256273

QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Sun, 5 Feb 2017 - 20:54) *
When he meets the new French leader, will this be on the menu?

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjUi_bR6vnRAhXEuBQKHe7AAfQQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpresidentcheese.com%2F&psig=AFQjCNGj7-ujc0hB8opXkfiJVf22VRVzNQ&ust=1486414171415829


He'll only think the packaging is specially in his honour.
Another "fact" to add to the belief system now in place in Washington DC

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 6 Feb 2017 - 07:10
Post #1256317

I'm sure they would rather be associated with President Mugabe than President Trump!

Posted by: Ocelot Mon, 6 Feb 2017 - 19:12
Post #1256677

He may be a narcissist but I'm quite enjoying him upsetting the US political establishment.

Posted by: Hippocrates Mon, 6 Feb 2017 - 21:59
Post #1256762

I bet his refrain from the famous Presley song goes: "And I can't help falling in love with.........................me."

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 05:30
Post #1256823

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Mon, 6 Feb 2017 - 20:12) *
He may be a narcissist but I'm quite enjoying him upsetting the US political establishment.

Narcissistic is his least worst attribute, sociopath with anger management issues is more of a concern, possibly even low level Aspergers.

Posted by: Ocelot Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20
Post #1257063

I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Posted by: Lodesman Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:41
Post #1257067

I wonder what the page count for this thread will be when nearing the end of his four year term ?

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:42
Post #1257069

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20) *
I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Why?

Are you a God in the looks department,or just a bit immature?


Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 19:52
Post #1257106

QUOTE (Lodesman @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:41) *
I wonder what the page count for this thread will be when nearing the end of his four year term ?

Depends if he lives that long.

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 20:24
Post #1257122

QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 19:52) *
QUOTE (Lodesman @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:41) *
I wonder what the page count for this thread will be when nearing the end of his four year term ?

Depends if he lives that long.

Or whether we do.

Posted by: Ocelot Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:24
Post #1257541

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:42) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20) *
I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Why?

Are you a God in the looks department,or just a bit immature?


Because when it rains I suspect he'll look like Cousin It from the Addam's family.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:51
Post #1257551

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:24) *
Because when it rains I suspect he'll look like Cousin It from the Addam's family.

Cousin It actually had hair; it'd be more like this, I expect:


Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 21:49
Post #1257605

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:24) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:42) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20) *
I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Why?

Are you a God in the looks department,or just a bit immature?


Because when it rains I suspect he'll look like Cousin It from the Addam's family.


Wet or dry,He will still be the president of America,and you will still be nobody.

Posted by: southpaw82 Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 22:57
Post #1257637

Steady on.

Posted by: mickR Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 23:25
Post #1257646

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 21:49) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:24) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:42) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20) *
I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Why?

Are you a God in the looks department,or just a bit immature?


Because when it rains I suspect he'll look like Cousin It from the Addam's family.


Wet or dry,He will still be the president of America,and you will still be nobody.


Hmmm i think youll find we are all somebody!

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 07:52
Post #1257690

Short of a successful and ongoing out of body experience I can't see being nobody catching on.....

Posted by: JagDriver Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 08:51
Post #1257703

QUOTE
The choice of countries has made Trump an absolute laughing stock


IIRC 6 of the 7 countries were bombed by Obama.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 11:02
Post #1257747

QUOTE (JagDriver @ Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 08:51) *
QUOTE
The choice of countries has made Trump an absolute laughing stock


IIRC 6 of the 7 countries were bombed by Obama.

I think the issue with the countries chosen is more the surprising omissions from the list, given that it's supposed to be about preventing terrorist attacks on US soil.

Rather like Britain, if the criterion was whether the US had intervened in them militarily during the past century or so then https://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html.

Posted by: JagDriver Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 12:49
Post #1257831

If I'd bombed a country I'd be pretty sure that I'd make coming to my country very tricky indeed but I take your point. It does seem odd that Obamas actions go ahead with no wailing and gnashing of teeth and Trumps are facing a barrage of abuse.

Posted by: DancingDad Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 14:01
Post #1257872

QUOTE (JagDriver @ Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 12:49) *
If I'd bombed a country I'd be pretty sure that I'd make coming to my country very tricky indeed but I take your point. It does seem odd that Obamas actions go ahead with no wailing and gnashing of teeth and Trumps are facing a barrage of abuse.


Obama's actions were overtly against terrorists. May have been collateral damage etc but when a bomb is targeted on a designated ISIS truck, building, person, relatively easy to justify and have red blooded Americans shouting Semper Fi

Trump cites the same reasons for the ban but oh so easy for his critics to see this as prejudicial, anti Muslim etc etc

And Obama may have had critics but not the level of antipathy that Trump has generated.

Posted by: Ocelot Thu, 9 Feb 2017 - 18:39
Post #1258004

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 21:49) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Wed, 8 Feb 2017 - 19:24) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:42) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Tue, 7 Feb 2017 - 17:20) *
I do think he should consider a hair cut.

Why?

Are you a God in the looks department,or just a bit immature?


Because when it rains I suspect he'll look like Cousin It from the Addam's family.


Wet or dry,He will still be the president of America,and you will still be nobody.


Bit grumpy aren't you? Has your giro not arrived this week?

Posted by: MFM Tue, 14 Feb 2017 - 16:37
Post #1259495

I honestly don't understand the irrational hatred for Trump. Yes, he might not be everyone's cup of tea but he's trying harder to make substantial changes in the US than any other president in living memory. People protest and riot because of how he conducts himself. All pointless and won't make any difference. And to be honest, I like the fact that he's a no holds barred president that doesn't pussyfoot around.

The world has enough people like James O'Brien of LBC.

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 14 Feb 2017 - 16:58
Post #1259504

I wouldn't understand irrational hatred either, but rational detestation of someone who has no regard for facts, or the law, or the consequences for innocent people caught up by his simplistic policies, and appears to be driven by extreme narcissism, seems understandable to me.

Less than a month in and already having lost his National Security Adviser, as well as his team briefing furiously against their own White House Chief of Staff, doesn't speak to his abilities as a leader either.

Posted by: psychopomp1 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 05:22
Post #1259631

laugh.gif


Posted by: MFM Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 14:55
Post #1259785

QUOTE (Fredd @ Tue, 14 Feb 2017 - 16:58) *
Less than a month in and already having lost his National Security Adviser, as well as his team briefing furiously against their own White House Chief of Staff, doesn't speak to his abilities as a leader either.


Maybe they're part of the swamp that needs draining. wink.gif

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 15:09
Post #1259790

Fairly odd behaviour draining the swamp of the material that you've filled it up with, don't you think?

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 15:13
Post #1259794

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 15:09) *
Fairly odd behaviour draining the swamp of the material that you've filled it up with, don't you think?



Plenty of people divorce,when they find out they arnt compatable

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 16:45
Post #1259842

Not generally within the first 24 days, however.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 20:04
Post #1259898

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 16:45) *
Not generally within the first 24 days, however.


It does happen though,and so does Companys throwing workers out when they find out they are useless or dont get with the same work ethics as everyone else. It doesn't make Trump Bad,only to them that want him to be,clinging to every morsel they can find to try and portray him that way.






Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 16 Feb 2017 - 11:47
Post #1260061

It's obvious that Flynn had to go for breaking the 11th commandment.

What it also highlighted is how disruption all the White House is right now with Conway and Spicer fundamentally contradicting each other both before and after the resignation, which version is true? Are either true or are two staffers paid for by the country both lying to the people they are meant to work for?

Posted by: Gan Thu, 16 Feb 2017 - 11:48
Post #1260062

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 15 Feb 2017 - 16:45) *
Not generally within the first 24 days, however.

When my nephew married we all reckoned it would last six weeks but it was over in less than three

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 17 Feb 2017 - 01:36
Post #1260293

Poor Donald, in over his head.
I hope they let him tweet from jail. He'll spend 2 weeks for treason. President Ryan will then pardon him.
Pence gets a deal for being a star witness against Trump. "No your honor, I was not at the pee pee party. Everything else is true. Yeltsin gave him two hotels. Putin put in the cameras."

Posted by: Richy_m_99 Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 11:36
Post #1260678

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 16 Feb 2017 - 11:47) *
It's obvious that Flynn had to go for breaking the 11th commandment.

What it also highlighted is how disruption all the White House is right now with Conway and Spicer fundamentally contradicting each other both before and after the resignation, which version is true? Are either true or are two staffers paid for by the country both lying to the people they are meant to work for?


I actually find all this quite refreshing.

A political appointee who is fired / resigns (whatever) having done nothing actually illegal, but simply causing embarrassment to his superior. Keith Vaz could take lessons there.

Representatives prepared to talk from the hip instead of constantly repeating specially prepared platitudes to deflect away from the question.

Somebody in charge finally treating the press with the same level of respect that they are giving him, ie none. The press started this war, attempting and failing to discredit him throughout the election process. The difference is that instead of being cowed by the press and showing them due deference for the power that previous leaders have done, he has just said screw you, and done an end run around them using social media to reach out to the people who supported him and put him in power. After all, he knows that he is not going to be fairly reported by the press so why give them the time of day. The only way that he can get his message and words out as he wants them to be heard is to do the job himself. Like it or not, it is something that political candidates around the world are likely to copy in future.

The media only serve the interests of their owners who are by majority liberals. Likewise, I suspect that the majority of celebrities are doing what they are told by record label/studio owners what to say. How times have changed since the Dixie Chicks dared to criticise the President of the USA.

Posted by: Fredd Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 12:40
Post #1260694

QUOTE (Richy_m_99 @ Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 11:36) *
A political appointee who is fired / resigns (whatever) having done nothing actually illegal, but simply causing embarrassment to his superior.

Well, apart from it being a felony under https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/logan-act-flynn.html?_r=0, with the rather more realistic prospect of him having committed an offence by lying to FBI investigators.

QUOTE (Richy_m_99 @ Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 11:36) *
Representatives prepared to talk from the hip instead of constantly repeating specially prepared platitudes to deflect away from the question.

Unfortunately they're not much use as representatives if you can't count on anything they say as representing the actual policy of the executive

QUOTE (Richy_m_99 @ Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 11:36) *
The media only serve the interests of their owners who are by majority liberals. Likewise, I suspect that the majority of celebrities are doing what they are told by record label/studio owners what to say.

Yes, like the niche media outlets run by those well-known lefty liberals Murdoch and Dacre, for example. biggrin.gif

Also I rather suspect that the record labels/studio owners would prefer that their artists said nothing to upset any part of their potential market, rather than try to herd those particular cats into expressing views that would be unpopular with getting on for half the country. And I thought it was Trump's view that being rich is a good thing in politics because you're not susceptible to pressure to say the "right" thing? Or perhaps that's only if you're very rich, extremely rich, the best kind of rich?

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 13:10
Post #1260704

The media in America is mostly 'owned' by the big corporations who keep them going with advertising dollars, the liberal media in America is a myth, breitbart and fox are both blatantly right wing, CNN is just a dollar taker and so committed to being non commital it's laughable, so committed to being neutral they don't even fact check. MSNBC is the only vaguely liberal mainstream and that's barely between the Conservatives and UKIP by our standards.

Posted by: Richy_m_99 Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 16:24
Post #1260752

QUOTE
@FreddAnd I thought it was Trump's view that being rich is a good thing in politics because you're not susceptible to pressure to say the "right" thing? Or perhaps that's only if you're very rich, extremely rich, the best kind of rich?


I think the point that was being made was that the Presidency has, for many years been bought by the highest bidder. Why else would corporations and individuals pour millions of dollars into campaigns for the candidate, if not to ensure that in return, they get favourable legislation and protection for themselves. That's one of the reasons Clinton's campaign backers are so upset at the outcome. All their money was wasted.

DT funded a considerable amount of his campaign himself from what I understand, with only small donations from individuals. That makes him the first president in a long time to be beholding to nobody, other than the electorate. He laid out his goals ahead of the election and so far, in spite of considerable opposition from those who hate his agenda, he is sticking to it and progressing it. But what the opposition have to remember is, he got elected BECAUSE he promised to do everything he is setting out to do.

Posted by: Fredd Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 17:15
Post #1260768

QUOTE (Richy_m_99 @ Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 16:24) *
QUOTE
@FreddAnd I thought it was Trump's view that being rich is a good thing in politics because you're not susceptible to pressure to say the "right" thing? Or perhaps that's only if you're very rich, extremely rich, the best kind of rich?


I think the point that was being made was that the Presidency has, for many years been bought by the highest bidder. Why else would corporations and individuals pour millions of dollars into campaigns for the candidate, if not to ensure that in return, they get favourable legislation and protection for themselves.

I entirely agree with that, but corporate interests run right through the Trump administration just like previous ones. Look at how many of his cabinet are from the previously-hated Clinton-speech paying Goldman Sachs, or were http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-weissman/trumps-corporate-cabinet_b_14087282.html that now stand to benefit? Putting the crocodiles in charge of draining the political swamp is a strange way to start.

QUOTE (Richy_m_99 @ Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 16:24) *
DT funded a considerable amount of his campaign himself from what I understand, with only small donations from individuals. That makes him the first president in a long time to be beholding to nobody, other than the electorate.

Uh, http://fortune.com/2016/12/09/donald-trump-campaign-spending/. That's the story, but in fact he contributed a fairly small proportion of the amount his campaign raised - and even then a chunk of that was siphoned straight back into his own businesses, eg through payments from his campaign for use of his own company's aircraft. And he still relied on PACs for the vast majority of what was spent in support of his campaign, as do all the candidates nowadays. Spending around $50m of his personal money makes him only fractionally less beholden to his backers than any other candidate.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 21:08
Post #1260840

Additionally over $8M was paid by his campaign back to Trump businesses for the use of various Trump business assets for campaigning such as the plane, hotel rooms and so on.

His labor secretary nomination was a big donor, was blocked by congress though as he had a history of employing illegals and also wanted a policy to increase legal immigrants as a source of cheap labour, somewhat contrary to the Trump ethos you would think.

Posted by: astralite Sat, 18 Feb 2017 - 23:20
Post #1260872

Don't they bet both ways?

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 13:08
Post #1260977

So one month in and Trump feels the need to start holding rallies about "Trump for President" again. If you needed any better proof how poor a president Trump it is this. Evidently there's nothing else of any importance whatsoever that warrants his attention other than campaigning for president.

How else can he get the adulation of the crowd except by filtering for the Trump deluded?

It is likely that he was never all that interested in the job of being president. Just the feeling of being center of attention of uncritical admirers while he ran for president.

He's still trying to get that same rush. It isn't going to come from the press, or Congress. Campaign whistle stops are his only supplier.

I saw Trump make the claim in Thursday's press conference that his electoral victory was, "the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan," an NBC reporter challenged him almost immediately and Trump responded he "was given" the data.

Unbelievable. Probably almost every one knows Trump's margin was not historic. It was 46th out of 58. In fact, in the past one hundred years only three presidents have won with a lower margin. (Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush twice.) 

How could Trump not know that?

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 14:54
Post #1261022

Trump has his own bowling green massacre moment, claims a terrorist act happened in https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/19/sweden-trump-cites-non-existent-terror-attack on Friday.

Trump told supporters: “We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden."

And here's what actually happened in Sweden the night before Trump's speech:
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/Vn17J/in-english-this-happened-in-sweden-friday-night-mr-president[

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 14:59
Post #1261027

Trump is so dismayed at losing the popular vote he has to keep bringing up the EC result, he even brought it up in his press conference with Netanyahu (or Benanyahu as he called him) which was massively inappropriate......narcissism anyone?

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 16:41
Post #1261064

Trump was only wrong about the date.

In fact, there was an underreported terrorist attack in Sweden last month:

QUOTE
However, despite widespread debunking of his claims, it has since emerged a largely underreported attack did, in fact, occur last month.

Three suspected neo-Nazis were arrested in January after a Gothenburg Asylum centre became the target of a homemade bomb attack, leaving one person seriously injured. 

Security services said all three suspects had previously been members of the Nordic Resistance Movement (NMR), a group that openly promotes racist and anti-Semitic views and has vocally opposed non-white immigration to the country. 


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-trump-terror-attack-claim-sweden-neo-nazis-refugee-centre-florida-rally-a7588516.html

Sure that's the attack Trump was referring to. No?

Posted by: Mat_Shamus Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 16:46
Post #1261067

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 16:41) *
Trump was only wrong about the date.

In fact, there was an underreported terrorist attack in Sweden last month:

QUOTE
However, despite widespread debunking of his claims, it has since emerged a largely underreported attack did, in fact, occur last month.

Three suspected neo-Nazis were arrested in January after a Gothenburg Asylum centre became the target of a homemade bomb attack, leaving one person seriously injured. 

Security services said all three suspects had previously been members of the Nordic Resistance Movement (NMR), a group that openly promotes racist and anti-Semitic views and has vocally opposed non-white immigration to the country. 


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-trump-terror-attack-claim-sweden-neo-nazis-refugee-centre-florida-rally-a7588516.html

Sure that's the attack Trump was referring to. No?


In the context of the attack and explaining it, Trump was blaming refugees for terrorism, when in this instance they are the victims.

Posted by: Richy_m_99 Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 18:05
Post #1261090

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 14:59) *
Trump is so dismayed at losing the popular vote he has to keep bringing up the EC result, he even brought it up in his press conference with Netanyahu (or Benanyahu as he called him) which was massively inappropriate......narcissism anyone?


But there again, when the Clinton camp are continually referring to their claim that he didn't win the popular vote so he shouldn't be president, what is he supposed to do? Just like in a court of law, if you don't refute an accusation, you are seen to have accepted it. His critics in the media and politics are constantly trying to delegitimise him solely on that basis. That is like saying that in the UK, the SNP should have only 1 MP and UKIP 57 based on the actually number of votes case.

Lets face it, one thing I'm sure that everyone can agree on is that there is no middle ground with him. He is the Thatcher of the 21st century, and if I recall people were pretty damning of her when she came to power. (How can the daughter of a common greengrocer be our prime minister etc). You either loath him, or like him. The problem is that those who loath him primarily using his personality to attack him and assuming that he is unfit for office, instead of seeing if he really can do the job. He is only four weeks into this presidency and already his opposition are talking about impeachment and failure without any due cause, whilst using every tactic in the book to block him from doing the job he was elected to do by the population of the USA, in accordance with laid down voting procedures.

I would say at least give him two years, until the Congressional elections, and then pass judgement on his record of achievement against the promises he made as a candidate, and not his personality.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 19:04
Post #1261121

I've not seen any such claim from the Clinton camp, but even so he'd be better off just ignoring it and getting on with what he's there to do, by responding he gives it credibility.

Of course the fact he can't even google "electoral college results" to know his wasn't the biggest since Reagan is rather an indictment of either his intelligence or his ability to tell the truth, neither is something you'd want to bring up yet he can manage it all on his own.

"The leaks are real but the news is fake" really, of course CNN is now elevated to 'very fake' (is he twelve years old?) now.

Posted by: Richy_m_99 Sun, 19 Feb 2017 - 23:01
Post #1261260

QUOTE
I've not seen any such claim from the Clinton camp, but even so he'd be better off just ignoring it and getting on with what he's there to do, by responding he gives it credibility.


I am not sure whether that is your version of a political answer or you just have beeen blind and deaf to anything that might be said contrary to your beliefs. The democratic party, her celebrity supporters, protesters and the MSM have repeated time and time again that Trump shouldn't be president because she got 2.5 million more votes than Trump (mainly in two States, California and New York). There was even a petition issued to urge the electoral college members to ignore the results of the election and give their vote to Clinton.

Try googling for yourself, Clinton wins popular vote or no mandate for Trump, or electoral college petition.


Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 13:14
Post #1261448

All beside the point. He won and is President. " But Hillary ... But Obama!" is irrelevant to his actions and behaviour.

Why is he getting his info on Sweden from unsourced online news and cable news when he has diplomats in the country, the entire State Department and huge sophisticated Intelligence Services at his command?
Did henot think to check before spouting his crap?
He has to get it in to his head that his words now have power and consequences.

Posted by: Ocelot Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:08
Post #1261553

Two petitions being debated in Parliament today, one for allowing Trump to come on a state visit, one against. laugh.gif

Posted by: fedup2 Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:51
Post #1261577

QUOTE (Ocelot @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:08) *
Two petitions being debated in Parliament today, one for allowing Trump to come on a state visit, one against. laugh.gif


Its a joke!



Posted by: Fredd Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:54
Post #1261582

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:51) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:08) *
Two petitions being debated in Parliament today, one for allowing Trump to come on a state visit, one against. laugh.gif


Its a joke!

That's a very disrespectful way of referring to the elected President of the United States.

Posted by: Ocelot Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 20:18
Post #1261592

IMHO, it isn't an option to cancel an already issued invitation. It would cause harm to both countries.

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 20:50
Post #1261607

With regard to recent 'smoothing over' of Trump comments concerning the Nuclear Weapons Treaties, the EU, NATO and Sweden etc. Why should any country trust what Mattis, Pence, the State Department or any Diplomats say? Trump could completely contradict them less than an hour later on twitter. How can anyone trust America at all when you have a leader who's so incredibly unpredictable?

Posted by: fedup2 Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 21:18
Post #1261614

QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:54) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:51) *
QUOTE (Ocelot @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 19:08) *
Two petitions being debated in Parliament today, one for allowing Trump to come on a state visit, one against. laugh.gif


Its a joke!

That's a very disrespectful way of referring to the elected President of the United States.


no what is a joke is its being debated.The man has done nothing wrong and was voted in fair and square.Its a real shame that in both countrys some are trying to undermine their own systems for their own aims.

Posted by: Fredd Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 21:32
Post #1261619



As it happens I agree with half of your argument - he was voted in legitimately and he should be afforded the same minimum level of respect as any other head of state. I don't see why this shouldn't be open to debate, however.

Posted by: astralite Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 22:27
Post #1261636

Quite.

Why was the invitation was issued so quickly ...?


Posted by: fedup2 Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 22:43
Post #1261641

QUOTE (astralite @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 22:27) *
Quite.

Why was the invitation was issued so quickly ...?


Why shouldnt it be?

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 21 Feb 2017 - 13:05
Post #1261789

QUOTE (astralite @ Mon, 20 Feb 2017 - 23:27) *
Why was the invitation was issued so quickly ...?

Brexit......

America is a big market for our goods and services, additionally as well Trumps natural vanity will tend to endear him towards those that are paying (or look like they are paying at least) fawning attention and giving him the respect he believes he is owed.

His vanity and insecurity is clear in the 'alternative facts' about size of inauguration crowd, that there must have been fraudulent voting (badly planned in all the non swing states luckily) for him to loose the popular vote and him having the biggest EC win since Reagan (except inconveniently for the Bush senior and Obama results of course).

His elevation of CNN from producing 'fake news' to 'very fake news' shows how childlike his mind is, I mean really - its what you expect of a 12 year old.

I agree we should respect the fact he won the election and is the democratically elected leader, but it shouldn't be unconditional.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 24 Feb 2017 - 22:41
Post #1263035

The president claimed ticket lines to get into his CPAC speech stretched 6 blocks. There were lines, the event is not open to public

Why tell a blatant lie like this?

In other news  CNN, the LA Times, NY Times, Politico and the BBC were barred from todays Whitehouse press briefing!

Posted by: Ocelot Sat, 25 Feb 2017 - 10:20
Post #1263104

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Fri, 24 Feb 2017 - 22:41) *
The president claimed ticket lines to get into his CPAC speech stretched 6 blocks. There were lines, the event is not open to public

Why tell a blatant lie like this?

In other news  CNN, the LA Times, NY Times, Politico and the BBC were barred from todays Whitehouse press briefing!


Alternative facts wink.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 25 Feb 2017 - 14:11
Post #1263153

It was his own fake news......

Actually one news channel made the point that people were not allowed into CPAC at the normal time due to security sweeps so it is possible that at some point there was a queue.

Then there was the waving of the Russian flag episode.

Interestingly in Trumps speech he anounced that he would like to force newspapers to name their sources when publishing (so presumably that source is either silenced or punished) a point that is clearly at odds with the first amendment to the constitution he swore an oath to uphold.


Posted by: Fredd Sat, 25 Feb 2017 - 14:57
Post #1263163

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 25 Feb 2017 - 14:11) *
Interestingly in Trumps speech he anounced that he would like to force newspapers to name their sources when publishing (so presumably that source is either silenced or punished) a point that is clearly at odds with the first amendment to the constitution he swore an oath to uphold.

To be fair, in that same speech he gave the dishonest MSM a lesson in naming sources when you run a dubious fake news-sounding story:
QUOTE
I have a friend, he's a very, very substantial guy. He loves the city of lights, he loves Paris. For years, every year during the summer, he would go to Paris, was automatic with his wife and his family. Hadn't seen him in a while. And I said, Jim, let me ask you a question, how's Paris doing? "Paris? I don't go there anymore, Paris is no longer Paris."

So there you have it, he doesn't base his knowledge of terrorism in Europe on fake news or the corrupt intelligence services: it's his friend Jim, a very, very substantial guy. Named source, that's how you do it. icon_thumright.gif

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 25 Feb 2017 - 21:14
Post #1263298

His go to in the election campaign was 'People are saying...'

His Border force are getting braver.
Muhammad Ali Jr. was detained by immigration at a Florid. airport. Ali Jr. and his mother Khalilah Camacho-Ali, the second wife of Muhammad Ali, were arriving at Fort Lauderdale International Airport after returning from speaking at a Black History Month event in Montego Bay, Jamaica. They were pulled aside while going through customs because of their Arabic-sounding names, according to family friend and lawyer Chris Mancini. Officials held and questioned Ali Jr. for nearly two hours, repeatedly asking him, "Where did you get your name from?" and "Are you Muslim?" Both American born citizens with US Passports and one of them the son of probably one of the most famous US sportsmen in history.

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 16 May 2017 - 14:10
Post #1285779

It's been a while, so I just thought I'd check that the Trump supporters are still happy with their man's swamp-draining, beautiful wall-building, non-Crooked Hilary-like http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2017/05/oops, et al?

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 16 May 2017 - 14:24
Post #1285781

If it was me id build a wall and stick all the people with destructive attitudes behind it to bicker and backstab and get on with bringing themselves down while the hard working and positive get on with building a better future for themselves and their kids.

Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 16 May 2017 - 15:40
Post #1285798

IIRC the Golgafrinchans had a similar idea, but that didn't work out too well for them.

Posted by: DancingDad Tue, 16 May 2017 - 17:51
Post #1285822

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 16:40) *
IIRC the Golgafrinchans had a similar idea, but that didn't work out too well for them.


Very true
But the B Ark survived.

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 16 May 2017 - 18:45
Post #1285839

QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 18:51) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 16:40) *
IIRC the Golgafrinchans had a similar idea, but that didn't work out too well for them.


Very true
But the B Ark survived.



Didnt A and C live full, rich and happy lives?

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 16 May 2017 - 18:52
Post #1285841

Fredd, you missed of firing the person investigating him for possible criminal activity, the same firing as he discussed with guests (paying ones) at mar-e-lago the weekend before he got the memo from the DAJ which was meant to be the reason he was fired but then (like warm milk) that story went off in less than 12 hours and it was for the Russian investigation after all, maybe, this after Trump had a conversation with himself (what it they say about that?). As side stories you have Sean Spicer hiding behind bushes on the White House lawn and now being replaced by the decidedly frumpy daughter of a republican senator as Trump seems concerned that Spicer was getting too much coverage (even though it's for all the wrong reasons) and you can't have that with such an egotistical boss. I'm sure I've missed something out its been hard to keep track!

The linatics have taken over the asylum.

Posted by: Gan Wed, 17 May 2017 - 00:30
Post #1285907

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 19:45) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 18:51) *
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Tue, 16 May 2017 - 16:40) *
IIRC the Golgafrinchans had a similar idea, but that didn't work out too well for them.


Very true
But the B Ark survived.



Didnt A and C live full, rich and happy lives?

No

After the telephone sanitisers had been sent off in the B ark, the remaining population was wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from a dirty telephone

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 17 May 2017 - 06:27
Post #1285918

" lived full, rich and happy lives until they were all wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from a dirty telephone"

living a full rich and happy life sounds good to me,even if its cut short.

Posted by: Lynnzer Sun, 21 May 2017 - 11:05
Post #1287181

http://www.thebridesmother.co.uk/Media/trump.mp4 from Trump's Middle East excursion reporting.

Posted by: Tartarus Sun, 21 May 2017 - 11:18
Post #1287182

Apparently Trump criticised Michelle Obama for not wearing a head scarf when visiting Saudi Arabia two years ago. Did Melania wear one on arrival? I'll let you find the photo to show the answer, but you can probably guess...

Posted by: Unzippy Mon, 22 May 2017 - 09:10
Post #1287333

QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Sun, 21 May 2017 - 12:05) *
http://www.thebridesmother.co.uk/Media/trump.mp4 from Trump's Middle East excursion reporting.



But are they running towards or away? biggrin.gif

Posted by: Lodesman Mon, 22 May 2017 - 11:14
Post #1287361

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 17 May 2017 - 07:27) *
living a full rich and happy life sounds good to me,even if its cut short.


I wonder if you'll continue saying that as cut off point approaches - I doubt it


Posted by: fedup2 Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 20:42
Post #1289787

No poodle on 'climate change' smile.gif

QUOTE (Lodesman @ Mon, 22 May 2017 - 12:14) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Wed, 17 May 2017 - 07:27) *
living a full rich and happy life sounds good to me,even if its cut short.


I wonder if you'll continue saying that as cut off point approaches - I doubt it


I could answer that with more precision than you think.Most definitely i would.

Posted by: notmeatloaf Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 21:03
Post #1289795

In between the inevitable hysterics about Trump "pulling out" of the Paris accord, there is the fact that it is odds on to be reinstated by his successor and companies aren't likely to invest in loads of coal infrastructure when renewable alternatives aren't much more expensive, and less likely to need premature scrapping.

Trump, in his bubble, fails to see that he can't influence energy policy in thirty years time by promising a short free run now.

Posted by: glasgow_bhoy Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 21:32
Post #1289801

OMG why are we still talking about this helmet?

Nothing he does should be a surprise to anyone now- I don't see him lasting a full term never mind a second at this rate.

Posted by: notmeatloaf Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 21:36
Post #1289803

QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 22:32) *
OMG why are we still talking about this helmet?

Nothing he does should be a surprise to anyone now- I don't see him lasting a full term never mind a second at this rate.

Because he makes all the rest of us look sane and reasonable. And god knows there aren't many that do that for me.

Posted by: fedup2 Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 22:01
Post #1289809

QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 22:03) *
In between the inevitable hysterics about Trump "pulling out" of the Paris accord, there is the fact that it is odds on to be reinstated by his successor and companies aren't likely to invest in loads of coal infrastructure when renewable alternatives aren't much more expensive, and less likely to need premature scrapping.

Trump, in his bubble, fails to see that he can't influence energy policy in thirty years time by promising a short free run now.


He might be in a bubble but the billions of dollars of tax payers money wasted isnt in a bubble.Seems its not even in an envelope any more smile.gif

I guess he read the fact sheet and it took 30 seconds to deduce,no facts...............

QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 22:32) *
OMG why are we still talking about this helmet?

Nothing he does should be a surprise to anyone now- I don't see him lasting a full term never mind a second at this rate.


Who would you prefer? smile.gif

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 06:00
Post #1289835

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 23:01) *
I guess he read the fact sheet and it took 30 seconds to deduce,no facts...............

You're probably precisely correct about how long he spent reading and thinking about it - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/intelligence-agencies-donald-trump-briefings-short-barack-obama-michael-flynn-a7584011.html. Unfortunately while that might be a satisfactory way of choosing a new snack dispenser for the office, it's not a great way of deciding what to do to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Posted by: glasgow_bhoy Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 06:29
Post #1289836

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Thu, 1 Jun 2017 - 23:01) *
Who would you prefer? smile.gif

Almost anybody to be quite honest. I trust Putin more than Trump!

Posted by: Gan Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 07:49
Post #1289844

Massachusetts Institute of Technology officials said U.S. President Donald Trump badly misunderstood their research when he cited it on Thursday to justify withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange-trump-mit-idUSKBN18S6L0

I don't personally subscribe to the man-made global warming religion but it's significant that, before pulling out of the Paris Accord, he was going to consult the energy companies - nobody else

Whether or not he's impeached is almost irrelevant now

He's already a lame duck president
His advisors are quitting, nobody wants to work with him and his aides that remain are busy excusing his outbursts and covering their own backs

Major energy investments will be put on hold because there are conflicts between his and individual state policies
Industrial investment will be on hold because nobody knows what he will try to alter the international trade landscape

U.S. companies no longer know rules of game under Trump, Hasbro director says
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-hasbro-trump-idUSKBN18P1MQ?feedName=topNews&feedType=RSS


Meanwhile there's an incentive for G7 and BRICS countries to delay any discussions or agreements until America has a president that will respect them and negotiate genuinely

Posted by: dacouc Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 17:02
Post #1289993

QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 08:49) *
Whether or not he's impeached is almost irrelevant now


Ironically he tweeted the following in July 2014 at Obama

"Are you allowed to impeach a President for gross incompetence"

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 17:19
Post #1289998

QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 08:49) *
Massachusetts Institute of Technology officials said U.S. President Donald Trump badly misunderstood their research when he cited it on Thursday to justify withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement.

Are they really that naive? What that should have said was:

Massachusetts Institute of Technology officials badly misunderstood U.S. President Donald Trump when they assumed that he had any idea what their research showed when he cited it on Thursday to justify withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement.

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 17:44
Post #1290005

QUOTE (dacouc @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 18:02) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 08:49) *
Whether or not he's impeached is almost irrelevant now


Ironically he tweeted the following in July 2014 at Obama

"Are you allowed to impeach a President for gross incompetence"


Incompetence or doing things you dont agree with or have the facts to properly judge?

Posted by: Gan Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 18:27
Post #1290018

Failure to seek out the facts or consider the consequences of a wrong decision is what turns it into a bad decision

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 19:49
Post #1290038

QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 19:27) *
Failure to seek out the facts or consider the consequences of a wrong decision is what turns it into a bad decision


Maybe he did seek out the facts,knew that there were no consequences from the facts and that made pulling out a good decision saving his country millions or billions of dollars.


Maybe if the bill landed for this climate change farce or what ever its called this week,through your door you would think about it differently.You dont because you are not paying it diectly but willingly wish that bill on others.Seems Trump thinks going on what he knows, and i doubt theres anyone more informed,he doesn't think its worth the money and the deal is bad.


Maybe you know more from just reading Facebook or watching the BBC? A sort of expert like?


Posted by: Lynnzer Sat, 3 Jun 2017 - 08:29
Post #1290112

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 20:49) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 19:27) *
Failure to seek out the facts or consider the consequences of a wrong decision is what turns it into a bad decision


Maybe he did seek out the facts,knew that there were no consequences from the facts and that made pulling out a good decision saving his country millions or billions of dollars.


Maybe if the bill landed for this climate change farce or what ever its called this week,through your door you would think about it differently.You dont because you are not paying it diectly but willingly wish that bill on others.Seems Trump thinks going on what he knows, and i doubt theres anyone more informed,he doesn't think its worth the money and the deal is bad.


Maybe you know more from just reading Facebook or watching the BBC? A sort of expert like?

The problem is I believe he knows the facts but his arm was already up his back from electioneer promises he made. He would seem to rather take all the $hit from the worldwide stage, to whom he promised nothing, than the people whose votes he fought for. The funny thing is that Pittsburgh didn't even come out for him. It went to Hilary.

Apart from his seeming lack of ability to enhance his position by openly doing an about turn "for the good of the people and after much further advice from the experts" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-climate-change-mar-a-lago-florida-flooded-sea-level-rise-global-warming-winter-white-a7677596.html
All low lying parts of the USA, as well as other countries, will be affected. In fact I remember when I was a kid going fishing off Seaham breakwater. The sea level was never so that it almost lapped over the top on a calm day, as it does now.

Opinion of whether any poster on here has himself studied evidence is a rather cynical take on this. Whether man made changes are taking place or not is a somewhat moot point. IT IS HAPPENING. We know it is. There's evidence to completely substantiate that. If it is a man made, or man-accelerated process, or just a cyclical thing is neither her nor there.
Something has to be done to slow the process as much as possible. We must stop throwing petrol onto the bonfire in the vain hope that it will extinguish it.

Trump cannot deny that something is happening. He also cannot deny that something should be done to slow it down whether or not Pittsburgh is in his thoughts at all. He has no interest in Pittsburgh anyway I guess. He runs in profit mode. Clockwork..... tick tock......tick tock.....

In fact his self promotion of a superb business person is belayed by the many failures in his past, the number of people who did work for him and never got paid and his excruciating bullying to get hos own way.

Nigel Farage did sum it somewhat though. He said, "that's the democratic result of his being elected". So they wanted him, got him and now have to suffer him, but the world is his stage in this instance and I most certainly don't want him. Narcissistic dick-head.
-------------------------------------------


Now, the implications of Global warming aren't just higher seas, drought in places, upheaval of weather patterns and economical disaster. It goes where no-one could have predicted but is now starting to happen.

We all know of glaciers that have melted and thrown up a mammoth or two that has been frozen for millions of years.
Well, a large critter like that presents no imminent danger to us. It's dead after all. Well is it?
The microbes, virus's and other biological nasties live on, totally immune from the effects of time. http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up

The vast areas of the world under the permafrost, that was once a lot warmer and hosted massive numbers of biological nasties are all thawing. God knows what'll crawl out from them. In fact during the earlier outbreaks of Anthrax etc, the animals spreading it were buried in
ground ( in Russia for example) that was permafrost. Not deep, A few feet. Already these are thawing out and already some outbreaks of disease are breaking out.

I have a couple of grand-kids and last thing I want is for them to suffer from an outbreak of anthrax.

So to conclude; DO NOT TELL ME ABOUT HOW TRUMP MIGHT BE RIGHT.

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 3 Jun 2017 - 09:36
Post #1290126

And if i buy a carrier bag,it will end up being eaten by a turtle.

Posted by: Lynnzer Sat, 3 Jun 2017 - 10:06
Post #1290134

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sat, 3 Jun 2017 - 10:36) *
And if i buy a carrier bag,it will end up being eaten by a turtle.

Ah ; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4507612/World-s-polluted-island-revealed.html?

By the way, http://www.thebridesmother.co.uk/Media/Cod-toy.pdf

By the way, it's described as medium size. Well I'm defo a small then......

Posted by: fedup2 Sat, 3 Jun 2017 - 15:28
Post #1290201

Be careful out there......


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3882159.stm

Apparently you are what you eat...........

Posted by: Gan Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 14:27
Post #1291976

Looks like he's going to spare us the State Visit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4593318/Trump-won-t-UK-Brits-don-t-like-him.html

Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 14:44
Post #1291984

QUOTE (Gan @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:27) *
Looks like he's going to spare us the State Visit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4593318/Trump-won-t-UK-Brits-don-t-like-him.html



At least its excited you on this otherwise non eventful Sunday.






Posted by: nigelbb Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:33
Post #1292001

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:44) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:27) *
Looks like he's going to spare us the State Visit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4593318/Trump-won-t-UK-Brits-don-t-like-him.html



At least its excited you on this otherwise non eventful Sunday.

No need for excitement when so many of us are enjoying a whole weekend of schadenfreude after the humiliation of the Maybot on Thursday.

Posted by: Gan Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 16:52
Post #1292024

QUOTE (nigelbb @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 16:33) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:44) *
QUOTE (Gan @ Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 15:27) *
Looks like he's going to spare us the State Visit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4593318/Trump-won-t-UK-Brits-don-t-like-him.html



At least its excited you on this otherwise non eventful Sunday.

No need for excitement when so many of us are enjoying a whole weekend of schadenfreude after the humiliation of the Maybot on Thursday.


So far I've spent the day painting the kitchen, clearing out under the stairs, tidying up my office and despairing that somebody I'm helping to defend a claim is issuing a substantial counter-claim because nobody has the right to charge for parking on Mother Earth
The Daily Mail is light relief

Having invented the word, the German's are still very good at demonstrating it :
We will not comment on the General Election out of respect and kindness - German Govt. spokeswoman (Sky News)

A Tweet to regret :

People are asking me how I shall vote. I shan't. I live in Chelsea and Kensington, so under our present system my vote is utterly worthless - John Cleese (21st May)

Posted by: fedup2 Sun, 11 Jun 2017 - 17:24
Post #1292032

Id got you down as a BB c sheep but Sky news, same thing. Pretty scary you've allowed yourself to be filled up with so much hatred but dont despair your not on your own.




Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 09:17
Post #1298591

So the now the ethics chief has quit....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40522488

Given Trump is facing 3 emolument clause court cases already I guess that was inevitable!

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 09:52
Post #1298615

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 10:17) *
So the now the ethics chief has quit....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40522488

Given Trump is facing 3 emolument clause court cases already I guess that was inevitable!


"It's clear that there isn't more I could accomplish"

So ethics must be in order wink.gif





Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 10:22
Post #1298630

Or he's being so roundly ignored that he can't accomplish anything more.......I know where my money is!

Posted by: fedup2 Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 10:24
Post #1298632

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 7 Jul 2017 - 11:22) *
Or he's being so roundly ignored that he can't accomplish anything more.......I know where my money is!


Paying your tv licence probably so you can get fed some more fake news ha ha

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 1 Aug 2017 - 12:27
Post #1305168

Well the latest series of the Apprentice is proving really exciting so far - just as well I pay my licence fee to watch it!
So far fired we have
Sally Yates - for refusing to lie by refusing to try and enforce a legally unenforceable travel ban
Mike Flynn - For being caught lying (Lying is only OK if you are POTUS it seems)
James Comey - For not being willing to lie
Walter Schaub (ethics chief) fired himself - anything to do with the lies?
Sean Spicer - Got to famous for his lies
Reinz Preibus - His only lying was laying low, that didn't work either!
Even late entry Anthony 'The Mooch' Scaramucci only lasted one episode before being on his way, despite missing the birth of his son to appear on the 'Flight on Air Force One' special episode. Rumours he was told he could stay if he washed his mouth out with soap may actually be the one piece of fake news here. In an extra irony, the man who was set to stamp out the leakers had news of his firing leaked a few hours before any official acknowledgement.
Looking on dodgy ground is of course Jeff Sessions after some recent bad showings in some episodes, he of course has also been caught lying but he hopes that's been forgotten by the man who's memory is often conveniently very short.
Left field entry Robert Mueller may also be sent on his way unless Congress protects him first, another man not willing to lie on demand it seems.
It's rumoured that Trump would like to fire Mitch McConnell after the 3 fantastically unsuccessful efforts at introducing whichever version of Trump(doesn't)care was on the table but was disappointed to find out he couldn't fire the majority leader, it seems John McCain would be willing to try though.
Honourable mention of course to Donald Trump Jnr who has also been caught lying but as he's not strictly an apprentice he can't be fired.

As Trump seems incapable of actually firing anyone face to face one wonders if his boardroom firing scenes from the older series were staged with Trump and the apprentice being dismissed not actually being in the same room at the same time!

Bookmakers are no longer taking bets on Sessions being the next apprentice to be fired.

This would all be great if it were just a reality TV show and not someone elected to run a country!

Posted by: DBC Sat, 5 Aug 2017 - 13:25
Post #1306317

More examples of Trump being "economical with the truth". This time about non-existent phone calls to him suposidly praising him. One from the Boy Scouts of America and the other from the Mexican President:-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/02/boy-scouts-and-mexico-both-deny-claims-of-calling-trump-to-offer-praise

Posted by: Lynnzer Sat, 5 Aug 2017 - 18:07
Post #1306356

QUOTE (DBC @ Sat, 5 Aug 2017 - 14:25) *
More examples of Trump being "economical with the truth". This time about non-existent phone calls to him suposidly praising him. One from the Boy Scouts of America and the other from the Mexican President:-

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/02/boy-scouts-and-mexico-both-deny-claims-of-calling-trump-to-offer-praise

There seem to be more boy scouts there than there were wellwishers at his inauguration.

Just for the record, a new word has come to the for for a period of ten days.
7 days is called a week, 10 days is now a Moochie.

Posted by: Roverboy Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 11:11
Post #1307150

I see he's threatening to wipe North Korea off the map now and fat boy jong says he will wipe Guam off the map !!!!!

I give it about a month before all hell breaks loose in the Koreas.

Trump will launch missiles at known Korean nuclear sites.

North Korea will retaliate by launching a massive artillery barrage at the south, and missiles (possibly nuclear) at Seoul and Guam.

Trump fires more missiles at North Korea.

North Korea fires more missiles at Guam and now possibly an attempt at the US mainland, and launches full scale invasion of the south (they reportedly have a million men/women under arms) forcing the Americans into a ground war.

All hell breaks loose as China and Russia get involved as they don't like Jong-un but won't allow American troops on their borders.

Jong-un will never beat the US, but will go down fighting and take as many as he can with him as well as starting WW3.

Posted by: Lynnzer Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 11:24
Post #1307153

QUOTE (Roverboy @ Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 12:11) *
I see he's threatening to wipe North Korea off the map now and fat boy jong says he will wipe Guam off the map !!!!!

I give it about a month before all hell breaks loose in the Koreas.

Trump will launch missiles at known Korean nuclear sites.

North Korea will retaliate by launching a massive artillery barrage at the south, and missiles (possibly nuclear) at Seoul and Guam.

Trump fires more missiles at North Korea.

North Korea fires more missiles at Guam and now possibly an attempt at the US mainland, and full scale invasion of the south (they reportedly have a million men/women under arms).

All hell breaks loose as China and Russia get involved.

Jong-un will never beat the US, but will go down fighting and take as many as he can with him as well as starting WW3.


Scares the crap out of me.



My dad fought in the Korean War and he rarely spoke about it. Says it was $hit scary facing off against a sea of NK infantry dug in on top of the mountain ranges. Have you looked a Google Earth? It's almost total mountain ranges.

I have a feeling Trump will be stupid enough to escalate from his end and suffer the consequences. God forbid.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 14:04
Post #1307193

Trump may have mouthed off about "fire and fury", but piss and wind is more like it. The US is nowhere near ready to fight a full scale war in Korea - look at how long it took to build up for the first Gulf War after Kuwait was invaded, that's the kind of time it would take to prepare. Unfortunately for him the bullying tactics he's used to using in his business negotiations just aren't going to work with Kim Jong Un, who immediately called his bluff with the threats against Guam.

The danger is that someone with such a fragile ego will sooner escalate than lose face.

Posted by: Lynnzer Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 15:19
Post #1307214

QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 15:04) *
Trump may have mouthed off about "fire and fury", but piss and wind is more like it. The US is nowhere near ready to fight a full scale war in Korea - look at how long it took to build up for the first Gulf War after Kuwait was invaded, that's the kind of time it would take to prepare. Unfortunately for him the bullying tactics he's used to using in his business negotiations just aren't going to work with Kim Jong Un, who immediately called his bluff with the threats against Guam.

The danger is that someone with such a fragile ego will sooner escalate than lose face.

He might even see the exit door to the White House before he has a chance to press the button.
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/donald-trump?ev_oc_grp_ids=2944322

Posted by: DastardlyDick Thu, 10 Aug 2017 - 10:21
Post #1307435

QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 16:19) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Wed, 9 Aug 2017 - 15:04) *
Trump may have mouthed off about "fire and fury", but piss and wind is more like it. The US is nowhere near ready to fight a full scale war in Korea - look at how long it took to build up for the first Gulf War after Kuwait was invaded, that's the kind of time it would take to prepare. Unfortunately for him the bullying tactics he's used to using in his business negotiations just aren't going to work with Kim Jong Un, who immediately called his bluff with the threats against Guam.

The danger is that someone with such a fragile ego will sooner escalate than lose face.

He might even see the exit door to the White House before he has a chance to press the button.
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/donald-trump?ev_oc_grp_ids=2944322


11/2 for next year looks good biggrin.gif

Posted by: DBC Fri, 18 Aug 2017 - 10:55
Post #1309438

I see Trump's latest idiocy is to quote a debunked myth about General Pershing and pig's blood in response to the Spanish attacks:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40969475


Posted by: Fredd Fri, 18 Aug 2017 - 13:29
Post #1309481

It was part of a very quick response condemning the (presumed extreme Islamist) Barcelona terrorist attack, though. He must have learnt a lesson from being so slow to respond to white supremacist domestic terrorism in Charlottesville - what other explanation could there possibly be?

Perhaps he'll listen to http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/arnold-schwarzenegger-in-brutal-take-down-of-donald-trump-white-supremacists-over-charlottesville/news-story/085e6972af36acff0f4a485d8a83edb5. icon_thumright.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 19 Aug 2017 - 13:09
Post #1309719

So having tried to fire the two business forums who were contributing to policy (including the manufacturing business forum which was kind of key to his made in America policy) but he couldn't as they quit before he could, for this episode he's had to fire his chief strategist (one of whose strategies was leaking a lot) Steve Bannon.

At this rate I give him six more months maximum. He can't lead, he can't do deals, he can't negotiate, he's already insulting the two different republican house leaders, he's still way under staffed and seems to be firing faster than he can find anyone stupid enough to work for him and it won't be long before his approval ratings are in the twenties (last opinion poll ahead of his disastrous responce to Charlottesville was at 32).

Posted by: Neil B Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 14:23
Post #1309910

From what I read Bannon having said, it seems to me the strings on the puppet just broke and it's
just performing silly dances rather than actually carrying out any essential functions.

Posted by: DastardlyDick Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 15:20
Post #1309923

I'd say they have 3 choices -
1. Wait for the result of the Russia enquiry
2. Wait for the mid-term Elections
3. Use the 25th Amendment
just depends on how quickly they want him out really, although Pence as President may not be any better - he's of a similar mindset to Trump, but he knows how to use the system.

Posted by: DBC Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 15:25
Post #1309925

A professor of American Studies at Birmingham (UK) University was on BBC breakfast this morning. He's giving Trump up to June next year before he goes.

Posted by: Fredd Sun, 20 Aug 2017 - 16:58
Post #1309944

A concern must be what Trump will do when he's frustrated at every turn and everything's falling apart. He clearly won't be able to admit to failure and just step down quietly, so as the pressure and isolation grow will some form of scorched earth policy be more likely, at the very least winding up his base to react violently? If he is impeached and forced to go his supporters seem certain to regard it as some kind of coup, whatever the facts.

Posted by: DBC Tue, 17 Oct 2017 - 16:43
Post #1324231

Donald Trump has falsely claimed Barack Obama and other presidents did not call the families of US soldiers killed in action.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-obama-dead-soldiers-call-claims-phone-write-president-accusation-a8003911.html

A classic quote from this idiot:-

“I don’t know if he did. I was told that he didn’t often, and a lot of presidents don’t — they write letters,” Mr Trump said. “President Obama, I think, probably did and maybe he didn’t. I don’t know, that’s what I’m told.”

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 17 Oct 2017 - 17:18
Post #1324247

Yawn

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 17 Oct 2017 - 17:32
Post #1324260

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Tue, 17 Oct 2017 - 18:18) *
Yawn

Feeling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_black_bear#Hibernation? Coincidentally, last year's presidential election was at about this time, too. Just saying'. smile.gif

Posted by: fedup2 Tue, 17 Oct 2017 - 17:46
Post #1324268

When i come out of hibernation he will still be president and he will be for quite some time to come.Some need to get used to it and not clinging to every little snipet of Media rubbish they can lay their hands on to appease their BBC and similar negative crap.

Ive lived long enough to have seen plenty of presidents do a far worse job than this guy.Ask any Iraqian,Afghan,or lybian!
For which we are now ALL paying with out freedoms.


Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 00:12
Post #1324388

Texas: "We are with you today, we are with you tomorrow, and we will be with you every single day after, to restore, recover, and rebuild."

Florida: "Just like Texas, We are with you today, we are with you tomorrow, & we will be with you every single day after, to restore, recover, and rebuild."

Puerto Rico: "Electric and all infrastructure was disaster before the hurricanes. We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in Puerto Rico forever!"

American Citizens in Puerto Rico don't get to vote in the presidential election so he doesn't care because they can't vote for or against him and the bulk of his supporters don't know or don't care.

He'll make up outrageous lies like Obama and other past presidents not calling the families of fallen troops in order to explain why he hasn't.
Then when called on it make up more lies claiming that it's what the generals told him.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 07:28
Post #1324403

They ALL lie!


"i did not have sexual relations with that woman"


Get used to it and do something productive smile.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 07:55
Post #1324406

Yes but they aren't all sociopathic misogynistic racist narcissistic criminal idiots (noting they may be the other four to an extent and bright enough to at least make an effort to mask it).

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 08:05
Post #1324408

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 08:55) *
Yes but they aren't all sociopathic misogynistic racist narcissistic criminal idiots (noting they may be the other four to an extent and bright enough to at least make an effort to mask it).


Lets face it,if the media had never said anything bad about him,you wouldnt be.

Im curious,who would you prefer?





Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 10:30
Post #1324450

There is a long list of who I'd prefer, but almost anyone who stood on either side in the primaries would be better (or less worse) than President Chirp.

Isn't it the media's job to hold those in power to account, its why freedom of the press from political interference is so important.

But you only have to watch a televised speech (with no commentary) to know he's wholly unsuited to the job.

Posted by: fedup2 Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 10:44
Post #1324458

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 11:30) *
There is a long list of who I'd prefer, but almost anyone who stood on either side in the primaries would be better (or less worse) than President Chirp.

Isn't it the media's job to hold those in power to account, its why freedom of the press from political interference is so important.

But you only have to watch a televised speech (with no commentary) to know he's wholly unsuited to the job.



I knew you wouldnt have the nouse to even be able to name one.I really find it sad that supposedly intelligent grown ups are having their chains yanked daily by some media who have their own agenda and yet they just cant see it.
I really feel sorry for people like you.

You see what you want to see and ignore the rest, just as you have with my posts.


Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 11:16
Post #1324470

Hilary would at least be stable and make reasoned choices, I would probably disagree with the reasoning, she is hopelessly corporate and self serving though, plus the Clinton foundation is appallingly crooked, but at least slightly less morally bankrupt than the Trump 'university', despite all that, she would still be a better president.

Of all those in the primaries Bernie Sanders was the only one who wasn't going to be corporate (to the extent of putting the wants of corporations way ahead of the population in terms of decision making) as American politics is hopelessly tainted by donor money.

Posted by: Itchy Bootmore Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 11:35
Post #1324480

Sorry Rookie, tongue.gif have to disagree about Hilary - in my opinion, and from the evidence produced via her statements, pronouncements and actions whilst in Obama's GOP I don't think she's stable, nor would I think she would make reasoned choices. Not for the vast majority of US citizens and the rest of the world, at any rate.
Wall Street, the CIA, Deep State and the rest of the military-industrial-intelligence complex would all benefit handsomely, no doubt....

In one way, I think Trump is the logical culmination of US domestic and foreign policy & opinions over the decades and US citizens have got exactly what they have voted for all these years.... a bigoted, blinkered ignoramus from a position of wealth & privilege - but so was George W Bush. And his Pappy. In another way, I think many wanted to believe his campaign pronouncements of not being all about "Wall St at the expense of Main St" (this from a billionaire? Yeah right) and being about business & negotiation and not war. Either they were outright lies (surprise surprise), or being generous - as an outside candidate and not part of the Establishment Clique, he's finally been browbeaten/bribed/threatened into kowtowing and fallen into line to the vested interests in the US Establishment and abandon his original direction.

I'm afraid Clinton would have just represented those interests from the start, but would of course have lied with smooth politically acceptable platitudes, language and identity politics (unlike Trump). But the US would probably be in an overt shooting war with Syria (and by implication the Russian forces in Syria) and Iran right now.

What a choice.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Oct 2017 - 11:48
Post #1324483

I'd disagree, but she wouldn't have been my first choice of candidate!


Posted by: Fredd Sun, 24 Dec 2017 - 23:35
Post #1342136

It's been quite a while since we heard about one of those MAGA successes, so I thought it would be worth noting https://thinkprogress.org/trump-tells-mar-a-lago-friends-you-all-just-got-a-lot-richer-after-he-signs-gop-tax-bill-0a0c4c0edd5a/ for the little people. huh.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 25 Dec 2017 - 06:52
Post #1342147

The quality of a Trump appointee....I think he found him at the bottom after draining the swamp.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/23/us-ambassador-netherlands-apologises-fake-news-interview-muslim-no-go-zones

Still at least he actually nominated someone, most the Middle East countries (not really that important of course) still have no US ambassador. Latest stats I’ve seen suggest he’s nominated only 60% of the 1200 White House appointed positions.

It’s just as well he’s not going near a golf course as promised, with all that work to be done!
https://youtu.be/BhITj1O2UTM

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 25 Dec 2017 - 10:05
Post #1342153

QUOTE (Fredd @ Sun, 24 Dec 2017 - 23:35) *
It's been quite a while since we heard about one of those MAGA successes, so I thought it would be worth noting https://thinkprogress.org/trump-tells-mar-a-lago-friends-you-all-just-got-a-lot-richer-after-he-signs-gop-tax-bill-0a0c4c0edd5a/ for the little people. huh.gif

I can't be bothered to look into anything Trump does any further, but I wonder if I even need to, given that the "evidence" being promoted in that link has been oddly limited to dollar amounts; percentages are blissfully ignored. I suspect that's not because the author is ignorant about statistics. Typical tribalist mentality, I'm afraid. When his tribe gets back in, everything will be "great again".

--Churchmouse

Posted by: fedup2 Mon, 25 Dec 2017 - 11:37
Post #1342159

It seems to me that some just want to slate Trump no matter what.

Well why not start at home?

https://debtcamel.co.uk/smi-loan-help-mortgage/

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 11:28
Post #1342572

Trump says that his administration has had

QUOTE
More legislation passed, including the record was Harry Truman… and we broke that record.
(can he put a sentence together at all?)

GovTrack (US Govt Legislation tracker) says that Trump has signed the fewest bills into law by this point in any recent president’s first year.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 16:58
Post #1342645

QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 25 Dec 2017 - 12:37) *
It seems to me that some just want to slate Trump no matter what.

Not at all, I’d love to not have any opportunity to genuinely slate him, it’s just that he makes it so easy by being such an obvious sociopath.

1/ he couldn’t tell the truth if his life depended on it
2/ his childish continued used of (mostly inappropriate) superlatives
3/ his childish need to always be biggest/best/most popular even when the evidence is to the contrary
4/ his blatant sexism and racism and pandering to the thoroughly objectionable sense in society like Alex Jones, Roger Ayles etc
5/ his complete lack of empathy for those living close to or below the breadline

Posted by: Lodesman Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 17:43
Post #1342659

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 16:58) *
Not at all, I’d love to not have any opportunity to genuinely slate him, it’s just that he makes it so easy by being such an obvious sociopath.

1/ he couldn’t tell the truth if his life depended on it
2/ his childish continued used of (mostly inappropriate) superlatives
3/ his childish need to always be biggest/best/most popular even when the evidence is to the contrary
4/ his blatant sexism and racism and pandering to the thoroughly objectionable sense in society like Alex Jones, Roger Ayles etc
5/ his complete lack of empathy for those living close to or below the breadline


No wonder the rednecks love him, despite what he is doing to their pockets.

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 17:43
Post #1342661

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 16:58) *
QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 25 Dec 2017 - 12:37) *
It seems to me that some just want to slate Trump no matter what.

Not at all, I’d love to not have any opportunity to genuinely slate him, it’s just that he makes it so easy by being such an obvious sociopath.

1/ he couldn’t tell the truth if his life depended on it
2/ his childish continued used of (mostly inappropriate) superlatives
3/ his childish need to always be biggest/best/most popular even when the evidence is to the contrary
4/ his blatant sexism and racism and pandering to the thoroughly objectionable sense in society like Alex Jones, Roger Ayles etc
5/ his complete lack of empathy for those living close to or below the breadline

NPD. So, let's not blame the victim... What's most worrying is that a "euge" number of American people voted for him, and it's hard to argue that they didn't know who--or what--he was.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 17:50
Post #1342664

I think that most people thought he was lying about the things they didn’t want him to act/think/believe, they thought they knew which lies were real and which were not, he’s now at a record low approval of circa 30%, the trouble is he’s getting worse now as he works hard to appeal to that vomit inducing 30%.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 18:17
Post #1342670

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 17:50) *
the trouble is he’s getting worse now as he works hard to appeal to that vomit inducing 30%.

Much as I might despise Trump as President, to dismiss a third of the population as "vomit inducing" is itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority. There are reasons they voted for such an imbecile, and unless those are acknowledged as valid and addressed then the future is bleak indeed.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 20:07
Post #1343541

Ego much?

QUOTE
Since taking office I have been very strict on Commercial Aviation. Good news - it was just reported that there were Zero deaths in 2017, the best and safest year on record!

Posted by: MFM Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 09:20
Post #1343636

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 20:07) *
Ego much?

QUOTE
Since taking office I have been very strict on Commercial Aviation. Good news - it was just reported that there were Zero deaths in 2017, the best and safest year on record!



The poor guy can't win can he.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 23:06
Post #1343936

There haven't been any deaths due to commercial aircraft crashes in the US for years.
When one goes down will he take responsibility?

Posted by: Fredd Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35
Post #1361991

Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.

Posted by: samthecat Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 21:29
Post #1362057

QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35) *
Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.


In the interests of fairness I would like to see Trump given the opportunity to show this to be true!

Posted by: DancingDad Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 22:14
Post #1362087

QUOTE (samthecat @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 21:29) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35) *
Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.


In the interests of fairness I would like to see Trump given the opportunity to show this to be true!


I firmly believe it is true and that he would try to run in, unarmed.
Only to be dragged away by multiple secret service agents who know better.

He really hasn't a clue, basing his "expertise" on watching Chuck Norris movies.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 23:31
Post #1362149

QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35) *
Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.

I found it quite unsurprising. It is exactly what a person with Trump's affliction would say.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 01:52
Post #1362161

The chances are extremely low that Cadet Bone-spurs will be in the vicinity of a school immediately after the start of such an incident

Wouldn't it be easier to let him run into a school and find somebody with an assault rifle to go in another entrance ?

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 23:31) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35) *
Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.

I found it quite unsurprising. It is exactly what a person with Trump's affliction would say.

--Churchmouse

It's pathetic

The sort of nonsense you might expect Kim Jong Un to come out with (or a small child)

Could he hold an effective handgun in those tiny hands ?

Posted by: Unzippy Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 01:58
Post #1362162

QUOTE
]Broward County Sheriff's Office is reportedly also investigating why three of its deputies appeared to remain outside the building with their guns drawn as the attack unfolded.

Mr Trump criticised those officers as well, saying they "weren't exactly medal of honour winners"- a reference to the US military award for valour.

"The way they performed was frankly disgusting," Mr Trump added.


I expect it was because their training says don't confront an assault rifle with a handgun..

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 02:06
Post #1362165

I've always assumed that deputies are supposed to wait outside, observe and contain until the SWAT team arrives

When I was in the States, I knew a SWAT team leader and he showed me the arsenal in the back of his patrol car

He was just leaving for his second job as a security guard at the shopping mall and I was going to be at home with his wife

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 03:57
Post #1362169

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Tue, 27 Feb 2018 - 00:31) *
QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:35) *
Just when you think you've heard it all, a 71-year old "bone spur"-handicapped multiple draft-dodger reckons he'd have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/43202075 - unarmed. Beyond parody.

I found it quite unsurprising. It is exactly what a person with Trump's affliction would say.

When it comes to President Chump you really have to clarify which of his multiple afflictions you are referring to, there are a few I can think of that apply here.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 28 Feb 2018 - 00:49
Post #1362655

His eloquent Tweet today in it's entirety.



"Witch Hunt"!

He is also trying to nominate his personal pilot as the new head of the FAA.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 28 Feb 2018 - 12:45
Post #1362751

Probably better qualified for the role than many of his other nominations have been for theirs, Ms DeVoss or Scott Pruitt spring to mind.

Posted by: Fluffykins Wed, 28 Feb 2018 - 22:35
Post #1362881

Has anyone seen the film "Idiocracy"?

Stand that up against Trump and his America and it's bloody frightening

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 1 Mar 2018 - 21:23
Post #1363117

"I like taking the guns early," said in his conference. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Funny how due process was important when it concerns sex assault and wife beating.



What will the GOP and the NRA say?

Wasn't it Obama and Hilary that were just going to grab the guns?

Posted by: DancingDad Thu, 1 Mar 2018 - 22:50
Post #1363165

Let's arm teachers isn't working out too well.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/a-georgia-teacher-fired-a-shot-in-his-classroom/ar-BBJJfTI?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp

QUOTE
Just two weeks after a deadly school shooting in Parkland, Florida, a Georgia high school dissolved into panic when a teacher barricaded himself in his classroom and fired a single gunshot.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 2 Mar 2018 - 07:10
Post #1363195

I wonder why the NRA is in favour of arming teachers? I’m sure it’s nothing to do with the circa 70,000 to 1 million extra gun sales that the gun manufacturers (who are struggling right now) will get.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 2 Mar 2018 - 08:43
Post #1363201

I think it's more to do with having an excuse to do nothing about the guns, while providing more victims to blame when they fail to stop a heavily-armed nutter slaughtering people next time.


Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 2 Mar 2018 - 17:13
Post #1363339

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 2 Mar 2018 - 07:10) *
I wonder why the NRA is in favour of arming teachers? I’m sure it’s nothing to do with the circa 70,000 to 1 million extra gun sales that the gun manufacturers (who are struggling right now) will get.

Really? Every time any kind of gun ban even got hinted at during the Obama Administration, gun sales in the United States hit a new record. Proving unequivocally, of course, that Obama was doing the bidding of the NRA. Except, he certainly never got a penny for his efforts. I doubt Trump would leave that money on the table...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 00:28
Post #1363473

Trump has had two meetings with NRA leaders since his conference on gun control.
Today one of them announced after the latest meeting that Trump has no intention of passing any bills to restrict gun ownership.

Putin brags about powerful new nukes that he calls invulnerable and shows a CGI video of them destroying Florida.
Trump tweets about 'Alex' Baldwin’s SNL impersonation and announces a Trade War with his allies.

Whatever these people have on him must be huge.

Posted by: Redivi Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 01:29
Post #1363482

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 00:28) *
Trump has had two meetings with NRA leaders since his conference on gun control.
Today one of them announced after the latest meeting that Trump has no intention of passing any bills to restrict gun ownership.
Meanwhile Delta has been told by two Republican senators that, because they've ended discounts for NRA members, they will be losing some tax breaks

Putin brags about powerful new nukes that he calls invulnerable and shows a CGI video of them destroying Florida.
There's a report that the video dates from 2007

Trump tweets about 'Alex' Baldwin’s SNL impersonation
Priorities

and announces a Trade War with his allies.
Economists commenting that the increased steel and aluminium prices will destroy more jobs than they create
Wall Street Journal (usually pro-Trump) describes it as the biggest policy blunder of his Presidency,
Not the best of times for the UK to be leaving the only trading bloc with serious muscle

Whatever these people have on him must be huge.
Becoming increasingly difficult to work out if the USA is a plutocracy or a kakistocracy
It certainly isn't a democracy

Posted by: Fredd Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 09:27
Post #1363494

QUOTE (Redivi @ Sat, 3 Mar 2018 - 01:29) *
Not the best of times for the UK to be leaving the only trading bloc with serious muscle

Since this country long ago stopped producing significant amounts of anything that Trump supposedly cares about, like steel and coal, in this instance I suppose it wouldn't much matter.

Posted by: Unzippy Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 02:27
Post #1363913

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/03/03/trump-escalates-trade-war-threatens-european-carmakers-with-stiff-tariffs/?utm_term=.72c75d63261f
Bless his heart, he doesn't realise the US cars don't sell well in Europe because they're utterly sh1t.


It's reported that he received a round of applause for his suggestion that the US should have a President for Life. This is a exactly the situation the 2nd Amendment was created for, except all the gun nuts are Trump supporters. *slow hand clap*

Posted by: Redivi Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 07:47
Post #1363917

He also doesn't realise that most of the "European" cars have been made in either their American plants or Mexico

BMW and VW are probably rethinking their investment plans and not in the way he intends

Electrolux has already announced that, as a result of the announcement of increased steel prices, it's putting an expansion plan on hold

Posted by: DastardlyDick Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 11:50
Post #1363992

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 2 Mar 2018 - 07:10) *
I wonder why the NRA is in favour of arming teachers? I’m sure it’s nothing to do with the circa 70,000 to 1 million extra gun sales that the gun manufacturers (who are struggling right now) will get.


Yes, arm the teachers! Can you imagine the results of a fire fight in a classroom?

As for gun control, I believe the US constitution says something about 'having a militia'. Why not just say 'you can have a gun, but you must be either a Police Officer or a member of the Armed Forces (inc. the National Guard) to do so'?

Posted by: Redivi Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:10
Post #1364000

I like the idea of a requirement to be a member of the National Guard complete with having to attend regular training and drill sessions

Posted by: Fredd Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:15
Post #1364002

QUOTE (DastardlyDick @ Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 11:50) *
I believe the US constitution says something about 'having a militia'. Why not just say 'you can have a gun, but you must be either a Police Officer or a member of the Armed Forces (inc. the National Guard) to do so'?

At the time of the US Constitution nations didn't have large regular armed forces; in time of war they relied on mobilising local militias comprising armed citizens, regulated centrally. If you translated it into the modern context of trained armies, reservists, National Guard and police forces then the right to bear arms would logically only apply to those groups, not any old Tom, Dick or Harry who would never be part of any organised militia. However logic has nothing to do with the argument over the 2nd Amendment and its interpretation.

Posted by: notmeatloaf Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:42
Post #1364006

No-one except the most foolish teacher would agree to be armed anyway because - bearing in mind the number of accidental gun deaths - you would be playing with fire to be the first teacher to negligently kill a child.

Plus with any incredibly rare event even by US standards, people become complacent and assume every alarm is a false alarm. The number of times I have walked through the hospital with the continuous fire alarm (evacuate now unless clinical staff) going off and everyone totally ignoring them including all the patients sat in waiting rooms.

Posted by: ManxRed Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 15:05
Post #1364042

QUOTE (DastardlyDick @ Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 11:50) *
As for gun control, I believe the US constitution says something about 'having a militia'. Why not just say 'you can have a gun, but you must be either a Police Officer or a member of the Armed Forces (inc. the National Guard) to do so'?


Because you CANNOT amend the constitution man. You simply CANNOT. Especially one of the, errrrrr, 'amendments'. Errrrr, no, hang on, that doesn't make sense. Why is it called an 'amendment'? It must mean something else as well. Oh God, my head hurts. Nurse! Nurse!!

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 16:16
Post #1364060

QUOTE
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The second amendment was introduced as part of the bill of rights (first 10 amendments).

This was heavily plagiarised from the UK's own (1691) Bill of rights, but we've grown up since.

Posted by: Lodesman Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 17:20
Post #1364083

For a bit of light relief have a look at,

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9UFyNy-rw4

Aussie who lives and works in the USA.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 23:29
Post #1364188

QUOTE (Fredd @ Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:15) *
QUOTE (DastardlyDick @ Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 11:50) *
I believe the US constitution says something about 'having a militia'. Why not just say 'you can have a gun, but you must be either a Police Officer or a member of the Armed Forces (inc. the National Guard) to do so'?

At the time of the US Constitution nations didn't have large regular armed forces; in time of war they relied on mobilising local militias comprising armed citizens, regulated centrally. If you translated it into the modern context of trained armies, reservists, National Guard and police forces then the right to bear arms would logically only apply to those groups, not any old Tom, Dick or Harry who would never be part of any organised militia. However logic has nothing to do with the argument over the 2nd Amendment and its interpretation.

On the off chance you're interested, this Wikipedia entry probably captures the "official" 2008 interpretation of the 2nd Amendment by the US Supreme Court:
QUOTE
The Supreme Court held:[45]

(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.

© The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30.

(d) The Second Amendment’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.

(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.

(f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.

(3) The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition – in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute – would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D.C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.

That kinda puts the kibosh on the amateur interpretations most people seem to devote approximately five minutes to thinking about. Though what this has to do with Trump is anyone's guess. In case you hadn't noticed, Trump says a lot of things, nearly all of it complete nonsense. No serious person takes the faintest notice of it.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 6 Mar 2018 - 22:42
Post #1364526

It's OK folks, Trump says the trade war will be conducted in a 'Loving way'

Posted by: DBC Tue, 6 Mar 2018 - 22:48
Post #1364528

His top economic adviser has just resigned because he disagrees with Trump over those proposed tariffs

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 00:18
Post #1364951

Stormy Daniels’ attorney on Today Show: “Did she have a sexual relationship with the president?”
Attorney: “Yes...”

Question: Did the president know about $130K payment?
Attorney: There's no question the president knew about it at”

Turns out that Stormy says that the Pres didn't sign the none disclosure agreement so it doesn't apply.
Apparently Trump's lawyer secretly obtained a restraining order last week to keep the porn star Stormy Daniels quiet despite the lack of an enforcible none disclosure agreement.
She is taking him to court so she can publish the full story.

She says she has pictures!

Are we ready for Trump Dick Pics?

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 07:03
Post #1364961

Also Chumps attorney himself breached the NDA which is another argument why it’s no longer enforceable, so they’ve paid $130k just to keep it out the 2016 election cycle. Melania of course will be back in thunder mode for a while longer!

Posted by: DastardlyDick Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 10:23
Post #1364999

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 00:18) *
She says she has pictures!

Are we ready for Trump Dick Pics?


Now that's a seriously nasty image! Quickly, pass me the mind bleach please!

Wonder if we'll be able to see the "bone spurs"?

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 19:41
Post #1365170

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 8 Mar 2018 - 00:18) *
Stormy Daniels’ attorney on Today Show: “Did she have a sexual relationship with the president?”
Attorney: “Yes...”

Question: Did the president know about $130K payment?
Attorney: There's no question the president knew about it at”

Turns out that Stormy says that the Pres didn't sign the none disclosure agreement so it doesn't apply.
Apparently Trump's lawyer secretly obtained a restraining order last week to keep the porn star Stormy Daniels quiet despite the lack of an enforcible none disclosure agreement.
She is taking him to court so she can publish the full story.

So, she's suing Trump over an NDA that isn't in his name, he didn't sign and for which he didn't pay her $130,000, because Trump has somehow kept her from revealing the truth about an affair she had with Trump, which she has now revealed anyway? Trump is obviously not the only rapacious moron in the country...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 9 Mar 2018 - 00:12
Post #1365234

Trumps (alias he used) lawyer obtained a “restraining order” from a private arbitration company, written by a retired judge. It has much legal standing as a restraining order written in crayon by my kids forbidding me from serving them veg at dinner.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 01:52
Post #1365556

President Donald Trump will not meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un unless North Korea takes "concrete and verifiable actions" toward denuclearization, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Friday.

Walking back on the meeting already.

Posted by: DastardlyDick Sun, 11 Mar 2018 - 20:10
Post #1365866

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 10 Mar 2018 - 01:52) *
Walking back on the meeting already.


Quelle Surprise!

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 12 Mar 2018 - 10:52
Post #1365980

Perhaps they should show Chump this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSkuC8lxXSQ

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 13 Mar 2018 - 00:49
Post #1366247

trump Tweets

"Highly trained expert teachers will be allowed to conceal carry, subject to State Law. Armed guards OK, deterrent"

and

"On 18 to 21 Age Limits, watching court cases and rulings before acting. States are making this decision. Things are moving rapidly on this, but not much political support (to put it mildly)"


So, what a surprise. His bold statements at his 'bipartisan' meeting have all evaporated.
Instead it's going to be more guns.

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 13 Mar 2018 - 07:35
Post #1366261

He listens to the last person to talk to him.....he made commitments (ahem) after speaking to the kids, but later spoke to the NRA.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 13 Mar 2018 - 21:58
Post #1366554

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 13 Mar 2018 - 07:35) *
He listens to the last person to talk to him.....he made commitments (ahem) after speaking to the kids, but later spoke to the NRA.



That's about it.

Last year Rex Tillerson called Trump a ‘******* moron’ and wasn't fired, he spoke out against Russia and was fired the next day.

Tillerson says his last day will be March 31. So Pompeo will be sworn into office on April Fool's Day.

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 15 Mar 2018 - 23:27
Post #1367287

Trump admits to lying to Canadian PM in a trade meeting

“Trudeau came to see me. He’s a good guy. Justin. He said ‘No, no, we have no trade deficit with you, we have none. Donald, please,’” Trump said. “Nice guy, good looking guy, comes in – ‘Donald we have no trade deficit.’”
“I said, ‘Wrong Justin, you do.’ I didn’t even know. ... I had no idea. I just said ‘You’re wrong.’ You know why? Because we’re so stupid. … And I thought they were smart. I said, ‘You’re wrong Justin,’” Trump continued.

The U.S. trade representative office states that the United States does, in fact, have a trade surplus with Canada, according to The Post.

Trump today 'doubled down' on the lie

"We do have a Trade Deficit with Canada, as we do with almost all countries (some of them massive). P.M. Justin Trudeau of Canada, a very good guy, doesn’t like saying that Canada has a Surplus vs. the U.S.(negotiating), but they do...they almost all do...and that’s how I know!"

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 16 Mar 2018 - 08:24
Post #1367343

The new chief economic advisor announced, Larry Kudlow, CNBC’s financial reporter, and the guy famous for laughing at a suggestion of a recession in late 2007. What could possibly go wrong?

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 16 Mar 2018 - 22:33
Post #1367588

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 16 Mar 2018 - 08:24) *
The new chief economic advisor announced, Larry Kudlow, CNBC’s financial reporter, and the guy famous for laughing at a suggestion of a recession in late 2007. What could possibly go wrong?



Sacked the Secretary of State so he is sending his daughter to South Korea for a meeting with the President.


Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 17 Mar 2018 - 07:56
Post #1367634

Now the deputy director of the FBI is sacked just 26 hours before retirement, screwing up the value of his pension, I’m not sure whether it’s just spite or whether they want to then use that against his testimony in the Russia probe (he’s obviously anti Trump because he had to fire him).....

Posted by: DastardlyDick Sun, 18 Mar 2018 - 19:32
Post #1368050

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 15 Mar 2018 - 23:27) *
Trump admits to lying to Canadian PM in a trade meeting

“Trudeau came to see me. He’s a good guy. Justin. He said ‘No, no, we have no trade deficit with you, we have none. Donald, please,’” Trump said. “Nice guy, good looking guy, comes in – ‘Donald we have no trade deficit.’”
“I said, ‘Wrong Justin, you do.’ I didn’t even know. ... I had no idea. I just said ‘You’re wrong.’ You know why? Because we’re so stupid. … And I thought they were smart. I said, ‘You’re wrong Justin,’” Trump continued.

The U.S. trade representative office states that the United States does, in fact, have a trade surplus with Canada, according to The Post.

Trump today 'doubled down' on the lie

"We do have a Trade Deficit with Canada, as we do with almost all countries (some of them massive). P.M. Justin Trudeau of Canada, a very good guy, doesn’t like saying that Canada has a Surplus vs. the U.S.(negotiating), but they do...they almost all do...and that’s how I know!"


As with most statistics, it depends on many things as to how accurate they are.
Apparently Chump doesn't count "services" in his, since 80% of the US Economy is "services", hey presto! you've got a deficit.
If you do, as the Dept of Commerce does, you have a surplus!
Lies, Damn Lies etc.

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 19 Mar 2018 - 23:10
Post #1368382

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 17 Mar 2018 - 07:56) *
Now the deputy director of the FBI is sacked just 26 hours before retirement, screwing up the value of his pension, I’m not sure whether it’s just spite or whether they want to then use that against his testimony in the Russia probe (he’s obviously anti Trump because he had to fire him).....



It's a message to intimidate other federal employees.

Get in the way and we will take your pension.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 3 Apr 2018 - 17:44
Post #1371646

Trump can’t remember name of big white house he lives in


"This incredible house, or building, or whatever you want to call it because there is no name for it"

https://shareblue.com/trump-cant-remember-name-white-house/


Posted by: Ocelot Tue, 3 Apr 2018 - 18:26
Post #1371653

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 3 Apr 2018 - 18:44) *
Trump can’t remember name of big white house he lives in


"This incredible house, or building, or whatever you want to call it because there is no name for it"

https://shareblue.com/trump-cant-remember-name-white-house/


Speaking of Donald trump fans, haven't heard from fedup2 lately.

Posted by: andy_foster Tue, 3 Apr 2018 - 23:39
Post #1371718

He lives in 'the big house'? No mention of that on Fox News...

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 4 Apr 2018 - 07:21
Post #1371727

Fox news is too busy as the Chumps new policy advisor to worry about house names!
(Caravans of Illegal Immigrants from Honduras and using the Military on the border in as yet to be defined role both originating from 'Fox and friends')

Posted by: ford poplar Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 01:19
Post #1389112

An overinflated ego or a school bully?

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 13:53
Post #1389204

By all accounts he was bullied at school (a military academy), now he’s getting his own back.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 23:49
Post #1390340

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/13/trump-in-fox-news-interview-says-kim-jong-un-understand-each-other.html

From Fox interview

"BAIER: Kim Jong Un is "clearly executing people."

TRUMP: "He's a tough guy. Hey, when you take over a country, tough country, tough people, and you take it over from your father ... if you could do that at 27-years old, I mean, that's 1 in 10,000 that could do that... but a lot of other people have done some really bad things too."


Also trumps Trade Spokesman says there is a 'special place in Hell' waiting for the Canadian Prime Minister.

What is happening?

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 04:22
Post #1390358

Didn’t Fun boy three make a song about the Trump presidency back in 1982?

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 15:31
Post #1391127

Trump claims, preposterously, that parents of Korean War veterans came up to him during the 2016 campaign and said, "when you can, we'd love our son to be brought back home -- you know, the remains."

From the same interview on why he wants Russia back in G7

"If Putin were sitting next to me & we were having dinner, I could say, 'would you do me a favour? Would you get out of Syria? Would you get out of Ukraine? Just come on.'... I could ask him to do things that are good for the world."

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 16 Jun 2018 - 19:21
Post #1391189

He just can’t stop lying......only about 4% of what he says is wholly true according to the non partisan fact checkers at Politico.

https://youtu.be/b9sO0VLKDmY

His attacks on the ‘fake news’ press have been for the sole reason to discredit them so when they inform on his lies they aren’t believed. It all started with the ‘biggest inauguration crowd, period’ and hasn’t got better since.

Posted by: Redivi Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 10:35
Post #1391544

Does it make any difference to his prospects of re-election ?

To quote a comment in a newspaper today:
Europeans have no experience of mid-west rednecks in their natural habitat

Posted by: emanresu Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 10:49
Post #1391549

Trump is clearly there for the taking and "little rocket man" played him like a fiddle. He may have a nuclear disadvantage but did a sitting president want his election prospects with red necks (literally) blowing up in his face.

As regards retaliation, given the geography of North Korea, there were the sentiments of China, Russia, South Korea and Japan to consider. Nuclear fallout is not that containable.

Looking forward to the rematch

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:02
Post #1391553

QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:35) *
Does it make any difference to his prospects of re-election ?

Well yes, his approval ratings amongst the floating voters (those who neither consider themselves a Democrat or a Republican) is on the floor, he has lost some amount of the republican vote but its holding steady at around 35% (of all voters), a swing of Circa 19% from just before the election in 2016, it wont have as big a proportional effect in most the midterms as the constituency boundaries are heavily gerrymandered.

Posted by: Redivi Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 11:21
Post #1391560

it wont have as big a proportional effect in most the midterms as the constituency boundaries are heavily gerrymandered

Trump's also packed the Supreme Court with consequences that will last for many years

As a result, it's not illegal to have policies that remove mainly Democrat voters from the voting registers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-purge/u-s-top-court-backs-ohio-voter-purge-democrats-blast-ruling-idUSKBN1J71QQ

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 21:37
Post #1391817

Trump is setting up a 'Space Force'

"My administration is reclaiming America's heritage as the world's greatest spacefaring nation," Trump said in the East Room, joined by members of his space council. "The essence of the American character is to explore new horizons and to tame new frontiers."

He said the new branch's creation will be overseen by Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"When it comes to defending America, it is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space," Trump said. He added: "We are going to have the Air Force and we are going to have the Space Force, separate but equal."

This is all contrary to international treaty that the US has been a signatory of for the last forty years.


Trump meets with a vicious dictator who kills his own family to maintain power
Trump Praises vicious dictator,
Trump says USA is to withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 22:11
Post #1391829

QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:21) *
it wont have as big a proportional effect in most the midterms as the constituency boundaries are heavily gerrymandered

Trump's also packed the Supreme Court with consequences that will last for many years

As a result, it's not illegal to have policies that remove mainly Democrat voters from the voting registers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-purge/u-s-top-court-backs-ohio-voter-purge-democrats-blast-ruling-idUSKBN1J71QQ

One out of nine is "packing the court" is it?

--Churchmouse

Posted by: MFM Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 11:09
Post #1391945

Still so much Trump hate after all his achievements. He will go down as one of the best presidents in US history!

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 12:14
Post #1391994

QUOTE (MFM @ Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 12:09) *
Still so much Trump hate after all his achievements. He will go down as one of the best presidents in US history!

icon_weed.gif
Just say no. Particularly before typing.

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 13:11
Post #1392017

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 23:11) *
QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:21) *
it wont have as big a proportional effect in most the midterms as the constituency boundaries are heavily gerrymandered

Trump's also packed the Supreme Court with consequences that will last for many years

As a result, it's not illegal to have policies that remove mainly Democrat voters from the voting registers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-purge/u-s-top-court-backs-ohio-voter-purge-democrats-blast-ruling-idUSKBN1J71QQ

One out of nine is "packing the court" is it?

--Churchmouse

It only needs one out of nine

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 18:22
Post #1392090

QUOTE (MFM @ Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 12:09) *
Still so much Trump hate after all his achievements. He will go down as one of the best presidents in US history!

What achievements exactly? No he won’t.

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 23:26
Post #1392178

It's sometimes hard to tell if a post is irony or not

Posted by: ManxRed Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 12:00
Post #1392279

Yeah, I thought that was a joke.

Although Trump should be applauded for at least partially addressing the problem of too many actual Human Rights abusers from being members of the UN Human Rights Council by removing one of the biggest culprits himself.

Well done, sir!

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 12:16
Post #1392282

QUOTE (ManxRed @ Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 13:00) *
Yeah, I thought that was a joke.

The trouble is that Trump is so polarising a Trump supporter will say that, the other 65% of the population will not.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 22:41
Post #1392458

President’s Executive Order will continue zero-tolerance policy on illegal border crossings, but allow families to remain together.
Just days ago Trump was specific, he said that he couldn't sign an executive order to stop families from being separated.
I wonder what changed?

"The president added that the move will be compassionate but will also be 'equally tough if not tougher.'"

He's admitting that it's an escalation. He is going to detain them for the full immigration proceedings that can take years. He's going to get the army to build new camps.
It's not a capitulation it's a tactical withdrawal to stronger ground.

Big camps built by the army to house detainees for years.

But don't worry there's going to be a new 'Space Force'

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 00:08
Post #1392473

QUOTE (Redivi @ Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 14:11) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 23:11) *
QUOTE (Redivi @ Mon, 18 Jun 2018 - 12:21) *
it wont have as big a proportional effect in most the midterms as the constituency boundaries are heavily gerrymandered

Trump's also packed the Supreme Court with consequences that will last for many years

As a result, it's not illegal to have policies that remove mainly Democrat voters from the voting registers
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-purge/u-s-top-court-backs-ohio-voter-purge-democrats-blast-ruling-idUSKBN1J71QQ

One out of nine is "packing the court" is it?

--Churchmouse

It only needs one out of nine

In the US, "packing the Court" has a very specific meaning, which apparently you were not aware of. It refers to a plan or threat to appoint multiple new justices in order to force through a particular point of view or legal interpretation that is not currently being upheld by the Court. Obviously, it would be difficult to "pack the court" if the president's only ever appointed one justice out of nine (and that was to fill an existing vacancy, rather than a new one).

In other news, Trump has now decided that enforcing the law as written just isn't going to play well, so he's decided to jail the children along with their parents. Not sure if he's asking the AG to prosecute them as well, or just confine them indefinitely without charge. Well done righteous campaigners! Hard to believe this was the intended consequence of all that media and political attention, though...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 08:40
Post #1392510

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 20 Jun 2018 - 23:41) *
President’s Executive Order will continue zero-tolerance policy on illegal border crossings, but allow families to remain together.
Just days ago Trump was specific, he said that he couldn't sign an executive order to stop families from being separated.
I wonder what changed?

Nothing except that GOP candidates looking at Novembers elections realised that if Trump continued with the lie they would be stuffed and stopping a democrat held house starting impeachment proceedings would be a bit harder than if they held the whip hand. It didn't even need an Executive order it just needed a change of government policy, the same Policy they implemented in the first place causing the issue.

In summary, yes Mr President you can carry on doing this and be impeached in January, or don't and you may not be.

Also Melania coming out against her husband could well have been seen as a thin end of a Stormy wedge if he didn't bow to that pressure.

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 22:04
Post #1392789

QUOTE
First Lady Melania Trump has been criticised for the choice of her jacket worn on a trip to a migrant child detention centre in Texas.
Mrs Trump was spotted in the jacket, which featured graffiti writing on the back with the words "I really don't care do u?", as she boarded a plane.
Her spokeswoman said "there was no hidden message" in the former fashion model's sartorial choice.


No hidden message.
No of course not, it was there plain to see.
If it wasn't deliberate she is very poorly advised and incredibly stupid.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44570688

Trump just tweeted


"“I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?” written on the back of Melania’s jacket, refers to the Fake News Media. Melania has learned how dishonest they are, and she truly no longer cares!"


Didn't the White House spokesperson just say there was no hidden meaning?

Who do we believe? I wish he would make his mind up.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 00:18
Post #1392803

It's the hypocrisy combined with the cowardice that galls me. The hypocrisy is that Trump's (former) policy was the subject of furious intergalactic condemnation, but those same people have had not a peep to say about all of the other children who are routinely separated from their parents when said adults are arrested for any other kind of criminal activity elsewhere in the United States and (I'd guess) anywhere else in the developed world). Apparently, that's perfectly okay.

The cowardice is that the real reason for the hypocrisy is never admitted: That people illegally crossing the US-Mexico border (but only with children, for some reason) should be exempt from criminal prosecution and either deported without charge or perhaps allowed to roam freely within the country. It is simply a disagreement about whether illegal border crossing should be enforced in the same way as other crimes, or whether it should not be enforced at all. So why not admit it?

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 07:38
Post #1392818

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 23:04) *
"“I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?” written on the back of Melania’s jacket, refers to the Fake News Media. Melania has learned how dishonest they are, and she truly no longer cares!"


Didn't the White House spokesperson just say there was no hidden meaning?

It was a first ladies office spokesperson that said that, not a white house one.

I see it as Melania having a dig at Trump for not caring in the best way she can without saying it outright, the very fact she visited the centres I see as a dig at the Chump. She's stayed quite over the Daniels/McDougal (plus about 15 others lining up) issue but she doesn't seem overly happy with her husband.

As an aside, has Melania's true immigration status been confirmed? There was a hint (from her own statements in interviews) that at one point she entered the US illegally (Tourist visa while working as a model), that would mean her eventual permanent status would be declared null and void retrospectively (under normal US protocol), in which case she could have been detained and Baron sent to one of the wire walled centres........

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 10:02
Post #1392853

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 01:18) *
It is simply a disagreement about whether illegal border crossing should be enforced in the same way as other crimes, or whether it should not be enforced at all. So why not admit it?

Because that's not the issue.

The policy was deliberately enacted to be punitive and act as a deterrent (as well as playing to Trump's political base) - a punishment that applied not only to illegal migrants, but also legitimate asylum seekers, incidentally. At the point when the children are removed the parents haven't even been charged or convicted of a crime, yet because all the adults in the group are imprisoned there's nobody who can care for the children, so they're immediately separated from their parents. That's not an accident, that's the harsh effect the policy was designed to have.

In the case of domestic criminals it will usually be one parent locked up, they will generally be bailed until convisted, and if not will generally have a family or other support network to care for a child. Obviously there will be cases of single mothers with no family able or willing to help, but that won't be the norm, and the state taking the child into care wouldn't be an intentional and vindictive act of punishment.

Does that help?

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 10:44
Post #1392863

remember a few months back, the House and Senate leaders of the Democrats had signed off an a bipartisan deal which would have, among other things, funded Trump’s Wall, only to have Trump blow it up at the last minute because his pet Nazi Miller didn’t find it sufficiently horrible.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 23:38
Post #1393049

QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 11:02) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 01:18) *
It is simply a disagreement about whether illegal border crossing should be enforced in the same way as other crimes, or whether it should not be enforced at all. So why not admit it?

Because that's not the issue.

The policy was deliberately enacted to be punitive and act as a deterrent (as well as playing to Trump's political base) - a punishment that applied not only to illegal migrants, but also legitimate asylum seekers, incidentally. At the point when the children are removed the parents haven't even been charged or convicted of a crime, yet because all the adults in the group are imprisoned there's nobody who can care for the children, so they're immediately separated from their parents. That's not an accident, that's the harsh effect the policy was designed to have.

In the case of domestic criminals it will usually be one parent locked up, they will generally be bailed until convisted, and if not will generally have a family or other support network to care for a child. Obviously there will be cases of single mothers with no family able or willing to help, but that won't be the norm, and the state taking the child into care wouldn't be an intentional and vindictive act of punishment.

Does that help?

No, but this does:



Apparently, exploiting traumatised children to score political points can also be helpful. (If you don't know the story behind this photo and the TIME cover, it makes interesting reading.)

Incidentally, I am only referring to alleged illegal immigrants: people accused of breaking the immigration laws. I don't know if the previous, current or future Trump policies also applied to "legitimate asylum seekers", but it strikes me as unlikely that the US government treats people it considers to be "legitimate asylum seekers" in the same way it treats people it accuses of having committed criminal acts. Certainly, many of the accounts I have read about recent detainees suggests that many of them have no idea what a "legitimate asylum seeker" is, so I will have to take that claim with a pinch of salt.

Criminal laws are generally designed to be "punitive and act as a deterrent", so it is hardly surprising that the enforcement of these particular laws has that effect. It is unfortunate that, unlike most people who break laws, the people breaking these particular laws often do so whilst accompanied by their children and in circumstances in which there are no (uninvolved) obvious relatives who can take custody of their children, but the law does not currently treat these situations differently. Perhaps it should? I have no problem with changing the law if that is what the people want. My objection is to the shameless dishonesty, which is now so commonplace in political discourse today. (And no, and I hope obviously, I do not exclude Trump or anyone involved with him from that assessment.)

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Redivi Sat, 23 Jun 2018 - 09:32
Post #1393078

So this is why America withdrew from the Human Rights Council
Nothing to do with its criticism of Israel

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/un-trump-children-family-torture-separation-border-mexico-border-ice-detention-a8411676.html

Posted by: Fredd Sat, 23 Jun 2018 - 09:35
Post #1393080

If they do make an asylum claim they're still being locked up while it's considered, with the same effect. And let's bear in mind that this draconian system (if scrabbling around to try to implement a random executive order can be considered to be a system) isn't to deter some heinous crime that carries a severe penalty if convicted, illegally crossing the border is a misdemeanor, invariably punished just by time spent in detention before deportation - which can be as little as a day.

This isn't a simple problem to solve, and lashing around with simplistic "solutions" like walling the country off or imprisoning every illegal border crosser is bound to result in ill-considered side effects, as it has here. Is it stupidity, a complete lack of empathy, or a lack of humanity? I don't know, but it's deeply unpleasant.

Posted by: Churchmouse Sat, 23 Jun 2018 - 23:54
Post #1393241

QUOTE (Redivi @ Sat, 23 Jun 2018 - 10:32) *
So this is why America withdrew from the Human Rights Council
Nothing to do with its criticism of Israel

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/un-trump-children-family-torture-separation-border-mexico-border-ice-detention-a8411676.html

As far as the UN goes, if it's not the Security Council doing something, it's effectively nothing. The rest of the UN, and its thousands upon thousands of international hangers-on, is powerless, often hysterically biased, and really not worth the global warming that results from the copious hot air they spew.

Because the news reports are so thin, I decided to look into Swoop's story further. As it turns out, this latest statement comes from the very same UN human rights mechanism (a group of independent "experts" affiliated with the UNHRC and organised into the "Working Group on Arbitrary Detention") that decided in 2016 that Julian Assange was being "arbitrarily detained" in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London by the United Kingdom and Sweden--despite his being completely free to leave at any time. These people have zero credibility--and that's before one considers their alleged Israel problem. In other words, if the Trump administration was quaking in its boots about yet another pontificating statement from the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, they're dumber than even you thought.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: stamfordman Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 13:42
Post #1398297

Trump has just flown over our house in some large copter thing escorted by two small helicopters. Very low - could almost reach with our hose pipe.

Posted by: Steve_999 Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 13:45
Post #1398298

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 14:42) *
Trump has just flown over our house in some large copter thing escorted by two small helicopters. Very low - could almost reach with our hose pipe.


And why didn't you?

Posted by: stamfordman Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 13:57
Post #1398300

QUOTE (Steve_999 @ Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 14:45) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 14:42) *
Trump has just flown over our house in some large copter thing escorted by two small helicopters. Very low - could almost reach with our hose pipe.


And why didn't you?



My wife was watering a flowerbed. Decided it would be a waste of a precious resource.

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 16 Jul 2018 - 21:43
Post #1399552

Well, I wasn't expecting it to be that bad!

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 06:06
Post #1399594

There were two people at that press conference, one was the President of the United States, the other was Donald Trump, even Fox News and the Republicans in the two houses are being critical now.

Posted by: stamfordman Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 09:37
Post #1399639

You have to wonder what Putin has on Trump - hope we find out.

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 09:38
Post #1399641

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 10:37) *
You have to wonder what Putin has on Trump - hope we find out.


The fact that he was voted in as President? He owes him big time.

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 10:55
Post #1399660

I wonder if Trump looked uncomfortable because he needed another pee-pee?

Posted by: bill w Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 11:04
Post #1399666

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 10:37) *
You have to wonder what Putin has on Trump - hope we find out.



Make of it what you will; this is just one link of many if you type " trump russian bankrupt" into your favourite search engine.

https://www.vox.com/2017/7/18/15983910/donald-trump-russia-putin-fbi-collusion-fusion-gps

It may of course be even more fake news. happy.gif

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 17 Jul 2018 - 21:56
Post #1399934

Following the backlash, Trump is now claiming that, as a result of a transcript error, he "misspoke and Russia did meddle in the election

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-election-2016-russia-meddling-putin-mueller-investigation-latest-a8451936.html

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 08:32
Post #1399976

I'm surprised he didn't just use his usual ploy and say the previous reporting was fake news, and that he'd said "wouldn't" all along.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 08:57
Post #1399980

But he still couldn't leave well alone contrary to what the prepared speech said, he adlibbed then a bit about 'many others' interfering (despite no evidence) and had hand modified the notes to add 'NO Collusion' (anyone really believe that still?). Yup he was careless enough with his notes that someone photographed them with enough clarity to read.

https://www.mamamia.com.au/donald-trump-speech-today/

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 18:44
Post #1400148

Russia Is No Longer Targeting the U.S., Trump Says, Contradicting His Own Intelligence Director

WASHINGTON — President Trump said on Wednesday that Russia was no longer targeting the United States, contradicting his own intelligence chief and just a day after promising that his administration was working to prevent Kremlin interference in the upcoming midterm elections.

back-pedalled his backpedal

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/us/politics/trump-putin-higher-intelligence.html


The Russian Defense Ministry tweeted

"The MOD is ready for the practical implementation of agreements in the area of global security reached in Helsinki between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump"

What agreements? Shouldn't Congress have been told?

No wonder he wanted a private meeting with no aides or stenographers present.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 19:57
Post #1400186

Some Democrat congressmen/women are talking about subpoenering the interpreter to interrogate them as to what the Chump has promised......

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 20:41
Post #1400206

That tape recording of Trump that came out in the election. It makes sense now. he meant to say

"I meant to say I DIDN'T try and **** her. I DIDN'T move on her like a bitch. She’s NOT got the big phoney ****. I better NOT use some Tic Tacs just in case I DON'T start kissing her. When you’re a star, they DON'T let you do it. You CAN'T do anything. DON'T grab ’em by the *****."

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 18 Jul 2018 - 21:23
Post #1400219

Trump calls out 'very aggressive' Montenegro in latest NATO jibe

President Trump suggested he would be unhappy defending "tiny" Montenegro if it were attacked, calling into question NATO's central principle of mutual defense.

I suppose it's just a coincidence that Russia has issues with Montenegro?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-calls-out-very-aggressive-montenegro-latest-nato-jibe-n892311

Posted by: Tartarus Thu, 19 Jul 2018 - 07:17
Post #1400262

You know things have reached meme level 9000 when even people such as Richard Marx are chiming in...

https://twitter.com/richardmarx/status/1019470147017293825

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 22:33
Post #1401170

Trump obviously hasn't heard of Search Warrants.

He tweeted

"Inconceivable that the government would break into a lawyer’s office (early in the morning) - almost unheard of. Even more inconceivable that a lawyer would tape a client - totally unheard of & perhaps illegal. The good news is that your favorite President did nothing wrong!"

Bwahahaha!

His lawyer has a tape of him ordering the payoff of a floozy.

It is good to know my 'favorite' President did nothing wrong. As for trump?

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 22 Jul 2018 - 07:14
Post #1401207

The Chump is compromised, there are now so many people who were high up in either the campaign, or the transition team or the initial administration with ties (frequently illegal) to Russia its almost inconceivable he thought they were all great for the job without some leveraging from Russia. In fact it’s hard to pick some without any link to Russia that could be considered in some way compromising or their position.

Posted by: Fredd Sun, 22 Jul 2018 - 11:50
Post #1401251

And yet his base still support him, so he'll continue to sell his country down the river as it protects his personal position.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 24 Jul 2018 - 19:47
Post #1402019

"Just remember," Trump tells a crowd veterans, "what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."

Seems familiar, Orwell wasn't it?

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command" .

Posted by: Unzippy Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 04:03
Post #1402091

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 24 Jul 2018 - 20:47) *
"Just remember," Trump tells a crowd veterans, "what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."

Seems familiar, Orwell wasn't it?

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command" .



He actually meant "what you're seeing and what you're reading is what's happening."

biggrin.gif

Posted by: ManxRed Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 09:36
Post #1402163

Maybe he's just referring to his own Twitter account. In which case, it's true.

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 09:51
Post #1409508

Here's the transcript of Trump's remarks at a New York fundraiser last week about his tax breaks to encourage 'Clean Coal' and windmills.

We are doomed.

You remember Hilary with the coal, right? Sitting with the miners at the table? Remember?
That wasn’t so good for her. So the people of West Virginia sniff all over, you look at Wyoming, you look at so many different places where they just. Pennsylvania, where they loved what did, and it’s clean coal and we have the most modern procedures.
But it’s tremendous form of energy in the sense that in a military way - think of it - call is indestructible.

You can blow up a pipeline, you can blow up windmills. You know, the windmills, boom, boom, boom, bing, that’s the end of that one.
If birds don’t kill it first, the birds could kill it first. They kill so many birds. You look underneath one of those windmills, it’s like a killing field, the birds.
But you know, that’s what they were going to do, they were going to windmills.
And you know, don’t worry about when the wind doesn’t blow - I said,”What happens when the wind doesn’t blow? Well, then we have a problem”
OK, Good. They were putting them in areas where they didn’t have much wind too. And it’s a subsidary - you need subsidiary for windmills. You need subsidy.
Who wants to have energy where you need subsidy? So, the coal is doing great.

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 10:28
Post #1409526

Clearly preparing his 'not of sound mind' defence ready for the results of the Russian electoral interference enquiry.

The irony is here that Coal is dying in the USA and nothing he can do (short of truly huge subsidies) will reverse that, wind and solar are cheaper to install than any 'clean' (ahem) coal and much cheaper to run. But his defence of coal means they are not taking advantage of that to create American jobs in those two areas.

Of course the Chump branded and Chump election campaign goods are still made in China (Even the 'Make America Hate again' hats) and one of the few sectors not yet threatened with tariffs (quelle surprise!).

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 10:37
Post #1410085

Well that's now 5 Chump appointees who have plead or been found guilty of offences, plus the first two Congressmen to endorse his presidency campaign. Does anyone with the ability to think critically really believe Mueller won't be able to pin some serious offences on Trump? The GoP certainly think so or wouldn't be hell bent on trying to stop the investigation.

I guess that's one way to Drain the Swamp, by filling it first!

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 12:17
Post #1410124

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 11:37) *
I guess that's one way to Drain the Swamp, by filling it first!

It seems the chosen drainage method is to pump more solid s*** in to displace the water.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 18:20
Post #1410244

Trumps comments on todays events.

"I feel very badly for Paul Manafort and his wonderful family. “Justice” took a 12 year old tax case, among other things, applied tremendous pressure on him and, unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to “break” - make up stories in order to get a “deal.” Such respect for a brave man! A large number of counts, ten, could not even be decided in the Paul Manafort case. Witch Hunt!"

"Michael Cohen plead guilty to two counts of campaign finance violations that are not a crime."

A lawyer pleading guilty to things that aren't a crime?

Posted by: notmeatloaf Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 21:28
Post #1410301

I have got to the stage where I don't believe anything will happen. How many times have we heard "this is the last straw" and then everything rolls on.

It doesn't seem likely they will get a majority for impeachment. I can't see many Republicans wanting the most infamous president in US history to still be on people's lips many decades later.

He is struggling with the fact that, for the first time in his life, money doesn't make everything go away. But, being almost immune from prosecution and having large sections of the six fingered electorate on your side may well be enough.

Posted by: Redivi Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 23:48
Post #1410347

I rather think you're right

The Democrat leader in the House of Representatives has said that impeachment isn't a priority

Perhaps they're content, if the mid-terms give them majorities in both Houses, to leave him in office but not in power for two years - watching the wolves circle

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 10:00
Post #1410423

QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 00:48) *
I rather think you're right

The Democrat leader in the House of Representatives has said that impeachment isn't a priority

Perhaps they're content, if the mid-terms give them majorities in both Houses, to leave him in office but not in power for two years - watching the wolves circle

Successful impeachment of a popular president (as opposed to a totally unpopular one) is never going to happen. Why? Because the Senate is not a court of law, it is a body of democratically elected representatives, two from each State, each of whom are well aware of the popularity of the president in their respective State and--more importantly--how the people in their State would want them to decide the case against the president. They are hardly the equivalent of "impartial jurors". In addition, a 2/3 super-majority is required for conviction, so a massive shift in Trump's popularity (and the composition of the Senate) would have to have occurred before he was in any danger of conviction.

Trump is currently an "UGE" magnet for Democrat activism--why on Earth would they want to have him replaced by Pence?

--Churchmouse

Posted by: nigelbb Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 11:13
Post #1410452

QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 00:48) *
I rather think you're right

The Democrat leader in the House of Representatives has said that impeachment isn't a priority

Perhaps they're content, if the mid-terms give them majorities in both Houses, to leave him in office but not in power for two years - watching the wolves circle

It's also democratically more palatable & avoids the backlash from right wing loons if Trump was removed from office by the liberal elite in Washington.

Posted by: Redivi Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 12:21
Post #1410482

Nixon commented that impeachment starts as a criminal process but ends as a political one
He resigned before the end of the process when he lost his support

He was also scuppered by the Supreme Court that forced him to provide the evidence
Trump has been packing the Court to prevent this possibility

Clinton was impeached but who remembers or cares ?

Trump's tax giveaways to the super-rich have probably ensured that the paymasters of the best democracy money can buy will still regard him as good value

I can only see a successful impeachment if he provided Putin with something anti-American in return for the money and support
PaddyPower and Ladbrokes have shortened the odds to 6/4

One possible outcome is that the suspected decades of involvement with crime families will be confirmed
His brand will be so associated with corruption that nomination for a second term will be impossible

As the self-proclaimed great deal-maker, he might agree not to run for a second term in return for a no-impeachment deal






Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 12:31
Post #1410487

QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Wed, 22 Aug 2018 - 22:28) *
I can't see many Republicans wanting the most infamous president in US history to still be on people's lips many decades later.

They already have that 'honour' as Mr Richard Nixon was certainly not a democrat!

Democrats won't talk about impeachment being a priority until it becomes
1/ A slam dunk on 'enough' guilt
2/ They either have the majority or enough republican support
The last thing they want to do is go early and fail, it makes it harder later on, they'll wait until it becomes much more certain to succeed.

Look how long Nixon clung on for. He finally went in August '74, the investigation had been started in June '72 when the Watergate burglars were caught red handed and arrested, that also included an early clear obstruction of Justice and Nixon was re-elected in late '72 although it was still in the middle of the Vietnam war and voters are loath to vote out a sitting president then (historically).

Chump is polarising, he certainly still has support (high 30's to 40% from polls)in a core supporter base but also the worst negative ratings in history, if the Republicans bomb in the mid terms those up for re-election in 2020 may consider their tactical position. If you pay attention to US politics you'll know some American states with the bizarre (to me anyway) 'top two' primary system have already shut out republicans as the top two in the primaries were Democrats.

Posted by: stamfordman Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 13:04
Post #1410498

If you bear in mind the principles that the truth isn't the truth and facts aren't facts you won't go wrong in life.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 13:09
Post #1410501

That's hard when its clear principles aren't principles but can also be changed on a whim when it suites, alongside the 'truth' and the 'facts'.

Posted by: Redivi Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 13:45
Post #1410522

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Although a Senator in the Democrat Party, he was also an advisor to Richard Nixon
Wonder what advice he gave

Posted by: cp8759 Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 21:00
Post #1410669

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 14:04) *
If you bear in mind the principles that the truth isn't the truth and facts aren't facts you won't go wrong in life.

you don't need to go that far, you just have alternative facts.

Posted by: stamfordman Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 21:47
Post #1410687

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

Posted by: notmeatloaf Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 21:58
Post #1410690

I can imagine digging up dirt on the relationship between the two most powerful men in the world may be difficult. Trump may not be but Putin certainly is clever enough to cover his tracks well.

However, with enough dirt and Trump's Twitter account the bookies probably have it right.

Posted by: Redivi Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 23:07
Post #1410702

Trump's approval rating has taken a hit but still in the high 30s

Latest plan is to replace the Attorney General but has been advised to wait until after the mid-terms

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 24 Aug 2018 - 05:36
Post #1410709

Well yes he’s desperate to end the Mueller probe, the poisoness gnome has recused himself and Rosenstein isn’t playing ball, so he needs to get sessions replaced with someone who will end the investigation.

In other news long time friend and backer David ****** (his name is an American euphuism for your Johnson and rhyimes with Becker, owner of the national inquirer amongst others) has also flipped.

Trumps response on the Foxhole news was

QUOTE
Flipping almost ought to be outlawed


Now would someone who hadn’t done anything wrong want that?

Posted by: spanner345 Fri, 24 Aug 2018 - 08:15
Post #1410723

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta51i-vCL1U

Posted by: Redivi Fri, 24 Aug 2018 - 08:43
Post #1410737

The poem is a lot more coherent than his recent speeches

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=engxHpn_a5Q

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 24 Aug 2018 - 19:45
Post #1410966

And now the CFO and exec VP of the Chump organisation and treasurer of the Chump Foundation (Alan Weisselberg) has flipped as well, the house or cards is crumbling now.......

That’s 4 pleading guilty and flipping, one found guilty and two flipped. Just like a Mafia syndicate coming down.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 25 Aug 2018 - 20:36
Post #1411178

Trump has suggested that 'flipping' should be made illegal.

He is also suggesting he needs to get 'involved' in the 'Witch Hunt' and sort it out.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 26 Aug 2018 - 11:04
Post #1411259

Hmm, that sounds like the definition of obstruction of justice.

I wonder how many will still say it’s a witch hunt once we know everything the enquiry knows.

Noting that the latest revelations show Trump DID NOT pay for the hush money himself as conveniently claimed, but instead it was paid out of the company as legal expanses, a clear campaign finance violation. Yes they actually have the paper trail from within Chump towers.

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 14:36
Post #1413224

Speaking at a Fundraiser over the weekend trump says of the Democrats

" They're going to raid your Medicare to pay for Socialism. It's a big statement, they're going to raid your Medicare.
They're going to take your medicare, that's to pay for Socialism."

This is from the man that approved big cuts in Medicare to pay for tax cuts for the top 1%.

Of Canada he said

"There is no political necessity to keep Canada in the new NAFTA deal.
If we don’t make a fair deal for the U.S. after decades of abuse, Canada will be out.
Congress should not interfere w/ these negotiations or I will simply terminate NAFTA entirely & we will be far better off.
Remember, NAFTA was one of the WORST Trade Deals ever made. "

and

"We shouldn’t have to buy our friends with bad Trade Deals and Free Military Protection!"


Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 05:33
Post #1413336

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 15:36) *
" They're going to raid your Medicare to pay for Socialism. It's a big statement, they're going to raid your Medicare.
They're going to take your medicare, that's to pay for Socialism."

Erm....Medicare (or better still single payer) IS Socialism.....

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 22:52
Post #1413609

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 06:33) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 15:36) *
" They're going to raid your Medicare to pay for Socialism. It's a big statement, they're going to raid your Medicare.
They're going to take your medicare, that's to pay for Socialism."

Erm....Medicare (or better still single payer) IS Socialism.....



He knows his supporters won't get the connection.
Then when he raids Medicare again to pay for another tax cut he can blame the Dems.

Posted by: Churchmouse Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 08:53
Post #1413666

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 23:52) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 06:33) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 15:36) *
" They're going to raid your Medicare to pay for Socialism. It's a big statement, they're going to raid your Medicare.
They're going to take your medicare, that's to pay for Socialism."

Erm....Medicare (or better still single payer) IS Socialism.....



He knows his supporters won't get the connection.
Then when he raids Medicare again to pay for another tax cut he can blame the Dems.

You're making him out like an evil genius...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 5 Sep 2018 - 17:38
Post #1414158

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:53) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 23:52) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 06:33) *
QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 15:36) *
" They're going to raid your Medicare to pay for Socialism. It's a big statement, they're going to raid your Medicare.
They're going to take your medicare, that's to pay for Socialism."

Erm....Medicare (or better still single payer) IS Socialism.....



He knows his supporters won't get the connection.
Then when he raids Medicare again to pay for another tax cut he can blame the Dems.

You're making him out like an evil genius...

--Churchmouse



Well, he thinks he is.

Today he said

"Almost everyone agrees that my Administration has done more in less than two years than any other Administration in the history of our Country. I’m tough as hell on people & if I weren’t, nothing would get done. Also, I question everybody & everything-which is why I got elected!"


Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 06:14
Post #1414225

Almost everyone I guess means about 25% of the population which is about 60% of his core base.

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 25 Sep 2018 - 21:08
Post #1419707

The world laughed at him live on TV.

Posted by: stamfordman Tue, 25 Sep 2018 - 21:27
Post #1419710

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 25 Sep 2018 - 22:08) *
The world laughed at him live on TV.



He did manage to unite the nations though.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 26 Sep 2018 - 05:02
Post #1419737

Republicans are down massively in Polling for the mid terms, other than Fox news most predictions are for the Democrats to have a big majority in the house of representatives and its going to be very close in the Senate (as the numbers not needing re-election in this cycle are 23 Republicans and 19 Democrats), Fox are just saying its too close to call.

The Chump camp are getting spooked as I'm sure impeachment is a fair bit more likely without his lackeys being in charge of both houses, even Texas is too close to call for heavens sake!

Posted by: Tank Engine Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:03
Post #1426531

Why am I unsurprised that [Mod edit] are found in this thread, busy degrading the best President the USA has had for ages.

You've got to go back to Nixon to find a President as effective. De-escalated USSR and China issues, detente, out of Vietnam. Obama isn't the recent worst - that title goes to Dubya.

A hint [Mod edit]: being a "nice guy" is, if anything, an undesirable trait in a US President. Carter, for example, was wildly dangerous.

Unlike the chatterati here, my Trump-number is 2, with 6 or more routes. So I've plenty to base my opinions on.

Trump-number 0 is a singleton set, Donald himself.
Trump-number 1 is all those who aren't T0 who've spent many hours in personal F2F meetings with T0 in recent years.
Trump-number 2 is all those who aren't T0 or T1 who've spent many hours in personal meetings with a T1 in recent years.
etc.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:18
Post #1426536

Wibble wibble wibble

DNFTT

Posted by: Tank Engine Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:39
Post #1426545

QUOTE (Fredd @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:18) *
Wibble wibble wibble
DNFTT
Inferiority complex showing again... sad. biggrin.gif

Posted by: Unzippy Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 04:57
Post #1426571

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:03) *
You've got to go back to Nixon to find a President as effective.


Effective at what?

Posted by: nigelbb Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 05:12
Post #1426572

QUOTE (Unzippy @ Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 05:57) *
QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 22:03) *
You've got to go back to Nixon to find a President as effective.


Effective at what?

Bringing the office of President into disrepute.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 06:05
Post #1426576

Built that wall?
Repealed Obama care and replaced it with something better? (Who knew healthcare could be so hard after all?)
Chosen ‘the best people’?
Drained the swamp?
Carpet bombed ISIS?

Or
Jailed young children of ASYLUM SEEKERS in open cage pens, getting the kids (aged as young as 6) to sign disclaimer documents while the 'responsible adult' being from ICE (no conflict of interest there).
Handed out massive tax cuts to the rich
Reversed the activity of the EPA in protecting Americans
Badly let down the American citizens of Puerta Rico who are still in dire straights with respect to power and water
Ruined Medicare by squeezing budgets without actually repealing OR adding something better
Had the highest turnover in key positions ever
The most scandals in key positions ever, he filled the swamp
The highest number of prosecutions of people who were in key positions ever
Still only filled 2/3 of the White House staff positions, but many he has filled are with complete incompetents like Betsy DeVoss, or Ben Carson.
A 2 year investigation into Russian collusion, if they had found nothing it would have been done in 4-6months, the final report is expected next month.
Can’t stop lying, ever, he lies so much if he said his house was white I’d have to go check it still was. Starting with biggest inauguration audience ever (period) and hasn’t stopped since. According to non partisan Politifact 85% of his facts are wrong, yes 85%, I mean you couldn’t even be that bad accidentally!
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Having some experience of dealing with one, it seems to me pretty clear that Trump is a sociopath, or at least has strong sociopathic tendencies.

Effective, yes, just not at being a good president. In 20 days the US will speak. A blue wave is coming, the GOP will lose the house, the senate is too close to call, in some states there has been as much as a 15% swing according to the polls, even Fox (to be renamed Trump) news polls.

Posted by: Tank Engine Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 18:52
Post #1426734

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 06:05) *
(snipperation)

TL;DR - PN,A

Upper limit established @110. So, 4+ gap confirmed. Where's the forum Ignore button, chief? S/N near-intolerable as it stands.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 19:12
Post #1426741

Of course, I shouldn’t expect a Trump supporter to be able to read that far, sorry.

Posted by: Fredd Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 19:42
Post #1426745

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 19:52) *
Where's the forum Ignore button, chief?

I'm surprised you have to ask!

Posted by: Tank Engine Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 12:37
Post #1426894

QUOTE (Fredd @ Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 19:42) *
QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Fri, 19 Oct 2018 - 19:52) *
Where's the forum Ignore button, chief?

I'm surprised you have to ask!


"Yuuge" enough for him to win, despite almost all the MSM being against him, and with his campaign spending only a dime to every quarter of Biliary's... ;-)

How silly people are in assessing greatness. Their mental forebears probably howled at Churchill too, as a xenophobic warmonger.

There's no cure for stupid, and the groupthink makes it worse.

Posted by: Spandex Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 13:06
Post #1426906

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 23:03) *
Trump-number 0 is a singleton set, Donald himself.
Trump-number 1 is all those who aren't T0 who've spent many hours in personal F2F meetings with T0 in recent years.
Trump-number 2 is all those who aren't T0 or T1 who've spent many hours in personal meetings with a T1 in recent years.
etc.

That is just brilliant.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 19:31
Post #1426991

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 13:37) *
"Yuuge" enough for him to win, despite almost all the MSM being against him, and with his campaign spending only a dime to every quarter of Biliary's... ;-)

More alternative facts? Certainly Clinton spent more, but less than twice as much, not 2.5 times as much, still expecting a chimp supporter to cope with that maths is optimistic.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-fundraising/

Posted by: Tank Engine Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 19:34
Post #1426993

Space below for the stalker.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 19:39
Post #1426995


Posted by: Tank Engine Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 19:41
Post #1426996

QUOTE (Spandex @ Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 13:06) *
QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 23:03) *
Trump-number 0 is a singleton set, Donald himself.
Trump-number 1 is all those who aren't T0 who've spent many hours in personal F2F meetings with T0 in recent years.
Trump-number 2 is all those who aren't T0 or T1 who've spent many hours in personal meetings with a T1 in recent years.
etc.

That is just brilliant.

?
No; if you're being serious, you're evidently not a mathematician. It's just an extension of this system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s_number

My paper-publishing days being over. Erdos popped his clogs decades ago. My Erdos Number, which is not 1, is definitely stable. A reely smart person can work out for certain what my Erdos number is from those facts.

However, I intend to decrement my Trump Number in 2019.

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 20:20
Post #1427008

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 20:41) *
No; if you're being serious, you're evidently not a mathematician.

From someone who struggles to divide 1191 by 692 and realise it’s a value less than 2, that’s amusing.

And I’m just a humble engineer.

Posted by: Tank Engine Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 00:21
Post #1427054

I shouldn't be this indulgent - still can't find the Ignore. I'm not silly enough to allow Fredd's Java to pollute my sandbox, which may be why the dropdowns don't work.

> divide 1191 by 692 and realise it’s a value less than 2

I doubt you know very much about what's in, and what's not in, those numbers you cite.

Say... in the treatment of PAC / SuperPAC expenditure. Thought not.

And expenditure incurred, some of it very discreetly, by the respective parties prior to the narrowing of the field to 1 vs. 1. The democRats managed to spend a lot on promoting the racist Biliary even when she had plenty of other dR rivals (they knew she would get through). We include that, as well as the nummer-padding candidates who were known would drop out and endorse Biliary.

Donald had no such Rep. help during those stages.

My total figures (significantly higher) come direct from KEC, and the ratio was 0.43:1, or roughly a dime to a quarter. You are just citing the stat. disclosure ones, lol.

Since you probably think "gullible" is a pukka word found in real dickies, and your figures come from KFC or the Bilkopedia, it wouldn't occur to you that given the humiliation of such a defeat as the delusional, bullet-dodging, India-hating liar suffered, the partisan media would spread a lot of the proverbial trying to minimise quite how much the dR-side wasted.

Carry on. I won't be here long - I know from many previous encounters how fragile are the egos of Fredd and, more recently, sp.

> > A reely smart person can work out for certain what my Erdos number is from those facts.

Still waiting. Simple if one is a logical engineer, instead of merely one whose logic is poorly engineered?


Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 08:00
Post #1427066

You stated the money spent by them, you are now adding money spent by unrelated parties and have of course missed off the money that was indisputably spent by the Russian government (with or without collusion which is the legal issue).

Still I don’t expect you to understand that.

As an aside you earlier mentioned the Chumps achievements without actually giving any, I gave you a long list of negative ones you couldn’t read, perhaps you could give me any list of his achievements.

At the end you can add approving the continued arms sales to a foreign dictatorship that has admitted sending a specialist team to illegally kidnap a journalist and who were so incompetent (despite having a long list of specialists) that not only did they kill him ‘accidentally’ but then instead of coming clean spent 17 days denying it and and doing their level best to clean up the mess (badly). Donald Trump seems to believe the stated intended actions entirely acceptable by calling their investigation a good first step!

Posted by: baggins1234 Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 08:52
Post #1427073

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 01:21) *
I won't be here long


Hopefully this isn’t fake news.......


Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 12:01
Post #1427103

In March, Trump said that Saudi military deals would produce 40,000 jobs.

A week ago, he made it 450,000 jobs.

Wednesday, 500,000 jobs.

Yesterday afternoon, 600,000 jobs.

Yesterday evening: "The million jobs."

He hasn't said what the deals are.




Trump confirms US will withdraw from key arms control treaty

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/412401-trump-confirms-us-will-withdraw-from-key-arms-control-treaty

Cold War 2 on the way.

Posted by: stamfordman Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 13:46
Post #1427125

https://ibb.co/bzKgvf

Posted by: Spandex Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 17:59
Post #1427177

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Sat, 20 Oct 2018 - 20:41) *
No; if you're being serious, you're evidently not a mathematician. It's just an extension of this system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s_number

Lol. It was more the fact that someone might actually care what their Trump-number was that amazed me.

Posted by: andy_foster Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 18:06
Post #1427180

In theory, the regulars on this site all have a relatively low Trump number (if you ignore the F2F element), as the 'old guard' have (or had) connections with someone who is a friend of Nige's.

Posted by: Tank Engine Tue, 23 Oct 2018 - 22:11
Post #1427924

QUOTE (andy_foster @ Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 18:06) *
Nige's.

Whose? 0:-)

But seriously, what are the many losers here going to squeal when Donald wins his second term? Save for some awful tragedy - the sort the Secret Service and medics exist to prevent - it's a slam dunk.

Assuming he wants to stand, that is.

I'd counsel him not to. He's already MAGA.

The US equivalent of ignorant ingrates like you lot exist, and bark loudly.

- - -

Just as an aside, why do you think that stating the truth in all circumstances is a desirable attribute in a US President?

Strangely naive...

Now, that dreadful Clinton woman was and is a whopping liar, and an odious racist too, but those aren't the main reasons why she's unfit for any high public office.

Posted by: Unzippy Wed, 24 Oct 2018 - 00:28
Post #1427945

QUOTE (Tank Engine @ Tue, 23 Oct 2018 - 23:11) *
Now, that dreadful Clinton woman was and is a whopping liar, and an odious racist too, but those aren't the main reasons why she's unfit for any high public office.



You seem to have spelt Trump wrong..

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 24 Oct 2018 - 08:13
Post #1427969

Its hard to see how anyone can call Clinton a liar and odious racist while supporting the Chump who is an even bigger one of both (on the liar front that's a proven fact). Admittedly I have very little time for her and thought she was a dreadful candidate, Trump promised to change the status quo (which Clinton very much stood for) which I can see would be attractive, the trouble is it was quite clear that what he said and what he would do were clearly different, however his core voters were generally the poorly (non college) educated who didn't see through him.

They are starting to though
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

I certainly don't brown nose, and have had my share of tickings off thanks, but I don't expect you to research that better than anything else you research, (like how the Police can find out who's driving a car).

Posted by: ManxRed Thu, 25 Oct 2018 - 10:28
Post #1428407

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45973436

Well, it's clearly not his fault is it?

He's obviously had the word hypocrisy tipp-exed from his dictionary.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 25 Oct 2018 - 11:22
Post #1428427

QUOTE
Mr Trump also called for more civility in public life, saying: "Those engaged in the political arena must stop treating political opponents as being morally defective.

Yes because he never chanted 'lock her up', make fun of a disabled journalist, made fun of the Muslim parents of a US Army Captain killed in Iraq, called Ted Cruz's wife ugly and accused his father of being part of a Kennedy assassination plot and referred to Cruz as "Lyin' Ted" near continually did he?

Posted by: Unzippy Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 04:09
Post #1441635

For an alleged "successful bushiness man" how unprofessional can you be? What an absolute child!

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/donald-trump-in-extraordinary-oval-office-spat-with-chuck-and-nancy-20181212-p50lna.html

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 20:28
Post #1441857

More to the point

Michael Cohen blames Trump's 'dirty deeds' as he is jailed

QUOTE
US President Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen, who once said he’d take a bullet for him, has lashed out at his ex-boss' "dirty deeds" as he was given a 36-month prison sentence.
Cohen is the first member of Mr Trump's inner circle to be jailed over the special counsel's inquiry into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
He admitted lying to Congress, campaign finance violations and tax evasion.

QUOTE
The disgraced attorney told Judge William Pauley on Wednesday that Mr Trump had caused him to "follow a path of darkness rather than light".
He told the court his "weakness was a blind loyalty to Donald Trump" and that he "felt it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds".


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46546238

Domino? Falling?

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 09:05
Post #1444269

Well the net is closing, first there was Chump University, now the Chump foundation has been found to be no more than a tax efficient extension of the Chump bank account and been forced to close and all the directors (Chump and kids) barred from being a director for a charitable organisation for life.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/18/trump-foundation-shutdown-lawsuit

Current ongoing investigations....
Campaign finance violations
Inauguration committee violations
Collusion with Russia over their interference into the US election
Collusion with Wikileaks over the material they published (obtained from Russian agents) that affected the US election
Interference by the middle east (Saudi Arabia mostly, aka Mohammed Bin Salman the accuised journalist murderer Trump is covering up for) in the election
Manaforts link to a Russian Oligarch and how that may have influenced the election
Chump tower Moscow and the ongoing negotiations with the Russian government including the offer of an illegal bribe to Putin to push it through
Potentially 14 members of the campaign had direct links to the Russian gov't or representatives of it
Obstruction of justice relating to the FBI investigation into Russian connections with the campaign
Investigation into the flow of money into the 'America Now' Super PAC which supported the Chump campaign and Manafort had connections to it
A Number of lobbyists linked to the Chump campaign who were receiving money from foreign governments without declaring (as Flynn and Manafort have already plead/been found guilty of)
Funding of the Chump campaign by the NRA which was arranged by Paul Erickson, the 'boyfriend' of the Russian agent Maria Butina
Investigation into the election meddling by Elena Khusyaynova (Another Russian agent), why this is a separate investigation isn't clear but its almost certain there is a good reason
The Turkish influence on the campaign, transition team and government via Michael Flynn who was still a paid agent of Turkey when the National Security Adviser
Investigation into the Chumps Tax affairs by the New York state attorney which has identified 'over $400M' of tax avoidance they wish to clarify the status of (Avoidance or Evasion)
Emoluments breaches (potentially multiple) where the Chump empire has benefited financially from his activity as president and that the 'blind trust' isn't properly blind in that the Trustees are his children and many serve the White House as well.

Yup 2 down (100% success rate to date) 15 to go. It's just as well he's a 'real stable genius' or he could be in big trouble.

We'll gloss over the other scandals in the administration (such as Scott Pruett) and the fact that he struggles to recruit anyone new right now (the chalice seems a little toxic) and had to double up the appointments to get a Chief of staff.

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 21 Dec 2018 - 00:17
Post #1444540

Now his Sec of Defence has resigned over his pullout from Syria leaving the floor to Russia and Iran

"Because you have the right to have a secretary of defense whose views better align with yours....I believe it is right for me to step down from my position"

The letter is actually more damning than this quote. Mattis basically says alliances matter, Russia & China are not our friends, I've formed these opinions over 40 yrs, you disagree with me so goodbye.

Full letter

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5655957-Letter-From-Secretary-James-N-Mattis

Trump is spinning it as a retirement.

No Secretary of Defence, no Attorney General, no Chief of Staff, His lawyer in jail, his charity forcibly wound up and the trustees still open to prosecution.

Forgot. Congress (controlled by his own party just voted to ens military cooperation and aid with Saudi Arabia and hold the Crown Prince directly responsible for the murder of a US resident journalist in their Turkish Embassy contrary to Trumps official position.

Also Congress passed bill to avoid attempted shut-down by trump over funding for his 'Beautiful Wall'

I hear Trump is asking Col. Sanders to be his new S of Defense.

The Republican Party just merged their 2020 campaign organisation with the Trump Re-election campaign.
The new campaign is called 'Trump Victory'
It means that for the first time there will be no official 'Primaries' and no other candidates for election by the Republican party.

the party is now officially the trump Party.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 21 Dec 2018 - 10:29
Post #1444605

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Fri, 21 Dec 2018 - 00:17) *
The Republican Party just merged their 2020 campaign organisation with the Trump Re-election campaign.
The new campaign is called 'Trump Victory'
It means that for the first time there will be no official 'Primaries' and no other candidates for election by the Republican party.

the party is now officially the trump Party.

Which definition of "officially" are you using? One state (South Carolina) is mulling whether to hold a 2020 primary, given Trump's popularity (amazingly, still very high). Not that it would exactly be shocking if they decided not to waste their money on one. There were no second-term Republican primaries in South Carolina for Reagan or G.W. Bush, either.

The "Trump Victory" merged campaign stategy does exist, but that "It means that for the first time there will be no official 'Primaries' and no other candidates for election by the Republican party" is not just fake news, it's false news.

In fact, this is exactly the sort of ridiculous, bias-confirming nonsense that Trump's idiot supporters gleefully tell each other in their own reality free safe spaces. From your previous posts in this thread, you obviously do the same in your side's echo chambers, and you've now "officially" lost the ability to think critically about what you're being told. Congratulations.

Trump's numerous legal troubles could easily derail his 2020 campaign, and I'm sure there are plenty of potential challengers just waiting in the wings for the smoking gun to be revealed.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 22:00
Post #1445014

How can there be any other official party candidates for primaries if the official party campaign is 'Trump Victory'?


Where is the popularity of Trump 'amazingly still very high'?

I would like to see some figures on that.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 23 Dec 2018 - 16:43
Post #1445127

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 22:00) *
Where is the popularity of Trump 'amazingly still very high'?

Poorer, less well educated registered Republican voters, making it almost impossible right now for anyone else to win a primary.

Posted by: The Rookie Sun, 23 Dec 2018 - 21:31
Post #1445197

Well the Chump has thrown a hissy fit over Mattis’s resignation letter and he’s now replaced as of 1/1/19 not 1/3/19 as intended.

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 23 Dec 2018 - 22:10
Post #1445201

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 23 Dec 2018 - 21:31) *
Well the Chump has thrown a hissy fit over Mattis’s resignation letter and he’s now replaced as of 1/1/19 not 1/3/19 as intended.



I am sure the folks in uniform won't miss the implications of switching from a Marine veteran to a Boeing executive.

Posted by: Churchmouse Mon, 24 Dec 2018 - 17:20
Post #1445297

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 22:00) *
How can there be any other official party candidates for primaries if the official party campaign is 'Trump Victory'?


Where is the popularity of Trump 'amazingly still very high'?

I would like to see some figures on that.

Just what the CNN story said: "As one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history, Trump could face a challenge from Ohio Gov. John Kasich, among others. But no one has officially jumped into the race, and the President is still overwhelmingly popular with Republican voters."

Incumbents always have a big advantage over internal challengers. It's usually because it's hard to argue with success (or raise money for a primary campaign); in the 2012 Democrat primary Obama's challengers only managed to qualify for the ballot in eight states, and he ended up winning 100% of the pledged delegates' votes. You could argue that the millions of dollars spent by the Democrat party on holding primaries in 2012 was just wasted.

In Trump's case, I have no idea why he has even one supporter, much less the millions and millions of them he apparently still enjoys. But, you're probably right that Trump would seek to manipulate the primaries to eliminate any challengers. But it's a moot point at the moment, as there aren't any challengers...

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 24 Dec 2018 - 17:32
Post #1445298

If the Chump is impeached or decides to do a Nixon and resign to avoid impeachment then clearly the field will be wide open.

Even die hard Chump supporters are starting is think that there maybe in some of these accusations....... after all the Chump University scam is now proven the Foundation scam is very likely to be proven in the next 2-3 months when they agree to wind it up and to not be trustees ever again.

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 26 Dec 2018 - 23:56
Post #1445610

NYT: Podiatrist’s Daughters Say He Diagnosed Trump With Bone Spurs During War As A ‘Favor’
The diagnosis allowed Donald Trump to get a medical exemption that allowed him to avoid the draft during the Vietnam War.

Dr. Elysa Braunstein and Sharon Kessel — the daughters of Dr. Larry Braunstein, who died in 2007 — say their father was one of Fred Trump’s tenants at the time, setting up his podiatry practice in the Trump-owned Edgerton Apartments in Jamaica, Queens. Though they are unsure whether their dad actually examined the then 22-year-old Donald Trump, the sisters say that he often spoke of signing off on the diagnosis that kept Trump out of the war. The doctor also gave them the impression that Trump didn’t actually have bone spurs, but he said otherwise to help keep him out of the draft, they say.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 27 Dec 2018 - 02:21
Post #1445613

As the Chump, when asked, couldn’t recal whether the spurs were in one foot - and which - or both, it’s pretty clear that they were made up to avoid the draft.

Posted by: Churchmouse Thu, 27 Dec 2018 - 12:57
Post #1445694

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 26 Dec 2018 - 23:56) *
NYT: Podiatrist’s Daughters Say He Diagnosed Trump With Bone Spurs During War As A ‘Favor’
The diagnosis allowed Donald Trump to get a medical exemption that allowed him to avoid the draft during the Vietnam War.

Dr. Elysa Braunstein and Sharon Kessel — the daughters of Dr. Larry Braunstein, who died in 2007 — say their father was one of Fred Trump’s tenants at the time, setting up his podiatry practice in the Trump-owned Edgerton Apartments in Jamaica, Queens. Though they are unsure whether their dad actually examined the then 22-year-old Donald Trump, the sisters say that he often spoke of signing off on the diagnosis that kept Trump out of the war. The doctor also gave them the impression that Trump didn’t actually have bone spurs, but he said otherwise to help keep him out of the draft, they say.

Are you offering this tasty morsel of timely tabloid hearsay because Trump's veracity is somehow questionable?

--Churchmouse

Posted by: captain swoop Fri, 28 Dec 2018 - 20:13
Post #1445920

trump tweeted

The United States looses soooo much money on Trade with Mexico under NAFTA, over 75 Billion Dollars a year (not including Drug Money which would be many times that amount), that I would consider closing the Southern Border a “profit making operation.”

Didn't he recently personally renegotiate the trade agreement to be the best ever trade agreement?

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 3 Jan 2019 - 22:46
Post #1447333

Some of trumps best bits from his Cabinet Meeting

"Russia used to be the Soviet Union. Afghanistan made it Russia because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan. Russia."

"I had a meeting at the Pentagon with lots of generals. They were like from a movie. Better looking than Tom Cruise, & stronger. And I had more generals than I've ever seen, & we were at the bottom of this incredible room. I said, 'this is greatest room I've ever seen."

"I saw more computer boards than I think that they make today."

"I just got a great letter from Kim Jong Un. The few people that I've showed this letter to - they've never written letters like that. This letter is a great letter"

If I hadn't won you'd be having a nice big fat war in Asia"

"I've heard numbers as high as $275 billion we lose on illegal immigration."

"I was here on Christmas evening, I was all by myself in the White House. That's a big, big house. Except for all the guys out on the lawn with machine guns... I was hoping that maybe somebody would come back and negotiate."

"When they say the wall is immoral, then you better do something about the Vatican. The Vatican has the biggest wall of them all. They work 100%. Never going to change. A wall is a wall."

"The reason it's down is because I called up some of the OPEC people, I say 'don't do it.' I called up certain people and I said 'let that damn oil and gasoline, you let it flow,' the oil."

"Look, we don't want Syria, we're talking about sand and death. That's what we're talking about. We're not talking about wealth. We're talking about sand and death."

"Why isn't Russia there? Why isn't India there? Why isn't Pakistan there? Why are we there? We're 6,000 miles away? But I don't mind"

"I think I would have been a good general."

"I don't think anybody would have been able to do the tax cuts like I did. We got the greatest tax cuts ever."

"I could be the most popular person in Europe. I could run for any office if I wanted to. I don't want to."

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 11:45
Post #1457058

So after 35 days of government shutdown the Chump has caved in, accepting the deal that was on the table before the shutdown even began.

Of course Fox news are terming it a strategic withdrawal (yeah, like back 35 days!).

So much for being a great deal maker!

Estimated unrecoverable loss to GDP for 2019 is $5B.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 14:35
Post #1457154

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 11:45) *
Estimated unrecoverable loss to GDP for 2019 is $5B.


Posted by: Unzippy Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 02:17
Post #1457770

Apparently God wanted Trump as President, so everything's alright now.

biggrin.gif rolleyes.gif

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066659

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 08:09
Post #1457778

In the latest twist the discovery material shared with the Russian company Concord management (indited by the Mueller probe as part of the collusion investigation) has now appeared on line, purportedly hacked from the investigations servers but in reality almost certainly provided by Concord (therefor unlawfully), however it's been edited to make it look less damming.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/30/mueller-evidence-leaked-online-russians

In other words Russia is still batting for Trump. I'm not sure which way this will sway public opinion in the US, I suspect both sides will just use it to reinforce there current viewpoint.

Posted by: Redivi Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 09:58
Post #1457814

QUOTE (Unzippy @ Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 02:17) *
Apparently God wanted Trump as President, so everything's alright now.

biggrin.gif rolleyes.gif

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066659

Very likely if He wants to teach the country a lesson

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 12:08
Post #1457866

QUOTE (Redivi @ Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 09:58) *
QUOTE (Unzippy @ Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 02:17) *
Apparently God wanted Trump as President, so everything's alright now.

biggrin.gif rolleyes.gif

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066659

Very likely if He wants to teach the country a lesson

Well, the logic is inescapable: God is all-knowing and all-powerful; therefore, everything that happens is "God's will". But it's still a bit disturbing whenever government officials publicly admit to believing in this nonsense. It's rare here, but very common in parts of the USA.

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 12:38
Post #1457884

As pretty much all the Trump has left as a support base is the evangelicals, its obvious why his regime wants to keep them onside.

Next we'll be talking about creationism and the ark!

Jesus was of course a white Aryan who would be aloud to immigrate not a Palestinian who would not.......

Posted by: Harnes Sat, 2 Feb 2019 - 08:37
Post #1458128

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 1 Feb 2019 - 12:38) *
As pretty much all the Trump has left as a support base is the evangelicals, its obvious why his regime wants to keep them onside.

Next we'll be talking about creationism and the ark!

Jesus was of course a white Aryan who would be allowed to immigrate not a Palestinian who would not.......


FTFY

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 2 Feb 2019 - 11:03
Post #1458154

Ta....

Posted by: captain swoop Sun, 3 Feb 2019 - 20:00
Post #1458465

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 11:45) *
So after 35 days of government shutdown the Chump has caved in, accepting the deal that was on the table before the shutdown even began.

Of course Fox news are terming it a strategic withdrawal (yeah, like back 35 days!).

So much for being a great deal maker!

Estimated unrecoverable loss to GDP for 2019 is $5B.



He wanted to get out of the WH and go play some golf in Florida is what happened.

I like his statement slagging off his own Intelligence services because they don't agree with his version of events.

QUOTE
The Intelligence people seem to be extremely passive and naive when it comes to the dangers of Iran.
They are wrong! When I became President Iran was making trouble all over the Middle East, and beyond.
Since ending the terrible Iran Nuclear Deal, they are MUCH different, but a source of potential danger and conflict.
They are testing Rockets (last week) and more, and are coming very close to the edge.
There economy is now crashing, which is the only thing holding them back.
Be careful of Iran. Perhaps Intelligence should go back to school!


Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 08:10
Post #1458537

'There economy'?

So they are dangerous because their economy is crashing.

Their economy is crashing because he threw out an international agreement and imposed severe sanctions on them.

And he says THEY are dangerous?

Oh well at least the Chump negotiated for 'Little rocket man' to end his drive towards getting nuclear weapons.....Oh no sorry, he weakened the US South Korea partnership for a vague promise to talk about doing it.....

The Republicans are in for a real hiding in 2020!

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 11:23
Post #1458580

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 08:10) *
'There economy'?

So they are dangerous because their economy is crashing.

Their economy is crashing because he threw out an international agreement and imposed severe sanctions on them.

And he says THEY are dangerous?

Oh well at least the Chump negotiated for 'Little rocket man' to end his drive towards getting nuclear weapons.....Oh no sorry, he weakened the US South Korea partnership for a vague promise to talk about doing it.....

The Republicans are in for a real hiding in 2020!



That's another 'bone of contention' between him and his intelligence services.
He says Kim is 'denuclearising' but Intelligence services say there is no sign of it and there is increased building and development at various test and missile sites.
Kim himself says he will only 'denuclearise' if the Americans do.

Trump supporters cite the Bush era 'intelligence reports' of Saddam's supposed WMDs as reason not to trust what the CIA etc say.
He forgets that it wasn't' the CIA etc that made the claims, it was Bush and Rumsfeld that cherry picked information and presented a distorted and inaccurate report to Congress to justify the war.
Similar to what Trump is doing, but even Bush didn't slag off the CIA in publics.
His supporters are claiming that along with the DOJ and FBI, the CIA and NSA are also part of the 'Deep State' out to get Trump.

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 11:44
Post #1458590

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 11:23) *
His supporters are claiming that along with the DOJ and FBI, the CIA and NSA are also part of the 'Deep State' out to get Trump.

I wish they were!

Fact is he's just a bumbling fool, not terribly bright and a clear sociopath.

What I don't get is how his supporters still trust his word after he's 'CHANGED HIS OWN FACTS' on various things and numerous times, such as the payments to Stephanie Clifford, the wall (it's not being built, its being built, they've built 115 miles already), the infamous meeting in Trump Towers with a Russian Lawyer, the continued negotiations to built Chump Tower Moscow, the release of his tax returns and so on, he can't lie straight in bed, yet everyone else is lying!

Posted by: captain swoop Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 20:10
Post #1458758

In an interview over the weekend he said he is going to use the State of the Nation speech declare a 'National Emergency'
this will allow him to send the Army Corps of Engineers to the border to start building the wall using military resource.
It also gives him the power to use 'Eminent Domain' to take the land needed and pay minimal compensation in return.

Then he changes his mind and says his speech will be 'bi-partisan' and will bring the country together.


This is going to go down well smile.gif

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 5 Feb 2019 - 09:19
Post #1458863

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 11:23) *
He says Kim is 'denuclearising'...


I'm sorry, but there is no way he can pronounce 'denuclearising'!

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 5 Feb 2019 - 14:02
Post #1458956

Now the inauguration committee has been subpoenaed over where the circa $117M came from and more crucially where it went.....

There has already been reports of some of the money being used to hire Trump tower venues at three times the normal price (which just about matches the definition of money laundering).

Posted by: Charlie1010 Fri, 8 Feb 2019 - 06:48
Post #1459939

Even Republicans in Alaska are turning their backs on him according to my relatives out there.

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 09:45
Post #1460317

So, Trump is finally going to Vietnam. Fifty years too late but at least he will get there.

He seems to be timing his summit with Kim for the day Michael Cohen testifies before congress.

Posted by: DastardlyDick Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 18:19
Post #1460708

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 09:45) *
So, Trump is finally going to Vietnam. Fifty years too late but at least he will get there.

He seems to be timing his summit with Kim for the day Michael Cohen testifies before congress.


Does Vietnam have an extradition treaty with the US, or is this just an attempt to bury bad news?

Posted by: The Rookie Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 16:12
Post #1462735

So the Chump declares a national emergency in order to get funding for the border wall that Mexico is going to be paying for from the Military budget, then heads of to Mar-e-Largo to play golf. I’m not sure he understands ‘emergency’!

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 16 Feb 2019 - 19:04
Post #1462764

When this gets to court (as it will when he tries to implement it) won't his statement in his speech that "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster." admitting there isn't actually an emergency?

Posted by: DastardlyDick Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:59
Post #1463187

Quite a clever move on Chump's part - divert defence spending, then put a bill before Congress giving Defence an extra $5bn to replace it - nobody will oppose that if they value their political life!
Pelosi came up with a good point - if Chump gets away with it, the next Democrat President could impose Gun Control and tell the NRA where to shove their opposition.

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 11:18
Post #1463197

Which is why many Republicans are nervous about the precedent being set....

Gun control after a mass shooting (a bad one like Orlando or Virginia Tech or Vegas) is much close to a national emergency.

The other issue is that the constitution specifically lays out that Congress is responsible for allocating spending, the Military cannot act on US soil (national guard have to do that) so you have the additional block that the military cannot fund the national emergency resolution on US soil anyway.....Only if the wall is to be built in Mexico!

Posted by: Fredd Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 12:59
Post #1463238

That's why the Trumpers are having to raid military construction funds - which fairly obviously can be for activities on US soil.

Posted by: Spandex Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 22:34
Post #1463452

Declaring a national emergency in order to get stuff done isn’t really setting that much of a precedent, it seems:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/presidents-national-emergencies/

Clearly, building the wall is a stupid waste of money, designed solely to placate his racist base, but declaring a national emergency to do it is possibly not as controversial as it might first appear.

Posted by: cp8759 Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 01:04
Post #1463490

QUOTE (Spandex @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 22:34) *
Clearly, building the wall is a stupid waste of money, designed solely to placate his racist base, but declaring a national emergency to do it is possibly not as controversial as it might first appear.

If they built it like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxV3FgSFB-k it may well prove to be very effective, whether it would be worth the cost is another matter.

I find the views expressed by many people in the UK to be hypocritical, I don't recall anyone objecting to the miles and miles of walls, fencing and barbed wire that was installed by the UK government in northern France to keep immigrants out of the ports at Calais and Dunkirk and the eurotunnol site. Indeed you could argue the UK / France border is one of the most fortified intra-EU borders (at least for now).

I'll also never understand why breaking immigration law is seen by so many as being "less wrong" than braking other sorts of laws. The stated position of so many people seems to be that illegal immigrants should have their immigration offences effectively pardoned, yet not so many people argue the same policy of leniency should apply to burglars, tax evaders, fraudsters, shoplifters...

Posted by: Unzippy Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 05:51
Post #1463496

QUOTE (Spandex @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 22:34) *
Declaring a national emergency in order to get stuff done isn’t really setting that much of a precedent, it seems:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/presidents-national-emergencies/

Clearly, building the wall is a stupid waste of money, designed solely to placate his racist base, but declaring a national emergency to do it is possibly not as controversial as it might first appear.



Almost all of these were sanctions placed on overseas individuals. And the reasons this power is used (and has been by successive Presidents both Republican and Democrat) is that it is swift.

This is only the second military national emergency.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 09:13
Post #1463522

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 01:04) *
I don't recall anyone objecting to the miles and miles of walls, fencing and barbed wire that was installed by the UK government in northern France to keep immigrants out of the ports at Calais and Dunkirk and the eurotunnol site. Indeed you could argue the UK / France border is one of the most fortified intra-EU borders (at least for now).

But they already have extensive border barriers, the issue for the US southern border is that the majority of illegal immigrants and also smuggling is already coming through the formal ports of entry, what the sane people are arguing for is improved resourcing to deter/detect the 90% coming through the official ports of entry and not the remaing circa 10% coming through weak points in the existing physical barriers (which already has over $1B signed off this year for maintenance and upgrading to the latest 'not Trump 's wall' barriers).

Posted by: Churchmouse Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 11:03
Post #1463555

QUOTE (Unzippy @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 05:51) *
This is only the second military national emergency.

What was the other one?

I also doubt any of the numerous "national emergencies" were declared solely in order to do an end run around Congressional opposition. Trump is slowly consolidating his authoritarian powers. All very predictable, unfortunately. Will he step down when his term(s) are over, I wonder?

--Churchmouse

Posted by: Tartarus Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 13:52
Post #1463619

QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 11:03) *
QUOTE (Unzippy @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 05:51) *
This is only the second military national emergency.

What was the other one?

I'm assuming post 9/11 attacks.

Posted by: Fredd Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 14:45
Post #1463640

QUOTE (Tartarus @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 13:52) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 11:03) *
QUOTE (Unzippy @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 05:51) *
This is only the second military national emergency.

What was the other one?

I'm assuming post 9/11 attacks.

Here'shttps://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/12/politics/national-emergencies-trump-opioid/index.html (from 2017; before Trump's one). So yes, almost exclusively economic sanctions. Enjoy. biggrin.gif

QUOTE (CNN)
1. Blocking Iranian Government Property (Nov. 14, 1979)
2. Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (Nov. 14, 1994)
3. Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process (Jan. 23, 1995)
4. Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources (Mar. 15, 1995)
5. Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers (Oct. 21, 1995)
6. Regulations of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels with Respect to Cuba (Mar. 1, 1996)
7. Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan (Nov. 3, 1997)
8. Blocking Property of Persons Who Threaten International Stabilization Efforts in the Western Balkans (Jun. 26, 2001)
9. Continuation of Export Control Regulations (Aug. 17, 2001)
10. Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Sept. 14, 2001)
11. Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism (Sept. 23, 2001)
12. Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe (Mar. 6, 2003)
13. Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest (May 22, 2003)
14. Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria (May 11, 2004)
15. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus (Jun. 16, 2006)
16. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Oct. 27, 2006)
17. Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its Democratic Processes and Institutions (Aug. 1, 2007)
18. Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea and North Korean Nationals (Jun. 26, 2008)
19. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia (Apr. 12, 2010)
20. Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya (Feb. 25, 2011)
21. Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal Organizations (Jul. 25, 2011)
22. Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen (May 16, 2012)
23. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine (Mar. 6, 2014)
24. Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to South Sudan (Apr. 3, 2014)
25. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic (May 12, 2014)
26. Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela (Mar. 9, 2015)
27. Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities (Apr. 1, 2015)
28. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi (Nov. 23, 2015)

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 21 Feb 2019 - 23:32
Post #1464141

You think he can think like that?
I don't think he can think like that.

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 22 Feb 2019 - 08:30
Post #1464165

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 21 Feb 2019 - 23:32) *
I don't think he can think.

FTFY

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 09:38
Post #1466069

Trump's former lawyer and deputy treasurer of the Republican Party in his testimony to Congress about Trump.

Cohen apologised for his earlier false statements to Congress, which he claimed were "reviewed and edited" by Mr Trump's lawyers.

“I recognize that some of you may doubt and attack me on my credibility. It is for this reason that I have incorporated into this opening statement documents that are irrefutable, and demonstrate that the information you will hear is accurate and truthful.”

Cohen testified that, contrary to Mr Trump's repeated claims, he seemed to have advance knowledge of a meeting at Trump Tower in Manhattan between his campaign aides and a Russian lawyer promising "dirt" on Mrs Clinton. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat who led the DNC when it was hacked, asked the witness: "Is it possible the whole [Trump] family is conflicted or compromised with a foreign adversary in the months before the election?"
Cohen said yes.

He submitted to the committee a copy of his $130,000 (£97,000) wire transfer to Stormy Daniels to keep her quie.
Cohen also gave the panel a copy of a $35,000 cheque dated August 2017 - one of a series he said Mr Trump signed to pay him back in instalments which trump denies existed.

Cohen says he was asked to pay off a woman that claims to have had Trumps child.

He said Mr Trump arranged for an anonymous bid to pay highest price - of $60,000 - for a portrait of himself during an auction in the Hamptons, an affluent enclave of New York state, then paid for it illegally from the account of his self-named charitable foundation, before hanging the picture in one of his country clubs.

He told lawmakers he wrote letters on behalf of Mr Trump threatening the Republican candidate's high school and colleges not to release his grades to reporters.

He says Mr Trump admitted to him he had no medical evidence of the bone spurs in his foot that he once claimed to obtain a draft deferment during the Vietnam War. He says Mr Trump told him: "You think I'm stupid, I wasn't going to Vietnam"

He will release all 11 checks Trump made out to him as part of a criminal campaign finance violation scheme

Cohen said federal prosecutors in New York are investigating some unspecified crime involving Trump and his family.
Cohen said he could not divulge what they discussed because it was currently being investigated by the Southern District of New York prosecutor.
Raja Krishnamoorthi asked "Is there any other wrongdoing or illegal act that you are aware of regarding Donald Trump that we haven't yet discussed today?"
Cohen replied "Yes, and again, those are part of the investigation that is currently being looked at by the Southern District of New York," Cohen replied.

Republican comments to Cohen included Arizona Republican Paul Gosar who told Cohen: "Look at the old adage that our moms taught us: 'Liar, liar pants on fire.'
Cohen replied “I did the same thing you’re doing now for ten years… the people who do what I did and follow Trump blindly will follow the same fate I did”

Fordham University confirms Michael Cohen’s testimony that Donald Trump threatened legal action if his academic records were released which by law they can't do anyway.

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 10:58
Post #1466102

There are a number of sources on Youtube of his full speech but I'd recommend the BBC one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjJX08dggYE

Some of the Q&A after was really rather funny, it's clear the Democrats were much much better prepared than the Republicans, 3 of whom at least made a total hash of their times slots.

Posted by: Fredd Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 11:11
Post #1466106

You could have summed up the Republicans' use of their time (little of which they devoted to actually asking questions) as just constant tirades of "he's a liar, he tells lies, don't believe anything he says!". A rather strange position to take since it would rule out using any witness who was inside a criminal operation and was then "turned" to give evidence in a trial against their ex-partners in crime; unless...

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 12:26
Post #1466135

For some of the Republican gaffs during the session Seth Myers is great! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ytg29ps2uI

Isn't it amazing how the 'party of law and order' that used to think witness flipping was great and how it helped bring down organised crime/mob bosses now think it "should be made almost like illegal"..... Just in case it brings down a particular possible organised crime boss!

Looks like they could be looking seriously at Tax returns (valuations used in loan applications versus valuations in tax declarations), where is Elliot Ness when you need him?

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 20:41
Post #1466331

That Cohen is such a slimeball and low life crook should make the GOP ask what the heck they were doing making him party treasurer in the first place!
Plus, what does it say about Trump that he would need to hire someone like Cohen?

As for still telling lies, he's already convicted. He is getting three years for 'minor' crimes because he told all to the Feds and handed over all his documents and tapes.
If any of his testimony to the House differs from what he told Mueller his plea deal is out of the window and he is right back in court for a lot more years in jail.

Posted by: Churchmouse Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 10:22
Post #1466448

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 20:41) *
That Cohen is such a slimeball and low life crook should make the GOP ask what the heck they were doing making him party treasurer in the first place!
Plus, what does it say about Trump that he would need to hire someone like Cohen?

As for still telling lies, he's already convicted. He is getting three years for 'minor' crimes because he told all to the Feds and handed over all his documents and tapes.
If any of his testimony to the House differs from what he told Mueller his plea deal is out of the window and he is right back in court for a lot more years in jail.

This is the first non-TDS post you've made in this entire thread. I'm worried you might be recovering.

I am not surprised that, slowly but surely, through the peeling away of layers of sleaze and corruption, Trump is being exposed as a liar, a sleaze and a crook. What has always been more worrying for me was that all of this had been blatantly obvious years and years before he ever ran for President, and yet, he was elected. Trump will eventually leave us (much to the chagrin of the big media businesses, I'm sure), but those people will remain. More worrying for me is the effect Trump seems to have had on the general disposition of not only the US government, but also public discourse in the United States. It has been notably coarsened and cheapened over the last few years, but I may be giving Trump too much credit. He may just be a symptom of something else that won't be going away when he does... sad.gif

--Churchmouse

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 11:18
Post #1466462

The cheapening and coarsening of discourse was really highlighted by Sarah Palin (Who John McCain apparently had huge misgivings over selecting as running mate and later much regretted it), though whether she was also cause or symptom it's hard to say.

As you say, it's been apparent to many people for a long time that the Chump was just an obnoxious slimeball who only wanted to make himself richer, it emphasises a failing in modern political processes that so many could be duped by so much for so long (Sorry for the slight plagiarism Winston).......

Posted by: captain swoop Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 23:06
Post #1467966

South Korean intelligence officials have reported seeing new activity at North Korea's Tongchang-ri nuclear launch site.

Less than a week after President Donald Trump’s second summit with Kim Jong Un in Vietnam, South Korean intelligence officials report they have seen indications that North Korea is actively working at nuclear sites the country agreed to dismantle.

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/south-korea-north-korea-is-now-restoring-a-nuclear-lunch-site-6BWN6-ptn02FS3m5GNcUnA/

Posted by: DastardlyDick Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 09:20
Post #1468563

I'm surprised the Democrats haven't started investigating Tump's breaks at Mar-e-Lago. OK, he's using his own property, fair enough, but how can it not be abuse of office when the Secret Service have to rent rooms, golf carts, pay for food etc. in order to do their job, from the Organization that Trump controls?

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 09:26
Post #1468566

He's also hosting summits with world leaders there, so paying for facilities etc from the government purse.

Posted by: 666 Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 09:27
Post #1468567

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 23:06) *
South Korean intelligence officials have reported seeing new activity at North Korea's Tongchang-ri nuclear launch site.

Less than a week after President Donald Trump’s second summit with Kim Jong Un in Vietnam, South Korean intelligence officials report they have seen indications that North Korea is actively working at nuclear sites the country agreed to dismantle.

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/south-korea-north-korea-is-now-restoring-a-nuclear-lunch-site-6BWN6-ptn02FS3m5GNcUnA/


Dismantling would require 'new activity'.

Posted by: captain swoop Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 18:08
Post #1468788

Would dismantling require new building work though?

NK have no intention of getting rid of their nukes. They have the President of the USA telling the world what a great guy the great leader is and holding one to one summits with them.
What do they gain by getting rid of them?

Posted by: captain swoop Wed, 3 Apr 2019 - 20:17
Post #1475793

Trump claimed noise from industrial wind turbines causes cancer.
He made the extraordinary claim while speaking at the National Republican Congressional Committee dinner on Tuesday.
Video in link

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/donald-trump-claims-noise-from-wind-turbines-causes-cancer-a4107841.html


In addition he said
"My father is German, was German. Born in a very wonderful place in Germany."
Fred Trump was born in New York.

At one point during that speech, he complained that someone would probably "leak the damn speech to the media".

It was being broadcast live on C-SPAN

Posted by: The Rookie Fri, 5 Apr 2019 - 04:52
Post #1476065

The 25th Amendment should be applied it seems.....

QUOTE (captain swoop @ Wed, 3 Apr 2019 - 20:17) *
"leak the damn speech to the media".

It was being broadcast live on C-SPAN

It's well known that no-one actually watches C-Span!

Posted by: captain swoop Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 00:58
Post #1476323

Oranges!

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 07:37
Post #1610289

Well I think now is a suitable time to resurrect this thread, reading the comments already posted, the current debacle that is the US calling itself a democracy wasn't exactly unpredictable!

Posted by: TMC Towcester Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03
Post #1610293

Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election? Then doubt will be removed (reduced in reality as some will never agree), but at least onlookers can see if there was anything awry.

Can't help being suspicious of those who resist such an approach - in our road-user perspective it's usually only the drink-drivers who resist random testing!

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:29
Post #1610299

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election

Indeed, and its been done.... to death Over 60 court cases failed for that reason, just the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.

Posted by: progbloke Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 16:18
Post #1610403

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 09:29) *
...the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.


Thank God nothing like that would ever happen in this country... oh, hang on. laugh.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 17:44
Post #1610452

Yes but we haven’t had an armed militia storming parliament aiming for a revolution, their words not mine).

Posted by: SatNavSam Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 17:50
Post #1610453

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:29) *
Indeed, and its been done.... to death Over 60 court cases failed for that reason, just the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.


reminds me of the Irish referendum on joining the EU. Keep at it until you get the answer you want!!!!!

Posted by: The Rookie Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 18:04
Post #1610459

If you have any doubts over the mentality being dealt with...... (Sorry only place I can find this video)
https://twitter.com/colbertlateshow/status/1347417372336947200?s=21

Posted by: TMC Towcester Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 18:22
Post #1610463

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:29) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election

Indeed, and its been done.... to death Over 60 court cases failed for that reason, just the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.


They blocked a legal challenge, but I've not seen an open audit take place?

Posted by: PASTMYBEST Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 19:05
Post #1610469

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 18:22) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:29) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election

Indeed, and its been done.... to death Over 60 court cases failed for that reason, just the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.


They blocked a legal challenge, but I've not seen an open audit take place?


https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-12-01/barr-no-evidence-of-fraud-thatd-change-election-outcome



Posted by: Spandex Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 21:13
Post #1610485

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 19:05) *
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-12-01/barr-no-evidence-of-fraud-thatd-change-election-outcome

Indeed. Evidence was not required in order for these people to believe the election was rigged, and evidence won’t make them believe it wasn’t.

Posted by: TMC Towcester Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 07:15
Post #1610499

QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 19:05) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 18:22) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:29) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election

Indeed, and its been done.... to death Over 60 court cases failed for that reason, just the nutjobs refuse to accept any answer but the one they want.


They blocked a legal challenge, but I've not seen an open audit take place?


https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-12-01/barr-no-evidence-of-fraud-thatd-change-election-outcome


Am I missing the 'open' aspect of this? This is 'the state' telling 'the public' all is well?

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 08:06
Post #1610501

The states ARE independent, many of those the Mango moron is targeting are Republican run states, they have counted the votes many times, they have audited them via vote slip matching, no more than a handful of dodgy ballets have been found (mostly in favour of the Chump). Who would then count as independent after that?

They have presented NO evidence in court at all of fraudulent ballots on any scale, despite the rhetoric none have been stupid enough to take a lie into court and risk being barred, not Powell, not Guilianni, Not Wood. It's all rhetoric for those lacking critical thought to swallow blindly.

The only court case the campaign won was a shortening of the permitted time to count votes in Pennsylvania, but they finished well within the rather pessimistic time anyway, one other case was dropped after the campaign had it's request satisfied before it even got to court with a minor change to how the count inspectors (auditors) were allowed to operate (for both parties).

There has never been any evidence of voter fraud, if the Republicans so much believe there should be this mythical independent audit why weren't they asking for it in 2016, or 12, or 08 etc?

Oh and 'States independence' is a huge rallying dry for the righter wing of the Republican party and determining how they run their ballot is something specifically devolved to state level, if that's how they choose to run it you have to suck it up or drop the 'states Independence', they are mutually exclusive!

A Confederate (traitors to the USA after all) battle flag being carried through the Capitol building in the interests of 'USA'...the irony!

Posted by: The Slithy Tove Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 08:53
Post #1610503

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election? Then doubt will be removed (reduced in reality as some will never agree), but at least onlookers can see if there was anything awry.

Can't help being suspicious of those who resist such an approach - in our road-user perspective it's usually only the drink-drivers who resist random testing!

There will be many who are never satisfied. An audit which confirms what we know (no widespread fraud) will only be more "proof" of a corrupt "deep state".

Further, there is NO NEED for such a thing. Those advocating it are guilty of circular logic. "Many people" are saying there was fraud. But trace it back, and it all comes down to one person (and his enablers) who started the whole allegation without evidence. The same people who are calling for an audit are those who spread the unfounded allegation in the first place.

63 lost lawsuits so far. And, strangely, those cases have not actually alleged fraud (except in the preamble). When you look at the detail, fraud is not mentioned. That's because they know there is no case, and lying to the court, rather than in a press conference, has serious consequences.

Posted by: TMC Towcester Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 08:57
Post #1610505

Sigh................usual/typical/expected response.

'Open' isn't the same as independent. Open = visible in this context. Moroever, as we're seeing here, (most) folk no longer take 'the authorities' at their word. swallow blindly indeed.

Posted by: cp8759 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 09:32
Post #1610514

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Mon, 11 Jan 2021 - 08:03) *
Regardless of one'sown political persuasion, surely common-sense would be to do an open and transparent audit of the election? Then doubt will be removed (reduced in reality as some will never agree), but at least onlookers can see if there was anything awry.

The hardcore Trump supporters (such as the ones who took part in the riot) will never agree, they will just claim the auditors are "corrupt". Frankly I think the core of the MAGA movement is no less insane than the FMOTL / sovcit movement, any evidence you put to them will be explained away as part of the conspiracy.

Posted by: spanner345 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 09:36
Post #1610516

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=2942561629348645&set=a.1449710368633786

Posted by: Spandex Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 09:41
Post #1610519

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 08:57) *
Sigh................usual/typical/expected response.

'Open' isn't the same as independent. Open = visible in this context. Moroever, as we're seeing here, (most) folk no longer take 'the authorities' at their word. swallow blindly indeed.

What makes you think that the ‘openness’ of the audits so far is the problem? It’s certainly not the conclusion I would have drawn, so I’m curious.

Posted by: TMC Towcester Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 10:09
Post #1610527

QUOTE (Spandex @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 09:41) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 08:57) *
Sigh................usual/typical/expected response.

'Open' isn't the same as independent. Open = visible in this context. Moroever, as we're seeing here, (most) folk no longer take 'the authorities' at their word. swallow blindly indeed.

What makes you think that the ‘openness’ of the audits so far is the problem? It’s certainly not the conclusion I would have drawn, so I’m curious.


There seems to be a strong feeling amongst many Americans that there were 'irregularities' in the election. That feeling seems to be exacerbated by the reluctance of some in the 'authorities' to publically (aka 'openly) audit and report.......that reluctance fires the unrest, more so as the US has a much stronger 'rebellion' culture than European countries. ('What are they hiding')

The guns would be spiked (literally and metaphorically!) if an open and transparent audit showed no (meaningful) irregularities. The state doing it, whether by Stateor Federal authorities is turkeys voting for Xmas - that aspect would be no different here! Of course, if an audit did show something up.....................

Is the the only 'problem'? Nope, but I reckon it would make a marked contribution to calming the emotions.

What's your perspective on the principal problem(s)?

Posted by: Spandex Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:20
Post #1610543

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 10:09) *
There seems to be a strong feeling amongst many Americans that there were 'irregularities' in the election. That feeling seems to be exacerbated by the reluctance of some in the 'authorities' to publically (aka 'openly) audit and report.......that reluctance fires the unrest, more so as the US has a much stronger 'rebellion' culture than European countries. ('What are they hiding')

The guns would be spiked (literally and metaphorically!) if an open and transparent audit showed no (meaningful) irregularities. The state doing it, whether by Stateor Federal authorities is turkeys voting for Xmas - that aspect would be no different here! Of course, if an audit did show something up.....................

Is the the only 'problem'? Nope, but I reckon it would make a marked contribution to calming the emotions.

What's your perspective on the principal problem(s)?

I don’t think the feeling is exacerbated by a lack of open audits. This can be seen clearly in states that have carried out open audits, where those audits have had absolutely no effect on the people who believe the election was rigged.

I’ve seen no evidence that a lack of openness has contributed to this situation, and no widespread calls for more openness from Trumps supporters. I think you are mistaking people using anything they can (hence the lack of widespread calls - people are just randomly jumping on anything they perceive as a chink in the armour) in an attempt to sow seeds of doubt with people making a genuine request for transparency.

Posted by: TMC Towcester Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:27
Post #1610545

OK, so what's your take on the causes?

Posted by: stamfordman Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:12
Post #1610561

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:27) *
OK, so what's your take on the causes?


The US has a thin veneer of democracy and a large number of people who don't realise they are being lied to and are susceptible to fear mongering. Trump and his operators have been masters at manipulating this but they couldn't cover up the 300,000+ dead Covid Americans. They tried of course to get the election struck out but that was a continuation of the strategy and was fully expected.

Posted by: Spandex Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:27
Post #1610565

QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:27) *
OK, so what's your take on the causes?

I think the most pressing issue is the way some politicians have embraced not just conspiracy theories, but the fundamentals of how conspiracy theories work, in order to create a following that can be manipulated into believing a narrative that requires no evidence whatsoever.



Posted by: Steve_999 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:39
Post #1610570

QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:12) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:27) *
OK, so what's your take on the causes?


The US has a thin veneer of democracy and a large number of people who don't realise they are being lied to and are susceptible to fear mongering. Trump and his operators have been masters at manipulating this but they couldn't cover up the 300,000+ dead Covid Americans. They tried of course to get the election struck out but that was a continuation of the strategy and was fully expected.



The question is . . . . did those 300,000 vote?

Posted by: stamfordman Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:56
Post #1610578

QUOTE (Steve_999 @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:39) *
QUOTE (stamfordman @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 12:12) *
QUOTE (TMC Towcester @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 11:27) *
OK, so what's your take on the causes?


The US has a thin veneer of democracy and a large number of people who don't realise they are being lied to and are susceptible to fear mongering. Trump and his operators have been masters at manipulating this but they couldn't cover up the 300,000+ dead Covid Americans. They tried of course to get the election struck out but that was a continuation of the strategy and was fully expected.



The question is . . . . did those 300,000 vote?


Some US states allow dead voters to count if they did a mail in vote but then died before election day, but more states disallow these if they can find out in time. Still other states have no rules on this.

I presume your question though is about the conspiracy that many thousands of previously dead vote in American elections.

Posted by: DancingDad Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 13:33
Post #1610597

There is an old adage that a lie can circle the world before the truth has got its boots on.
It doesn't matter that science for centuries have proved the world is round, flat earthers still believe.
Aliens in Area 51, Elvis is working in the local chip shop, Kennedy was shot by the CIA, Covid is spread by 5G, the moon landings were filmed in Arizona, MAgna Carta still holds sway etc etc.
Comes as no surprise that those who get their facts from Twitface don't believe open audits or court decisions

Posted by: The Rookie Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 13:45
Post #1610601

There had only been 2 recorded cases of 'dead voters voting' last time I looked in detail, one was where a voter had the same name as his deceased dad and an entirely legitimate vote was misallocated, the other was a Trump voter trying to offset perceived electoral fraud with his own actual vote by voting as himself and then as his dead dad.

The repeated 2 faced-ness of Trump supporters is astounding, black footballers taking a knee are anti-american, but armed terrorists storming the seat of government to try and overturn an election they don't like the result of are patriots. Taking a knee is an abuse of the first amendment, armed terrorists are not.

At least now the (Ex? or still current?) Confederate states can now claim they got their battle flag into the heart of DC.

Then all those who committed crimes under the flag protection act by sewing Trumps name on them, real patriots?

The latest is the identified terrorists being slapped with 'no fly' bans are crying like snowflakes, but were happy to support bans for every Muslim in the USA just in case they may be a terrorist.

Posted by: southpaw82 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 14:27
Post #1610619

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 13:45) *
Then all those who committed crimes under the flag protection act by sewing Trumps name on them, real patriots?

First Amendment? Flag burning/desecration is constitutionally protected...

Posted by: cp8759 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 16:10
Post #1610645

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 12 Jan 2021 - 13:45) *
Then all those who committed crimes under the flag protection act by sewing Trumps name on them, real patriots?

As sp mentioned, you might want to look up United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 13 Jan 2021 - 07:25
Post #1610754

Thanks for the correction, I got two different flag protection acts mixed up, the first made burning/defacing it an offence but that was overturned by the SCOTUS for first amendment defences of 'expression', a second was prepared which (on the face of it) would have allowed it to over ride the 1st A but was never enacted.

Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 24 Mar 2021 - 10:21
Post #1626333

So now one of Donald Trump's attorneys (Sydney Powell), in her defence to the lawsuit brought by Dominion (voting machine manufacturer) has stated that her claims of election fraud were merely her opinion and that no 'reasonable people would accept such statements as fact'. Or in other words they are now saying that they knew all along that the claims of fraud were in fact based in no facts at all.

Of course she now has to have her own attorneys. (MAGA - Making Attorneys Get Attorneys).
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-dominion-lawsuit-b1820886.html

Of course this isn't unprecedented, Fox 'News' and Alex Jones have both tried to use this defence in the past when sued for their more outrageous statements, despite claiming to be news outlets.

Posted by: rosturra Wed, 24 Mar 2021 - 11:09
Post #1626346

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 24 Mar 2021 - 10:21) *
Fox 'News' and Alex Jones have both tried to use this defence in the past when sued for their more outrageous statements, despite claiming to be news outlets.


Tucker Carlson, Fox News, not only tried but actually won with this argument.




Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.'

She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."




https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye










Posted by: The Rookie Wed, 24 Mar 2021 - 11:36
Post #1626355

Fox news won that one, they lost another related to a 'Fox and friends' morning show suite.

Posted by: The Slithy Tove Thu, 25 Mar 2021 - 07:07
Post #1626489

QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 24 Mar 2021 - 10:21) *
So now one of Donald Trump's attorneys (Sydney Powell), in her defence to the lawsuit brought by Dominion (voting machine manufacturer) has stated that her claims of election fraud were merely her opinion and that no 'reasonable people would accept such statements as fact'. Or in other words they are now saying that they knew all along that the claims of fraud were in fact based in no facts at all.

Didn't some of her claims make it as far as court filings (even if not sworn testimony under oath)? Surely that isn't just "freedom of speech"?

Mind you, when you're on the hook for more than $1bn, it's straw-clutching time.

Meanwhile, we haven't heard what Guliani's defence is for the parallel case. Up to now, he's still been maintaining he'll use the opportunity to prove the fraud. icon_eyes.gif

Posted by: The Rookie Thu, 25 Mar 2021 - 07:27
Post #1626490

QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Thu, 25 Mar 2021 - 07:07) *
Didn't some of her claims make it as far as court filings

No, none of the filings I have detail on actually made direct allegations of fraud, most were on legalities. A few made claims of 'irregularities' being reported (such as some that appeared on SM and were then debunked) and used that to ask for some form of recount but stopped short of claiming it was actual fraud. What the Ant Hill Mob (Guiliani, Powell and Wood) said in public was very different to their actual filings. A lot of the big law firms they retained dropped them very quickly as clients when they realised it was all just a PR stunt and refused to put their names to any filings.

Actually one big PR stunt I think adequately sums up the 5 years from his announcing his running!

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)