Cable Forum
Page 133 of 213 « First 3383123129130131132 133 134135136137143183 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   U.S President: Donald Trump (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33704412)

Hugh 03-08-2017 16:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35910590)
Hang on, I've not said anything like that! Do you think that, like J K Rowling in this event, you might be projecting your sensitivities onto me? ;)

Call me old fashioned but if you (Rowling) make a mistake, then you should apologise. It's simply good manners and very significant when millions of people are watching and potentially influenced by the things you say and do.
If only posters held all public figures equally to this standard...

Mick 03-08-2017 17:09
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35910603)
If only posters held all public figures equally to this standard...
This thread is not about ALL public figures though is it ?

Feel free to start several topics on all past and present public figures, who have broke this standard. I'll happily join in on a few.

Osem 03-08-2017 18:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35910560)
She's donated a lot more than that I think, the figure is from 2012 and last year she was one of the biggest givers again: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...uses-year.html



But you can't win, here is someone who produced a remarkable British success story, whose work has been a massive cultural benefit to Britain and increased tourism and donates millions and millions to charity each year but she'll still be a hypocrite and greedy. People seem incapable of believing other people can be nice, generous and have decent intent.
How much money do they need? How many millions is enough? How many properties which stand largely empty when they're not at home and hardly bursting at the seams when they are at home? If they're going to moralise about generosity, poverty, homelessness etc. they can expect to have the reality about their own extraordinary wealth pointed out along with any of the excesses which they choose to avail themselves of. Someone with £50m in the bank and homes around the globe could easily 'win' by giving away most of it and living in one or even two homes like most of us mere mortals - albeit a lot bigger and nicer of course and comfortably far away from any of the 'worthy' social causes they say they support so as not to be inconvenienced by them. Furthermore these people don't suddenly stop earning when they donate, they have massive annual income which can easily replace what they've donated, all too often off the back of the rest of us who buy their products, watch their films or whatever. The truth is that when you have more money than you know what to do with it's really not difficult to 'donate' what to the rest of us would be sums approaching or exceeding a lifetime's income. That doesn't render you immune from criticism when hypocrisy is evident however.

ianch99 03-08-2017 21:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35910639)
How much money do they need? How many millions is enough? How many properties which stand largely empty when they're not at home and hardly bursting at the seams when they are at home? If they're going to moralise about generosity, poverty, homelessness etc. they can expect to have the reality about their own extraordinary wealth pointed out along with any of the excesses which they choose to avail themselves of. Someone with £50m in the bank and homes around the globe could easily 'win' by giving away most of it and living in one or even two homes like most of us mere mortals - albeit a lot bigger and nicer of course and comfortably far away from any of the 'worthy' social causes they say they support so as not to be inconvenienced by them. Furthermore these people don't suddenly stop earning when they donate, they have massive annual income which can easily replace what they've donated, all too often off the back of the rest of us who buy their products, watch their films or whatever. The truth is that when you have more money than you know what to do with it's really not difficult to 'donate' what to the rest of us would be sums approaching or exceeding a lifetime's income. That doesn't render you immune from criticism when hypocrisy is evident however.
Do you like actually anyone? You are always whining about everything. Give us all a break and contribute something constructive for a change ..

Hugh 03-08-2017 21:53
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35910632)
This thread is not about ALL public figures though is it ?

Feel free to start several topics on all past and present public figures, who have broke this standard. I'll happily join in on a few.
Ok, how many times has Trump apologised to those he has insulted?

At least JK Rowling owned up to her mistake.

Mick 03-08-2017 22:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35910714)
Ok, how many times has Trump apologised to those he has insulted?

At least JK Rowling owned up to her mistake.
Ahh playing the whataboutery card are we? I'm not aware of any apologies made, but then I'm neither aware of who he has insulted that warrants an apology. Crooked Hillary does not count. ;)

As for JK Rowling.... Don't make me laugh. It took her days to correct her mistake and only when it hit the press. She owned up to it then albeit, half-heartedly.

denphone 04-08-2017 07:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35910717)
Ahh playing the whataboutery card are we? I'm not aware of any apologies made, but then I'm neither aware of who he has insulted that warrants an apology. Crooked Hillary does not count. ;)

As for JK Rowling.... Don't make me laugh. It took her days to correct her mistake and only when it hit the press. She owned up to it then albeit, half-heartedly.
Trump has insulted many in the last couple of years unless one has their eyes closed and puts cotton wool in their ears as he never apologised to them did he?.;)

As for Hilary well she is just as bad IMO.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/27/po...ist/index.html

1andrew1 04-08-2017 23:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Even the Murdoch press is now happy to reveal the true negotiating "abilities" of Trump. My take-away is his lack of understanding of the other countries' likely reactions when he puts his demands to them, as well as not understanding the basic issues.
The Times: Transcripts reveal president pleading, angry and confused
Quote:
In a call with President Enrique Peña Nieto, he describes his vow to make Mexico pay for a border wall as a growing political problem, and begging Mr Peña Nieto to “stop talking about the wall.” The Mexican president has repeatedly said Mexico will not pay for the wall.
“You cannot say that to the press,” Mr Trump says. “We should both say, ‘We will work it out.’ It will work out in the formula somehow,” he said. Mr Trump veers sharply between sweet talk and invective, blaming Mexico for America’s drug epidemic before pledging: “It is you and I against the world, Enrique, do not forget.”
...Australia does not admit any refugees or migrants reaching its shores by boat in a bid to deter people smuggling.
Mr Trump struggles to understand the deal despite Mr Turnbull’s repeated efforts to explain it. Mr Trump had just issued the first of his executive orders seeking to ban migrants and refugees from a number of Muslim countries.
Mr Turnbull explains they are economic refugees, not from any of the banned countries, and that the US can vet and turn away any it believes are dangerous. He adds they have not been detained because they are criminals but because of Australia’s policy. Mr Trump is unconvinced.
“I hate taking these people. I guarantee you they are bad,” he said.
“That is why they are in prison right now. They are not going to be wonderful people who go on to work for the local milk people.” He goes on: “What is the thing with boats? Why do you discriminate against boats?”
Mr Turnbull refuses to budge, telling Mr Trump he will honour the deal, and the phone call ends in acrimony. “I have had it,” Mr Trump fumes. “I have been making these calls all day and this is the most unpleasant call all day. Putin was a pleasant call. This is ridiculous.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...used-pnvbjs5d8

---------- Post added at 23:14 ---------- Previous post was at 23:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35910560)
She's donated a lot more than that I think, the figure is from 2012 and last year she was one of the biggest givers again: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...uses-year.html

But you can't win, here is someone who produced a remarkable British success story, whose work has been a massive cultural benefit to Britain and increased tourism and donates millions and millions to charity each year but she'll still be a hypocrite and greedy. People seem incapable of believing other people can be nice, generous and have decent intent.
It's the British disease, knock people who have become successful whilst at the other end of the spectrum, criticise those on benefits for being lazy and a drag on society. Ironically, JK Rowling has been both.

Mick 05-08-2017 08:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I hope whoever leaked the transcripts to the pathetic liberal press, with a one sided agenda, go to jail. Republican Senators are demanding jail time for the leakers.

Leaking private conversations not just the US President, but foreign leaders, is plain wrong and illegal. It's the leaking of the Manchester Arena crime scene photos, all over again, in their desperate bid to embarrass Trump and yet again, gutter press New York Times and Washington Post are the culprits. POS companies, who have no ethics when it comes to balance.

It seems however they like to turn away from real scandals, like when former President Bill Clinton, met former US Attorney General, on the back of a plane, days before FBI Director James Comey dropped a federal investigation in to his wife's private email server use.

Quote:
Reporters with the Washington Post and New York Times were apparently less than enthusiastic about covering the controversial private meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton just months ahead of the 2016 election.

The non-profit American Center for Law and Justice published emails Friday that showed reporters asking Department of Justice officials for details on the meeting.

Mark Lander, a reporter for the Times, is seen in one June 30 email reaching out to a DOJ official to say he's "been pressed into service to write about the questions being raised" by the meeting.

Matt Zapotosky with the Post emailed a DOJ official the same day after several other emails to say that his editors "are still pretty interested" in the story but that he wanted to "put it to rest."

Lynch and Clinton had met on the tarmac in Phoenix to discuss "primarily social" matters, according to public comments Lynch made after the meeting.

But at the time, Democratic presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was under federal investigation for her use of a private email server as a top government official.

When news initially broke of the meeting, the Times did not publish any stories about the meeting for more than 24 hours, as the Washington Examiner reported.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/em...rticle/2630650

Damien 05-08-2017 08:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
New York Times was the paper that broke the Clinton email story.

1andrew1 05-08-2017 09:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I think the leaks show the lack of respect and authority that the US President commands. You can tighten things up as much as possible but ultimately, having respect for the President would reduce leaks. And, it's not just his inner circle that has a problem with POTUS; Trump's popularity is now down to 33%. And that's before taking his lengthy 17-day holiday.
Further more, we can see evidence of others sidelining him. Prominent Republicans ignored the president’s instructions to continue working on healthcare and instead turned to tax policy. “Trump has proven to be a relatively weak president. He hasn’t learned how to use the powers of the office,” says John Sides, a political scientist at George Washington University. “It’s difficult for other political actors to take him seriously.”
And those pesky Russians? Prime Minister Dimitri wrote on Facebook "The Trump administration has shown its total weakness by handing over executive power to Congress in the most humiliating way . . . The US establishment fully outwitted Trump; the president is not happy about the new sanctions, yet he could not but sign the bill.”
Mentioning Russians, talk that special counsel Robert Mueller has convened a grand jury to investigate alleged ties between Mr Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government only sets the scene for more interesting times ahead.

ianch99 05-08-2017 09:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35910835)
Even the Murdoch press is now happy to reveal the true negotiating "abilities" of Trump. My take-away is his lack of understanding of the other countries' likely reactions when he puts his demands to them, as well as not understanding the basic issues.
The Times: Transcripts reveal president pleading, angry and confused

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...used-pnvbjs5d8

---------- Post added at 23:14 ---------- Previous post was at 23:05 ----------


It's the British disease, knock people who have become successful whilst at the other end of the spectrum, criticise those on benefits for being lazy and a drag on society. Ironically, JK Rowling has been both.
Yes, whine about those like Rowling who try and make a difference with their money and keep quiet about those who have the money and just keep it for themselves.

---------- Post added at 09:14 ---------- Previous post was at 09:09 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35910855)
I think the leaks show the lack of respect and authority that the US President commands. You can tighten things up as much as possible but ultimately, having respect for the President would remove any leaks. And, it's not just his inner circle that has a problem with POTUS; Trump's popularity is now down to 33%. And that's before taking his lengthy 17-day holiday.
In fact, we can see evidence of others sidelining him. Prominent Republicans ignored the president’s instructions to continue working on healthcare and instead turned to tax policy. “Trump has proven to be a relatively weak president. He hasn’t learned how to use the powers of the office,” says John Sides, a political scientist at George Washington University. “It’s difficult for other political actors to take him seriously.”
And those pesky Russians? Prime Minister Dimitri wrote on Facebook "The Trump administration has shown its total weakness by handing over executive power to Congress in the most humiliating way . . . The US establishment fully outwitted Trump; the president is not happy about the new sanctions, yet he could not but sign the bill.”
Talking of Russians, talk that special counsel Robert Mueller has convened a grand jury to investigate alleged ties between Mr Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government only sets the scene for more interesting times ahead.
What is interetsing is that when is clear, and it has been for a while now, that Trump and his administration are a joke, literally a laughing stock, that his supporters still try focus on how the information showing him to be a joke is disseminated.

Trump has made the office of President of the United States a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.

Mick 05-08-2017 11:20
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35910854)
New York Times was the paper that broke the Clinton email story.
Doesn't change anything about the Washington Examiner Story.

Damien 05-08-2017 11:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35910869)
Doesn't change anything about the Washington Examiner Story.
But the Examiner story doesn't seem a big deal. They reported on the story and e-mailed people at the DOJ for details. They're complaining it took them 24 hours to report on it but that's not outrageous, they need to time to do their own investigation.

The wider point that they're not interested in the Clintons is surely difficult when they, more than anyone else, were doggedly chasing the e-mail story (as in breaking news about it, rather than the conspiracy stuff).

Mick 05-08-2017 11:43
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35910855)
I think the leaks show the lack of respect and authority that the US President commands. You can tighten things up as much as possible but ultimately, having respect for the President would reduce leaks. And, it's not just his inner circle that has a problem with POTUS; Trump's popularity is now down to 33%. And that's before taking his lengthy 17-day holiday.
Further more, we can see evidence of others sidelining him. Prominent Republicans ignored the president’s instructions to continue working on healthcare and instead turned to tax policy. “Trump has proven to be a relatively weak president. He hasn’t learned how to use the powers of the office,” says John Sides, a political scientist at George Washington University. “It’s difficult for other political actors to take him seriously.”
And those pesky Russians? Prime Minister Dimitri wrote on Facebook "The Trump administration has shown its total weakness by handing over executive power to Congress in the most humiliating way . . . The US establishment fully outwitted Trump; the president is not happy about the new sanctions, yet he could not but sign the bill.”
Mentioning Russians, talk that special counsel Robert Mueller has convened a grand jury to investigate alleged ties between Mr Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government only sets the scene for more interesting times ahead.
That's typical of Russia not understanding there is three branches of government in play. All independent of each other.

And yet after all that questionable above, US jobs, US economy, all up considerably under the Trump Presidency. In July, over 200K extra jobs.

And you still doing it again with polls. I take no notice of them at all. Remember that 90% chance that Killary would win Presidency in a landslide, that there was no path to Trump winning. What total bollocks all this turned out to be.

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35910870)
But the Examiner story doesn't seem a big deal. They reported on the story and e-mailed people at the DOJ for details. They're complaining it took them 24 hours to report on it but that's not outrageous, they need to time to do their own investigation.

The wider point that they're not interested in the Clintons is surely difficult when they, more than anyone else, were doggedly chasing the e-mail story (as in breaking news about it, rather than the conspiracy stuff).
Not a big deal ?

Of course it's a big deal, it's called one sided biased Journalism. You know the type of media outlet that gives the questions to Hillary, to help her cheat in the Bernie Sanders Primaries debate.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:14.
Page 133 of 213 « First 3383123129130131132 133 134135136137143183 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum