Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

She broke the law? If only there was a politician brave and honest enough to promise to lock her up

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

If she cleared and found not guilty then yes it is over and finished with.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Nope. If the findings show she was improperly cleared and they will, the investigation could be re-opened. The law is the law, you cannot just select who it applies to.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Get over it Mick, Hillary is an innocent woman ! :)

She can't being used an excuse for all Donald's mess ups.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Let's look at the facts shall we.

Classified emails were found on the Anthony Weiners laptop belonging to Hillary Clinton. Antony Weiner was the husband of Huma Abedin, closest Aide to Hillary Clinton.

Antony Weiner's Laptop was not an Authorised and secured device to retain and hold Classified information, neither was Antony Weiner and Huma Abedin an authorised person to see classified information.

The mishandling of Classified Information is a Federal Crime in the U.S, it violates the following Federal Statutes:-

The ones in Red and bold are the Statutes (Laws) that Hillary violated, yet the FBI cleared her of any wrong doing despite these violations and just labeled her 'extremely careless', in the original draft statement by 'Slippery Comey', he said she was "Grossly Negligent", that was altered and removed because it would have levied a potential indictment.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

So she was cleared.

By that statement it's over and no reason to keep insisting she was guilty.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

He has not done any mess ups far as I am concerned, U.S Economy booming, Jobs growing massively, lower taxes, meaning greater take home pay.

Stronger borders and removing the drug cartels the "Animals" MS-13 gangs that Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, adores and who was outraged that they should stopped being called "Animals" by Trump.

Oh and did I forget also Peace in the Korean Peninsula and Denuclearised.

If you remove the hate, the progress from Trump is ALL there.

---------- Post added at 11:36 ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 ----------

She was wrongly cleared! It is NOT over - there is an investigation report due next week on it and the 'improper considerations' - it could be reopened at any time.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Think you're counting a lot of chickens before they've roosted there....

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

With what ?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

A denuclearised North Korea.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You forgot rising gas (petrol) prices and the deficit surge...

http://time.com/money/5273390/gas-prices-cost-you/ http://thehill.com/policy/finance/39...ion-in-may-cbo Re the "booming economy"

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf...s_this_fa.html

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You never learn Hugh and please correct my quotes - I don't trust these 'Fake News' Media polls. ;)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

So which media outlets are trustworthy and not fake news?:erm:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

They are all as bad as each other - lazy journalism I call it. A rush to get a story out and then either having to correct it or retract it...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Okay I will give you an example here, Maggy. A few days back the ruling on the CO baker (who refused to participate in gay marriages) won his case in the high court not to have bake cakes for gay weddings, whilst not falling foul of CO's civil rights laws:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.dff35124ccf7

Now the decision was 7-2 in favor of him. What did WaPo / USA Today etc all run with as a headline?

That was the headline, this was the first line:

Now this was not narrow - not by any stretch of the imagination. A narrow decision by the Supremes is usually 5-4. Sure this is not a unanimous decision (no dissenting votes) but by no stretch of the imagination is this "narrow".

As shown by the fact that the follow up stories (all in the WaPo) all had the following headlines:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...eaf_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...eaf_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...2b1_story.html

Notice how they took out the word narrow? Now they knew what the majority was all along - they knew that it wasn't 5 to 4. They still editorialized it as "narrow" to begin with.

USA Today was the same - I did check through the AP and these were not linking of an AP story, nor Reuters. They had their own individual reporting on the issue. This, in no way was a narrow decision - you have to be numerically challenged to think that.

When the Halbig decision came down (6-3) WaPo even stated that because it wasn't a 5-4 ruling that it shouldn't be seen as a "close" ruling but that it had broad consensus among the court's justices.

Yet in this case, a 7 to 2 ruling was close? They knew how full of it they were so they did issue corrections but their sheer audacity to print such stuff is staggering.

So, you tell me - is that fake news? Whether it is indicative of the entire WaPo is another matter but the article headline is clearly wrong given their own admission and corrections later, but does that constitute fake news? You be the judge.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You mean like Twitter then?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Yep I saw that one and laughed Chloe. One main outlet broke the story, most copied the same misleading headline.

5-4 is a narrow victory.

7-2 ruling in Supreme Court is an overwhelming verdict, which includes 2 Democrat Justices who sided with the bakers legal fight.

---------- Post added at 14:28 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Give it a rest, I told you the other day my views on polls, stop bringing up the same rubbish.

I said I found that twitter poll interesting, I never said I absolutely trusted it. Only one poll mattered to me and that was the June 23rd poll undertaken in 2016, that resulted in us Democratically deciding to leave the EU. :rolleyes:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

They called it a narrow decision or ruling, not a narrow victory. I.E The decision was limited to a very narrow scope.

That's why a lot of outlets called it narrow.

PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...x-wedding-cake

This blog is a neutral one which follows the Supreme Court from a legal perspective and they called it narrow: http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/op...ing-cake-case/

This isn't a Trump thing. People have used this phrasing before to refer to court decisions whose impact is limited. Here is an article from 2014: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...rrow-decisions

Anyone saying victory would be wrong, calling it a narrow ruling appears to a correct way to talk about a legal ruling.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Sorry to tell you this polls show he is more popular than ever. At least he does what he says. More than can be said of UK

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44409775
G7: Trump says Russia should be part of summit

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Dick head comes to mind.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Macron has other ideas.

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2018/...s-back-with-G6

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...al-up-4-points

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:33 ----------

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...r-muhammad-ali



---------- Post added at 21:47 ---------- Previous post was at 21:35 ----------

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/39...ia-back-to-g-7

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

More obstruction of justice cases in the Russia probe.
https://www.ft.com/content/e438bf3c-...b-4acfcfb08c11

---------- Post added at 21:53 ---------- Previous post was at 21:52 ----------

Surely not, there must be some mistake! :D

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...-at-g-7-summit So, the USA won’t buy from or sell to the UK, France, Germany, Japan, Canada, and Italy?

US Exports to -
Canada - $282.5 billion or 18.3% of its overall exports
Japan - $63.3 billion or 4.4% of its overall exports
U.K. - $56.3 billion or 3.6% of its overall exports
Germany - $53.5 billion or 3.5% of its overall exports
France - $34.2 billion or 2.2% of its overall exports
Italy - $18.4 billion or 1.2% of its overall exports

So, Trump is saying he will not deal with countries who buy over $500 billion worth of US goods, around a third of their exports.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Trump at G-7 floats end to all tariffs, threatens major penalties for countries that don’t agree.

It may sound good but is it? GM foods, dairy and beef products with antibiotics and growth hormones etc, etc.

Unfortunately the WaPo won't let me to copy the URL which I've never known before. I'm sure there will be a link to the report on their site though.

Link available via this twitter post. https://twitter.com/PatrickW/status/1005488255335362567
As an aside for those remainers in the Brexit thread wanting our strategy before negotiations started bear this in mind (from the same report).

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Having re-read through the article, you are correct, this is what they inferred when they wrote the article...which is even more inaccurate (I'll get to that in a minute) but you are correct, they spoke in regards to the ruling, not the numeric majority. Thank you for the correction.

In regards to saying that the scope of the decision was narrow in its definition is wrong. This was not narrow by any imagination.

They all but excoriated CO's findings (the commission). There is no ambiguity in what Kennedy wrote, for the majority:

CO should be facing civil penalties and I hope that Phillips decides to sue.

Now, Kagan (in her own opinion) wrote:

Just to be clear though, her finding that this was a narrow and limited ruling was not the prevailing opinion of the majority which all deferred to Kennedy.

Even those who voted against it (like RBG) realize that the issue was folly and CO screwed up:

They just did not want to rule against the couple (bless, lol).

Jeff Sessions seems to think that on a state by state basis, this does show some precedent:

However, the ACLU does not agree:

Now, the ACLU is just full of crap here...they just don't seem to understand that Phillips never turned away the custom in the first place:

They just simply refused to be involved in the baking of a cake for a gay wedding.

This again, is the slant from WaPo but in fairness they are just quoting the ACLU representative.

Now there are plenty of other cases pending the HC:

All from the same article so that could possibly be what the post is looking for to cite that this ruling is broad in nature but as it is it has said that the religious beliefs of a cake baker must be considered along with ruling against CO's commission, it mentions the 1st amendment and short of invoking RFRA to make it a federal issue there is nothing they seem to note that invokes federal supremacy here.

At the end of battles over gay marriage Kennedy authored the final part of it, with protection intended to re-affirm the deeply held religious beliefs of those opposed to homosexuality:

This is the beginning of him re-affirming that and it is not in a narrow scope - I'll show you an example of a ruling that is limited by definition:

(From Bush V Gore)

This was clearly meant to be infer that the case was not setting precedent ; it was narrow in scope to purely that race, at that time and not any election moving forward.

That is the difference between a case and in this case, an issue.

The issue is still being litigated to some extent but the decision was not narrow by any stretch of the imagination.

At the beginning it just looked like the Washington Post was taking a hit for the team / editorializing their own wishes but they were not so thank you for pointing out my error.

However, that just made them look biased. Their fundamental failure in understanding the very basic principle of the ruling however makes them look woefully incompetent ; it is the usual argument of what is worse? Stupidity and ignorance or outright wrong and evil acts?

Both are a danger but the Washington Post just looked like they are clueless.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

It wasn't just them, there was a large amount of reporting that suggested it was of limited scope including the SCOUTUS blog which is a pretty well respected outlet for reporting on the court., ABC News and even the right-wing National Review

You may have a different legal interpretation to them, some outlets do, but they weren't isolated in their view of this so I think it's unfair to accuse them of being woefully incompetent. They are clearly in the majority on their interpretation of the judgement.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

GoldenHair, from ABC Australia.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

GoldenHair: Licensed to Shill

Worthy of an Oscar nomination at least!

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

How many believe that a special relationship exists between the President of the US and the UK Prime Minister? I guess the only thing about it is that it's especially bad.
https://news.sky.com/story/trumps-pe...at-g7-11400189

Where is Trump when British citizens are being poisoned by overseas agents? Ignoring Theresa May, slapping tariffs on British companies and calling for Russia to be readmitted to the G7/8.
It's getting trickier to be both a British patriot and a Trump supporter.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

DT is running America like his own business. He is a ****

---------- Post added at 20:23 ---------- Previous post was at 20:23 ----------

Admin. That was NOT a rude word.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I reckon he messed up because his mind is elsewhere. He's thinking about the Korea gig and how he could go down in history if he pulls it off.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Clearly it was, if it triggered the bloody swear filter! :rolleyes:

You reckon wrong.

He did not mess up - he stood up to other world leaders who are trying to fleece the U.S on trade tariffs, fancy that, a leader of his own nation standing up to others and putting his own country first for a change which is exactly what he campaigned on.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Looks like the donalds handlers have been exerting influence again :)

Wouldn't the thing most likely not to pull it of be to have already shown a carefree attitude to treaties and agreements :shrug:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

That would be sensible and logical but I'm not sure that Trump thinks that strategically. I think he was tired and focused on Korea and was just lashing out a bit in frustration as he prefers one-to-one meetings.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Finally, a President that stands up to Canada - after all, they did burn down the White House!

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Technically speaking, if you studied your history, rather than google searching all the time. Canada had British Colony’s status, Trump is partly correct. The British burned down the White House in 1812, in retaliation because part of it’s other “British Colony”, Canada, had been attacked by the U.S.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Exactly. And Trump stated that his is aim is reciprocal free trade amongst all nations. This is exactly what May is trying to do with the EU and other trade deals after Bexit.


Trump was right to blame previous administrations. Obama is a supporter of global government, and a strong America is a problem for the globalsts. Hillary Clinton is of the same view as Obama. Thank God that Hillary lost the Presidential election.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

We apply the same tariffs they do.

Do you think we should retaliate and apply higher tariffs on US imports in response or just take it since it's Trump?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

The best bits about this thread are the tortuous lengths Mick will go to defend Trump.

So, let's get this clear: the British soldiers led by General Ross (also British) commanding a 4,500-man army, composed of the 4th (King's Own) Light Infantry, the 21st Royal North British Fusiliers, 44th (East Essex) Regiment of Foot, and 85th Regiment of Foot who burnt down the White House as part of the Burning of Washington were not British at all, they were Canadians.

Got it ..

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You have a choice, if you find what I say tortuous, don’t read the thread, it’s not hard. I won’t stop standing by what I say here, because you or others don’t like it.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

It was the British who burnt down the White House.

Good explanation here on the misconception it was Canada: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistoria...rned_down_the/

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Can’t say Australia because it’s on other side of the planet. Canada is right above the U.S. Trump was partly right, but got his wires crossed it was burned down because it was in retaliation to the U.S attacking Canada. So Canada is still in the equation as to why the White House got burned down.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Well they are definitely in line for a Nuking then !

I think the Canadian PM is cool, he's the only one that's really standing up to Trump. He's the opposite of the weak leader Trump portrays. Tariffs on the US and their Russian friends all round I say.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I think he’s a coward, made false assurances and only went back on them after Trump left for Singapore.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

and miss all the fun, no chance!

---------- Post added at 14:52 ---------- Previous post was at 14:51 ----------

Fake News! The British burned down the White House. Trump is an idiot ..

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

The only casualties suffered were in the Canadian militia iirc I'd still say it was the British that did it though, was Canada even a country then...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

* In your opinion.

P.S They burned it down and Canada was the reason why/Cause. I will not back down from this correct assertion.

The Historical facts are....

U.S Attacked part of Canada.... (During the time in which Canada was part of and under British rule/territory).

In retaliation around 1812, Brits burned down the White House. Canada was under British rule from 1763 – 1867.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/7/1743499...ouse-burn-1812

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Canada did not exist as a country until 1867. In fact between 1791 and 1841, Canada did not exist at all. During this time, we had Lower Canada and Upper Canada: two British colonies.

Trump asked Trudeau: "Didn't you guys burn down the White House?" No, they didn't, the British did.

Trump is still an idiot.

---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:47 ----------

BTW, from your article:

Just so we are clear. So when Trump asked "Didn't you guys burn down the White House?", (altogether now), the answer is a resounding No :)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Loving how all the Trump fans will work so hard to try and cover up and explain away his mistruths when the historical facts are there for all to see.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

If Trump says history and facts are lies/fake, then they must be ! The orange bufoons word is absolute. Sometimes folks bury themselves in so deep with their devotion, that there's no going back without making themselves look silly.

However he's not a joke unfortunately, he's a bigger threat to World security than Putin. Just hope those that are propping him up will realise in time.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

National review is a traditional conservative voice but along with ABC etc, seem to have similar opinion(s) on the case - I think that it is circulated through Reuters or the pool of the news wire service. (Big 5).

I'll re-read the opinion(s) from what you linked tomorrow or later in the week. Editorializing is one thing but I think that on the merits, they are not reporting accurately on this.

Ironically, the majority seem to be look at this from the perspective of pure constructionist philosophy (i.e. just this one specific case within the confines of the constitution) but most of them will only do so when it suits them.

The trend will show that this is a broader precedent that is eventually set but even on the merits of this individual case, I do not see this as a ruling with limited scope. The headlines may have grammatical issues but on the substance of the case, and the ruling plus the trend the court clearly is leaning towards (if members stay similar) is that of a deep protection of religious liberty (as indicated by many cases lately the little sisters / Hobby Lobby etc etc).

The thing is, even though you mentioned that other outlets see it the way that I did, I don't need to read their commentary to validate my views. Not to sound too obnoxious about this, but I know that I am correct - this is not limited the way that it is being opined and the clear trend going forward is a pattern under these parameters for comparable cases, which sets precedent.

ScotusBlog btw is just a rumor mill of what people think will come down the pipeline - kind of like the Michael Bevan in legal scholar form. So basically, worthless.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Utter rubbish, the historical facts I presented are the truths. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 03:32 ---------- Previous post was at 03:15 ----------

I stand by my posts, always. I believe my assertion of the historical facts and nothing you or others say, will alter that.

What we have laid bare here, is the pathetic Anti-Trumpers with TDS, are just nitpicking over what is essentially a question, not a statement, Trump asked about Canada, so in essence he didn't actually say a statement of fact...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

The historical fact is that British forces burnt down the White House. Trump asked that not who was in the war in 1812.

Most people assumed it was an rhetorical question. If it wasn’t then I would suggest it’s a bit weird for the President of the United States to be asking the Canadian PM relatively basic questions of US history.

It’s not a big deal, just poking fun at him, I don’t understand why people critising him bothers you so much. As you said in the other thread telling him to ignore ‘the haters’ as if we’re teenage girls talking about One Direction. I don’t think there is a famous person alive I would be so motivated to defend. Especially not a politician.

---------- Post added at 08:24 ---------- Previous post was at 06:36 ----------

I didn't say you did and there were people who agreed with you.

However my only point was that these outlets were reporting the mainstream interpretation of the decision. First they were editoraising their headline to call a 7 - 2 decision 'close' but they weren't and instead they were incompetent which, while debatable, in probably unfair given it was not a uncommon reading of the decision even if it later turns out to be wrong.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

We should definitely consider doing that again. Then re-invade via the friendly Canada, unfinished business, and its for their own good. :)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

In fact what we're doing here is revealing how difficult it is for Trump's supporters to accept that he, like anyone else, can make mistakes. The whole Canada thing is a joke, no more.

What is not a joke is where people are unable to discern fact from fiction and try to weave arcane explanations to try and justify the impossible. The last act is then just to throw a few playground insults and say that he didn't mean it in the first place. :rolleyes:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

What is a joke is you going on and on and getting nowhere.

And who is this "we" ?

- You or anyone else is not revealing anything, you're just trying to argue a point that I have already dealt with and I believe to be the facts.

Let's just agree to disagree and move on.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44486250

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/14/n...s&ref=headline

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

"Fake News!"

"But her emails!"

"Dems collusion!"

Etc., etc., etc...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Too many sources are now reporting it..and if the BBC are doing so it's hard to assert that it's fake news.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Is it Mick's night off ? :)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

The infamous IG report is out: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...watchdog-finds

It seems:

- Comey damaged the FBI but wasn't politically biased.

- 5 FBI agents were biased, and have been referred for investigation, but that this did not affect the material investigation

- Nothing suggests the decision to clear Clinton was incorrect


So it doesn't pave the way for another investigation into Clinton. Comey is accused of being improper but not of illegality.

Peter Strzok and Lisa Page come off the biggest losers in the report.

---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:11 ----------

Wait, best one yet:

While Comey was heading the investigation into Clinton using a private e-mail server for government business Corney was using Gmail for FBI business:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Damien, why do you keep calling Comey Corney ? :D

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Fixed.

Believe it or not the font kerning on my computer kept leading me to think it was 'rn' instead of 'm'. :dunce:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I think one of the major bombshells and damning information coming out of the IG report and I have not even read it yet, is the following text exchange between Page and Strzok the FBI lovers who were initially on Muellers team, until their texts were found:-

Lisa asks Peter Strzok:

"Donald Trump is never going to be president, right?"

Strzok replies.. "no he will not, we will stop him"

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Bias in the investigation is like a natural born protection of class being seen as grounds for discrimination.

Just because me or you have natural bias it does not mean that we cannot do our jobs without letting natural bias become prejudicial.

This is a very big distinction - Clinton was in no way "cleared" of anything. there was no "no bill" returned by a GJ. She was not charged due to a lack of probability by the investigating agents in charge, of a potential conviction. She was never acquitted of any wrong doing because Comey chose not to press charges.

Very much so - this is why people do not have work place romances to begin with.

The text from her, terrified that he (Trump) was going to get elected President and Strzok's re-assurances seem hilarious.

Looks like they got what they deserved for whoring for Hillary.

---------- Post added at 19:46 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ----------

Oh that was epic - I kind of wished that I could see the tears in the eyes of any woman on election night who thought that Hillary might win. Idiots, the lot of them.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Does that mean we can't call her Crooked Hillary any more? :D

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Even if Trump does suffer from TS, even a broken clock is correct, twice a day and even though it may have no relevance to whatever issue he may be talking about at the time, Hillary's Emails are a serious issue over which she almost certainly broke the law and should have been charged. No amount of bad behavior will make any of her own behavior excusable. What she did is far worse.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Nope, it's a big no no. The Mods have spoken. Did you not see this post ?

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=3023

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You can't read properly can you? :dozey:

"Hillary" is her name. "Crooked" is an appendage and if you have actually noticed, I have stopped using it for a while now (as I agreed to do so to the rest of the team in our team forum) - This does not mean it is not allowed to be used by others, it can still be.

If someone's surname is Mogg but has been changed to "Frogg", that is not acceptable, as it breaches Paul's rule announcement he made last year and is a bit childish actually, anyway, you are interfering in matters which do not concern you - we will be judge on what is acceptable, not you, so do not mis-categorise any instruction that has been given by the team like you have above.

Back on topic.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

According to WH Press Secretary, the Current FBI Director, Christopher Wray is to give a Press conference later today following the release of the IG Report.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-s...r-kim-jong-un/

Idiot

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Yeah his people sit and listen or they get shot lol.

So he wants the US to become a dictarship?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

tbf, he doesn't just shoot them - he has also used

anti-aircraft guns (for falling asleep at a military event)
mortar round
flamethrowers
tanks to run over people
public decapitations
poison

Firm, but fair*


*by fair, I mean a bloodthirsty psychopath

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

And off to jail he goes, pending trial / bail revocation:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/15/mana...ng-charge.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8401001.html

Rightly so, and unless Trump pardons him (post conviction) Manafort will spend the rest of his days behind bars.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Michael Cohen ditched his legal team and will cooperate with Mueller as well.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

So I have a question (to both you and Damien), do you think the stories about Kim having people executed by 100+ dogs eating them is accurate?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...d-dogs-made-up

I personally think that it is farfetched, too but then again he is absolutely bat shit crazy.

Anti aircraft fire is bad enough...but the dogs. Umm I don't see that as a credible means of execution, even by his standards - what do you think?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I don't know about the specific dog thing but Kim is a vast human rights abuser as were his predecessors in this family.

We're losing perspective on how bad the North Korean leadership is. There are few people as bad as them on this planet. Even Putin doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same league as them. North Korea have the closest equivalents in concentration camps/gulags we know of in the modern world. Political dissents aren't an issue because even a lack of enthusiasm for the leadership is met with swift brutality if not death.

You can find a list of what they've done on Google but two specific books: Nothing to Envy and In Order To Live and good on this. Escape from Camp 14 too which recounts stories of an entire family sent to the gulag because of his father's lack of purity and ultimate disservice to the regime. Most people died of starvation, the kid escaped.

The people outside of the cities can struggle for food. Especially if they've, on their ancestors, have been assumed to have shown a lack of respect to Dear Leader. This video here shows a young woman looking for food (it's hard to watch. so you've been warned): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzTC31JA7DY

America has to deal with him for everyone's safety but let's never forget who he is.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I don’t believe there is enough documented evidence to confirm that, which is why I omitted it.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

What worries me is that Steve Doocy didn't call him out on it through the interview - Fox have just turned into a propaganda network now.

Steve was a guy who practically had an orgasm when Trump mentioned him by name, on air but aside from that, forget the people Trump has the media.

Of the female anchors on Fox they certainly do not slouch on air when talking to him but do usually cross their legs / sit up when talking to him.

Ainsley is one of the most stalwart at it:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/1...s-donald-trump

She seems to have good posture.

When she stands she is a little shorter than him but around my height (though she does have ridiculous heels on) but the bigger story is that Fox is all but a state run entity now:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-frie...un-television/

However when interviewing dear leader, they really shouldn't stoop so much:

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1529103525

Tut tut.

Dear leader will not be very happy.

(Yeah, they're tools at Fox these days though I was being serious about Ainsley - she has a good pair of legs and does sit well / positions herself well for as short as she keeps her dresses - bravo. Very dignified).

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...ger-his-lawyer

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I think it would be a stretch for any lawyer, to deal with any clients, when that lawyer themselves is under criminal investigation and not just any plain investigation, but one that’s got the Special Counsel behind it.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

America is withdrawing from the UN Human Rights Council (probably incompatible with keeping children in cages anyway)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

It is depressing that a President that surrounds himself with Christian Evangelists has an Attorney General that cites the Bible to justify their policy of separating immigrant children from their families at the border.

Is this just a US Reality TV show and all I need to do is change channel?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

How the mighty have fallen...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

All part of making America great again...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Great for who though, that is the question?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Americans .

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Some Americans...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

No, you need to include the word ILLEGAL next to immigrants.

I see the liberal approach here to is to completely bypass the outrage at parents using their kids as leverage to break laws by crossing the borders "illegally". No surprise there then. :rolleyes:

I certainly know and remember from the President Bush years, a special detention center, Hutto, was built to hold family units, women with children, who were caught at the border trying to illegally enter the country. BUT.... in Obama’s presidency, the center was re-purposed as an adult-only center, presumably because locking up children with the parent is, um, wrong. A shoplifter, who is a parent, doesn't get locked up with their kids. An illegal border crosser should be treated no differently.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

I think the liberal approach would be not to put kids in cages.

---------- Post added at 22:12 ---------- Previous post was at 22:11 ----------

A kid whose parents shoplift don't get put in a cage. Put odd to say locking up children with their parents is wrong when instead their locking up children without their parents.

Either do what they did with Obama, as bad as that policy was, and take care of them in a centre, foster care or something. Better yet do what Bush did and do the special detention centres so you can at least keep families together.

This current situation of not only separating them but putting the kids in cages, some shared with dozens of other kids, is barbaric.

---------- Post added at 22:17 ---------- Previous post was at 22:12 ----------

This is just sick:

In America of all places.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Oh please, I didn't see the fake outrage when Obama did a mass deportation program that actually separated parents from their kids at the time as well and Obama did catch and deport MILLIONS during his presidency, so where was the damn outrage back then FFS?? :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 22:25 ---------- Previous post was at 22:21 ----------

No it is not sick - they should try to enter the country LEGALLY then.

The parents have themselves to blame for using their kids to gain entry in to a country, illegally.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

If you are following the news then the context is obvious :rolleyes:

Glad to know you support this new policy. A growing number of Republican supporters both in the country and in the DC seem to disagree with you. The rhetoric of drawing comparisons with concentration camps is going too far but, the use of constant, demonising propaganda by Trump does bear comparison with Germany in the early 1930's:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

It's not the kids' fault. You can punish the parents without doing this to children.

The fact you think kids, 20 a cage, having to looking after babies left in the cage with them. Children kept in cages unsure of where their parents are is not sick then I don't know what to say.

I know we have our disagreements but I have to say I am surprised at this. :(

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

Like hell it does, far fetched nonsense.

These are ILLEGAL immigrants - they want to be in the U.S they should apply to be there legally. Jeez it's not hard.

I never said I did support the policy, I am as usual pointing out the hypocrisy that there is this sudden fake outrage just because it's Trump, when deportations on a massive scale, that included separations as well happened in the Obama years.

I just don't see how using a kid means it's an automatic get out of jail free card, breaking the law, is breaking the law and that includes entering the country, illegally.

---------- Post added at 22:42 ---------- Previous post was at 22:40 ----------

Why..?

I am ALL for legal immigration...

I am totally against people smuggling and illegal immigration under any form regardless of any age range.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

You can be against immigration while objecting to children being treated like wild animals. It's horrible.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation
 

It's terrible to see innocent children being treated this way in 2018 in a rich, educated and developed country whose achievements I have a lot of admiration for. Strategically, I fear it may help the West lose its moral high ground. We can point to human rights atrocities in Iran and Belarus but now such countries will just turn round and point to what is going on in America.