Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

One would expect the Speaker of the house of commons to follow the correct procedure if he were indeed being impartial.

Here's what he said.



If that was impartial and following procedure then why this the following day?



Perhaps he should have lit a candle as he did with that powerful force in the world and moral inspiration to it, Xi Jinping, with his terrible human rights record.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Well, Bercow overstepped his boundaries on impartiality, but he seemed to also ignore the clapping, which is also banned in parliament.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

There's a whole lot of double standards evident when it comes to comparing Trump with other far more dubious leaders but hey, let's just ignore all that. Bercow is a clown.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Clapping is often tolerated in Parliament so long as it's rare.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Bercow has been further sharing his impartiality. :erm:

In addition to publicly announcing he voted Remain and insulting the POTUS (and therefore a sizeable number of American citizens), he has now advised that Parliament has the right to ignore the Brexit referendum.

This isn't the sort of 'neutrality' needed at the heart of UK democracy.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I watched the Eminem freestyle rap about Trump. Wow he certainly didn't hold back.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Obamacare is probably dying at this point: http://www.npr.org/2017/10/12/540920...s-for-the-poor

These payments shared the cost of the insurance for the very poor between the insurers and the government. Without them the premiums will spike further for those still insured whilst ending insurance for others.

Trump just cares about ending Obamacare more than anything else, whoever suffers, that's why he didn't care what bill was passed so long as one passed. The last one would have removed the obligation to give insurance even for pre-existing conditions, the most popular part of the policy by far, and others ones would have cut Medicaid, the policy for those will still can't pay. Trump supported them all.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Hillary Clinton, is in UK at the moment promoting her “What happened” book. She was on “The One” show last night, when talking about Weinstein, she changed subject and started talking about Trump’s grabbing women by the “ahem” video. Marr, then referred to her husbands sexual activities, when he was President, she replied, that had all been litigated and was in the past, how convenient.

She will apparently be a guest on the Graham Norton show next Friday.

In other news, Judicial Watch has obtained FBI documents of the former Attorney General, Loretta Lynch tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton. The pair met and had a 40 minute chat and days later, former FBI Director James Comey, announced Hillary’s FBI Investgation on her use of a private email server, concluded that it was extremely careless but was not indicted on any criminal charges, which would have hindered her candidacy for U.S President. Comey later testified that when he asked the former Attorney General, for permission to go public with the investigation, she ordered him to not call it an investigation but to call it a “matter”, which he said confused and concerned him.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-41618165

Could get interesting to see how many other global powers will step up and if the US ends up being left out on the world stage.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Donald has a mandate to end Iran deal, he actually has not done that, he’s kicked it down the road to Congress to see if they legislate any new arrangements, he campaigned hard on it during election, calling it a bad deal and he has a point, Iran will eventually become a nuclear power, which is what this so called deal is suppose to stop.

And like idiots, the UK wants to remain part of the deal, madness, especially when it has just been reported that Iran hacked 9,000 Parliament email accounts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7999801.html

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Yes I heard her having a dig about Trump being elected in spite of his record with women yet she didn't seem very keen to talk about her own husband's abuse of power in the Oval Office with a young intern which he then subsequently lied about to the whole world. Talk about rank double standards. The truth is that these people care about one thing only and that is satisfying their own desire for power.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Yes. Clinton didn't just have an affair but in doing so abused his power. It needs to be called out at every level.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Just a blow job now and again!

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

That's a statement of fact, too, much as that Donald Trump is racist and sexist. The UK is a representative democracy, not a direct one. Had MPs wanted to they could've taken the whole referendum issue seriously, ensured it would take effect by law and replicated the super-majority requirement of the first one on continued membership of the EEC - they didn't.

MPs know what they can do if they want rid of him.

---------- Post added at 14:39 ---------- Previous post was at 14:32 ----------

It's the Iran nuclear deal, not a deal over being nice to everyone. You sign a credit agreement with Capital One you don't get to consider it invalid because you don't like one of their advertisements.

Whether Trump has a 'mandate' or not tearing up multi-lateral deals because he doesn't like them, whether they are being adhered to or not, simply ensures that no-one will regard any agreements they have with the US as being solid.

Why strike a deal when, whether you keep your end of the bargain or not, the other side will claim you're not in compliance because they thought it would win votes from people who neither understand or have the desire to understand the deal.

It has ensured that, while the deal is in place and being adhered to, Iran cannot produce nuclear weapons. They are under the tightest inspection regime anywhere and are only able to produce nuclear fuel.

The deal was put in place because sanctions were in danger of starting to fragment. Without those Iran can accelerate their nuclear programme dramatically.

Aside from the MAGA crew find me anyone who thinks this is a good idea?

---------- Post added at 14:43 ---------- Previous post was at 14:39 ----------

It also means that even if Congress do decide to implement sanctions on Iran again they'll be doing it alone, or with whatever nations whose arms they can twist.

The US is looking more isolated and, increasingly, less like the world's superpower and more like the school bully. In common with every other superpower they've been getting away with bullying the other kids for a while as it could be said it was all for good aims, but now that's gone. They just look bellicose, unstable and belligerent.

All Trump is doing is accelerating the rise of China and, after that India, along with speeding the decline of the United States. With the lack of stability, guidance and co-operation from the US other nations will increasingly move towards them.

Pity.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

You know as well as I do that it's not always about what we say, it's about what's not said and/or inferred in the words that come out of our mouths.