Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35902961)

FYI The Times is now reporting this as well.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ests-3qq8m7mzw

Not sure this will ever happen if it's the protests he fears. Not sure when he thinks that will change.

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35902970)

If the Great British Public think they have an easy way of keeping Trump out of the country by peaceful protest then he will never be coming here :)

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35902972)

A gross misrepresentation. Many would welcome a visit by the POTUS.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35902915)

Oh, I don't know, maybe something to do with the Secret Service not wanting to broadcast his movements incase of nut jobs or Terrorists.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35902978)

Someone better tell his Press Secretary, then... ;)

(Travel to G20 in July) https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...coming-foreign

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35902961)

FYI The Times is now reporting this as well.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ests-3qq8m7mzw

Not sure this will ever happen if it's the protests he fears. Not sure when he thinks that will change.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35902952)

The prospect of being booed by large crowds might just dent his ego and pierce his narsistic streak enough for him to want to put the visit of, wonder what he intends to do to win the mob round in the future though, not cause world war three, tell his handlers in Moscow to shove it, not grab anyone by the pussy for a while, lock her up, the list of possibilities is endless

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35902992)

Don't see no dates, times, actual travel routes in any of those Briefings. Wink back. ;)

---------- Post added at 10:51 ---------- Previous post was at 10:45 ----------



The story is FAKE NEWS. You have two sides, both White House and Downing Street denying the account that was published in the guardian.

---------- Post added at 11:10 ---------- Previous post was at 10:51 ----------



World War Three is off the cards, this down to the fact that Hillary did not win.

Regarding Hillary. Senator Graham, is insisting former Attorney General, Lyretta Lynch, be called to testify why she instructed former FBI Director, James Comey to change 'Investigation', to 'Matter' during a Press briefing detailing the FBI's investigation in to Hillary's use of a private email server. Comey testified last week that Lynch ordered him to change those wordings to align itself with the Clinton campaign own explanations, which confused and concerned him.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35903040)

But not really, no specific routes, times and places he will be at are not present, noone should know this beforehand, I doubt the Secret Service would allow for such a thing. I Don't believe anything written in those one sided crap sources. (nydaily news or nyt).

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35903051)

How about something the White House Press office releases - would you believe that?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...coming-foreign

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...-united-states

Since it was widely known that the G7 summit was being held on May 26–27, 2017 in Taormina (ME), Sicily, and that the NATO meeting was in Brussels on May 25, this makes that sort of information, and the movements of the President, public knowledge.

This gives information about departure dates, destinations, and duration of the trip.

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35903052)

As a matter of interest which news sources do you believe Mick ? Give us a list and a laugh ;)

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35903057)

Hardly any. As I said, I do my OWN research on news items. One sided media gets overlooked and there is plenty of those that have people hoodwinked, like yourself.

Originally Posted by alanbjames (Post 35903061)

I heard hes visiting the UK cos Teresa May and the Queen have knitted him a new wig between them.

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35903062)

So where do you get the information for your valuable research? I really am interested so I too can avoid that horrible Fake News stuff :cool:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35903064)

You obviously don't avoid it Mr K, given your tendency to misrepresent what people say and or stories, all in the name to align with your narrative, i.e if it does not suit your agenda.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35903040)

But not really, no specific routes, times and places he will be at are not present, noone should know this beforehand, I doubt the Secret Service would allow for such a thing. I Don't believe anything written in those one sided crap sources. (nydaily news or nyt).

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35902913)

No Mick, it's been reported elsewhere but I'm prepared to wait and see what happens. If he's coming soon, why has the date not been banded around?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35903098)

You're moving the goal posts a little. I didn't ask for a time or route...simply a date.


Let's approach this another way. If The Whitehouse has advised details of other trips over the Summer, why hasn't it mentioned anything about the UK?
Is it:
a) You can't trust the mainstream media - The Times, The Guardian, Huffington Post - they're all in it together and it's a gigantic conspiracy.
b) He's not coming to the UK anytime soon.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35903509)

Qatar Buys U.S. F-15s Days After Trump Says Country Funds Terror

He says one thing then does another.

Even the Australian MP takes the perverbial out of him.

Leaked audio reveals Malcolm Turnbull roasting Donald Trump over 'fake polls' and Russia

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904034)

Mexico have got a nice new line in Trump bog roll. Do you think Sainsbury's stock it ? ;)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...tness-without/

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904244)

Seems the Donalds invite has been quietly forgotten, no mention in Queenie's speech. We don't want him and he doesn't want to come. Threats of a bare bottomed protest may have put him off, it would have given me pause for thought....
http://globalnews.ca/news/3518112/do...n-bum-protest/

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904267)

The Government has said the trip is 'still going to happen' but the fact it's not listed as a state visit this year probably means it's later in his term. That's more keeping with historical precedent anyway, it wasn't normal to offer the visit in his first year but was clearly to designed to help with any trade deal. A plan I always thought was nonsense because years of work could be undone by a early morning Tweet from the man himself lambasting the UK or the deal.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904269)

It had been pencilled in for October 2017 but clearly won't happen then, if at all.
http://www.politico.eu/article/trump...ctober-report/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/306425...it-before-him/

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904265)

I'm sure that the Trumpster's biggest defenders will be wondering how to respond to that, given their slightly desperate denials of the many earlier reports in the media.

What's more significant is that American industry now realises that Trump is pretty powerless so it can continue its existing strategies and ignore any adverse tweets from him. For example, Ford will now make the Focus not in Mexico, not in the US...but in China.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...2019-exec.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40345592
https://www.rt.com/usa/393298-ford-f...-trump-mexico/

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904272)

The first link suggests it might not be a State Visit. That would allow him to come this year and explain it not being in the speech.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904274)

What is there to wonder ? Apart from it being another, boring let's get another opportunity to bash Trump with less than an accurate account of what's really going on.

And nothing desperate about my earlier responses to media reports as I still stand by them based off official information that was released at the time. ! :rolleyes:

As for Ford making the focus in China. Does Ford only make one type of car model now ? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904288)

Good point but I suspect both governments will have their hands full of other matters this year. Trump will be trying to get his Muslim travel ban in place and Mexican wall built whilst trying to avoid the Russian investigation. Theresa May will be arguing how large a settlement the country should cough up. Latest reports in The Telegraph say £2bn. ;)

---------- Post added at 23:47 ---------- Previous post was at 23:32 ----------


You've missed the point as much as Theresa May misses her inherited Parliamentry majority. Ford no longer fears the President and yet another of his claimed victories is no more. The Standard describes the situation quite succinctly:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904295)

No it doesn't.

You and The Standard have their facts misconstrued in a totally gung-ho fashion.



Sounds bad, BUT here is the BUT.........



http://www.wearecentralpa.com/news/n...xico/746153291

Cannot see anything in that announcement that is devastating news for the U.S Jobs market. It's interesting when you delve a little deeper, rather than believe stuff, at face value, a problem you and some others have.

Thus, I have not missed any point actually.

As for the other failures mentioned in The Standard.

No wall that is thousands of miles long, can be built in 6 months. Pointed this out to you before.

Obamacare, it's not concluded yet.

The Travel ban, is being taken down the SC route, so it's not quite failed, they could overrule 9th Circuit Judge(s) and invoke his Executive Order or they may not, to say it's failed, means it's final.

They would be colossal failures, if he had not done all he said he was, by the end of his term(s), not months in to his early presidency.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904296)

Yes it's always worth delving a little deeper where the Donald's concerned, like when he spent $7 million dollars to save less than 800 jobs

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.3188843

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904333)

But if we are going to bring in what seems silly spending amounts, that was extremely wasteful spending, was the DNC spending $30,000,000 trying to get their candidate Jon Ossoff, into Congress in the State of Georgia and still losing to the Republican, Karen Handel. Record crazy spending amount for not even a Mid-term Election.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904350)

If you combine the Democrat and Republican spending in that one congressional district in Georgia, not even the whole state, more money was spent in that election than our general. :erm:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904333)

To which has absolutely nothing to do with what was being discussed about Ford, do keep up. But yes let's delve a little deeper. He did not actually spend it, it was a tax break deal and keeping those jobs actually saves more than that amount in unemployment benefits, given average weekly state benefit is about $400. So do the maths..... $400 x 750 x 26 (weeks claimable) = $7,800,000.
.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904379)

So those are the consequences he threatened business with, we'll give you a wheelbarrow full of cash, I'm sure most people would have judged going by his rhetoric pre election that things would be going in a slightly different direction than corporate welfare.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904392)

And they are. Jobs total is up in US, in fact at a record total. Not claiming this is down to Trump as he has not been in office that long but the way you are talking, companies are leaving in droves, which they are not.

As I said, which you have ignored, no cash has exchanged hands. It's called incentives to encourage businesses to keep people in work, you are finding fault with this because ?

I find it laughable you're nitpicking on the above but find nothing wrong with the Democratic Party wasting a colossal $30,000,000, trying to get their candidate in Congress and failing, this is over 4 times the amount you're whinging about Trump, saving a company a heap of cash to keep people in work.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904399)

No cash changed hands, that's laughable, the tax take is short changed by 7 million but it's okay because they didn't hand over what was due in the first place. I'm finding fault with it because it's not what trump said would happen pre election, then he was threatening consequences with a grim face, who would've thought those consequences would be filling your boots with tax free cash, if I were an American corporation I'd be threatening to of shore jobs to based on that.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904412)

So basically you're essentially nitpicking just because it's Trump, yet I've told you the party in opposition to Trump, wastes $30,000,000, trying to gain a congressional seat and still fails, such a colossal waste of cash which is another point you have conveniently ignored, had Trump wasted that amount, I'm sure you'd have whinged on about it. Double standards springs to mind. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904413)

Just to be clear it's their own (donated) money they wasted, not government. I think it's obscene how much money they spend on these things.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904412)

So basically you're essentially nitpicking just because it's Trump, yet I've told you the party in opposition to Trump, wastes $30,000,000, trying to gain a congressional seat and still fails, such a colossal waste of cash which is another point you have conveniently ignored, had Trump wasted that amount, I'm sure you'd have whinged on about it. Double standards springs to mind. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904436)

I essentially have a problem with people in office lying, something you're clearly fine with and I ignored the point about the congressional seat because I know nothing about it, what I do know is these issues are best kept separate and that two wrongs don't make a right or anyone less wrong

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904437)

All politicians lie or distort the truth so you should essentially have a problem with all politicians.

Hillary Clinton lied under oath that she did not send or receive classified emails, former FBI director James Comey's press briefing said she had.

Over here in U.K., Jeremy Corbyn lied that he never met the IRA.

David Cameron lied that he would implement the result of the EU referendum if it was a leave vote.

Lying and politics are bonded, it's purely done for political gain.

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904450)

And we should just accept that ? Just go for the ones that lie the least ?? Even by that standard Donald would be at the bottom of the pile.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904477)

And nothing. I never said it was acceptable for any politician to lie. Poor reading ability again I see. :rolleyes:

But as who would be at bottom, it's not a competition, a liar, is a liar but it's a big issue with ALL politicians. As for who should be at the bottom, you're incorrect as always, been a few good liars in the Labour Party, there still is with it's leader, but that's always been a problem, so much so that those lies from Labour, have took us into the illegal Iraq war. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904485)

Chillax Michael, it's the weekend and Donald isn't coming, reasons to be cheerful :)

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904437)

All politicians lie or distort the truth so you should essentially have a problem with all politicians.

Hillary Clinton lied under oath that she did not send or receive classified emails, former FBI director James Comey's press briefing said she had.

Over here in U.K., Jeremy Corbyn lied that he never met the IRA.

David Cameron lied that he would implement the result of the EU referendum if it was a leave vote.

Lying and politics are bonded, it's purely done for political gain.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904501)

I'm chilled thanks and sorry to disappoint but he is still coming and so he should.

Come on Mr K, I thought you were educated enough to work out, President Trump was elected the Head of State of our most important ally, you go on about Putin being bad but, not having a good relationship with the US just because of who is the president plays into Putins hands surely you have worked this out being educated ? :rolleyes:

The EU has treated us recently with such disdain but they have always done that in my eyes but you'd gladly welcome those pissants here.

And China!s President came and they have dire human rights records, you don't/didn't whinge often about him. Double standards again :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35904569)

Yup. Some folk can't help being idiots and some can't help being hypocrites, some even manage to combine being both.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904552)

You are absolutely right, I do have a massive problem with pretty much every politician, I dislike most on general principle and don't trust any of then until they prove otherwise, it's why my vote is nearly always a protest

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904573)

Your assessment of Trump is harsh and brutally honest.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35904591)

And not crushingly dull for once either



I think so to, there's a reason trump and corbyn have become popular

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904648)

I'm sure Osem was not referring to Trump regarding people being idiotic and hypocrites, I'm sure he would be happy to say either way.

In other news, former US Attorney General Lyretta Lynch, who served under President Obama, is under Senate investigation, after former FBI Director James Comey's testimony that she ordered him to not say in a press briefing that Hillary Clinton was under FBI investigation and told him to call it a 'matter', which confused and concerned him as he said in the testimony, Lynch seemed to be aligning with the Clinton campaign and that it was only days earlier that Lynch had met with former President, Bill Clinton, on the back of a plane while it sat on the tarmac for about 40 minutes.



http://uk.businessinsider.com/senate...17-6?r=US&IR=T

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904664)

Fake news I should think Mick, you've been 'hoodwinked' again (or is it only fake if his holyness, the Donald says so...)

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904667)

You, think?.... You sure ? :rofl:

It's definitely not fake news.

We have had the Russian allegations for months that have uncovered nothing so far.

Yet, you see from the Former FBI Director, James Comey himself, the former US Attorney General ordering Comey to not call it a FBI Criminal Investigation, but to call it a 'matter', into Crooked Hillary's use of a private email server in which, Classified emails were sent and received through a unsecured system and that during the 2016 US Election Campaign, there are reports that Lynch apparently went round the DNC, telling certain people, she would make sure the investigation did not go 'too far.'

This is Obstruction of Justice, and now here we are, even Democrats calling for Lynch to be investigated for her potential interference in the FBI criminal investigation.

In other other news....

It's been revealed, Democrat, Bernie Sanders and his wife are under FBI Investigation for Bank Fraud....



I think Trump has had a lot of mud slung in his direction of late from the likes of Sanders and nearly all the Democrats and liberal fake media, majority of it, a heap of political horse poo, yet it's now time for him to sling it back...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-a...-hire-lawyers/

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904668)

Yes it's all fake news, whatever the facts if they don't suit, 'Donald's Law' applies.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904671)

They clearly don't suit you, but then again you are always full to bursting with double standards. ;):rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35904672)

Ah well I've learnt from the Master of double standards Mick ;)

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904667)

We have had the Russian allegations for months that have uncovered nothing so far.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904673)

Who would that be then ? Never studied that course. ;)

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904709)

The investigation has not published its findings yet so that's a peculiar conclusion to jump to.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35904782)

The Donald states that the Russians meddled in the US election.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904648)

I'm sure Osem was not referring to Trump regarding people being idiotic and hypocrites, I'm sure he would be happy to say either way.

In other news, former US Attorney General Lyretta Lynch, who served under President Obama, is under Senate investigation, after former FBI Director James Comey's testimony that she ordered him to not say in a press briefing that Hillary Clinton was under FBI investigation and told him to call it a 'matter', which confused and concerned him as he said in the testimony, Lynch seemed to be aligning with the Clinton campaign and that it was only days earlier that Lynch had met with former President, Bill Clinton, on the back of a plane while it sat on the tarmac for about 40 minutes.



http://uk.businessinsider.com/senate...17-6?r=US&IR=T

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904793)

Pretty harsh :confused:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35904755)

It is not a conclusion, it is fact at this moment in time.
Once the investigations have been completed and the findings reported that fact may change.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904801)

Incorrect. No one can accurately state that the investigations into the Russian connections have found nothing unless they have inside knowledge. No running commentary is being published so we have to wait until the results of the investigation are published.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35904810)

They have found a stuff around Mike Flynn, it's why he had to resign.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904813)

No he had to resign, because he was less than honest with Vice President, Mike Pence regarding meetings and conversations he had with the Russians.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35904801)

Incorrect. No one can accurately state that the investigations into the Russian connections have found nothing unless they have inside knowledge. No running commentary is being published so we have to wait until the results of the investigation are published.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35904829)

By your own argument you cannot say the investigations have found anything unless you have inside knowledge.

So, until the results of the investigation are published then no evidence of Russian connections has publically been found.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35904842)

Arguments be they convincing or not can only lead to unfounded conclusions. Your initial argument is dead in the water.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35904959)

U.S Supreme Court lifts injunction on key parts of Trump Travel Ban Executive Order, to hear case in full in the fall.

http://news.sky.com/story/trumps-tra...ahead-10928036

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35904944)

If you were waiting for the results to be unveiled you wouldn't be prattling on about convincing arguments from people not involved in the investigation.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35905209)

Doesn't that show that when fake stories are printed they're easily discounted and withdrawn?

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35905220)

I do not think it has ever got to the stage where three journalist resign, all at once, at a well known branded news organisation.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35905220)

But I have seen a video surface of a CNN producer caught on camera by project veritas, saying he thinks the Russia, Trump story is 'mostly total BS.'

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35905228)

Well no but that's because this time they actually did print a bogus story and had to face the consequences. Proper journalists generally do not make up news. It doesn't occasionally happen, i.e totally fabrications, and they're fired or resigned when caught.

But not always which brings us too...



Project Veritas. This guy has a known history for selective editing and distortion.

He has edited videos to make people look worse and taken out his part of the context. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...eos_.282009.29

Acorn:



NPR:



So I would wait for the full video/story of his meeting with the CNN guy.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35905235)

It's more than one story that has to have been retracted though. You missed that bit.;)

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35905228)

Well no but that's because this time they actually did print a bogus story and had to face the consequences. Proper journalists generally do not make up news. It doesn't occasionally happen, i.e totally fabrications, and they're fired or resigned when caught.

But not always which brings us too...



Project Veritas. This guy has a known history for selective editing and distortion.

He has edited videos to make people look worse and taken out his part of the context. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...eos_.282009.29

Acorn:



NPR:



So I would wait for the full video/story of his meeting with the CNN guy.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35905247)

I can see there is obvious editing but I cannot see how it can be denied that he (The CNN Producer), never said those things in the video, when he was asked specific questions, and even being quite flippant about News broadcasting ethics and that in his opinion, saying Russia swung the election, but we swing theirs.' and claiming the CIA manipulating foreign governments, i.e rig their elections.

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35905258)

It's fake news again Mick, gets everywhere.... CF should ban it.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35905247)

I can see there is obvious editing but I cannot see how it can be denied that he (The CNN Producer), never said those things in the video, when he was asked specific questions, and even being quite flippant about News broadcasting ethics and that in his opinion, saying Russia swung the election, but we swing theirs.' and claiming the CIA manipulating foreign governments, i.e rig their elections.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35905264)

I think he probably said it. The swing elections thing isn't a unheard of view although if the US did swing Russian elections they're doing a poor job of it. :D

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35905264)

I think he probably said it. The swing elections thing isn't a unheard of view although if the US did swing Russian elections they're doing a poor job of it. :D

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35905970)

Just when you think he can't do anything more stupid....


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40474118

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35905992)

Please explain how Trump is responsible for this.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35905995)

From the linked article:"The US President has tweeted...

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35905992)

Please explain how Trump is responsible for this.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35906005)

'False Russian narrative'?

Didn't Trump state that the Russians had meddled in the US Presudential elections?

Originally Posted by Hugh

Also, shouldn't the President be held to a higher standard than a reporter? Could you begin to imagine the outrage if President Obama had tweeted a GIF of himself bodyslamming a Fox News reporter?

Double standards, much?