Cable Forum
Page 24 of 24 « First 1420212223 24
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)
-   -   President Trump 2.0 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33712850)

nomadking 13-01-2026 12:30
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36208872)
Thats not the person who fired the shots.
Since the window is fully down, they couldnt be trapped by it anyway.

(and if they were, shooting the driver just made it worse, as the the car went down the street anyway, out of control, so would have dragged anyone "trapped").

I really dont understand why you're so desperate to make this shooting seem ok.
I know that's not the person, who fired the shots. THAT'S MY POINT. Technically that officer was ALSO potentially at risk, as demonstrated by the previous actual experience of the officer who fired.
How is possible to put your hand inside the vehicle, if the window was open?
If you look at the 2 still images on the BBC article, the 1st is with the window only starting to open and would be impossible to reach in and open the door. The 2nd where he is being dragged along, his arm is further down and trapped.
Quote:
Ross reached into Muñoz's vehicle with his right hand and attempted to unlock the driver's door. Muñoz drove up on the kerb and accelerated away. Ross's right arm was caught in the vehicle and he was dragged along with it.
As it is, the officer reaching in to open the door was pulled around by the car reversing. He still could've been injured in that situation. Completely undeniable.


And how could anybody have known which direction the vehicle was eventually going to go? The "drive, baby, drive" shout from the wife could be seen as telling the driver to drive away quickly. It's intention might've been a less aggressive "don't wait for me", rather than "run him over". Hindsight allows for consideration of different interpretations, a split-second reaction doesn't. In the real world and in real time, there's no "what ifs" or redos.
At the point in time, she was pointed straight ahead and changed from reverse to drive and was urged to "drive, baby, drive". If you look at that factual description of events in isolation, without regard to this actual incident, what would you say was possibly going to happen to somebody in front of the vehicle? Your conclusion would be that the person was at risk of being run over. It you were watching a film with that as a scene, your immediate thought would be "is he going to get knocked over?".
You have to look at the apparent situation at that precise moment in time, without having any idea of what any intentions were. Bear in mind, the women were intentionally being obnoxious and awkward and weren't calmly complying with instructions. Their actions and intentions were more on the aggressive side of things, rather than being compliant.


I can't see what isn't there. Eg the wheels WERE pointed straight ahead AND the car was moving forwards. I ask questions and try to find the answers, whatever those answers may be. I DON'T simply accept something, whichever side it comes from.


It is unbelievable, mind-boggling, and outright SINISTER, that so many people deny the reality of moving objects. Eg People deny that when reversing and turning, the viewpoint of the driver changes. IE something that was to the left or right of the driver can up end being in front, without that something having to move. Eg somehow the wheels can be pointed left and go to point right, without pointing straight ahead at some stage. People prefer physical IMPOSSIBILITIES to justify the views that they have blindly chosen. Right or wrong, correct or incorrect doesn't come into it.

---------- Post added at 11:30 ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36208875)
Confess I was a bit confused by that one as well but thought it was just me! The US highway code seems a bit simpler - shoot first, ask questions afterwards. ;)
Nonsense. That "swinging out" is unavoidable when reversing with a turn. That line from the UK highway code simply is a warning as to the REALITY of what happens to the front of car when it reverses with a turn. It's not a phenomenon restricted to the UK or to cars. It happens to people EACH AND EVERY DAY, in and out of cars. If you walk forwards and then turn, whatever was in front of you, is now to the side and then behind you. Those objects don't have to have moved. If you walk towards a simple straight wall, but then turn left or right, is the wall in right in front of you or to the side? It's no longer in right in front of you, but it hasn't moved.

Paul 13-01-2026 18:24
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36208891)
I know that's not the person, who fired the shots. THAT'S MY POINT.
The entire set of posts was about the shooter, who got injured a few months ago, then suddenly you randomly move onto another person. Ok... :dozey:

Quote:
I ask questions and try to find the answers, whatever those answers may be. I DON'T simply accept something, whichever side it comes from.
Right ... I'm sure you believe that. :angel:

I still think you are just trying desperately to justify the shooting.
I did notice you completely skipped that part of my previous post. :sleep:
In fact, that's almost "unbelievable, mind-boggling, and outright SINISTER". ;)

You should contact the FBI - they could clearly do with your expertise to clear the officer.

nomadking 13-01-2026 20:46
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36208903)
The entire set of posts was about the shooter, who got injured a few months ago, then suddenly you randomly move onto another person. Ok... :dozey:


Right ... I'm sure you believe that. :angel:

I still think you are just trying desperately to justify the shooting.
I did notice you completely skipped that part of my previous post. :sleep:
In fact, that's almost "unbelievable, mind-boggling, and outright SINISTER". ;)

You should contact the FBI - they could clearly do with your expertise to clear the officer.
So have people accepted that when a car is reversing and turning, the front swings around? They constantly say it doesn't, and try to claim it only happens in the UK. Even if it was a 4 wheel steering vehicle, what was in front of any vehicle would still change without anything moving other than the vehicle. They also don't accept that in going from wheels pointing left to pointing right, that they at one stage have to be pointing straight forward. Then there are the claims of "he should've moved, while at the same time claiming he wasn't in front of the vehicle. They seem to think he was several yards away, when it was 1 or 2 yards, They think reactions and actions are instantaneous, with no such things as reaction times involved. People were claiming that she didn't know who she was dealing with and it was like an attempted carjacking.
Things may operate like they claim on another planet, but not in this one.
I have posted conclusive evidence that the vehicle was pointed at him and moving forwards.
Only later when finding about the way he was injured last year, and seeing the link between the 2 situations could I mention it. Still doesn't meant it's not true.
Is any of that not true? When people even refuse to see what happens to them when they move around each and every day, just to support a biased view, then that is beyond sinister.

Hugh 13-01-2026 21:19
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
1 Attachment(s)
Anyway, here’s another delusional posting on Social Media…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...4&d=1768335543

jem 13-01-2026 23:22
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36208913)
Anyway, here’s another delusional posting on Social Media…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...4&d=1768335543
Oh for crying out loud, just how much of a complete idiot can one human being be?

Paul 14-01-2026 00:41
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jem (Post 36208918)
Oh for crying out loud, just how much of a complete idiot can one human being be?
Read this topic, you might find a few contenders :angel:

Hugh 15-01-2026 18:03
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fiv...mp-2026-01-15/

This bodes well…

Quote:
The president expressed frustration that his Republican Party could lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives or the Senate in this year’s midterm elections, citing historical trends that have seen the party in power lose seats in the second year of a presidency.

“It's some deep psychological thing, but when you win the presidency, you don't win the midterms,” Trump said. He boasted that he had accomplished so much that “when you think of it, we shouldn't even have an election.”

Stephen 15-01-2026 18:17
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209031)
Spoken like a real dictator. I am so awesome who needs elections:erm:

Paul 15-01-2026 19:20
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 36209033)
Spoken like a real dictator.
You didnt need the 'tator' bit ;)

jem 15-01-2026 19:36
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 36209033)
Spoken like a real dictator. I am so awesome who needs elections:erm:
Especially ones that it looks like my party will lose, biggly!

thenry 15-01-2026 22:40
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Venezuela's opposition leader Maria Corina Machado tells reporters outside the US Capitol that she presented Donald Trump with her Nobel Peace Prize medal.

It's unclear whether Trump has accepted the medal.

https://news.sky.com/story/venezuela...#liveblog-body
:eeek:

Hugh 15-01-2026 23:39
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
I bet she didn’t give him the prize money…

daveeb 15-01-2026 23:58
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Of course he accepted the medal, why wouldn't you if you had zero scruples and a massively over inflated sense of self importance.

Stephen 16-01-2026 01:07
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
The Nobel committee already stated a few days ago that award are none transferable. So it is a meaningless gesture and the committee may even revoke it after that.

TheDaddy 16-01-2026 01:20
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 36209068)
The Nobel committee already stated a few days ago that award are none transferable. So it is a meaningless gesture and the committee may even revoke it after that.
It's not meaningless if it gets her his support for the presidency. It's ridiculous, everythjng that's going on is so ridiculous, the damage that man is doing to American society, standing and alliances won't be fixed with him being gone and the time its taken to do it in...

---------- Post added at 00:20 ---------- Previous post was at 00:18 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209066)
I bet she didn’t give him the prize money…
He doesn't need the cash, he'd have probably paid her for it and given the transactional nature of everythjng with him, he probably will

Anonymouse 16-01-2026 03:05
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 36209068)
The Nobel committee already stated a few days ago that award are none transferable. So it is a meaningless gesture and the committee may even revoke it after that.
Yes, she should lose it IMO. MLK promoted peace. Gandhi did. Hell, John Lennon did. Trump is too much like Tony Stark at the beginning of Iron Man: "Peace through superior firepower". Admittedly his weapons were being abused without his knowledge and certainly without his approval.

Yeah. One might recall "The Arsenal Of Freedom" and what happened to the people of Minos.

Though I will concede that 'Fight For Peace' is not a contradiction - that's exactly what the Allies did in WWII. That, however, is not what Trump is doing.

Hmm. I wonder what Echelon (which I bet is AI by now) makes of all this. Up yours, you damn bug! :mad:

Chris 16-01-2026 08:46
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
There’s an episode of The Office in which Tim beats Brent and Chris Finch at the annual quiz, so Finch makes up an extra game involving throwing shoes over the building in order to declare himself the real winner and steal Tim’s prize.

Just thought of that for some reason.

Hugh 16-01-2026 09:26
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
On that note, I just gave my six year old grandson the trophy I received for being the RAF Support Command High Jump Champion in 1976 - he’s really pleased he can now clear 1.90m…

Anonymouse 17-01-2026 03:32
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Oh, boy. NATO troops - French, though Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Finland, Norway and the UK are involved - have landed in Greenland.

I think DefCon has just gone up. This is no 'exercise'. The French President is talking about "land, sea and air assets".

In other words, if the nutter wants a fight, NATO will give him one. :erm:

Now he's talking about tariffs on the affected countries. Yeah, you prat, go ahead and kill American trade, why not? Next thing you know, he'll do a U-turn and he'll be found in bed (perhaps literally?) with Putin. Russia and China can just sit back while NATO self-destructs...then pick up the pieces.

In Firefly, America and China came together. Well, Whedon was almost right.

Das vidanya, tovarishch! :p:

Sirius 17-01-2026 04:23
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Unfortunately Trump is a petulant child with a big army behind him to back him up.

Dingbat 17-01-2026 11:52
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36209148)
Unfortunately Trump is a petulant child with a big army behind him to back him up.
Although the Constitution plus NATO Article 5 should hamper his ambitions.

Hugh 17-01-2026 12:26
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingbat (Post 36209157)
Although the Constitution plus NATO Article 5 should hamper his ambitions.

I'm pretty confident he doesn't feel constrained by either...

https://wapo.st/49B3hPa

Quote:
Trump Cabinet secretaries conspired to violate Constitution, judge says

“The Cabinet secretaries and, ostensibly, the president of the United States, are not honoring the First Amendment,” U.S. District Judge William Young declared.

A federal judge Thursday decried what he said were “breathtaking” constitutional violations by senior Trump administration officials and called the president an “authoritarian” who expects everyone in the executive branch to “toe the line absolutely.”

In remarks laced with outrage and disbelief, U.S. District Judge William Young said Donald Trump and top officials have a “fearful approach” to freedom of speech that would seek to “exclude from participation everyone who doesn’t agree with them.”

Young, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan, leveled the searing critique during a hearing in Boston to determine the appropriate remedies for the administration’s detentions of pro-Palestinian students last year. The judge had ruled in September that senior administration officials engaged in an illegal effort to arrest and deport noncitizen students based on their activism.

On Thursday, he again denounced the administration’s conduct in unusually stark terms. “Talking straight here,” he said. “The big problem in this case is that the Cabinet secretaries and, ostensibly, the president of the United States, are not honoring the First Amendment.”

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio engaged in an “unconstitutional conspiracy” to deprive people of their rights, Young said. “The secretary of state,” he said, his voice full of incredulity, “the senior Cabinet officer in our history, involved in this.”

Carth 17-01-2026 14:02
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
I'm pretty sure he believes God is on his side . . . which may change once he decides to slap a tariff on religion :D

thenry 17-01-2026 18:09
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2026/01/3.png

What will our coward leader say, rinse and repeat Ukraine comments. Well done.

Hugh 17-01-2026 18:45
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
What would you have him say?

papa smurf 17-01-2026 18:47
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36209159)
I'm pretty sure he believes God is on his side . . . which may change once he decides to slap a tariff on religion :D
I'm sure he thinks he is God


we should give him a Weetabix peace prize for his efforts to keep world peace

Stephen 17-01-2026 18:50
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
There is also this posted earlier.

Withdrawing the United States from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States

Quote:
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct:

Section 1. Purpose. (a) On February 4, 2025, I issued Executive Order 14199 (Withdrawing the United States from and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations and Reviewing United States Support to All International Organizations). That Executive Order directed the Secretary of State, in consultation with the United States Representative to the United Nations, to conduct a review of all international intergovernmental organizations of which the United States is a member and provides any type of funding or other support, and all conventions and treaties to which the United States is a party, to determine which organizations, conventions, and treaties are contrary to the interests of the United States. The Secretary of State has reported his findings as required by Executive Order 14199.

(b) I have considered the Secretary of State’s report and, after deliberating with my Cabinet, have determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum.

(c) Consistent with Executive Order 14199 and pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to take immediate steps to effectuate the withdrawal of the United States from the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum as soon as possible. For United Nations entities, withdrawal means ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law
Very very concerning!

https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...united-states/

thenry 17-01-2026 18:54
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209175)
What would you have him say?
Be honest. How did they go from Ukraines land to Trumps leadership giving Zelenskyy a reality check..

papa smurf 17-01-2026 19:16
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Latest from Trumpvil

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXiZHXkG-ac

Hugh 17-01-2026 19:42
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36209178)
Be honest. How did they go from Ukraines land to Trumps leadership giving Zelenskyy a reality check..
You could try answering my question…

thenry 17-01-2026 19:53
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209183)
You could try answering my question…
I did. If he can say screw Ukraine and liberate Ukraine why can he not choose one and stick to it?

I can't put words in his mouth, I can't talk for him. Your original question is difficult because I care little about him to even attempt to help him. I tuned out when he was blindly supporting Arsenal and their previous honours charge which were all so perilous.

The wind is blowing this way today :no::rolleyes:

1andrew1 17-01-2026 20:40
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36209184)
I did. If he can say screw Ukraine and liberate Ukraine why can he not choose one and stick to it?

I can't put words in his mouth, I can't talk for him. Your original question is difficult because I care little about him to even attempt to help him. I tuned out when he was blindly supporting Arsenal and their previous honours charge which were all so perilous.

The wind is blowing this way today :no::rolleyes:
How would you like a leader of the UK to respond to Trump's announcement?

Hugh 17-01-2026 20:42
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36209184)
I did. If he can say screw Ukraine and liberate Ukraine why can he not choose one and stick to it?

I can't put words in his mouth, I can't talk for him. Your original question is difficult because I care little about him to even attempt to help him. I tuned out when he was blindly supporting Arsenal and their previous honours charge which were all so perilous.

The wind is blowing this way today :no::rolleyes:
When did Starmer said "screw Ukraine"?

Dingbat 17-01-2026 20:50
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
How long until TACO time, now that the whole of Europe are telling him to go forth and multiply?

thenry 17-01-2026 20:53
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36209187)
How would you like a leader of the UK to respond to Trump's announcement?
Follow suit in his own radical changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209188)
When did Starmer said "screw Ukraine"?
Paraphrase :rolleyes:

Chris your troll splatter is required.

Hugh 17-01-2026 21:27
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
"Made up ordure" ≠ "paraphrase"…

thenry 17-01-2026 21:33
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209192)
"Made up ordure" ≠ "paraphrase"…
I'm happy as a pig in shit to point you in the direction of this quote and Google link...

Quote:
express the meaning of (something written or spoken) using different words, especially to achieve greater clarity.

https://www.google.com/search?q=para...s-wiz-hp#ebo=0

Mr K 17-01-2026 22:17
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Make
America
Go
Away

Boycott all US products. Not that they make anything of use.

Sephiroth 17-01-2026 22:23
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
I suppose this (Greenland) needs some analysis. So here goes (subject to #8 below).

1/
Trump is doing a Putin - but in a different way. I don't need to go into that any further.

2/
He is blackmailing Europe with a tariff policy that, in the long term, could negatively impact our economic growth as well as Europe's. Problem is, how do we fight back? Diplomacy won't do it; not even licking his arse.

3/
Europe needs urgently to hold a "what shall we do" conference; this isn't an EU matter - it's a European issue that doesn't need us to be under the Brussels heel. It needs cooperation.

4/
The first thing that Europe then could do (but see #8), is to implement a "USA not welcome here" policy. Basically, do a Trump. Retaliate. Slap reciprocal tariffs on their products.

5/
It now looks inevitable that that Europe will have to look after its own defence. We can put the USA on tice to quit its bases in the UK and Europe, including Greenland and give them just a few weeks to implement that.

6/
All of Europe needs to understand that Trump only understands strength and therefore strength must be shown and further developed in his face.

7/
The special relationship is all but over. If it is special, Trump can exempt us from his measures without insisting that we lick his arse. The illusion must be snuffed.

8/
And here is the problem: the associated disruption to business is likely to have dire consequences for European wellbeing. So, one strategy is to string the USA along until the mid-term elections, having sounded out the Democrats as to their opposition to Trump's upsetting the world order. Otherwise, there will be a new world order.

In writing the above, I note that the UK and France have an independent nuclear deterrent, in the UK's case limited to submarines as I understand matters, Then between the European countries we could muster c. 1 million professional soldiers under a unified command. Navies and air forces can be similarly managed and weapons production limited to home grown.

Who's gonna do all that?

Carth 17-01-2026 22:49
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
No need to do anything, I'd guess there are a few people already scratching his name on a bullet or two . . and some may be close to him

Damien 17-01-2026 22:55
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Labour, Lib Dems and Reform all have spoken out against Trump now on this. There is cross-party unity in the UK - and across Europe - against American on this.

Hugh 17-01-2026 23:22
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36209193)
I'm happy as a pig in shit to point you in the direction of this quote and Google link...
What did Starmer say against Ukraine that you paraphrased "screwed Ukraine"?

Was it this from August 2022?

https://labourlist.org/2022/08/starm...n-sovereignty/

Quote:
Keir Starmer has declared the Labour Party’s “unrelenting” support for Ukrainian sovereignty following a meeting with Ukrainian soldiers on the 31st anniversary of the country’s independence from the Soviet Union.

The Labour leader met with Ukrainian soldiers being trained by British Army officials today on a visit to Salisbury Plain. Speaking with Ukrainian and British personnel, Starmer reiterated the opposition party’s commitment to NATO and praised the work the organisation has done providing assistance to Ukraine.
Or perhaps in August 2024?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ar...f-independence

Quote:
Keir Starmer has told Ukrainians that the UK will back them “today and always” as Kyiv marks 33 years since it declared independence from the Soviet Union.

The prime minister described his message to frontline fighters and people who have sought refuge in Britain as “crystal clear” as community groups, councils and parishes around the UK plan to mark the anniversary on Saturday.

Ukraine’s supreme soviet agreed the state should leave the Moscow-based Soviet Union on 24 August 1991, a decision which Ukrainian voters backed at a referendum in December the same year.

Starmer said: “My message to all Ukrainians, whether on the frontline or here in your second home in the UK, is crystal clear: we are with you today and always.
Or was it in March 2025?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-save-ukraine/

Quote:
Britain and France will lead a European “coalition of the willing” to provide security guarantees to Ukraine and enable peace negotiations with Russia, Sir Keir Starmer said.

The Prime Minister said he and Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, were working together on a security plan which is believed to include peacekeeping troops on the ground.

This European security guarantee would then be put to the US for approval, Sir Keir added.

thenry 17-01-2026 23:37
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
There's a lot of communication between our PM and the media I can't find the exact pieces. He has clearly spoken of his support for Ukraine which would be the opposite of screwed. It was just a clearer way of saying he wouldn't ignore what's happening to Ukraine.

There's some stuff in this lengthy piece but no, no mention of the actual word screwed

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b2577476.html

papa smurf 18-01-2026 09:40
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenry (Post 36209203)
There's a lot of communication between our PM and the media I can't find the exact pieces. He has clearly spoken of his support for Ukraine which would be the opposite of screwed. It was just a clearer way of saying he wouldn't ignore what's happening to Ukraine.

There's some stuff in this lengthy piece but no, no mention of the actual word screwed

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b2577476.html
So to be clear he never said screwed :angel:

Anonymouse 18-01-2026 10:20
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36209175)
What would you have him say?
Um, he's lost all ability to talk sense, it's more about what we say, viz. "Don't dismantle NATO and start a nuclear war".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36029199)
No need to do anything, I'd guess there are a few people already scratching his name on a bullet or two . . and some may be close to him
We can but hope. In a UFO reboot fanfic I'm trying to write, a member of the Secret Service does just that...despite being Republican, and despite knowing he won't (and doesn't) leave the room alive. Some of them are sensible, i.e. they don't agree with him. Right now they're our best bet.

Terrible, isn't it, when we're hoping an ostensible ally will be assassinated...?

(Wonder what Echelon will make of this, Carth? :p:)

Mind you, has America ever had a forceful but successful Democratic president?

TheDaddy 18-01-2026 10:31
Re: President Trump 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymouse (Post 36209214)
Mind you, has America ever had a forceful but successful Democratic president?[/FONT]
They had the most forceful and successful imho in FDR


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:24.
Page 24 of 24 « First 1420212223 24
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum