Cable Forum
Page 30 of 32 « First 2026272829 30 3132
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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

1andrew1 05-01-2018 16:42
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Great live updates on the book here.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8143136.html

Mick 05-01-2018 17:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931134)
Great live updates on the book here.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8143136.html
Yawn. :zzz:

Piers Morgan sums it up in a tweet just now...

Quote:
Piers Morgan‏ @piersmorgan

Everyone in NYC, DC & LA is going absolutely nuts about every juicy detail of Michael Wolff's (sensational!) book.
The rest of America, the part that voted for Trump, won't give a monkey's cuss about any of it.

Mr K 05-01-2018 18:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
He does seem to have a cult following. If he murdered his granny live on air, they'd still vote for him ! However these diehards will be in the minority come the next election. The first past the post system could undo him and the Republicans.

Mr Banana 05-01-2018 18:37
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931154)
He does seem to have a cult following. If he murdered his granny live on air, they'd still vote for him ! However these diehards will be in the minority come the next election. The first past the post system could undo him and the Republicans.

The books in 4 years time, when he is replaced will make better reading.

Hugh 05-01-2018 18:55
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931146)
Yawn. :zzz:

Piers Morgan sums it up in a tweet just now...

Quote:
Piers Morgan‏ @piersmorgan

Everyone in NYC, DC & LA is going absolutely nuts about every juicy detail of Michael Wolff's (sensational!) book.
The rest of America, the part that voted for Trump, won't give a monkey's cuss about any of it.
Well, the 60.8 million voters in the rest of the USA who voted for Clinton, rather than the 5 million Clinton voters who live in NYC, DC, & LA, might give a monkey’s cuss about it, and buy the book.

The NYC, DC, and LA voters were only 7.5% of the total Clinton vote, so Piers’ assertion may be more about him sucking up to Trump than being based in reality...

Mick 05-01-2018 19:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
The book is still fantasy Hugh, even the author himself admits it. Sheeple will be sheeple though and waste their money on pure fiction.

What's not fiction which has just gone BREAKING: GOP senators make first known criminal referral in congressional Russia probes, targeting author of Trump dossier. (Source: Associated Press).

---------- Post added at 19:23 ---------- Previous post was at 19:14 ----------

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Two Republican senators have made the first known criminal referral in congressional investigations of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. They’re targeting the author of a dossier of allegations about President Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham say they’ve referred former British spy Christopher Steele to the Justice Department for investigation about false statements he may have made about “the distribution of claims contained in the dossier.”

Lawmakers cannot prosecute criminal activity. But they generally refer any criminal violations they find to the Justice Department. The senators say part of the referral is classified.

The dossier was compiled during the campaign and contains allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia. It was partially paid for by Democrats.
There's the collusion and corruption right there with the Crooked Democrats.

https://apnews.com/281c60f078ed4e43bee3fb7f3e0598f8

Damien 05-01-2018 19:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Since Trump had people actually working directly for him who've been charged (not referred) does that mean Trump is crooked too?

Mick 05-01-2018 19:43
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931161)
Since Trump had people actually working directly for him who've been charged (not referred) does that mean Trump is crooked too?
No, because if you remember, Trump fired Manafort and Flynn when he learned of their misdeeds.

And lets be honest the crimes they have been charged with are petty crimes, without absolutely no connection to any Russian collusion or election interfering.

Has any money changed hands you know of during the election from the Trump himself to pay for Opposition Research ?

The only money so far that is known to have been paid, is the DNC and Crooked Hillary paying Fusion GPS and which has now caused two GOP Senators to make Criminal referrals in Congress.

1andrew1 05-01-2018 19:47
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931161)
Since Trump had people actually working directly for him who've been charged (not referred) does that mean Trump is crooked too?
Unless you follow Trump blindly, it makes him more crooked given the fact that they've been charged and not just referred.

Damien 05-01-2018 19:50
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931163)
No, because if you remember, Trump fired Manafort and Flynn when he learned of their misdeeds.

And lets be honest the crimes they have been charged with are petty crimes, without absolutely no connection to any Russian collusion or election interfering.

Has any money changed hands you know of during the election from the Trump himself to pay for Opposition Research ?

The only money so far that is known to have been paid, is the DNC and Crooked Hillary paying Fusion GPS and which has now caused two GOP Senators to make Criminal referrals in Congress.
Right. So two actual criminal charges of people on Trump's payroll is not as a bad as two senators requesting that the head of a firm the DNC paid for is charged?

And Flynn was charged for lying. Just as Steele has been accused of lying. Why is that different?

I am all for this guy being charged and prosecuted if he lied under oath or committed some other crime. But the double standard where there is always some excuse or fake news if it's Trump but it's a open and shut case for the democrats is increasingly absurd.

Since the other two have been charged for 'petty' crimes then what has Steel been charged with?

Mick 05-01-2018 20:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931165)
Unless you follow Trump blindly, it makes him more crooked given the fact that they've been charged and not just referred.
If you read the article properly, I know you have issues reading, given you repeat things that people have already posted. It says Senators cannot prosecute, they can only refer Criminal matters to the U.S Department of Justice. :dunce:

---------- Post added at 20:11 ---------- Previous post was at 19:52 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931166)
Right. So two actual criminal charges of people on Trump's payroll is not as a bad as two senators requesting that the head of a firm the DNC paid for is charged?

And Flynn was charged for lying. Just as Steele has been accused of lying. Why is that different?

I am all for this guy being charged and prosecuted if he lied under oath or committed some other crime. But the double standard where there is always some excuse or fake news if it's Trump but it's a open and shut case for the democrats is increasingly absurd.

Since the other two have been charged for 'petty' crimes then what has Steel been charged with?
He has not been charged with anything yet, the referral has only just been made.

What part of 'They were fired' did you not understand ? So they were NO longer on his pay roll ?

Are you telling me people who hire people with criminal liabilities are tainted ?

There is no double standards because there is no evidence of Trump paying anybody to get dirt on Hillary, unless you know something the rest of us and Congress and Robert Mueller himself doesn't ?

However, there is documented evidence the Democratic National Committee party did, along with Crooked Hillary, pay in to the coffers of Fusion GPS, for the Russian Dossier on Trump during the 2016 Election.

This is crucial because there is the collusion right there, god help Hillary if she was president, thankfully she isn't but she would be facing certain impeachment proceedings, if she had and this is just the start, the Clinton Foundation is being re-investigated and together with Classified emails of hers being found on Huma Abedin's perverted husband laptop, the FBI investigation of her emails being certainly re-opened, yet again, she would be facing a lot of legal ramifications right now, as president.

1andrew1 05-01-2018 20:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931167)
If you read the article properly, I know you have issues reading, given you repeat things that people have already posted.
I'm in fine company though. :)
3/1/18 11:24pm I posted Blair's denial
4/1/18 02:01am You too posted Blair's denial

Mick 05-01-2018 20:48
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931172)
You're not though because you didn't understand that GOP Senators can't prosecute, given you were comparing why one vs another had not been charged. :rolleyes: :dunce:

Mr K 05-01-2018 20:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Nice hat you're wearing tonight Mick ;)

Mick 05-01-2018 20:53
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931175)
Nice hat you're wearing tonight Mick ;)
No hats. Just facts. Next... ? :)

Damien 05-01-2018 20:55
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931167)
What part of 'They were fired' did you not understand ? So they were NO longer on his pay roll ?

Are you telling me people who hire people with criminal liabilities are tainted ?
And nor was Steele employed by the Democrats today. If the Democrats are tainted because somebody they had paid has been charged for lying why isn't Trump tainted because somebody he had paid has been 'referred' for lying?

Quote:
There is no double standards because there is no evidence of Trump paying anybody to get dirt on Hillary, unless you know something the rest of us and Congress and Robert Mueller himself doesn't ?

However, there is documented evidence the Democratic National Committee party did, along with Crooked Hillary, pay in to the coffers of Fusion GPS, for the Russian Dossier on Trump during the 2016 Election.
This alleged crime, we know little about so far, isn't to do with the fact he made the dossier but that is accused of lying to someone somewhere (presumably under oath or to the FBI).

I think if he has committed a crime then he should be invested/charged. If that implicates Clinton or someone else at the DNC they should be charged too. It's little to do with me.

But if you think the Democrats are tainted by this because they had employed him then I can't see why Trump isn't tainted because he had employed Flynn. You believe every accusation levelled against Clinton and none of them against Trump., even when those accusations are very similar.

Hugh 05-01-2018 21:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/u...committee.html

I think this sums up the reasons for this.
Quote:
“Publicizing a criminal referral based on classified information raises serious questions about whether this letter is nothing more than another attempt to discredit government sources, in the midst of an ongoing criminal investigation,” said Joshua A. Levy, the lawyer for Fusion. “We should all be skeptical in the extreme.”
It’s a win-win for Grassley and the Republicans - if anything does come out of it, they win; if nothing comes out of it, it’s a ‘cover up’ by the ‘deep state’ and the ‘corrupt FBI’, and they win.

And in the meantime, less focus on what the Committee are supposed to be looking at (congressional investigations into Russian election meddling), and more distraction.

Mick 05-01-2018 21:35
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931177)
And nor was Steele employed by the Democrats today. If the Democrats are tainted because somebody they had paid has been charged for lying why isn't Trump tainted because somebody he had paid has been 'referred' for lying?
Again, they were fired, I don't get why you don't get this, they did something wrong, Trump fired them for doing so. You cannot have a go at someone who took the correct course of action that was only available to him at the time. They lied, he fired them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
I think if he has committed a crime then he should be invested/charged. If that implicates Clinton or someone else at the DNC they should be charged too. It's little to do with me.
When there is documentation that says DNC and Hillary paid or contributed to Fusion GPS, then I would say there is criminal intent. The issue here is is that it is unclear if elements within the FBI also paid Steele for the information, when Deputy AG, Rod Rosenstein was asked who paid for it, he said he knew the answer but wasn't prepared to say either way in a open setting. That to me suggests they did, because someone who is essentially in charge of the FBI, would want to vindicate a department they have dealings in and say no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
But if you think the Democrats are tainted by this because they had employed him then I can't see why Trump isn't tainted because he had employed Flynn. You believe every accusation levelled against Clinton and none of them against Trump., even when those accusations are very similar.
The distinction is because the actions Trump took when he learned of their failings. Manafort was fired, as was Flynn because they had lied.

The only accusation so far is Russian collusion and no I don't believe it because there has been no evidence to suggest it happened, only hearsay.

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:28 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931181)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/u...committee.html

I think this sums up the reasons for this.

It’s a win-win for Grassley and the Republicans - if anything does come out of it, they win; if nothing comes out of it, it’s a ‘cover up’ by the ‘deep state’ and the ‘corrupt FBI’, and they win.

And in the meantime, less focus on what the Committee are supposed to be looking at, and more distraction.
LMAO. :D

Why am I not surprised New York times, would align itself with Fusion GPS and come out with trash like that, NYT is very upset that the party it's aligned with has been caught with it's trousers down. I totally don't feel sorry for those crooks, who were only too happy to leak photos from an active crime scene investigation from my home city days after a Terrorist Attack not that long ago. :mad:

Damien 05-01-2018 21:45
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931182)
Again, they were fired, I don't get why you don't get this, they did something wrong, Trump fired them for doing so. You cannot have a go at someone who took the correct course of action that was only available to him at the time. They lied, he fired them.
I do get it. Since the DNC no longer employ Steele then this allegation doesn't require them being fired.

Quote:
When there is documentation that says DNC and Hillary paid or contributed to Fusion GPS, then I would say there is criminal intent.
For what crime? It doesn't appear this 'referral' has anything to do with the creation of the Dossier. They're saying he lied to someone in authority. It's the same as the charge against Flynn not being to do with Russia itself by lying about that to the FBI.



The distinction is because the actions Trump took when he learned of their failings. Manafort was fired, as was Flynn because they had lied.

Quote:
The only accusation so far is Russian collusion and no I don't believe it because there has been no evidence to suggest it happened, only hearsay.
There are plenty of accusations against Trump. From women who allege sexual assault to the collusion. Only one on-going investigation though. Clinton too has plenty of accusations but only one (reopened) investigation too.

I think we should await to see if anyone is actually convicted of anything before calling them crooked or criminals.

Quote:
Why am I not surprised New York times, would align itself with Fusion GPS and come out with trash like that, NYT is very upset that the party it's aligned with has been caught with it's trousers down. I totally don't feel sorry for those crooks, who were only too happy to leak photos from an active crime scene investigation from my home city days after a Terrorist Attack not that long ago. :mad:
The New York Times is just reporting on it. The quote comes from a lawyer for Fusion GPS. They're reporting the action from the senators and the reaction from those involved.

Mick 05-01-2018 22:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931187)
I do get it. Since the DNC no longer employ Steele then this allegation doesn't require them being fired.
DNC never employed Steele as far as I am aware but they paid for the fake research and I say fake because nothing in the dossier is substantiated or verified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
For what crime? It doesn't appear this 'referral' has anything to do with the creation of the Dossier. They're saying he lied to someone in authority. It's the same as the charge against Flynn not being to do with Russia itself by lying about that to the FBI.
It's unclear because parts of the referral have been deemed classified, so there may be more to this referral than is known, other than lying to Federal Agents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
There are plenty of accusations against Trump. From women who allege sexual assault to the collusion. Only one on-going investigation though. Clinton too has plenty of accusations but only one (reopened) investigation too.
I guess you missed the story on Gloria Alfred's daughter willing to pay big bucks for women to come forward and accuse Trump of sexual stuff during the election ?

Funny how they all vanished in to oblivion once the election was over and only reared their heads again during the Roy Moore Senate race in Alabama, where he too, was also conveniently facing sexual allegations and yet again, election is over, where are these women who came out in droves accusing Moore ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
I think we should await to see if anyone is actually convicted of anything before calling them crooked or criminals.
Well, normally I would agree, but not when the evidence is right there, that was so evidently missed, I mean, look during the Clinton email investigation, people taking the 5th, Clinton's server tech guy using Bleachbit to remove 33,000 emails, Bill Clinton talking with then AG, Lynch on back of a plane for 45 minutes days before Comey cleared the path for Hillary.

However, now we know why she was really cleared, because we had high level folk in the FBI totally biased in her favor, and totally against Trump winning, via that Text message from Peter Strzok to his mistress, discussing an 'Insurance Policy' they spoke of in Deputy Director for the FBI Andrew McCabe's office, did Hillary pay these off too, like she did with the Russian Dossier and Fusion GPS ?

I mean I am no expert investigator but it's not hard to join the dots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
The New York Times is just reporting on it. The quote comes from a lawyer for Fusion GPS. They're reporting the action from the senators and the reaction from those involved.
I find it just a tad funny how Fusion GPS go running to NYT, why not AP or any other news outlet, that isn't biased against the Trump Administration?

1andrew1 05-01-2018 22:12
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931173)
You're not though because you didn't understand that GOP Senators can't prosecute, given you were comparing why one vs another had not been charged. :rolleyes: :dunce:
Um, you criticised me for posting something that someone had previously posted and I pointed out that you had done exactly the same thing yesterday. I'm not perfect and that makes two of us.

Mr Banana 05-01-2018 22:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931190)
Um, you criticised me for posting something that someone had previously posted and I pointed out that you had done exactly the same thing yesterday. I'm not perfect and that makes two of us.
No ones perfect Andrew, well apart from Mick and Trump, they are always right.

Mr K 05-01-2018 22:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
'Favour' not 'favor' Mick. We're not another state of the US yet...

Mick 05-01-2018 22:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931190)
Um, you criticised me for posting something that someone had previously posted and I pointed out that you had done exactly the same thing yesterday. I'm not perfect and that makes two of us.
As I said, no it doesn't because you went off on a tangent about why they had not been prosecuted, I am pointing out to you, Senators don't prosecute, they're law makers, not law enforcers. ;)

BREAKING: GOP aka Republican Party rally around their President tonight... The Reviews of the book are in...

https://twitter.com/GOP/status/949395088735723520

:rofl:

Mr K 05-01-2018 22:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931197)
As I said, no it doesn't because you went off on a tangent about why they had not been prosecuted, I am pointing out to you, Senators don't prosecute, they're law makers, not law enforcers. ;)

BREAKING: GOP aka Republican Party rally around their President tonight... The Reviews of the book are in...

https://twitter.com/GOP/status/949395088735723520

:rofl:
Hardly breaking news a GOP tweet.... Desperate times indeed for Trump Inc...

Mr Banana 05-01-2018 22:32
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931197)
As I said, no it doesn't because you went off on a tangent about why they had not been prosecuted, I am pointing out to you, Senators don't prosecute, they're law makers, not law enforcers. ;)

BREAKING: GOP aka Republican Party rally around their President tonight... The Reviews of the book are in...

https://twitter.com/GOP/status/949395088735723520

:rofl:
The people tweeting below the GOP post are certainly not rallying around their President.

1andrew1 05-01-2018 22:44
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931199)
Hardly breaking news a GOP tweet.... Desperate times indeed for Trump Inc...
Funny how Trump suddenly develops a liking for sources he previously derided as fake news!

Mick 06-01-2018 01:28
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931201)
The people tweeting below the GOP post are certainly not rallying around their President.
Over 700 comments. Compared to 2400 likes on the Tweet so far. 3 x as many likes than comments disagrees with you (and I doubt all the comments are negative). But nice try. :rolleyes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931202)
Funny how Trump suddenly develops a liking for sources he previously derided as fake news!
And when did Trump deride his own party, GOP as Fake News. More inaccuracies from you Andrew and more to the point what are you on about ? :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 01:28 ---------- Previous post was at 00:29 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931199)
Hardly breaking news a GOP tweet.... Desperate times indeed for Trump Inc...
The only desperation, I see is from the Democrat side, given they tried to steal an election via paying for a fake Russian dossier in an attempt get Trump in to trouble via the FBI later on down the line perchance?

I would say the GOP party rallying around their President is big news, was this crap book full of lies and deceit, suppose to have them distance them from him ?

That equally would have been news too.

Mr Banana 06-01-2018 08:22
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Likes say nothing Mick, words do. Here is one of many examples but hey, appreciate you will never accept he is wrong on any subject and you will probably still defend him if a mushroom cloud engulfed you.

“Remember, folks. This isn't some random Twitter whack job ranting away and embarrassing himself. This is the president of the United States, embarrassing the whole damned country” twitter.com/realDonaldTrum…

1andrew1 06-01-2018 11:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931206)
https://twitter.com/GOP/status/949395088735723520
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931202)
Funny how Trump suddenly develops a liking for sources he previously derided as fake news!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931206)
And when did Trump deride his own party, GOP as Fake News. More inaccuracies from you Andrew and more to the point what are you on about ? :rolleyes:
See the tweet's contents. After criticising the mainstream media for being fake news, he's now posting excerpts from the likes of the New York Times and CNN to support his views. Are these sources no longer fake news? :confused:

pip08456 06-01-2018 11:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931229)
See the tweet's contents. After criticising the mainstream media for being fake news, he's now posting excerpts from the likes of the New York Times and CNN to support his views. Are these sources no longer fake news? :confused:
If you mean in the GOP tweet that Mick linked to then you are wrong again. That tweet is not by Trump.

1andrew1 06-01-2018 11:32
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35931230)
If you mean in the GOP tweet that Mick linked to then you are wrong again. That tweet is not by Trump.
Trump retweeted the GOP tweet.

Mick 06-01-2018 11:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931214)
Likes say nothing Mick, words do. Here is one of many examples but hey, appreciate you will never accept he is wrong on any subject and you will probably still defend him if a mushroom cloud engulfed you.

“Remember, folks. This isn't some random Twitter whack job ranting away and embarrassing himself. This is the president of the United States, embarrassing the whole damned country” twitter.com/realDonaldTrum…
I couldn’t give a stuff what you do or don’t appreciate. There are many thing I don’t agree with this President on, but those views, I choose not to share and that’s my prerogative.

As for the comment, it a hideous remark probably by a Hillary fan, still upset that she thankfully lost. ;)

Of course likes say a lot. It’s not about defending him either, I just refuse to join in on the pathetic ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ and hysteria bandwagon. So stop attacking me with pathetic connotations because I refuse to join it. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 11:38 ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931234)
Trump retweeted the GOP tweet.
So bloody what ?

You are being deliberately obtuse as usual. :rolleyes:

If people in the liberal media are finding issues with the book, then it’s tool to express strong criticism of the book that even the other side of the fence are finding issues with it.

1andrew1 06-01-2018 11:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931235)
If people in the liberal media are finding issues with the book, then it’s tool to express strong criticism of the book that even the other side of the fence are finding issues with it.
I would totally agree with you on this point were it not for the fact that Trump has said CNN and the New York Times are fake news.

Mick 06-01-2018 12:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931238)
I would totally agree with you on this point were it not for the fact that Trump has said CNN and the New York Times are fake news.
Sigh. :rolleyes:

If people, the audience this book is aimed for and they are the ones even finding fault with it, you use that as an advantage to mock it and take pot shots at.

1andrew1 06-01-2018 13:07
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931241)
Sigh. :rolleyes:

If people, the audience this book is aimed for and they are the ones even finding fault with it, you use that as an advantage to mock it and take pot shots at.
Clearly Trump and GOP fuelling the fire of publicity is only driving sales higher! :dunce: Its sales are unexpectedly high and it's out of stock until mid-January!
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/fir...781250158062#/

He should have learnt a lesson from Barabra Streisand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

A sensible reaction would have been for him to publish his tax returns thereby removing all suspicion that he received money from foreigners to support his election campaign, and distracting from the book.

Hugh 06-01-2018 13:58
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Interesting comment from Grassley and Lindsey Graham re Steele.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42586855
Quote:
In a joint statement from Mr Grassley and his colleague, Lindsey Graham, who chairs a number of senate subcommittees, the senators said they were not alleging Mr Steele had committed any crime. Rather. they had passed on the information for "further investigation only".

Mr Banana 06-01-2018 14:59
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Latest tweet from the orange buffoon. Wonder if he reads the responses, you have to look really hard to find anything positive?

....Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart. Crooked Hillary Clinton also played these cards very hard and, as everyone knows, went down in flames. I went from VERY successful businessman, to top T.V. Star........to President of the United States (on my first try). I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius....and a very stable genius at that!

Hugh 06-01-2018 15:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931265)
Latest tweet from the orange buffoon. Wonder if he reads the responses, you have to look really hard to find anything positive?

....Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart. Crooked Hillary Clinton also played these cards very hard and, as everyone knows, went down in flames. I went from VERY successful businessman, to top T.V. Star........to President of the United States (on my first try). I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius....and a very stable genius at that!
He ran in 2000 to be nominated as the candidate for the Reform Party, and qualified for two Presidential Primaries.

Mr Banana 06-01-2018 16:06
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931268)
He ran in 2000 to be nominated as the candidate for the Reform Party, and qualified for two Presidential Primaries.
Obama, George W Bush and Bill Clinton also won on their first attempt apparently.

Itshim 06-01-2018 16:09
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I voted for trump ANYONE would have had my vote over Clinton

Mr K 06-01-2018 19:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 35931272)
I voted for trump ANYONE would have had my vote over Clinton
Like Trump, you must be a 'stable genius' then ! ;)

papa smurf 06-01-2018 19:54
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931305)
Like Trump, you must be a 'stable genius' then ! ;)
Still showing your respect for democracy then .

Mr K 06-01-2018 20:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35931309)
Still showing your respect for democracy then .
Well Clinton got 2.8 million more votes than the 'stable genius', so if he had any respect for democracy and everyone's vote being equal....

Hugh 06-01-2018 20:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I thought a stable genius was someone who could quickly shoe a horse in it’s stall without it noticing...

Mick 06-01-2018 20:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931312)
Well Clinton got 2.8 million more votes than the 'stable genius', so if he had any respect for democracy and everyone's vote being equal....
You keep throwing out this crap argument and I keep telling you cannot have California and New York deciding who is President and forgetting about all the ones in the in the middle. :rolleyes:

Trump won more States and it's this what wins the Presidency. They both entered the race on that understanding, however much you/they disagree with it.

Damien 06-01-2018 20:52
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931319)
You keep throwing out this crap argument and I keep telling you cannot have California and New York deciding who is President and forgetting about all the ones in the in the middle. :rolleyes:

Trump won more States and it's this what wins the Presidency. They both entered the race on that understanding, however much you/they disagree with it.
A better argument against Smurfs post is that in a free society you're allowed to oppose those in power. It's those who think a democratic vote should shut down opposition who are undemocratic, not those in the opposition.

---------- Post added at 20:52 ---------- Previous post was at 20:46 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931321)
That had absolutely nothing to do with what I posted.
No. It's to do with what Mr K posted. I was saying that there were better responses.

Osem 06-01-2018 20:52
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931320)
A better argument against Smurfs post is that in a free society you're allowed to oppose those in power. It's those who think a democratic vote should shut down opposition who are undemocratic, not those in the opposition.
Those in 'oppositon' are entitled to disagree as much as they like. That isn't the same as trying to overturn a legal process whether it's Trump's election or the Brexit referendum. That's democracy.

1andrew1 06-01-2018 21:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35931323)
Those in 'oppositon' are entitled to disagree as much as they like. That isn't the same as trying to overturn a legal process whether it's Trump's election or the Brexit referendum. That's democracy.
Should a US President be impeached and have to step down that's democratic too.

Damien 06-01-2018 21:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35931323)
Those in 'oppositon' are entitled to disagree as much as they like. That isn't the same as trying to overturn a legal process whether it's Trump's election or the Brexit referendum. That's democracy.
Mr K just had a go at Trump that's all.

Mick 06-01-2018 21:28
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931326)
Should a US President be impeached and have to step down that's democratic too.
They have to have committed an impeachable offense. High crime or misdemeanor, first for it to become a democratic decision in the House of Representatives and then the Senate. The process can take a long time. Bill Clinton was Impeached by the House, but cleared in the Senate, thus, he was not removed from office.

People call Trumps tweeting in to question but the President is entitled to his First Amendment rights like every other American citizen is.

A misdemeanor is about a President abusing his Constitutional powers.

A President cannot be removed from office because someone doesn't like how orange they look (I think calling someone how they look by the colour of the skin is plain nasty and ignorant btw) or how much crap someone thinks they are posting on twitter and obviously twitter was not around when the Constitution was written.

People with Republican Party allegiance had to put up with Obama for 8 years and yes there was even protests when he won the Presidency.

But just going back to the popular vote. When it was Bush vs. Al Gore, I really wanted Al Gore to win, the days when I was all for Democrats, a lots changed since then. Gore won the popular vote by hundreds of thousands.

Gore won the popular vote, but there was a bit of a tussle with Florida, Gore had 266 Electoral College votes, Bush had 246, Bush needed Florida to win, but so did Gore, this was the closest presidential election in the nation's history, with a .009% margin, 537 votes was in it, a recount was called for and ultimately the decision went to the Florida Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. The high court's contentious 5:4 decision that was announced on December 12, 2000, ended a statewide recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court on December 8, effectively awarding Florida's 25 EC votes to Bush and as history recalls, granting him the Presidency.

Osem 06-01-2018 21:49
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931327)
Mr K just had a go at Trump that's all.
Well as you can see, my comment wasn't aimed at anyone in particular or restricted to Trump's election. If something has been done improperly it's fine to complain and try to remedy the wrong. Thus far Trump hasn't been found to have done anything illegal. What isn't democratic is trying to overturn the outcome of a perfectly legal vote by spurious means just because you don't happen to like the result. Those who don't like Trump (or Brexit for that matter) are free to moan for as long and as often as they like but in the absence of something which renders the vote illegal they'll just have to suck it up I'm afraid... ;)

Mr K 06-01-2018 22:49
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35931334)
Well as you can see, my comment wasn't aimed at anyone in particular or restricted to Trump's election. If something has been done improperly it's fine to complain and try to remedy the wrong. Thus far Trump hasn't been found to have done anything illegal. What isn't democratic is trying to overturn the outcome of a perfectly legal vote by spurious means just because you don't happen to like the result. Those who don't like Trump (or Brexit for that matter) are free to moan for as long and as often as they like but in the absence of something which renders the vote illegal they'll just have to suck it up I'm afraid... ;)
Think you're confusing different points of view on an internet forum, with attempts to take over the World old chap ! It would be a very boring forum if different opinions weren't allowed...
(and if Trump hasn't done anything illegal, it just means he's got very good/expensive lawyers ;) )

Mick 06-01-2018 22:59
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931338)
Think you're confusing different points of view on an internet forum, with attempts to take over the World old chap ! It would be a very boring forum if different opinions weren't allowed...
(and if Trump hasn't done anything illegal, it just means he's got very good/expensive lawyers ;) )
It means no such thing. One has to be charged with a crime first for his lawyers to become essential.

passingbat 06-01-2018 23:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 35931272)
I voted for trump ANYONE would have had my vote over Clinton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931305)
Like Trump, you must be a 'stable genius' then ! ;)

No! he just made the right decision

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35931312)
Well Clinton got 2.8 million more votes than the 'stable genius', so if he had any respect for democracy and everyone's vote being equal....

You clearly don't understand the US voting system. That remark is pointless, given the system they choose

papa smurf 07-01-2018 10:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35931340)
No! he just made the right decision




You clearly don't understand the US voting system. That remark is pointless, given the system they choose
he doesn't understand ours either .

passingbat 07-01-2018 12:32
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931319)
You keep throwing out this crap argument and I keep telling you cannot have California and New York deciding who is President and forgetting about all the ones in the in the middle. :rolleyes:

Especially California; America would be run over by Illegal immigrants, guilty of crimes and released from jails. Law and order would be over. Maybe Trump should build a second wall separaring California if they don't come to their senses and start obeying Federal Laws ;)

Hugh 07-01-2018 12:35
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35931381)
Especially California; America would be run over by Illegal immigrants, guilty of crimes and released from jails. Law and order would be over. Maybe Trump should build a second wall separaring California if they don't come to their senses and start obeying Federal Laws ;)
I thought the Republican Party and the Tea Party was all about “States’ Rights"?

pip08456 07-01-2018 12:55
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Something Trump supporters and haters can both enjoy (in different ways)

Trumpy Bear!

passingbat 07-01-2018 13:07
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931383)
I thought the Republican Party and the Tea Party was all about “States’ Rights"?

I believe certain Federal Laws 0ver ride State laws, Such as Protecting the safety of the United States of America?


Would you like illegal immigrants who have commited crimes in the UK, released from jail, free to wander around the UK?

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 13:34
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931331)
They have to have committed an impeachable offense. High crime or misdemeanor, first for it to become a democratic decision in the House of Representatives and then the Senate. The process can take a long time. Bill Clinton was Impeached by the House, but cleared in the Senate, thus, he was not removed from office.

People call Trumps tweeting in to question but the President is entitled to his First Amendment rights like every other American citizen is.

A misdemeanor is about a President abusing his Constitutional powers.

A President cannot be removed from office because someone doesn't like how orange they look (I think calling someone how they look by the colour of the skin is plain nasty and ignorant btw) or how much crap someone thinks they are posting on twitter and obviously twitter was not around when the Constitution was written.

People with Republican Party allegiance had to put up with Obama for 8 years and yes there was even protests when he won the Presidency.

But just going back to the popular vote. When it was Bush vs. Al Gore, I really wanted Al Gore to win, the days when I was all for Democrats, a lots changed since then. Gore won the popular vote by hundreds of thousands.

Gore won the popular vote, but there was a bit of a tussle with Florida, Gore had 266 Electoral College votes, Bush had 246, Bush needed Florida to win, but so did Gore, this was the closest presidential election in the nation's history, with a .009% margin, 537 votes was in it, a recount was called for and ultimately the decision went to the Florida Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. The high court's contentious 5:4 decision that was announced on December 12, 2000, ended a statewide recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court on December 8, effectively awarding Florida's 25 EC votes to Bush and as history recalls, granting him the Presidency.
http://www.marieclaire.com/politics/...appearing-tan/

Hugh 07-01-2018 14:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35931386)
I believe certain Federal Laws 0ver ride State laws, Such as Protecting the safety of the United States of America?


Would you like illegal immigrants who have commited crimes in the UK, released from jail, free to wander around the UK?
You appear to have missed my point - one of the tenets of the Tea Party and a large section of the Republican Party is that States know better than the Federal Government about which laws are best applied in their individual states, as they think that the Federal Government "over-reaches".

But to answer your point - I believe if an undocumented immigrant has committed a crime, they should be deported.

Mick 07-01-2018 16:09
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931388)
Sorry (well, actually I am not), I don't click links that people don't bother to explain what they are linking to and why. :rolleyes:

I hope you're not trying to justify calling someone by their skin colour. Given that you have bold my reference to calling someone 'nasty and ignorant' for doing such a thing.

My point still remains, attacking someone by referencing their skin colour, is actually quite pathetic, which usually means they have no other valid argument to present, so they attack appearances instead.

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 16:20
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931412)
Sorry (well, actually I am not), I don't click links that people don't bother to explain what they are linking to and why. :rolleyes:

I hope you're not trying to justify calling someone by their skin colour. Given that you have bold my reference to calling someone 'nasty and ignorant' for doing such a thing.

My point still remains, attacking someone by referencing their skin colour, is actually quite pathetic, which usually means they have no other valid argument to present, so they attack appearances instead.
Mick - I have no valid argument I want to present about this egotistical moron. I think the man is a disgusting, repulsive excuse for a human being and I have no problem calling a man who chooses to paint himself orange - an orange baffoon.

Is that clear enough for you?

pip08456 07-01-2018 16:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931414)
Mick - I have no valid argument I want to present about this egotistical moron. I think the man is a disgusting, repulsive excuse for a human being and I have no problem calling a man who chooses to paint himself orange - an orange baffoon.

Is that clear enough for you?
It would appear your link does not agree with your POV, pity you didn't read it before posting.

Quote:
Trump might *never* have had a spray tan addiction to begin with.
Quote:
There's a lot about Donald Trump that we can never understand or unpack, but this? This seems doable. So let's dig deep into an investigation of what appears to be Trump's breakup with his spray tan.

To get to the bottom of things, we reached out to an expert who's worked with Trump personally—Cleveland-based makeup artist Jason Kelly, who handled Trump's look (and a slew of other prominent Republicans) at the 2016 Republican National Convention.

"He didn't have any liquid or cream foundation on, or spray tan actually," Kelly reveals, explaining that the key to spotting a spray tan is all in the knuckles (or elbows/knees/anywhere the body bends), where you'll see creases that give the tan away. "The newer ones nowadays are a lot better, but I have an eye for it and I can spot it a mile away."

What's more, Kelly reports that the orange tone we see in pictures might be more a result of lighting than of Trump's tanning routine. "When I met him, he didn't really look orange at all," Kelly explains. "Not the way he did in all the previous pictures I had seen when I was doing my homework."

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 17:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35931417)
It would appear your link does not agree with your POV, pity you didn't read it before posting.
I could post hundreds of other links to sites that point out that his colour is due to spray tanning or sun beds.

Mr K 07-01-2018 17:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931418)
I could post hundreds of other links to sites that point out that his colour is due to spray tanning or sun beds.
Why spray yourself orange though? He just looks like an oompa loompa gone wrong....

Mick 07-01-2018 18:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931414)
Mick - I have no valid argument I want to present about this egotistical moron. I think the man is a disgusting, repulsive excuse for a human being and I have no problem calling a man who chooses to paint himself orange - an orange baffoon.

Is that clear enough for you?
The bit I've put in bold is clear enough, sure.

He paints himself orange, wow, that's a new one on me. I did not realise having a different coloured skin was such an issue to you. This coming from a man who has a username as a yellow fruit... Okay then. :dozey: :rolleyes:

His skin colour looks normal to me but then again I don't pay too much attention to how he looks, but thanks for confirming you cannot present any valid argument and prefer to lower yourself to 'nastyness' to try and justify your hatred.

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 19:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931433)
The bit I've put in bold is clear enough, sure.

He paints himself orange, wow, that's a new one on me. I did not realise having a different coloured skin was such an issue to you. This coming from a man who has a username as a yellow fruit... Okay then. :dozey: :rolleyes:

His skin colour looks normal to me but then again I don't pay too much attention to how he looks, but thanks for confirming you cannot present any valid argument and prefer to lower yourself to 'nastyness' to try and justify your hatred.
You are missing the point - I don't want to have a valid argument - I despise the man.

Stephen 07-01-2018 19:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Who needs a valid argument the guy is a top closs tool of the highest order. Resorting to childish name calling and non-factually correct statements.

no-one can sink as low as he does!

Osem 07-01-2018 19:28
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35931362)
he doesn't understand ours either .
:rofl:

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 19:36
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35931442)
Who needs a valid argument the guy is a top closs tool of the highest order. Resorting to childish name calling and non-factually correct statements.

no-one can sink as low as he does!
And never forget his lovely comment - You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it, you can do anything. Grab them by the p***y, you can do anything.

Or - How much money is the extremely unattractive (both inside and out) Arianna Huffington paying her poor ex-hubby for the use of his name?

Or -"@ForeverMcIn: @realDonaldTrump how much would it take for you to make out with Rosie O'Donnell?" One trillion, at least!

Or -26,000 unreported sexual assults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?

Mick 07-01-2018 19:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931440)
You are missing the point - I don't want to have a valid argument - I despise the man.
I despise quite a few politicians but I wouldn't call out their skin colour tone to try and justify or vilify my hatred further, it just shows how nasty one can get by doing such a thing.

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 19:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931448)
I despise quite a few politicians but I wouldn't call out their skin colour tone to try and justify or vilify my hatred further, it just shows how nasty one can get by doing such a thing.
Well not many other politicians paint themselves orange Mick. Still not sure why you find it nasty that I call out a fool who paints himself orange. If I painted myself red or dyed my hair blue, I'm sure my mates would refer to me with some interesting names but wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

Mick 07-01-2018 19:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931445)
And never forget his lovely comment - You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it, you can do anything. Grab them by the p***y, you can do anything.

Or - How much money is the extremely unattractive (both inside and out) Arianna Huffington paying her poor ex-hubby for the use of his name?

Or -"@ForeverMcIn: @realDonaldTrump how much would it take for you to make out with Rosie O'Donnell?" One trillion, at least!

Or -26,000 unreported sexual assults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?
I thought you said you had no valid arguments to give because you despise the man ?

Yet here you are, talking about the infamous 'pussygate' tape.

Where is your complaints on the Democrats sexual perversion, huh?

Bill Clinton was impeached for having 'extra' marital affairs, while in office and then lying about it!!!

What about Disgraced Democratic Senator Al Frankenstein, who was snapped trying to grab the breasts of a sleeping woman?

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931449)
Well not many other politicians paint themselves orange Mick. Still not sure why you find it nasty that I call out a fool who paints himself orange. If I painted myself red or dyed my hair blue, I'm sure my mates would refer to me with some interesting names but wouldn't bother me in the slightest.
Trump does not paint himself orange. I think you'll find that's Fake News.

pip08456 07-01-2018 19:54
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931450)
I thought you said you had no valid arguments to give because you despise the man ?

Yet here you are, talking about the infamous 'pussygate' tape.

Where is your complaints on the Democrats sexual perversion, huh?

Bill Clinton was impeached for having 'extra' marital affairs, while in office and then lying about it!!!

What about Disgraced Democratic Senator Al Frankenstein, who was snapped trying to grab the breasts of a sleeping woman?

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------



Trump does not paint himself orange. I think you'll find that's Fake News.
As shown in the article he linked to earlier. Good way to prove a point though.:dunce:

Arthurgray50@blu 07-01-2018 19:55
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I think someone in high authority in the White House, should go to Trump and punch his pearly whites out.

He is nothing but a hypocrite.

If people get in his way - he sacks them. This it the sign that he wants hios own way all the time

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 19:56
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931450)
I thought you said you had no valid arguments to give because you despise the man ?

Yet here you are, talking about the infamous 'pussygate' tape.

Where is your complaints on the Democrats sexual perversion, huh?

Bill Clinton was impeached for having 'extra' marital affairs, while in office and then lying about it!!!

What about Disgraced Democratic Senator Al Frankenstein, who was snapped trying to grab the breasts of a sleeping woman?

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------



Trump does not paint himself orange. I think you'll find that's Fake News.
The quotes listed are a few reasons why I despise Trump Mick. We are not discussing the other names you mention. You are displaying a typical Trump here Mick, don't look here look over there.

Mr K 07-01-2018 20:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931450)
I thought you said you had no valid arguments to give because you despise the man ?

Yet here you are, talking about the infamous 'pussygate' tape.

Where is your complaints on the Democrats sexual perversion, huh?

Bill Clinton was impeached for having 'extra' marital affairs, while in office and then lying about it!!!

What about Disgraced Democratic Senator Al Frankenstein, who was snapped trying to grab the breasts of a sleeping woman?

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------



Trump does not paint himself orange. I think you'll find that's Fake News.
All a bit of a Trump diversion to try and divert when he's exposed for being a, sexist, bigoted idiot , again, again and again.

(He probably gets someone else to paint him orange, he can afford it I guess.... It's a 'Fake' tan(go) certainly ;) )

Mick 07-01-2018 20:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931455)
The quotes listed are a few reasons why I despise Trump Mick. We are not discussing the other names you mention. You are displaying a typical Trump here Mick, don't look here look over there.
Rubbish, I am doing no such thing.

No, I am highlighting hypocrisy in it's highest form from you, you quote all those comments. I mean you mention potty mouth herself Rosie O'Donnell.

All those remarks from him, yet he still beat Hillary, who she and her DNC campaign still tried to cheat, re the Fusion GPS funding on the Fake Russian Dossier.

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 20:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931450)
I thought you said you had no valid arguments to give because you despise the man ?

Yet here you are, talking about the infamous 'pussygate' tape.

Where is your complaints on the Democrats sexual perversion, huh?

Bill Clinton was impeached for having 'extra' marital affairs, while in office and then lying about it!!!

What about Disgraced Democratic Senator Al Frankenstein, who was snapped trying to grab the breasts of a sleeping woman?

---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------



Trump does not paint himself orange. I think you'll find that's Fake News.
No Mick, this is fake news - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/213923...could-go-down/

Whether he paints himself or uses sun beds he used to be orange and that's a fact or are the millions of pictures of an orange Trump all fake as well?

---------- Post added at 20:03 ---------- Previous post was at 20:01 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931457)
Rubbish, I am doing no such thing.

No, I am highlighting hypocrisy in it's highest form from you, you quote all those comments. I mean you mention potty mouth herself Rosie O'Donnell.

All those remarks from him, yet he still beat Hillary, who she and her DNC campaign still tried to cheat, re the Fusion GPS funding on the Fake Russian Dossier.
Why hypocrisy from me? You do not know my views on the other names you mention. We are talking about Trump and I am telling you I despise the man. My opinion has nothing to do with him beating Hillary.

Osem 07-01-2018 20:20
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I wonder if all those who despise Trump for being a womaniser, having dubious morals etc think of JFK in the same way. Just imagine what would have come out regarding all his shenanigans had the internet been around during his tenure... :shrug:

Mick 07-01-2018 20:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931458)

Why hypocrisy from me? You do not know my views on the other names you mention. We are talking about Trump and I am telling you I despise the man. My opinion has nothing to do with him beating Hillary.
You're not 'telling me' anything, actually. So less of 'that' tone. :mad:

Mr Banana 07-01-2018 20:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931463)
You're not 'telling me' anything, actually. So less of 'that' tone. :mad:
What!!!

Ok - I am pointing out that i despise the man

Or if you prefer - I am letting you know that I despise the man

Or is this better - Mick I'm just telling you, I despise the man

Mick 07-01-2018 20:35
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35931454)
I think someone in high authority in the White House, should go to Trump and punch his pearly whites out.
:rofl:

Yes because violence is always the answer, when things don't go peoples way. How super intelligent. :rolleyes:

Damien 07-01-2018 20:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35931461)
I wonder if all those who despise Trump for being a womaniser, having dubious morals etc think of JFK in the same way. Just imagine what would have come out regarding all his shenanigans had the internet been around during his tenure... :shrug:
Hard to tell what people would think in retrospect especially when comparing different periods of time.

The issue isn't so much the womanising though that might be a moral failing but who really cares? The issue would be if it was harassment or worse. The tape was someone boasting of something which would easily classify as harassment. Clinton had examples if abusing power and harassment. Al Franklin was harassment too.

People on either side struggle to condemn their own as they would others. It's an understandable defensive impulse to assume your friends and allies are innocent and under partisan attack, especially when partisanship is a daily part of life, but at some point you need to take a step back and ask if you're holding yourself to the same standard as you hold others.

I am not sure JFK is useful here when there are far more modern comparisons that can be made. The Democrats today have had senators and former Presidents accused of these crimes.

GrimUpNorth 07-01-2018 20:48
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931466)
:rofl:

Yes because violence is always the answer, when things don't go peoples way. How super intelligent. :rolleyes:
You'd never hear Donald Trump inciting violence would you, because as you say violence is never the answer. Oh wait...

Cheers

Dave

Mick 07-01-2018 20:53
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35931464)
What!!!

Ok - I am pointing out that i despise the man

Or if you prefer - I am letting you know that I despise the man

Or is this better - Mick I'm just telling you, I despise the man
I am really not sure how many times you have to feel the need to tell me. :disturbd:

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35931473)
You'd never hear Donald Trump inciting violence would you, because as you say violence is never the answer. Oh wait...

Cheers

Dave
Totally different scenario. Arthur is going on about someone going up to punch Trump, because he's Trump and the President and in the White House.

Violence against violent protesters throwing food and missiles, I have no issues with.

Next ?

GrimUpNorth 07-01-2018 20:56
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931474)
I am really not sure how many times you have to feel the need to tell me. :disturbd:

---------- Post added at 20:53 ---------- Previous post was at 20:48 ----------



Totally different scenario. Arthur is talking about going on about someone going up to punch Trump, because he's Trump and the President and in the White House.

Violence against violent protesters throwing food and missiles, I have no issues with.

Next ?
So violence IS sometimes the answer :rolleyes:. Make your mind up Mick.

Cheers

Dave

Mick 07-01-2018 21:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 35931477)
So violence IS sometimes the answer :rolleyes:

Cheers

Dave
You need to put your glasses on and re-read my post, I said violence is not the answer when things don't go peoples way and wanting to punch someone simply because of who they are, is pathetic.

I have no issues with protesting, but throwing food/rocks/projectiles at a campaign rally, is not a legitimate and peaceful protest.

Next ?

Cheers

Mick.

Hugh 07-01-2018 21:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931478)
You need to put your glasses on and re-read my post, I said violence is not the answer when things don't go peoples way and wanting to punch someone simply because of who they are, is pathetic.

I have no issues with protesting, but throwing food/rocks/projectiles at a campaign rally, is not a legitimate and peaceful protest.

Next ?

Cheers

Mick.
Rocks and projectiles aren’t mentioned in that clip, only tomatoes?

Mick 07-01-2018 21:08
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931479)
Rocks and projectiles aren’t mentioned in that clip, only tomatoes?
Seriously ?

A Tomato is a projectile Hugh.

Any object that gets thrown in to the air, by force, becomes a projectile. :dozey:

I have done the google searching for you for free this time... here you go...

Quote:
A projectile is any object thrown into space (empty or not) by the exertion of a force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectile

GrimUpNorth 07-01-2018 21:09
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931478)
You need to put your glasses on and re-read my post, I said violence is not the answer when things don't go peoples way and wanting to punch someone simply because of who they are, is pathetic.

I have no issues with protesting, but throwing food/rocks/projectiles at a campaign rally, is not a legitimate and peaceful protest.

Next ?

Cheers

Mick.
But things (well the tomatoes) were going his way, or he was scared they were ;).

Cheers

Dave

pip08456 07-01-2018 21:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931479)
Rocks and projectiles aren’t mentioned in that clip, only tomatoes?
Isn't a projectile somethig which is thrown as well as a form of missile?

Mr K 07-01-2018 21:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
# You say tomato , i say projectile...#

I'll get my coat....

Osem 07-01-2018 21:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35931472)
Hard to tell what people would think in retrospect especially when comparing different periods of time.

The issue isn't so much the womanising though that might be a moral failing but who really cares? The issue would be if it was harassment or worse. The tape was someone boasting of something which would easily classify as harassment. Clinton had examples if abusing power and harassment. Al Franklin was harassment too.

People on either side struggle to condemn their own as they would others. It's an understandable defensive impulse to assume your friends and allies are innocent and under partisan attack, especially when partisanship is a daily part of life, but at some point you need to take a step back and ask if you're holding yourself to the same standard as you hold others.

I am not sure JFK is useful here when there are far more modern comparisons that can be made. The Democrats today have had senators and former Presidents accused of these crimes.
I'm not sure many more modern presidents have got up to quite the amount of immoral stuff JFK did and still been remembered quite so fondly but there we are. I think there's a degree of double standards in play here and that was my point.

Hugh 07-01-2018 21:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35931480)
Seriously ?

A Tomato is a projectile Hugh.

Any object that gets thrown in to the air, by force, becomes a projectile. :dozey:

I have done the google searching for you for free this time... here you go...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectile
You were the one who posted the words
Quote:
throwing food/rocks/projectiles
Let’s narrow it down, then - where are the rocks you mentioned?

Mick 07-01-2018 21:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35931488)
You were the one who posted the words

Let’s narrow it down, then - where are the rocks you mentioned?
I was generalizing Hugh. Food/Rocks/Projectiles. Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things ?

Throwing any of them at people or someone is not a peaceful and legitimate way of protesting.

Seriously. I am not playing this 'clutching at straws' game.

1andrew1 07-01-2018 22:13
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I think we can all accept that the throwing of rocks was false and that tomatoes are projectiles and can now move on. ;)

Now, moving on it's interesting to see Bannon grovelling for the comments he made to Michael Woolff which were published in his number one best-selling book. Two key things here:
- The damning quotes attributed to Bannon are indeed correct and vindicate Woolf's statement that he has recordings of the interviews. It gives the book more credibility.
- According to the linked article, Bannon sees apologising as a weakness so he is clearly rattled by Trump's reaction to the book.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-bannon-s...e5ee2b493.html

Mick 07-01-2018 22:36
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35931493)
I think we can all accept that the throwing of rocks was false and that tomatoes are projectiles and can now move on. ;)

Now, moving on it's interesting to see Bannon grovelling for the comments he made to Michael Woolff which were published in his number one best-selling book. Two key things here:
- The damning quotes attributed to Bannon are indeed correct and vindicate Woolf's statement that he has recordings of the interviews. It gives the book more credibility.
- According to the linked article, Bannon sees apologising as a weakness so he is clearly rattled by Trump's reaction to the book.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-bannon-s...e5ee2b493.html
I am beginning to wonder if he does actually have any recordings. They would have leaked by now... If the crooks at New York Times can leak sensitive photos shared via the intelligence community, they can leak an audio file from a backstreet journalist.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46.
Page 30 of 32 « First 2026272829 30 3132
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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