Cable Forum
Page 8 of 32 « First 4567 8 910111218 Last »
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)

adzii_nufc 07-03-2017 16:19
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35889004)
If Trump believed that to be true then he would be prioritising it. He's not.
He'd do anything to drag his predecessor through the mud, which he's doing. Then at the same time, I also believe Obama would do it, but wouldn't be the first and would be a mere continuation of something that someone else started.

1andrew1 07-03-2017 16:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by adzii_nufc (Post 35889006)
He'd do anything to drag his predecessor through the mud, which he's doing.
He'd do anything to get people from focusing on the Russian question. If he smears the Democrats in the process then even better!

passingbat 07-03-2017 16:26
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35889004)
If Trump believed that to be true then he would be prioritising it. He's not.

Umm... you seem very sure... you're not hacking anywhere you shouldn't are you... :shocked::)

adzii_nufc 07-03-2017 16:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889010)
Umm... you seem very sure... you're not hacking anywhere you shouldn't are you... :shocked::)
He's not :D But the CIA are :cool:

An organization with that history that's still doing things unethical to people to this very day continues to exist. Land of the free, except your webcams, cars, smartphones, computers, tablets, anything running windows, android, iOS, linux and anything in between. Oh and your Smart TV's.. In fact, All your base are belong to us. They could be watching Kim Jong Un scoff a waffle down but they're busy making sure you don't get the right colour in candy crush.

1andrew1 07-03-2017 16:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889010)
Umm... you seem very sure... you're not hacking anywhere you shouldn't are you... :shocked::)
Lol. :) I doubt he'd do anything like that without sharing his words of wisdom via Twitter first ;)

Damien 07-03-2017 16:52
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by adzii_nufc
So the CIA are evidently doing as they please, and there's nothing saying they're actually answering to anyone, so what if Trump's right about being tapped, but wrong about who's done or doing it.
We already know the FBI had applied for warrants back in October to tap the phones of Trump's associates, probably Trump himself, over the Russia thing. That's how the intelligence services knew of the calls from the Flynn. Trump is making a specific allegation that Obama ordered it. That would be against the law, it's the justice wing of the government that can seek and authorise wiretaps of America citizens.

Bugging the phones of international citizens is different as they don't have the same protections under American law. It's why the NSA found it more difficult to spy on Americans and looked to GCHQ for help. That's why it's not a simple progression from the Government spying on foreign citizens to spying on Trump.

It's a very big accusation to say Obama ordered the bugging of Trump. Trump needs to at least give enough information to allow an investigation, he has declined to do so thus far.

This wikileaks release is, on first inspection (I haven't read the entire dump), rather mundane. CIA have lists of zero-day exploits of software, they continue to develop ways of hacking into the internet of things and phones, they can bypass encryption by getting to the data before it's encrypted if they can compromise the device. Nothing you wouldn't expect. Intelligence services look to exploit security vulnerabilities....

Seriously governments looking to buy zero-day attacks is nothing new. We already knew they are on the market for them.

1andrew1 07-03-2017 17:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35889020)
We already know the FBI had applied for warrants back in October to tap the phones of Trump's associates, probably Trump himself, over the Russia thing. That's how the intelligence services knew of the calls from the Flynn. Trump is making a specific allegation that Obama ordered it. That would be against the law, it's the justice wing of the government that can seek and authorise wiretaps of America citizens.

Bugging the phones of international citizens is different as they don't have the same protections under American law. It's why the NSA found it more difficult to spy on Americans and looked to GCHQ for help. That's why it's not a simple progression from the Government spying on foreign citizens to spying on Trump.

It's a very big accusation to say Obama ordered the bugging of Trump. Trump needs to at least give enough information to allow an investigation, he has declined to do so thus far.

This wikileaks release is, on first inspection (I haven't read the entire dump), rather mundane. CIA have lists of zero-day exploits of software, they continue to develop ways of hacking into the internet of things and phones, they can bypass encryption by getting to the data before it's encrypted if they can compromise the device. Nothing you wouldn't expect. Intelligence services look to exploit security vulnerabilities....

Seriously governments looking to buy zero-day attacks is nothing new. We already knew they are on the market for them.
An interesting and informative post.
Do you have any inkling of how the tapping allegations might conclude? Will Trump just let it all die down? Will Obama sue him?

Damien 07-03-2017 17:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35889023)
An interesting and informative post.
Do you have any inkling of how the tapping allegations might conclude? Will Trump just let it all die down? Will Obama sue him?
I suspect it will be quietly dropped. Investigations are unlikely to start without Trump giving where he got his information to the committee. It just won't be mentioned again, Trump will tweet something else shocking and we all move on.

I didn't think you could sue a sitting President but even so I doubt Obama would bother. He didn't sue over the birther stuff. Presidents are just used to all sorts of things being said about them, usually not from other Presidents though.

Hugh 08-03-2017 18:52
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) replacement unveiled - modestly titled little number.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...bill/1275/text

Quote:
H.R.1275 - World's Greatest Healthcare Plan of 2017
Apparently there are concerns amongst the elderly (one of the biggest tranche of Trump voters) that this will make health insurance unaffordable for them.

Pierre 10-03-2017 22:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
This is where we are now.......

White House spokesman's flag pin mishap
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39238141

I mean, is this news? Who gives a flying,,, ,,,,,,,

Maggy 10-03-2017 22:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Just a bit of banter..a little bit of light relief..

passingbat 10-03-2017 23:07
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35889542)
This is where we are now.......

White House spokesman's flag pin mishap
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39238141

I mean, is this news? Who gives a flying,,, ,,,,,,,
Those pesky Ruskies; interfering yet again... where will it all end.

"What's that?" "it was the CIA." "I don't believe it!" "Yep heard it through my bugged Samsung TV, although it said it was Trump what done it."

1andrew1 10-03-2017 23:16
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889559)
Those pesky Ruskies; interfering yet again... where will it all end.

"What's that?" "it was the CIA." "I don't believe it!" "Yep heard it through my bugged Samsung TV, although it said it was Trump what done it."
It was a secret sign to those globalists in the know to buy shares in BP. :)

Hugh 11-03-2017 00:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
All these seckrit global deep state conspiracies- why are they so bad at it?

I mean, Brexit won, Trump won, Obama didn't take all the guns and impose FEMA camps - they're not very good at it, are they?

passingbat 11-03-2017 02:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35889564)
All these seckrit global deep state conspiracies- why are they so bad at it?

I mean, Brexit won, Trump won, Obama didn't take all the guns and impose FEMA camps - they're not very good at it, are they?

World government is coming in the future. Brexit/Trump and even the break up of the EU (if it does actually happen) is just a temporary pause in my view. Despite this temporary pause, there are things that have been and are still going on in the background that are laying the groundwork for that future time.

Osem 11-03-2017 10:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889566)
World government is coming in the future. Brexit/Trump and even the break up of the EU (if it does actually happen) is just a temporary pause in my view. Despite this temporary pause, there are things that have been and are still going on in the background that are laying the groundwork for that future time.
Correct. There doesn't need to be a detailed master plan and timetable of events to create the conditions in which extreme decisions are taken without our consent and you can bet those decisions and restrictions won't hit the elite and their powerful mates. Fools can be as useful as experts strategists in achieving a long term goal and yes of course there will be unforeseen setbacks along the way but that won't alter the drive to create a world run by a relative few powerful people. In fact, that might be the only way in which the human race and our planet can survive - a planet sized colony of worker ants. :erm:

ISIS have shown how 'chaos' can be highly effective in creating the conditions in which their long term objectives can be achieved. In fact their use of social media etc. to broadcast their evil and recruit the likeminded is already impinging upon our freedoms. What better excuse could there be to gradually seek more control of and scrutiny over the public?

The uber rich and powerful aren't just going to sit back and watch as their wealth and privilege is eroded away by a global populace which is increasingly aware and resentful of just how big a slice of the pie they have been allowed to accumulate at the expense of the rest of us. All that's required is the circumstances in which they can assume that control and the catalyst could come in many forms, including the entirely unpredictable.

Hugh 11-03-2017 10:54
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889566)
World government is coming in the future. Brexit/Trump and even the break up of the EU (if it does actually happen) is just a temporary pause in my view. Despite this temporary pause, there are things that have been and are still going on in the background that are laying the groundwork for that future time.
Such as?

1andrew1 11-03-2017 11:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889566)
World government is coming in the future. Brexit/Trump and even the break up of the EU (if it does actually happen) is just a temporary pause in my view. Despite this temporary pause, there are things that have been and are still going on in the background that are laying the groundwork for that future time.
Great to see the nutty Navarro got hos come uppance recently. As a result, he's now been sidelined and Gary Cohn's power is in the ascendancy. One of Cohn's most encouraging appointments has been Andrew Quinn. He served as a senior negotiator during Obama push for the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

passingbat 11-03-2017 19:07
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35889593)
Such as?

Mass migration isn't over: look at the crazy outcry by the politically correct liberals, against a very sensible plan to protect the country. Given that many, many more non Muslim countries were not affected, to say it is a Muslim ban is crazy.

The Ecumenical movement, again following the politically correct lie that all religions worship the same god. This is nonsense. But both this and mass migration produce homogeneous cultures across many nations making them more acceptable to global government.

The move to digital banking and personal identities for doing so. Very handy for global monetary control. Interesting that powerful banking institutions and prominent world leaders attend the annual Bilderberg meeting. World debt is increasing. It is worrying that these kinds of people are discussing this in secret.

Globalisation is back-doored via multinational trade deals, which bring multinational law courts, where participating nation states laws are subservient to those courts Trump is against them, but that doesn't mean that they won't continue elsewhere in the world.

The other way multinational laws are back-doored is the environmental movement.. There is nothing wrong with wanting clean air etc. but some people behind the movement see it as a way to globalisation via multinational laws.

And don't forget the United Nations Agenda 2030. It's aims seem very noble. But look at the emphasis on 'global cooperation'. Expect them to want to put laws behind the 'cooperation'


https://sustainabledevelopment.un.or...ormingourworld

Quote:

Partnership

We are determined to mobilize the means required to implement this Agenda through a revitalised Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, based on a spirit of strengthened global solidarity, focussed in particular on the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and with the participation of all countries, all stakeholders and all people.

The interlinkages and integrated nature of the Sustainable Development Goals are of crucial importance in ensuring that the purpose of the new Agenda is realised. If we realize our ambitions across the full extent of the Agenda, the lives of all will be profoundly improved and our world will be transformed for the better.


Mr K 11-03-2017 21:22
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889626)
Mass migration isn't over: look at the crazy outcry by the politically correct liberals, against a very sensible plan
How is it sensible? Virtually every US terrorist attack in recent times has been homegrown.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/12/op...terror-bergen/

The 9/11 hijackers were mostly from Saudi Arabia who haven't been banned(!).

Can we rename this thread to:- 'U.S. President Donald Duck' ? Then we can pretend it isn't as bad after all...

Pierre 11-03-2017 21:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35889635)
How is it sensible? Virtually every US terrorist attack in recent times has been homegrown.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/12/op...terror-bergen/
..
How many of the foiled ones have been from these states? Or instigated from these states?

Mr K 11-03-2017 21:49
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35889637)
How many of the foiled ones have been from these states? Or instigated from these states?
You tell me. The main threat in the US seems to be from right wing nutters who love their guns.

passingbat 11-03-2017 23:19
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35889635)
How is it sensible? .

I've explained it at least twice on this thread. You need to check out media outside the UK to get the full story; don't trust the BBC to give you the full story it is against their anti Trump agenda.


The Obama administration identified the initial 7 countries as needing more attention from a travel perspective. The documentation provided by those countries was less than sufficient to prove that there was no security risk. The Trump administration decided to impose a temporary ban whilst working out ways to obtain more information. Iraq has now agreed to supply more information and has been taken off the list. According to a Whitehouse press briefing, the list is not set in stone; countries could be added or removed at a later date.


BTW Terrorism is not Saudi Arabia's default method of 'attacking' America; their method appears to be influence via financial investments.

1andrew1 12-03-2017 00:13
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889641)
I've explained it at least twice on this thread. You need to check out media outside the UK to get the full story; don't trust the BBC to give you the full story it is against their anti Trump agenda.

The Obama administration identified the initial 7 countries as needing more attention from a travel perspective. The documentation provided by those countries was less than sufficient to prove that there was no security risk. The Trump administration decided to impose a temporary ban whilst working out ways to obtain more information. Iraq has now agreed to supply more information and has been taken off the list. According to a Whitehouse press briefing, the list is not set in stone; countries could be added or removed at a later date.

BTW Terrorism is not Saudi Arabia's default method of 'attacking' America; their method appears to be influence via financial investments.
I don't think Mr K mentioned the BBC in his posts.

Main issue with the ban is that Homeland Security said it would not make the country safer. So why is Trump wasting time on a measure that does not make the country safer when he could be spending time on measures that make it safer? It looks more like posture and placating his always-believers.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7599126.html

Pierre 12-03-2017 07:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35889638)
You tell me. The main threat in the US seems to be from right wing nutters who love their guns.
I don't know, and neither do you.....that's the point.

passingbat 12-03-2017 07:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35889644)
I don't think Mr K mentioned the BBC in his posts.

Main issue with the ban is that Homeland Security said it would not make the country safer. So why is Trump wasting time on a measure that does not make the country safer when he could be spending time on measures that make it safer? It looks more like posture and placating his always-believers.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7599126.html
Interring mix of reader comments on that article.

Quote:
I don't think Mr K mentioned the BBC in his posts.
It's a generalisation. Most UK citizen's news source is predominately via the BBC.

TheDaddy 12-03-2017 07:36
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35889656)
I don't know, and neither do you.....that's the point.
Considering over the last 10 years or so you're 3210 times more likely to have been killed by guns than terrorists in America, I'd say the balance of probability lay with the gun nuts, the terrorists would have some way to go to kill over 300 000 people and tbh I'm not sure they're up to it, fortunately.

Pierre 12-03-2017 09:25
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35889658)
Considering over the last 10 years or so you're 3210 times more likely to have been killed by guns than terrorists in America, I'd say the balance of probability lay with the gun nuts, the terrorists would have some way to go to kill over 300 000 people and tbh I'm not sure they're up to it, fortunately.
Different argument, and not really relevant.

Mr K 12-03-2017 09:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35889641)
I've explained it at least twice on this thread. You need to check out media outside the UK to get the full story; don't trust the BBC to give you the full story it is against their anti Trump agenda.
The link I posted was from CNN :erm:
Let me guess, they've a bunch of Commie Liberals as well that spoil Donalds bile with facts. Shoot them all I say, they're not God fearing like the Donald ( praise the Lord!).

passingbat 12-03-2017 09:37
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35889664)
The link I posted was from CNN :erm:
Let me guess, they've a bunch of Commie Liberals as well that spoil Donalds bile with facts. Shoot them all I say, they're not God fearing like the Donald ( praise the Lord!).

Well, they are commonly known as the 'Clinton News Network', especially during the Presidential election :)

nidave 12-03-2017 09:42
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
How do you reconcile the fact trump is cutting funding to the TSA & Cost Guard to cover the initial cost of the wall on the Mexico border? (Do Mexicans not have boats?) How does this play with the travel ban? To me the two things seem incompatible, especially the TSA.

"This plan would cut the Coast Guardsbudget by 14 percent down to $7.8 billion and that of the TSA by 11 percent, down to $4.5 billion. It would also decrease the budget of the Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA, which provides relief after natural disasters, by 11 percent to $3.6 billion."

RizzyKing 13-03-2017 05:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Given how many americans loathe both the tsa and fema i think trump has again cemented his core support, we are judging all this without understanding the americans that voted for trump or the reasons many of them voted anti establishment. I think that was the key to trumps victory not that people are overly supportive of him or even like him but that he was a complete break from an establishment that a majority of americans feel has failed them and isn't representive of them and trump was just the only option to express that. What I've noticed over the last few years amongst the americans i chat with is a growing anti government sentiment and an exasperation with how the government operates.

That's from both democrat and republican voters theres something very wrong in the US and while i don't think trump will solve it he at least recognises it exists unlike the democrats who still haven't woken up yet.

Damien 13-03-2017 20:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Congressional Budget Office has said 24 million people will lose health coverage under the current plan: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fi...lthcareact.pdf

That's worse than the expected 11 million.

1andrew1 13-03-2017 20:44
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35889855)
Congressional Budget Office has said 24 million people will lose health coverage under the current plan: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fi...lthcareact.pdf

That's worse than the expected 11 million.
That links seems to have broken but this one works https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52486

I wonder how many of the 24m voted for Trump?

Damien 13-03-2017 20:52
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
But for those who remain insured their Premiums will rise 10-20% than Obamacare in the first 5 years but end up 10% lower for young people than Obamacare in 2026.

Hugh 13-03-2017 21:57
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
http://uk.businessinsider.com/sean-s...17-3?r=US&IR=T

So, when Trump said 'Obama' last week, he didn't mean Obama, and when he said 'wiretap', he didn't mean wiretap.

OK, then...

Maggy 15-03-2017 09:48
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...MCNEWEML6619I2

Quote:
Donald Trump’s leaked tax return reveals that the businessman had to pay tens of millions of dollars in a single year because of a tax rule that he has specifically promised to abolish as president.

A two-page section of Trump’s tax return for 2005, which was published by MSNBC late on Tuesday, revealed that the president paid $38m in federal taxes on more than $150m in income in 2005.But the documents also showed that about 82% of the total paid to the Internal Revenue Service that year by Trump and his wife, Melania, was incurred due to a tax that Trump has said should be abolished.
Quote:
Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, welcomed the leak, adding to speculation over whether the president leaked a favourable portion of his own tax return.
Interesting timing possibly managing to overshadow the 'claims' about illegal wire tapping.

Stuart 15-03-2017 13:19
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35890059)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...MCNEWEML6619I2





Interesting timing possibly managing to overshadow the 'claims' about illegal wire tapping.
The thing is that Trump is right, he is under no legal obligation to release his tax returns.

However, if his returns are as legit as he says, then he is being a fool not releasing them. If he releases the tax returns and they show nothing untoward, then the anti Trump lobby lose a major stick they can beat him with.

Even if they show that he hasn't paid quite as much tax as he should have, that will generate a storm, and may even lose him some votes, but it will blow over.

This, combined with the administration's continued refusal to release them makes me think that those tax returns are hiding something serious. Something that could possibly get Trump impeached.

Mick 15-03-2017 14:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35890079)
The thing is that Trump is right, he is under no legal obligation to release his tax returns.

However, if his returns are as legit as he says, then he is being a fool not releasing them. If he releases the tax returns and they show nothing untoward, then the anti Trump lobby lose a major stick they can beat him with.

Even if they show that he hasn't paid quite as much tax as he should have, that will generate a storm, and may even lose him some votes, but it will blow over.

This, combined with the administration's continued refusal to release them makes me think that those tax returns are hiding something serious. Something that could possibly get Trump impeached.
That 2005 Tax return shows he paid a whopping $38 Million on a $150Million income, I'd say in that year alone, he paid his dues.

If his tax returns exist and has submitted them, that information exists to government sources already or did over the years, if there had been something untoward in them, I'm sure something would have been said or done to prevent him from standing as a Candidate.

During the campaign and in one of the debates, he did mention that he was heavily scrutinized by the IRS (US equivalent to HMRC), this being the case, if something was in them, the IRS had that information.

The issue here is, the sour faced Democrats, won't accept they lost and keep throwing the false narrative that Trump got Russia to help him win the Election. I keep saying this, 62 Million Americans were not held at gun point and forced to vote for Trump and help him win more States than Hillary.

1andrew1 15-03-2017 17:54
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Sky News The House Intelligence Committee says it has seen no evidence to support Donald Trump's claim that his phones were wiretapped.
Republican Congressman Devin Nunes and Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff, who lead the committee, have said they are still waiting for evidence from the Justice Department.
http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...-says-10802970

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890092)
I keep saying this, 62 Million Americans were not held at gun point and forced to vote for Trump and help him win more States than Hillary.
You wouldn't need to persuade 62m, I think if you persuaded 2m that would have been enough to swing the election one way or the other.

Mr K 15-03-2017 18:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Trump leaked his own tax return to try and deflect from his ludicrous wire tapping story. Cunning devil, you have to hand it to him.

On the subject of number of votes, more voted for Hillary (65m to the Donalds 62m) but that's the World's greatest democracy for you ! (our system is no better).

1andrew1 15-03-2017 18:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35890115)
Trump leaked his own tax return to try and deflect from his ludicrous wire tapping story. Cunning devil, you have to hand it to him.

On the subject of number of votes, more voted for Hillary (65m to the Donalds 62m) but that's the World's greatest democracy for you ! (our system is no better).
Yes, I think the "client copy" suggests that's exactly what happened.

It's funny that Trump has to engineer another story to distract from a story that he engineered to distract from the actual investigation into the Russian connections! :D

Mick 15-03-2017 18:36
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890111)
http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...-says-10802970

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

You wouldn't need to persuade 62m, I think if you persuaded 2m that would have been enough to swing the election one way or the other.
Let's not forget though, Trump also got his fair share of embarrassing scandals thrown his way, Pussygate was the big one, him not releasing his Tax returns probably being another.

The pussygate alone should have cost him the election, his party was literally turning his back on him when that video tape was released and I think many were expecting him to abandon his candidacy, but he remained firm and despite that tape, women went out and voted for Trump in droves because they simply did not want Hillary and they say this is Russian influence? Utter bollocks.

---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35890115)
Trump leaked his own tax return to try and deflect from his ludicrous wire tapping story. Cunning devil, you have to hand it to him.

On the subject of number of votes, more voted for Hillary (65m to the Donalds 62m) but that's the World's greatest democracy for you ! (our system is no better).
No better in your eyes because you don't like the results. :rolleyes:

There is nothing 'ludicrous' about his wiretapping claims, Obama Administration had form when it came to spying on folk and even friendly folk, allies, just ask UN's Ban Ki Moon. Ask the French too and other countries.... :rolleyes:

The 'who got most votes' is getting an old tired argument :zzz: , they, (Both Trump and Clinton) entered the Election race knowing the rules and they are, to win States, not total votes. :rolleyes:

1andrew1 15-03-2017 18:37
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890119)
Let's not forget though, Trump also got his fair share of embarrassing scandals thrown his way, Pussygate was the big one, him not releasing his Tax returns probably being another.

The pussygate alone should have cost him the election, his party was literally turning his back on him when that video tape was released and I think many were expecting him to abandon his candidacy, but he remained firm and despite that tape, women went out and voted for Trump in droves because they simply did not want Hillary and they say this is Russian influence? Utter bollocks.
Trump did well to survive Pussygate, credit where it's due.
Presumably, some people were influenced by the Wikileaks stuff, we just don't know how many. I don't think anyone's saying it's 62m but the again, I don't think anyone's saying it's zero.

Damien 15-03-2017 18:42
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890119)
There is nothing 'ludicrous' about his wiretapping claims, Obama Administration had form when it came to spying on folk and even friendly folk, allies, just ask UN's Ban Ki Moon. Ask the French too and other countries.... :rolleyes:
Spying on American citizens vs spying on foreign citizens is very different. It's why the NSA tried to use GCHQ as a work around. The President has the authority to tap foreign citizens but it's a massive and criminal violation to tap your own citizens without a warrant and even then it's typically the FBI that would apply for that warrant - certainly not the President or any part of the executive branch.

But Trump didn't speculate that Obama tapped his phone. He said he did. It's only after constant badgering from Democrats and Republicans alike for proof did the White House attempt to say that by 'Obama' he meant 'any aspect of the government' and by 'wiretapping' he meant investigation and even then it was theory and not intel. Today the intelligence committee said there was no evidence.

If Trump doesn't have proof he shouldn't throw accusations like that around.

passingbat 15-03-2017 18:42
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890119)

The pussygate alone should have cost him the election, .

Exactly. Anti Trump posters are missing the point, by focussing on the man and not his policies

Many people who voted for him did not like the man. But they were so fed up with 'the swamp' and the morally liberal policies perused by Obama (which would have gotten* worse under Hilary), jobs being lost to other countries through multinational trade deals, etc. etc., that they looked passed the man and voted for Trump. Unless people understand that, they will never get why Trump won. The Democrats need to focus less on trying to derail his Presidency, and focus on why they lost.


* Specially for Mr K; a word in common use in the US that has an English root.

Mick 15-03-2017 18:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890123)
Trump did well to survive Pussygate, credit where it's due.
Presumably, some people were influenced by the Wikileaks stuff, we just don't know how many. I don't think anyone's saying it's 62m but the again, I don't think anyone's saying it's zero.
The Democratic National Committee's mistake was backing the wrong horse, they were so sure she was going to win.

Big mistake, they should have had Bernie Sanders, but they robbed that chance from him, leaked emails showed Hillary, getting propped up in the Primaries Debates, by getting the questions prior to the debates when it was Sanders vs Clinton.

pip08456 15-03-2017 18:50
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35890124)

But Trump didn't speculate that Obama tapped his phone. He said he did. It's only after constant badgering from Democrats and Republicans alike for proof did the White House attempt to say that by 'Obama' he meant 'any aspect of the government' and by 'wiretapping' he meant investigation and even then it was theory and not intel. Today the intelligence committee said there was no evidence.

If Trump doesn't have proof he shouldn't throw accusations like that around.
Did they Damien? If you look at one of the above posts you'll see this.

Quote:
Republican Congressman Devin Nunes and Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff, who lead the committee, have said they are still waiting for evidence from the Justice Department.
The jury's still out yet. Not saying the point will be proved but don't assume until all the evidence is in.

1andrew1 15-03-2017 18:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35890125)
Exactly. Anti Trump posters are missing the point, by focussing on the man and not his policies

Many people who voted for him did not like the man. But they were so fed up with 'the swamp' and the morally liberal policies perused by Obama (which would have gotten worse under Hilary), jobs being lost to other countries through multinational trade deals, etc. etc., that they looked passed the man and voted for Trump. Unless people understand that, they will never get why Trump won. The Democrats need to focus less on trying to derail his Presidency, and focus on why they lost.


* Specially for Mr K; a word in common use in the US that has an English root.
Surely there's a small contradiction in wanting local culture preserved yet using American English? ;)

passingbat 15-03-2017 19:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890128)
Surely there's a small contradiction in wanting local culture preserved yet using American English? ;)

Quote:
That gotten is primarily used in North America has given rise to the mistaken belief that it is American in origin and hence new and inferior. But gotten is in fact an old form, predating the United States and Canada by several centuries. It fell out of favor in British English by the 18th century, but it was eventually picked up again on the other side of the Atlantic, perhaps by analogy with forgotten.


The vehemence of some Britons’ scorn for gotten likely has to do with the fact that it has gained ground in British English over the last couple of decades. Many English speakers from outside North America resist the encroachment of so-called Americanisms (many of which, like gotten, are not actually American in origin) on their versions of English, and, for mysterious reasons, some feel especially strongly about gotten.

I like that word; I think I'm justified in using it, especially to tease Mr K ;)


http://grammarist.com/usage/got-gotten/

1andrew1 15-03-2017 19:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35890127)
Did they Damien? If you look at one of the above posts you'll see this.

The jury's still out yet. Not saying the point will be proved but don't assume until all the evidence is in.
The 20th March is a key date
Quote:
Sky News The department has until 20 March to comply with a request for evidence, but could be compelled to do so by the committee if it misses the deadline.
http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...-says-10802970

Damien 15-03-2017 19:25
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
However cromulent a word gotten is it's important to remember that British English, also known as proper English, evolves faster than that of our American friends. ;)

1andrew1 15-03-2017 19:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890126)
The Democratic National Committee's mistake was backing the wrong horse, they were so sure she was going to win.

Big mistake, they should have had Bernie Sanders, but they robbed that chance from him, leaked emails showed Hillary, getting propped up in the Primaries Debates, by getting the questions prior to the debates when it was Sanders vs Clinton.
The Democrats probably made several mistakes. The leak showing Clinton getting the questions beforehand would have given Trump some votes.

passingbat 15-03-2017 20:17
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35890140)
However cromulent a word gotten is it's important to remember that British English, also known as proper English, evolves faster than that of our American friends. ;)

I'll take the slow train! ;)


Actually I've liked the word gotten for at least twenty years, maybe longer, long before Trump was even thinking of being president. I don't use it very much; seems like a good time to start :D I've used 'get-go' a lot, for a long time. Mr K seems to think its American; I don't have a clue; nor do I really care ;)

Stuart 15-03-2017 20:22
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35890125)
Exactly. Anti Trump posters are missing the point, by focussing on the man and not his policies

Many people who voted for him did not like the man. But they were so fed up with 'the swamp' and the morally liberal policies perused by Obama (which would have gotten* worse under Hilary), jobs being lost to other countries through multinational trade deals, etc. etc., that they looked passed the man and voted for Trump. Unless people understand that, they will never get why Trump won. The Democrats need to focus less on trying to derail his Presidency, and focus on why they lost.


* Specially for Mr K; a word in common use in the US that has an English root.
The problem is from what I saw, very little of the US election was about policies (in fact, Trump rarely even mentioned them), and more about attacking the opponent.

Talking to friends in the US (including one fairly rabid Trump voter who I actually went to school with who made me look right wing when he lived here), the main concern seems to be loss of jobs from the US to other countries, and a secondary concern is that Obamacare apparently increased health costs for a lot of people, and reduced choice. The thing that caused offence is a raid Hillary was involved with as secretary of state, during which soldiers died.

That's simplifying things a lot. Trump largely just promised to correct those things. Lets hope he follows through on those promises. He may not. After all, he owns a major company that outsources a lot of jobs to other countries, and he may have links to the health insurance industry we are not aware of.

Note: I think Trump will prove to be bad for the US, and if he has links to any foreign power that are beyond normal diplomatic relations, then that needs investigation. My concern is not whether they influenced the election or not (although I don't like the idea they might have, it's done, nothing anyone says or does is going to change that), more that they may have something they can use to compromise him (and therefore America) further down the line.

One thing I don't like about his style of administration. It doesn't feel like much of what the current Administration is being thought through properly. Take the Immigration ban for instance. The fact that was slapped down by so many judges suggests to me that they didn't even bother to check whether the ban conflicted with existing law.

That said, as with most things (Brexit included) I am happy to be proved wrong.

pip08456 15-03-2017 20:26
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890139)
So you agree the jury's still out then. Perhaps you can convince Damien then.

passingbat 15-03-2017 23:31
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35890159)
The problem is from what I saw, very little of the US election was about policies (in fact, Trump rarely even mentioned them), and more about attacking the opponent.

.

When I realised that the BBC, were interested only in attacking Trump, rather than looking at his policies, and were pro Clinton, I decided to find out for myself, by listening to a good few full length speeches from Trump and general research, including a couple of the TV debates.


I found it quite easy to determine his policies, and they were very significant in my view. I listed these in an earlier post with comments on Trump himself


Quote:
I'm prepared to judge him on whether he keeps to the promises he made in the election. Anyone who thinks Trump is free from past wrong doings is deluded.

But as far as I was concerned, the policies Trump was putting forward are essential to America. They were, in key areas, opposite to the policies that Obama pursued and Hillary would have taken further. Examples are:

Standing against globalism and upholding the sovereign nation state.
Strong borders and doing whatever is necessary to prevent radical Islamic terrorists entering the country.
Controlling Immigration
Taking definitive action against Mexican drug cartels (who also smuggle in ISIS terrorists)
Re-building US industry and the jobs attached to it, which had been outsourced to other countries for cheap labour reasons.
Trying to halt the liberal moral decline that had gone on under Obama and would have got worse under Hillary
His promise to sort out problems in the inner cities.
His intention to strengthen the military and increase support for Veterans.
His support for Israel
Draining the Washington swamp.
Rejecting multinational trade deals (back-door globalism, TPP. TTIP etc.)

Trump is an egotist and outspoken (clumsily at times). But I think in some ways you need someone 'full of himself' to drive through the above agenda.

Make no mistake, people who voted for him were fully aware of his faults (especially the Evangelical Christians) but decided that America needed so badly, the policies that Trump was advocating that they decided to look past the man himself.


http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...&postcount=497
American healthcare, I know little about. The gist I gleaned was that premiums were rising and providers were dropping out under Obama care. Some Republicans seem to be moaning about the new proposal because they see too much Federal financing still going on rather than a completely free market. Personally, I'm just glad I live in the UK, where we have the NHS. It's not something that I will follow closely, as I don't live in the US. The policies I posted previously have far more significance for me and globally in the coming years.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 00:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Oops I did it again!
Making Philip Hammond and Jeremy Corbyn look like nimble political operators, Trump's second travel ban is um, banned before it even starts!
http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...judge-10803239
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...aii-court-live

Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35890161)
So you agree the jury's still out then. Perhaps you can convince Damien then.
The jury's doing nothing at the moment as it's been given zero evidence to review. Let's see if it gets anything by the 20th.

Mick 16-03-2017 02:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890206)
Oops I did it again!
Making Philip Hammond and Jeremy Corbyn look like nimble political operators, Trump's second travel ban is um, banned before it even starts!
http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...judge-10803239
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...aii-court-live
This is pure political motivated BS. The Federal Judge in Hawaii, was appointed by Barack Obama in 2012. Enough said. :rolleyes:

martyh 16-03-2017 07:08
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35890161)
So you agree the jury's still out then. Perhaps you can convince Damien then.
I rather think that if it was true then Trump would have been the first to show proof ,he would have wasted no time at all in splashing the proof all over his twit machine and spicer would have been able to show some real facts instead of his 'alternative facts'As it stands there is no proof because it did not happen .Trump lied ...again

---------- Post added at 07:08 ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890211)
This is pure political motivated BS. The Federal Judge in Hawaii, was appointed by Barack Obama in 2012. Enough said. :rolleyes:
So what ? it doesn't matter who appointed him he still has to enforce the law and if the law says that Trumps Muslim ban is illegal then it is illegal .Maybe if Trump paid more attention to his policies instead of making stuff up and lying to cover up his own cock ups he would have more success

1andrew1 16-03-2017 08:04
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890211)
This is pure political motivated BS. The Federal Judge in Hawaii, was appointed by Barack Obama in 2012. Enough said. :rolleyes:
Mick, that's a pretty poor defence. A judge can't just ban something without a robust legal reason, even in the more politicised US.
Most of his supporters acknowledge that as a political outsider, Trump may not be as au fait with due processes as his predecessors. But it's up to Trump to assemble a team that complements his strengths and weaknesses.

TheDaddy 16-03-2017 08:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890226)
Mick, that's a pretty poor defence. A judge can't just ban something without a robust legal reason, even in the more politicised US.
Most of his supporters acknowledge that as a political outsider, Trump may not be as au fait with due processes as his predecessors. But it's up to Trump to assemble a team that complements his strengths and weaknesses.
Or just assemble a team that can write an order that's actually legal, I'm surprised we can't hear the alarm bells ringing in the American publics ears from here, to get it wrong again after last time shows a breath taking level of incompetence imo

1andrew1 16-03-2017 08:37
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Trump puts too more effort into his comfort zone of Twitter to explain away/distract from his lack of policy success.
He needs to invest his time in making sure his policies are implemented correctly and not moaning about the media and legislature. If he hasn't got the skills himself that's understandable, he needs to assemble a team around him that does. You would think he has done this in the business world so why not the political world?

Mick 16-03-2017 08:58
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35890221)

So what ? it doesn't matter who appointed him he still has to enforce the law and if the law says that Trumps Muslim ban is illegal then it is illegal .Maybe if Trump paid more attention to his policies instead of making stuff up and lying to cover up his own cock ups he would have more success
Wind your neck in. :rolleyes:

He has not made any 'stuff' up AND more importantly, his Executive Order that was due to start today, went through thorough legality checks.

The EO was released well over a week ago. I find it too convenient that this Hawaiian Federal Judge brought in by Obama in 2012, put a halt to it, hours before it's due to start, why not last week? Why not 3 or 4 days after EO was signed?

This was done for maximum embarrassment impact, i.e a totally politically motivated action clearly by an Activist Judge. The fact that two of his orders have been blocked is nothing short of a judicial coup against President Trump.

The President of the United States has EXCLUSIVE and SPECIFIC authority, to do what Trump's EO did and the Constitution does not grant any State any authority over immigration.

The US District Court Authority, to issue orders outside of their own geographical/jurisdictional venues, that affect the nation at large, are an over stretch of their respective jurisdiction. Only the Supreme Court should be able to issue nationwide decisions. e.g: The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has nationwide jurisdiction only in SELECTED cases.

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals. When there is disagreement between circuits, it's finally up to the Supreme Court to decide what the law is.

President Trump is well within his authority under 8USC, Sec. 1182 to exclude ALL non-citizen aliens who may pose a threat to the USA for whatever period of time he so desires and I would say those countries that do not do thorough checks on who enters and leaves their borders or share specific intelligence, he has a right to ban those citizens of those countries, whatever race or religion they are.

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890226)
Mick, that's a pretty poor defence.
No it's bloody not. I stand by it.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 09:17
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890230)
Wind your neck in. :rolleyes:

He has not made any 'stuff' up AND more importantly, his Executive Order that was due to start today, went through thorough legality checks.

The EO was released well over a week ago. I find it too convenient that this Hawaiian Federal Judge brought in by Obama in 2012, put a halt to it, hours before it's due to start, why not last week? Why not 3 or 4 days after EO was signed?

This was done for maximum embarrassment impact, i.e a totally politically motivated action clearly by an Activist Judge. The fact that two of his orders have been blocked is nothing short of a judicial coup against President Trump.

The President of the United States has EXCLUSIVE and SPECIFIC authority, to do what Trump's EO did and the Constitution does not grant any State any authority over immigration.

The US District Court Authority, to issue orders outside of their own geographical/jurisdictional venues, that affect the nation at large, are an over stretch of their respective jurisdiction. Only the Supreme Court should be able to issue nationwide decisions. e.g: The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has nationwide jurisdiction only in SELECTED cases.

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals. When there is disagreement between circuits, it's finally up to the Supreme Court to decide what the law is.

President Trump is well within his authority under 8USC, Sec. 1182 to exclude ALL non-citizen aliens who may pose a threat to the USA for whatever period of time he so desires and I would say those countries that do not do thorough checks on who enters and leaves their borders or share specific intelligence, he has a right to ban those citizens of those countries, whatever race or religion they are.
If you read why he lost the case, it's because he campaigned for a "Muslim ban" in his Presedential election and this is seen as that. And as I've posted before, the advice he was given is that these countries do not pose more of a terrorist threat than others so there was seen to be no case for this ban.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

pip08456 16-03-2017 09:17
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
After the February ruling, some judges had called for a rehearing of the case by 11 judges rather than the original three. On Wednesday the call was denied. But five judges – Bybee, Kozinski, Callahan, Bea, and Ikuta – dissented, saying the decision to halt the executive order was wrong.

Quote:
The Executive Order of January 27, 2017, suspending the entry of certain aliens, was authorized by statute, and presidents have frequently exercised that authority through executive orders and presidential proclamations. Whatever we, as individuals, may feel about the President or the Executive Order,1 the President’s decision was well within the powers of the presidency, and “[t]he wisdom of the policy choices made by [the President] is not a matter for our consideration
Link (page 4)

passingbat 16-03-2017 12:21
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35890227)
Or just assemble a team that can write an order that's actually legal, I'm surprised we can't hear the alarm bells ringing in the American publics ears from here, to get it wrong again after last time shows a breath taking level of incompetence imo

Or the liberalisation of America, under Obama, where political correctness ruled the day. That's why one of Trumps main policy pledges was to a appoint, to the Supreme Court, judges who would uphold the Constitution; not the wishy-washy liberal judges that Hilary wanted to appoint. It was a very popular policy. And he has fulfilled that promise with his first Supreme Court appointment.


Americans are not blind to the liberalisation of the judicial system.

Damien 16-03-2017 12:29
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35890262)
Or the liberalisation of America, under Obama, where political correctness ruled the day. That's why one of Trumps main policy pledges was to a appoint, to the Supreme Court, judges who would uphold the Constitution; not the wishy-washy liberal judges that Hilary wanted to appoint. It was a very popular policy. And he has fulfilled that promise with his first Supreme Court appointment.


Americans are not blind to the liberalisation of the judicial system.
The constitution requires interpretation. It's a point of contention. All the Justices on the Court 'uphold the constitution' but differ into what that means.

This isn't new either, it didn't start under Obama, the court has been a battleground for liberals and conservatives for ages. Abortion is still one of the big examples.

Besides it's unlikely they'll be able to ban abortion or gay marriage at this point.

passingbat 16-03-2017 12:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35890266)

This isn't new either, it didn't start under Obama, the court has been a battleground for liberals and conservatives for ages. Abortion is still one of the big examples.

.

You're right, it has been an on-going battle. However the liberal side did gain ground under Obama. I hate to think where it would have gone under Hillary.

Mick 16-03-2017 14:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Oops, looks like either Mcdonald's official Twitter account was hacked or someone (a now ex-employee) with an axe to grind against DJT, left a delicate tweet for him this morning:-

http://wlrn.org/post/mcdonalds-tweet...uickly-deleted

Damien 16-03-2017 14:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Trump to promote Burger King in 3...2...1....

Hugh 16-03-2017 14:57
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890211)
This is pure political motivated BS. The Federal Judge in Hawaii, was appointed by Barack Obama in 2012. Enough said. :rolleyes:
He was also voted for 94-0 by the Republican dominated Senate.

---------- Post added at 14:57 ---------- Previous post was at 14:53 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890230)
Wind your neck in. :rolleyes:

He has not made any 'stuff' up AND more importantly, his Executive Order that was due to start today, went through thorough legality checks.

The EO was released well over a week ago. I find it too convenient that this Hawaiian Federal Judge brought in by Obama in 2012, put a halt to it, hours before it's due to start, why not last week? Why not 3 or 4 days after EO was signed?

This was done for maximum embarrassment impact, i.e a ' politically motivated action clearly by an Activist Judge. The fact that two of his orders have been blocked is nothing short of a judicial coup against President Trump.

The President of the United States has EXCLUSIVE and SPECIFIC authority, to do what Trump's EO did and the Constitution does not grant any State any authority over immigration.

The US District Court Authority, to issue orders outside of their own geographical/jurisdictional venues, that affect the nation at large, are an over stretch of their respective jurisdiction. Only the Supreme Court should be able to issue nationwide decisions. e.g: The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has nationwide jurisdiction only in SELECTED cases.

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals. When there is disagreement between circuits, it's finally up to the Supreme Court to decide what the law is.

President Trump is well within his authority under 8USC, Sec. 1182 to exclude ALL non-citizen aliens who may pose a threat to the USA for whatever period of time he so desires and I would say those countries that do not do thorough checks on who enters and leaves their borders or share specific intelligence, he has a right to ban those citizens of those countries, whatever race or religion they are.

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 ----------



No it's bloody not. I stand by it.
The judge was responding to the Hawaiian Attorney General's application - these things take time.

You called him an activist judge - what else has he done to warrant that label?

Mick 16-03-2017 15:07
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35890308)

You called him an activist judge - what else has he done to warrant that label?
Given that several other Judges have come out saying Trump has every right to restrict immigration and that it's wrong for Federal Judges to block his Executive actions, specifically over immigration, given that it is not open at State level, who have no authority to alter immigration wishes of the Executive Branch. I think my judgement is a fairly accurate assessment.

Hugh 16-03-2017 15:08
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
But what has he specifically done to deserve that label?

Mick 16-03-2017 15:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35890313)
But what has he specifically done to deserve that label?
I suggest you re-read my post(s) in which I say why. You're not telling me this is not a politically motivated move, especially when several judges, not one or two, several, have said it is wrong to block the executive actions of the President, specifically when it comes to immigration.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 15:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890315)
I suggest you re-read my post(s) in which I say why. You're not telling me this is not a politically motivated move, especially when several judges, not one or two, several, have said it is wrong to block the executive actions of the President, specifically when it comes to immigration.
As we saw with the Brexit case which the UK Government lost, not all judges agree with one another, that's why multiple judges are consulted on important matters.
I've read nothing in your posts to support your assertion that the the judge in question is an activist judge. I get that you don't agree with his judgment and that some judges disagree with him too...whilst some judges agree with him.
But nothing I've read says activist and Hugh's point about him being voted for 94-0 by the Republican-dominated Senate seems to make him an unlikely activist.

Mick 16-03-2017 15:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890319)
As we saw with the Brexit case which the UK Government lost, not all judges agree with one another, that's why multiple judges are consulted on important matters.
I've read nothing in your posts to support your assertion that the the judge in question is an activist judge. I get that you don't agree with his judgment and that some judges disagree with him too...whilst some judges agree with him.
But nothing I've read says activist and Hugh's point about him being voted for 94-0 by the Republican-dominated Senate seems to make him an unlikely activist.
Well, I have an opposing view and I am sticking to it.

martyh 16-03-2017 17:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890230)
Wind your neck in. :rolleyes:

He has not made any 'stuff' up AND more importantly, his Executive Order that was due to start today, went through thorough legality checks.

The EO was released well over a week ago. I find it too convenient that this Hawaiian Federal Judge brought in by Obama in 2012, put a halt to it, hours before it's due to start, why not last week? Why not 3 or 4 days after EO was signed?

This was done for maximum embarrassment impact, i.e a totally politically motivated action clearly by an Activist Judge. The fact that two of his orders have been blocked is nothing short of a judicial coup against President Trump.

The President of the United States has EXCLUSIVE and SPECIFIC authority, to do what Trump's EO did and the Constitution does not grant any State any authority over immigration.

The US District Court Authority, to issue orders outside of their own geographical/jurisdictional venues, that affect the nation at large, are an over stretch of their respective jurisdiction. Only the Supreme Court should be able to issue nationwide decisions. e.g: The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has nationwide jurisdiction only in SELECTED cases.

There are 13 Circuit Courts of Appeals. When there is disagreement between circuits, it's finally up to the Supreme Court to decide what the law is.

President Trump is well within his authority under 8USC, Sec. 1182 to exclude ALL non-citizen aliens who may pose a threat to the USA for whatever period of time he so desires and I would say those countries that do not do thorough checks on who enters and leaves their borders or share specific intelligence, he has a right to ban those citizens of those countries, whatever race or religion they are.

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 ----------



No it's bloody not. I stand by it.
Trump has made stuff up ,his accusation that Obama bugged his offices is complete made up trash ,he keeps making stuff up to support his view point and when it's proven to be wrong he calls it fake news and mugs like you keep sucking it up .You can babble on as much as you like that Trump has the authority to do what he wants with EO's but the judges say different so once again you are wrong.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 18:10
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Senate panel rejects Trump wiretap claim
There are "no indications" that Trump Tower was under surveillance by the US government before or after the election, a Senate committee has said.
The statement from Senator Richard Burr, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, dismissed Donald Trump's claim that his phones were tapped.
Mr Trump had accused Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower during the presidential race.
Mr Burr joins a cadre of lawmakers who have rejected the allegation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39297439

RizzyKing 16-03-2017 18:11
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
This presidency will stand or fall in it's first year as much as I'm happy that a different type of person won the election Trump needs to adjust to his new position quicker then he is. He cannot continue running the presidency as he ran his business interests they are two different to work. Trump has some good ideas but he's too quick to use twitter and that's causing too many problems for it to continue for much longer or be accepted by even the republicans. He has been caught out a few times now putting it politely embelishing things and not reacting well when he is caught out it's not the way to be a president and he needs to find a way to put the whole Russia situation to bed as well because as long as that's not resolved his presidency will struggle.

I want Trump to succeed so that another nail is hammered in the coffin of the type of politician that's infested western politics for the last twenty years and i have no doubt Trump winning averted a serious problem with Russia that Clinton would have pushed perhaps going too far. That said he has to step up and adapt to the role and blind loyalty and defence of him is not going to help him do that, right now if your a real Trump supporter do him the biggest favour you can and admit his mistakes and show him that he has to change.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 18:23
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35890340)
This presidency will stand or fall in it's first year as much as I'm happy that a different type of person won the election Trump needs to adjust to his new position quicker then he is. He cannot continue running the presidency as he ran his business interests they are two different to work. Trump has some good ideas but he's too quick to use twitter and that's causing too many problems for it to continue for much longer or be accepted by even the republicans. He has been caught out a few times now putting it politely embelishing things and not reacting well when he is caught out it's not the way to be a president and he needs to find a way to put the whole Russia situation to bed as well because as long as that's not resolved his presidency will struggle.

I want Trump to succeed so that another nail is hammered in the coffin of the type of politician that's infested western politics for the last twenty years and i have no doubt Trump winning averted a serious problem with Russia that Clinton would have pushed perhaps going too far. That said he has to step up and adapt to the role and blind loyalty and defence of him is not going to help him do that, right now if your a real Trump supporter do him the biggest favour you can and admit his mistakes and show him that he has to change.
Sensible advice. No one who surrounds himself with yes men will last the length.

Paul 16-03-2017 18:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Once again people start acting like they are in a school playground.

Any more childish name calling and the guilty person will be taking a rest from posting.

Mick 16-03-2017 18:59
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35890335)
Trump has made stuff up ,his accusation that Obama bugged his offices is complete made up trash ,
Obama Administration has form when it comes spying on folk just ask France, UN's Bank Ki Moon. Feel free to go ask them : That's after you calm down and wind your neck in again.

Quote:
he keeps making stuff up to support his view point and when it's proven to be wrong he calls it fake news and mugs like you keep sucking it up .You can babble on as much as you like that Trump has the authority to do what he wants with EO's but the judges say different so once again you are wrong.
Now you are just babbling. :zzz:

martyh 16-03-2017 19:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890347)
Obama Administration has form when it comes spying on folk just ask France, UN's Bank Ki Moon. Feel free to go ask them : That's after you calm down and wind your neck in again.

Now you are just babbling. :zzz:
It's glaringly obvious to everyone with half a brain that Trump has just made that up ,what's worrying is he thinks he can get away with it

Mr K 16-03-2017 19:43
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
We can always start the thread yet again, and be nice to each other for a bit....

Trumps lies have been exposed repeatedly, but he can do no wrong for some. Wonder what his disciples would object to....

martyh 16-03-2017 19:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
There are "no indications" that Trump Tower was under surveillance by the US government before or after the election, a Senate committee has said.
The statement from Republican Senator Richard Burr, Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, dismissed Donald Trump's claim his phones were tapped.
So according to the Republican senator Richard Burr and the intelligence committee he chairs ,Trump is a liar and made it all up

Mick 16-03-2017 19:53
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35890349)
Better tell mick to stop being so aggressive then or don't the rules apply to him

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------



It's glaringly obvious to everyone with half a brain that Trump has just made that up ,what's worrying is he thinks he can get away with it
But you have conveniently ignored that Obama Admin has form when it comes to spying !

If Obama Administration was capable of spying on ALLIES, why not foes, i.e. a Republican candidate? If Obama was desperate to get evidence to prove these so called Russian links : How best to do that with the tools available and they had used those tools before to even spy on friends.

Whose the mug now ? :rolleyes:

1andrew1 16-03-2017 20:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890354)
But you have conveniently ignored that Obama Admin has form when it comes to spying !

If Obama Administration was capable of spying on ALLIES, why not foes, i.e. a Republican candidate? If Obama was desperate to get evidence to prove these so called Russian links : How best to do that with the tools available and they had used those tools before to even spy on friends.

Whose the mug now ? :rolleyes:
This is a great forum with well-informed contributors and hopefully no one's a mug.
But as Hugh has explained, you can't just spy on US citizens, a court order is required and none was requested or given. That's easy to prove.

martyh 16-03-2017 20:00
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890354)
But you have conveniently ignored that Obama Admin has form when it comes to spying !

If Obama Administration was capable of spying on ALLIES, why not foes, i.e. a Republican candidate? If Obama was desperate to get evidence to prove these so called Russian links : How best to do that with the tools available and they had used those tools before to even spy on friends.

Whose the mug now ? :rolleyes:
And you keep ignoring the fact that Trump has provided not one single bit of evidence to back up his lies

Here's a few people who have said that there is no evidence at all

former President Barack Obama
FBI Director James Comey
ex-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
ex-CIA Director John Brennan
Republican chairman of House intelligence committee, Devin Nunes
Republican John McCain, who chairs Senate Committee on Armed Services
House Speaker Paul Ryan
Former White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough

I really don't know why you keep saying Obama has form for spying ,so does every other President and leader Trump has accused Obama of something completely different

Mick 16-03-2017 20:13
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890355)
This is a great forum with well-informed contributors and hopefully no one's a mug.
But as Hugh has explained, you can't just spy on US citizens, a court order is required and none was requested or given. That's easy to prove.
What kind of intelligence agency would NOT need a court order to spy on a US citizen ?

A foreign one.

Obama Administration only needed to ask an ally to do their bidding, no litigation come backs. Now, which foreign entity outside US has the capability? Clue: Re-arrange these letters CQGH.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 20:15
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890354)
But you have conveniently ignored that Obama Admin has form when it comes to spying!
Every US President and for that matter, every British Prime Minister has form for spying. That's what countries do, including spying on their allies.

Mr K 16-03-2017 20:17
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Ah, so now it's the British intelligence agencies colluding against Trump. Have to hand it to you Mick, you're way ahead of the Trumpster. Maybe he'll read this thread and tweet it as a fact...

Mick 16-03-2017 20:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890365)
Every US President and for that matter, every British Prime Minister has form for spying. That's what countries do, including spying on their allies.
Precisely my point, so if it's fine to spy on friends, why not DJT ?

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 20:19 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35890366)
Ah, so now it's the British intelligence agencies colluding against Trump. Have to hand it to you Mick, you're way ahead of the Trumpster. Maybe he'll read this thread and tweet it as a fact...
Never said it was actually the case just presenting a scenario where if a spy order was issued and to avoid getting a court order, as that would leave a paper trail, therefore evidence, just get an ally to do the spying for you.

Damien 16-03-2017 20:59
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890354)
But you have conveniently ignored that Obama Admin has form when it comes to spying !

If Obama Administration was capable of spying on ALLIES, why not foes, i.e. a Republican candidate? If Obama was desperate to get evidence to prove these so called Russian links : How best to do that with the tools available and they had used those tools before to even spy on friends.

Whose the mug now ? :rolleyes:
Mick I did address why the Obama administration spying on foreign allies is not the same as spying on citizens in the US. One is legal and within his remit and the other isn't.

What's more I don't understand why you're so keen to defend Trump on his considering both he and his press security are slightly backing away from the specific accusation that it was Obama who did it and that it was a wiretap. Also considering Trump hasn't provided any evidence and Republicans are saying they haven't seen any either.

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:42 ----------

Bizarrely my Twitter feed just went crazy with the Sean Spicer accusing GCHQ of spying on Trump? Did he say that before your post? Where did come from?

Is Sean Spicer reading this thread? Are you Sean Spicer? So many questions :D

1andrew1 16-03-2017 21:10
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35890374)
Bizarrely my Twitter feed just went crazy with the Sean Spicer accusing GCHQ of spying on Trump? Did he say that before your post? Where did come from?

Is Sean Spicer reading this thread? Are you Sean Spicer? So many questions :D
I did think Mick was Trump at one time until he said that he didn't understand the States' obsession with guns! :D

RizzyKing 16-03-2017 22:37
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Well for a start the N.S.A has form for illegal surveillance of US citizens and both the F.B.I and C.I.A have conducted illegal domestic surveillance in the past so it's not as simple as taking denials at face value. Personally i think the only way to prove or disprove any of this is an official investigation and an official investigation of the numerous Russian accusations and suspicions well may be the only way to kill that but who you would get to oversee it that has the knowledge of the US intelligence services and no links or loyalties to any of them could be the biggest challenge.

What is beyond debate is this presidency is being overshadowed by issue's that shouldn't really be a big problem and are only becoming big problems because they are being completely mismanaged from the top down. Trump's inexperience of the higher political world is showing badly and rather then get his head down and adapt to this new world he's in all he is doing is reverting to stereotypical businessman and trying to blag his way through it and it's not working.

1andrew1 16-03-2017 23:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Away from Tweetgate, New York Mag finds Trump busy...breaking his promises to the electorate.
Quote:
Say what you want about Donald Trump — you’ve gotta admit, he’s doing what he said he would. Many people, including some of the president’s most fervent detractors, have expressed this sentiment since January 20. Which is odd, since it isn’t really true...
But many of the president’s less reactionary — and more popular — promises are directly contradicted by his budget proposal. Here are six of the most conspicuous:
(1) We will “free the Earth from the miseries of disease.”
(2) The government will stop wasting money overseas and “rebuild” our inner cities.
(3) “We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.”
(4) My administration will “promote clean air and water.”
(5) “The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.”
(6) America will eliminate its national debt “over a period of eight years.”
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...t-betrays.html

Mick 17-03-2017 00:16
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35890403)
Away from Tweetgate, New York Mag finds Trump busy...breaking his promises to the electorate.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...t-betrays.html
Come off it Andrew, I mean you make some wild claims over Brexit but how can he break promises when he has only been in Office less than 60 days ? You can judge him on some of those after 8 years geez. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 00:16 ---------- Previous post was at 00:04 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35890395)
Well for a start the N.S.A has form for illegal surveillance of US citizens and both the F.B.I and C.I.A have conducted illegal domestic surveillance in the past so it's not as simple as taking denials at face value. Personally i think the only way to prove or disprove any of this is an official investigation and an official investigation of the numerous Russian accusations and suspicions well may be the only way to kill that but who you would get to oversee it that has the knowledge of the US intelligence services and no links or loyalties to any of them could be the biggest challenge.

What is beyond debate is this presidency is being overshadowed by issue's that shouldn't really be a big problem and are only becoming big problems because they are being completely mismanaged from the top down. Trump's inexperience of the higher political world is showing badly and rather then get his head down and adapt to this new world he's in all he is doing is reverting to stereotypical businessman and trying to blag his way through it and it's not working.
I am with others who demand to see the proof too. He has to show us what he has to back up his claims but at same time I don't will fully accept when some agencies, says there is no proof or evidence I mean come on, some of these agencies investigated Hillary Clinton during her email scandals, then threw a whopper weeks in to Election Day then announce days before the day itself they found nothing.

1andrew1 17-03-2017 00:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35890405)
Come off it Andrew, I mean you make some wild claims over Brexit but how can he break promises when he has only been in Office less than 60 days ? You can judge him on some of those after 8 years geez. :rolleyes:
Ha ha. No, I'm deadly serious. He's slashing the budgets in all these areas, as the article says. His promises apart from the deficit are for four years, not eight.

Taking just two examples from the six in the article:

a) My administration will “promote clean air and water.”
Trump’s budget abolishes the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a popular, bipartisan program that preserves the health of the lakes that eight Midwestern states depend on.

b) The government will stop wasting money overseas and “rebuild” our inner cities.
Trump’s budget cuts $2 billion from public housing and $300 million from rental assistance, while abolishing the Community Development Block Grant program, which funds affordable housing, community recreation centers, and food assistance, among other things.
The budget also cuts job-training programs, legal aid, and home energy subsidies to low-income Americans.

Mick 17-03-2017 00:39
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Still inclined to say judge after 4/8 years : Obama did rack up a huge deficit in the 8 years he was in office, in fact he doubled it.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:26.
Page 8 of 32 « First 4567 8 910111218 Last »
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