US Politics 2

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:12 am

Peter Crisp wrote:Rome had Hadrian's Wall built in about 6 years and you saw huge political outrage from the Picts because Rome cut them off from their favourite place to raid.


FTFY

User avatar
Victor Mildew
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Victor Mildew » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:48 am

All this talk of jail and nobody is talking about the real person that should be locked up, crooked Hillary Clinton! SAD!

Hexx wrote:Ad7 is older and balder than I thought.
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:22 am

twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1086301380334272512



Don’t kill baby Hitler, he’s a baby.

User avatar
Harry Ola
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Harry Ola » Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:49 am

The intervention from the Mueller team has rather put a big dampener on what looked like a big move forward towards impeachment.

I don't suppose there is any doubt Trump has been up to no good with witnesses, but looks like we are going to have to wait longer.

:fp: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:43 am

Harry Ola wrote:The intervention from the Mueller team has rather put a big dampener on what looked like a big move forward towards impeachment.

I don't suppose there is any doubt Trump has been up to no good with witnesses, but looks like we are going to have to wait longer.

:fp: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


I find it encouraging. It proves Mueller isn’t making things up and isn’t going to just snatch at rumours or lies to get Trump. Anything he comes up with will be genuine.

User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009
Location: SES Hammer of Vigilance

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Preezy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:04 pm

Moggy wrote:

twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1086301380334272512



Don’t kill baby Hitler, he’s a baby.

Good hypothetical question - would you kill a baby if you knew it would grow up to be a mass murderer?

User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Alvin Flummux » Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:22 pm

You could always kidnap the baby and give it to a loving home, rather than the strict household Adolf grew up in.

Moggy wrote:
Harry Ola wrote:The intervention from the Mueller team has rather put a big dampener on what looked like a big move forward towards impeachment.

I don't suppose there is any doubt Trump has been up to no good with witnesses, but looks like we are going to have to wait longer.

:fp: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


I find it encouraging. It proves Mueller isn’t making things up and isn’t going to just snatch at rumours or lies to get Trump. Anything he comes up with will be genuine.


The Mueller team's intervention doesn't dispute the facts, apparently, just the characterization. Trump & co will seize on it as a vindication of their case, but the reality is, it isn't.

In terms of optics though, Buzzfeed done goofed.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:31 pm

Preezy wrote:
Moggy wrote:

twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1086301380334272512



Don’t kill baby Hitler, he’s a baby.

Good hypothetical question - would you kill a baby if you knew it would grow up to be a mass murderer?


No, I would give the baby to Queen Victoria, get her to announce him as heir and then we could have King Adolf.

Corazon de Leon

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Corazon de Leon » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:37 pm

Preezy wrote:
Moggy wrote:

twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1086301380334272512



Don’t kill baby Hitler, he’s a baby.

Good hypothetical question - would you kill a baby if you knew it would grow up to be a mass murderer?


Rick Remender's X-Force asks the same question. :slol:

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Peter Crisp » Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:47 am

This point was made by the Federal News Network who obviously sound super unbiased :slol: .
There are two kinds of furloughs. “Administrative furloughs” are planned events by an agency “designed to absorb reductions necessitated by downsizing, reduced funding, lack of work or any budget situation other than a lapse in appropriations,” according to the Office of Personnel Management.

“Shutdown furloughs,” also called “emergency furloughs,” occur during lapses in appropriations.

OPM’s 2015 guidance on shutdown furloughs also clarifies the matter.

“Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to emergency shutdown furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action,” OPM guidance reads. “The RIF furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements, on the other hand, contemplate planned, foreseeable, money-saving furloughs that, at the outset, are planned to exceed 30 days.”


So, that's a possible 800,000 people cut from the government and made unemployed and here's the reaction of my former US politics forum.
https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/forum/ ... -they-know

They think it's a great idea :fp: .

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Drumstick
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Drumstick » Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:50 am

Democrat Kamala Harris announces presidential run:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46947839

Check out my YouTube channel!
One man should not have this much power in this game. Luckily I'm not an ordinary man.
Image Image Image
User avatar
Monkey Man
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Monkey Man » Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:50 am

twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1087563055226146816



But I can tell you, from the moment I read the story, I knew the story was false.

Because?

Because I have been through all the tapes, I have been through all the texts, I have been through all the e-mails, and I knew none existed. And then, basically, when the special counsel said that, just in case there are any others I might not know about, they probably went through others and found the same thing.

Wait, what tapes have you gone through?

I shouldn’t have said tapes. They alleged there were texts and e-mails that corroborated that Cohen was saying the President told him to lie. There were no texts, there were no e-mails, and the President never told him to lie.

So, there were no tapes you listened to, though?

No tapes. Well, I have listened to tapes, but none of them concern this.

The Times reported yesterday, “President Trump was involved in discussions to build a skyscraper in Moscow throughout the entire 2016 presidential campaign . . .”

He’s wrong! They’re wrong!

“. . . His personal lawyer said on Sunday.”

I didn’t say that. Go find out where I said that on Sunday. I never said he was involved in such conversations. I said the same thing I said to you, which is—

The quote in the story from you is that the “ ‘discussions were going on from the day I announced to the day I won,’ Mr. Giuliani quoted Mr. Trump as saying during an interview with The New York Times.”

I did not say that.

The Times just made that quote up?

I don’t know if they made it up. What I was talking about was, if he had those conversations, they would not be criminal.

If he had them, but he didn’t have them?

Does it matter to the American people if it’s true? We are living in a democracy here. We want to know these things.

That’s an insane question you just asked me. I am not saying that he did it. I just told you he didn’t do it. I am telling you that their investigation is so ridiculous that, even if he did do it, it wouldn’t be a crime.

I can’t think of a person who has been as unfairly treated as this, by both the media and, to some extent, the special counsel. Now, maybe he is near the end and is starting to rethink it. I hope.

The Central Park Five? Trying to think of other people treated badly.

O.K., unfairly?

Yeah.


Stupid Watergate continues.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Tue Jan 22, 2019 1:12 pm

After Michael Cohen, Trump must have thought he could never get a worse lawyer.

And then Rudy Giuliani got the job.

:lol:

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Peter Crisp » Tue Jan 22, 2019 1:46 pm

I don't understand how they don't realise they would get into less problems if they just didn't say anything.
Trump is constantly screwing himself by tweeting absolute crap and then responding by tweeting more crap if he'd have just only talked or tweeted when absolutely needed he'd be in a much better position now.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Hexx » Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:17 pm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46963426

GOP's stolen supreme court backs him on Transgender military ban

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Moggy » Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:41 pm

Hexx wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46963426

GOP's stolen supreme court backs him on Transgender military ban


At least Graham Linehan will be happy.

User avatar
Garth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Norn Iron

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Garth » Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:57 am

Ocasio-Cortez and liberal freshmen join Oversight Committee

The House Oversight Committee is adding a group of progressive flamethrowers to its ranks.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) all won spots on the high-profile committee on Tuesday, two sources told POLITICO.

The new members, all of whom are freshmen except for Khanna, have been intensely critical of President Donald Trump, and their addition to the committee comes as Democrats have pledged to launch wide-ranging investigations into the president and his administration.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/ ... ee-1120002

:nod:

User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Alvin Flummux » Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:23 am

This is either going to go extremely well, or be an absolutely monumental fuck-up. No in-betweens here, chaps.

User avatar
Skarjo
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: US Politics 2
by Skarjo » Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:29 am

Monkey Man wrote:

twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1087563055226146816



But I can tell you, from the moment I read the story, I knew the story was false.

Because?

Because I have been through all the tapes, I have been through all the texts, I have been through all the e-mails, and I knew none existed. And then, basically, when the special counsel said that, just in case there are any others I might not know about, they probably went through others and found the same thing.

Wait, what tapes have you gone through?

I shouldn’t have said tapes. They alleged there were texts and e-mails that corroborated that Cohen was saying the President told him to lie. There were no texts, there were no e-mails, and the President never told him to lie.

So, there were no tapes you listened to, though?

No tapes. Well, I have listened to tapes, but none of them concern this.

The Times reported yesterday, “President Trump was involved in discussions to build a skyscraper in Moscow throughout the entire 2016 presidential campaign . . .”

He’s wrong! They’re wrong!

“. . . His personal lawyer said on Sunday.”

I didn’t say that. Go find out where I said that on Sunday. I never said he was involved in such conversations. I said the same thing I said to you, which is—

The quote in the story from you is that the “ ‘discussions were going on from the day I announced to the day I won,’ Mr. Giuliani quoted Mr. Trump as saying during an interview with The New York Times.”

I did not say that.

The Times just made that quote up?

I don’t know if they made it up. What I was talking about was, if he had those conversations, they would not be criminal.

If he had them, but he didn’t have them?

Does it matter to the American people if it’s true? We are living in a democracy here. We want to know these things.

That’s an insane question you just asked me. I am not saying that he did it. I just told you he didn’t do it. I am telling you that their investigation is so ridiculous that, even if he did do it, it wouldn’t be a crime.

I can’t think of a person who has been as unfairly treated as this, by both the media and, to some extent, the special counsel. Now, maybe he is near the end and is starting to rethink it. I hope.

The Central Park Five? Trying to think of other people treated badly.

O.K., unfairly?

Yeah.


Stupid Watergate continues.


Image

Karl wrote:Can't believe I got baited into expressing a political stance on hentai

Skarjo's Scary Stories...
User avatar
BID0
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Essex

PostRe: US Politics 2
by BID0 » Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:17 pm

The Dems putting Ocasio-Cortez in that position is odd, they were trying to get her to fall in line a don't rock the boat only a week or two ago


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Benzin, Edd, Google [Bot], Green Gecko, Grumpy David, Met, poshrule_uk, PuppetBoy, Red 5 stella, SEP, Tineash and 348 guests