BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
50 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Trump, Russians and Corruption, The Golden Years
Track this topic - Email this topic - Print this topic - Download this topic - Subscribe to this forum
Qassändra
post Jan 12 2017, 09:34 PM
Post #21
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,948
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 06:48 PM) *
What are Trump's sexual preferences anything to do with what sort of President he'll be? If he was peed on by prostitutes then so what? Each to their own I say. It's all fuss over nothing.

Watched his press conference yesterday and he was brilliant. He's a real breath of fresh air although he shouldn't be criticising the security services.

The peeing isn't the scandal, it's the treason allegations involving his campaign backchanneling with Wikileaks and the Russian government.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
common sense
post Jan 12 2017, 10:32 PM
Post #22
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Members
Posts: 14,639
Member No.: 53
Joined: 7-March 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Jan 12 2017, 08:07 PM) *
We obviosuly didn't watch the same conference. He was an arrogant, rabid dick who said nothing of substance about anything. And he's about to be President!


Did you watch it all, the full hour? I did again on BBC Parliament tonight. He said lots of substance. He's going to build the wall and will start soon rather than wait a year or two and Mexico WILL pay for it, one way or another. There's going to be an inquiry in to the hacking to be completed within three months. He's going to replace Obamacare. He has no business interests in Russia and no loans there. Plenty of substance if you watch in full and not just the bits the anti-Trump media want to show you. He will play no part whatsoever in running his businesses whilst President and his lawyer spoke to explain this. He doesn't even have to separate running his business from the country but is going to anyway. Isn't that a measure of the integrity of the guy? The President and VP are exempt from the conflict of interest rules.


This post has been edited by common sense: Jan 12 2017, 10:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
common sense
post Jan 12 2017, 10:36 PM
Post #23
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Members
Posts: 14,639
Member No.: 53
Joined: 7-March 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ Jan 12 2017, 09:34 PM) *
The peeing isn't the scandal, it's the treason allegations involving his campaign backchanneling with Wikileaks and the Russian government.


I know that but it's still nothing really and will all be forgotten in a few weeks, after the Inauguration. He said any hacking is wrong and announced an inquiry in to it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Jan 13 2017, 12:29 AM
Post #24
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,948
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 10:36 PM) *
I know that but it's still nothing really and will all be forgotten in a few weeks, after the Inauguration. He said any hacking is wrong and announced an inquiry in to it.

Treason through aiding and abetting hacking and conspiring with a foreign power during an election is "nothing really"?

Put it this way - if Jeremy Corbyn won a general election through foreign assistance from the EU which went to every effort to sabotage his opponents, and he was alleged to have been in communication with them and to have encouraged them to continue with it at every stage, would you claim that to be "nothing really"? If he then after winning said it was wrong and announced an inquiry into it, rather than resigning immediately and calling fresh elections on the basis that the prior result was irrevocably tainted, would you consider that a satisfactory response?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Jan 13 2017, 02:07 PM
Post #25
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Admin.
Posts: 28,421
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 10:32 PM) *
Did you watch it all, the full hour? I did again on BBC Parliament tonight. He said lots of substance. He's going to build the wall and will start soon rather than wait a year or two and Mexico WILL pay for it, one way or another. There's going to be an inquiry in to the hacking to be completed within three months. He's going to replace Obamacare. He has no business interests in Russia and no loans there. Plenty of substance if you watch in full and not just the bits the anti-Trump media want to show you. He will play no part whatsoever in running his businesses whilst President and his lawyer spoke to explain this. He doesn't even have to separate running his business from the country but is going to anyway. Isn't that a measure of the integrity of the guy? The President and VP are exempt from the conflict of interest rules.

No, not at all. All previous presidents have done far more than Trump is proposing. They have sold their business interests. Trump will continue to own his various businesses and it is, therefore, not unreasonable to wonder whether he could take a decision that would potentially damage one of those businesses.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Oliver
post Jan 13 2017, 03:01 PM
Post #26
Buzzjack's Finest Alcoholic.
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 9,496
Member No.: 15,367
Joined: 19-November 11
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 10:32 PM) *
He's going to build the wall and will start soon rather than wait a year or two and Mexico WILL pay for it, one way or another.


I still don't understand how he thinks he'll be able to do this? It's like my parents getting an extension on the house and then making our next door neighbour pay for it. It really makes no sense. Mexico have said numerous times they aren't paying for it. huh.gif


This post has been edited by Oliver: Jan 13 2017, 03:01 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brett-Butler
post Jan 13 2017, 06:28 PM
Post #27
Howdy, disco citizens.
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11,273
Member No.: 10,455
Joined: 16-January 10
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Oliver @ Jan 13 2017, 04:01 PM) *
I still don't understand how he thinks he'll be able to do this? It's like my parents getting an extension on the house and then making our next door neighbour pay for it. It really makes no sense. Mexico have said numerous times they aren't paying for it. huh.gif


I've seen a few tongue-in-cheek yet plausible ways that Trump could theoretically make Mexico pay for the wall. The first is to employ only Mexicans to build the wall. Mexico will then be paying for it in 2 ways - firstly those Mexicans will have to pay tax to America for work, and it will cost Mexico in terms of labour that would otherwise be used in order to boost the GDP of Mexico, therefore coming out of Mexico's pocket.

The even more tongue-in-cheek suggestion is that the state of Mexico should make all drugs legal. Therefore they won't need to be made & smuggled over the border by Mexican drug lords, and it ensures the money from the production and sale of these drugs stays in America, rather than being taken back across the border. Then tax the bejesus out of it and use that money to build the wall.

Not that I expect there to be a giant Mexico-wide wall built on the border anyway, I never believed for a moment that would ever happen under a Trump presidency.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Silas Frøkner
post Jan 13 2017, 06:38 PM
Post #28
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 66,264
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 10:32 PM) *
He has no business interests in Russia and no loans there.

This is an outright lie that even his own child has contradicted pre-presidential bid.

The man lies so much if he introduced himself to me a Donald Trump i'd be f***ing sceptical if he was telling me the truth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jan 13 2017, 07:53 PM
Post #29
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 14,951
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 12 2017, 10:32 PM) *
Did you watch it all, the full hour? I did again on BBC Parliament tonight. He said lots of substance. He's going to build the wall and will start soon rather than wait a year or two and Mexico WILL pay for it, one way or another. There's going to be an inquiry in to the hacking to be completed within three months. He's going to replace Obamacare. He has no business interests in Russia and no loans there. Plenty of substance if you watch in full and not just the bits the anti-Trump media want to show you. He will play no part whatsoever in running his businesses whilst President and his lawyer spoke to explain this. He doesn't even have to separate running his business from the country but is going to anyway. Isn't that a measure of the integrity of the guy? The President and VP are exempt from the conflict of interest rules.


sigh.

Trump lies and spouts bluster.

1. He can't force another country to build a wall on American land and he hasn't said how it will be paid for. Mexico have said they won't. Trump can try to bring in protectionist trade laws to attempt to pay for it, but that depends on him actually proposing it and getting it through politically, then organising and building it (not him). Both Mexico and the USA are huge trade partners, and if he wanted to go tit for tat both would suffer. The working class folk working in industry may well have a change of heart as their jobs disappear.

2. Obamacare can be gotten rid of by the right-wing Repubs. They have nothing proposed to replace it. That will mean thousands of dead children, disabled people and older vulnerable people. Note: POOR people, the sort of people who voted for Trump without thinking about what they voted for. If there is no realistic alternative (and Trump has offered nothing) then he will soon find his popularity littered with the ongoing stream of dead and dying until he day the dems win the next election and bring it back. Of course, if you support poor people dying of medical problems that can easily be avoided in a fair society, you may wish to consider moving to the USA and see how you fair as an older immigrant.....

3. Business Interests in Russia. Yes he does. And China. Why do you think all those papers on his desk at the conference were blank? Why do you think he hasn't published any business details? Why do you think he hates the American authorities who are investigating the President-Elect on his tax returns, bearing in mind he hasn't paid anything in 20 years (his own words) and brags about it, having used bankrupt companies (cos he's so rubbish in business) to avoid paying it. Do you believe everyone should pay tax, or do you support the rich not paying tax? Do you believe that living on benefits would be possible without taxpayers?

4. The media are not anti-Trump. They let him off lightly. Journalists doing their job properly would have challenged every lying claim he made during the campaign and hounded him until he told the truth. And Clinton. Clinton's lies were minimal and easily confirmed. Trump just habitually denies everything he doesn't like answering on, even stuff we have seem him do and say live on TV. he is a serial liar. Serial liars lie. You can't trust them or anything they say. How can you tell if Trump is lying? His mouth is open.......

5. The President must not have business interests that can cause him to manipulate the national interest into self-interest. This is law. It's a fact. He hasn't put aside his business interests at all, he just got his sons to manage the company that he still owns. While getting foreign-leaders to stay at his hotels and pocket the cash two months ago. This is easily checkable. You just ask them. Or flick through the hotel checking-in books.

You see, you are denying facts, just as Trump denies facts. Breitbart and other disreputable alt-right media push lies and their fans lap it up as if they were true when they are piss-easy to prove to be lies. But as my original article stated, facts don't mean anything to people who choose to believe something, whether it's true or not is irrelevant, it's the message they love, because they want to believe it, and facts just get in the way.

Thats why smart people hate Trump and what he stands for, and people who are not well-educated and get all their info from The Daily Mail or Trump tweets, are inclined to believe anything any charlatan tells them. That's how Hitler got into power, and how people went aloud with mass murder. Germans weren't any more evil than people in any other country in the 1930's, they were just willingly stupid and ready to believe the first lying evil twat who told them he could solve all the problems caused by foreigners.

That is all....



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
common sense
post Jan 16 2017, 04:01 PM
Post #30
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Members
Posts: 14,639
Member No.: 53
Joined: 7-March 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


I'm going to make a prediction now. I reckon the first female president will be Ivanka Trump and not as I've seen some US commentators predict, Chelsea Clinton. She's going to be supporting her father in the White House then may become a senator before a White House run and she has plenty of time yet. That's if Donald doesn't mess things up too much to prevent a Trump having any chance ever again.

This post has been edited by common sense: Jan 16 2017, 04:02 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Jan 16 2017, 04:25 PM
Post #31
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,948
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


I reckon if anything the salutary lesson of Hillary Clinton is that the first female president will almost certainly not be someone who could be said to have got there through family ties.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
common sense
post Jan 16 2017, 04:40 PM
Post #32
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Members
Posts: 14,639
Member No.: 53
Joined: 7-March 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


Interestingly, Trump's inauguration is being shown live by both BBC1 and ITV, much to the annoyance of some TV viewers. ITV has never shown one live before, not even Obama's in 2009 so the Donald must be special! All inaugurations up to and including Dubya Bush's were on BBC2 but Obama's was promoted to BBC1.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Oliver
post Jan 16 2017, 04:46 PM
Post #33
Buzzjack's Finest Alcoholic.
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 9,496
Member No.: 15,367
Joined: 19-November 11
 


QUOTE(common sense @ Jan 16 2017, 04:40 PM) *
Interestingly, Trump's inauguration is being shown live by both BBC1 and ITV, much to the annoyance of some TV viewers. ITV has never shown one live before, not even Obama's in 2009 so the Donald must be special! All inaugurations up to and including Dubya Bush's were on BBC2 but Obama's was promoted to BBC1.


They're probably hoping for something hilarious to happen.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Silas Frøkner
post Jan 16 2017, 05:11 PM
Post #34
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 66,264
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


Scotland's Sunday Herald gave it a fab write up in the TV section
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
common sense
post Jan 16 2017, 06:41 PM
Post #35
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Members
Posts: 14,639
Member No.: 53
Joined: 7-March 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Silas @ Jan 16 2017, 05:11 PM) *
Scotland's Sunday Herald gave it a fab write up in the TV section



What did they say? Did they slag off Donald?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Silas Frøkner
post Jan 16 2017, 06:56 PM
Post #36
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 66,264
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


They compared it to the TV "The Man In The High Castle"

Think it's safe to say the Herald won't be getting any questions when trumpy next inflicts his unwanted presence upon Scotland
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Soy Adrián
post Jan 17 2017, 09:07 AM
Post #37
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
******
Group: Members
Posts: 12,898
Member No.: 10,596
Joined: 6-February 10
 


I just hope it's a windy day.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bluesunstorm
post Jan 20 2017, 12:04 AM
Post #38
BuzzJack Climber
**
Group: Members
Posts: 162
Member No.: 22,132
Joined: 10-July 15
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ Jan 16 2017, 09:25 AM) *
I reckon if anything the salutary lesson of Hillary Clinton is that the first female president will almost certainly not be someone who could be said to have got there through family ties.

Well really, she won. Winning by 3 million votes is winning, it's just that POTUS is not necessarily decided by who wins at least a plurality of a popular vote-unlike Congress members, governors, mayors, etc. It's beating a dead horse now, but having the second place candidate become president is never ease to take-especially when it's misogynistic, bigoted, unintelligent scum like Donald Trump. I don't like the notion that she got where she did because of family ties either. She's always been incredibly accomplished and ambitious, not to mention she worked so hard during two presidential primaries to get the nomination. I've always seen her as completely separate from Bill. I get that many people had problems with her when it came to policy, but she's not a unpopular as many people and the media make her out to be.


This post has been edited by bluesunstorm: Jan 20 2017, 12:06 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jan 21 2017, 09:21 AM
Post #39
BuzzJack Platinum Member
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 14,951
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


so. The Whitehouse website has removed all pages on climate change, LBGT, and other assorted attempts to improve humanity.

Instead, some are reporting, we have a war on Islamic terrorists and Melania's jewellery and clothing lines for sale.

So, The POTUS is using his position to make personal money and drum up populist support by creating enemies everyone can rally round him against.

This goes against the constitution. So the question is - how long before the gutless brainless right-wing Republicans keeping him in office give up and just admit he's doing everything for his own ego and bank account?

Meanwhile some elements of the British press can see a silver lining in the new speeches (if one can call them that): They love the new foreign-born First Lady's clothing range! She's gorgeous they say, never having noticed she's a former model, so that makes the apocalyptic tone of the protectionist, poor-attacking (despite all pretence that it's pro-poor) statements all OK then...

Wonder if they have shares in her clothing line......?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Jan 21 2017, 10:59 AM
Post #40
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Admin.
Posts: 28,421
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Given his record, shouldn't Melania be referred to as Trump's "current wife"?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post


50 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd November 2019 - 07:54 PM