Rick Gates has pleaded guilty to defrauding the USA laundering Ukranian money and lying.

 

For such "fake news" as trump keeps calling it, an awful lot of his cronies are pleading guilty to a variety of charges in exchange for lesser sentences and co-operating with the investigations on others...

 

Remember when I said over a year ago that the first ones to plead guilty get the best deals? As they are now witnesses against those higher up the chain, expect Trump & his closest maggots to step up the shrieking denials and slag off those pleading guilty as nothing to do with him and his actions.

 

A lifetime of lies catching up slowly and he will take down the Republicans with him once it becomes clear who has been complicit (note: those appointed to the investigation are Republicans and not are doing this out of Democrat-loving, they do it out of USA-loving)

Allegedly there are three seal indictments headed for the UK

 

*crosses fingers for Farage rotting in an American prison*

Allegedly there are three seal indictments headed for the UK

 

*crosses fingers for Farage rotting in an American prison*

:party2:

Rick Gates has pleaded guilty to defrauding the USA laundering Ukranian money and lying.

 

I've never heard of him before?

 

Allegedly there are three seal indictments headed for the UK

 

*crosses fingers for Farage rotting in an American prison*

 

What is it he is supposed to have done (not counting leading us to Brexit - which I dare say some of you might consider a crime in itself). :heehee:

 

I've never heard of him before?

What is it he is supposed to have done (not counting leading us to Brexit - which I dare say some of you might consider a crime in itself). :heehee:

 

Use google (supporter of the NRA, incidentally) or any other reputable search engine.

 

Farage:

 

using EU funds illegally to pay for Brexit campaigning

Using a company that has links to Russian propaganda techniques and bots to target Brexit-leaning users with propaganda

Visiting President Trump (who immediately tried to lean on May to make him US ambassador) and then sneaking into the Ecuadorian Embassy (but got spotted) for a private meeting with Julian Assange who co-incidentally had some interesting data to bung on wikileaks. A man who regularly put anything on wikileaks that attacked democrats during the campaign, sourced from Russia.

Supporting far right political movements outside his own country, the very same ones being pushed by Russians via internet propaganda in an attempt to destabilise the USA and the EU.

 

just off the top of my head. Now he may have just popped into to see Jules about an interview for his radio show (as he feebly claims) - but funnily enough interview there has been none.....

 

Farage:

 

using EU funds illegally to pay for Brexit campaigning

Using a company that has links to Russian propaganda techniques and bots to target Brexit-leaning users with propaganda

Visiting President Trump (who immediately tried to lean on May to make him US ambassador) and then sneaking into the Ecuadorian Embassy (but got spotted) for a private meeting with Julian Assange who co-incidentally had some interesting data to bung on wikileaks. A man who regularly put anything on wikileaks that attacked democrats during the campaign, sourced from Russia.

Supporting far right political movements outside his own country, the very same ones being pushed by Russians via internet propaganda in an attempt to destabilise the USA and the EU.

 

just off the top of my head. Now he may have just popped into to see Jules about an interview for his radio show (as he feebly claims) - but funnily enough interview there has been none.....

 

1. Is there a court case ongoing I haven't heard about?

 

2. Not a crime, even if true.

 

3. Ditto

 

4. Ditto

 

The idea that Russia is trying to destabilise the US & EU is just an conspiracy theory, with no more provable evidence than my contention that the EU is not as benign as they claim.

1. Is there a court case ongoing I haven't heard about?

 

2. Not a crime, even if true.

 

3. Ditto

 

4. Ditto

 

The idea that Russia is trying to destabilise the US & EU is just an conspiracy theory, with no more provable evidence than my contention that the EU is not as benign as they claim.

 

1. Yes the EU are chasing him.

 

2. The company is under investigation in the US, suggesting there is something illegal

 

3. Depends what data (if true) was passed on. The FBI may consider him a person of interest. The UK government has no intention of allowing Assange free even though the original Swedish charges of rape have been dropped. Draw your own conclusions.

 

4. It's not a conspiracy theory it's a fact. Warrants have been issued by the FBI for Russian citizens involved in it. Some EU countries are going back to paper voting, as are some States, because it can't be fiddled with electronically.

 

Several close associates of Trump have already pleaded guilty and are aiding the FBI. Why would they plead guilty to dealing illegally with Russians/Ukranian-supporters of Russia if they were innocent? Or admitted lying as per Trump instructions. Why is Trump shitting bricks tweeting about a conspiracy every day and not ever once criticising Russians? Why did Obama expel dozens of Russian diplomats only for Trump to hug them all dearly?

 

Either smart Obama is corrupt or dumb Trump is corrupt. There is no investigation into Obama. Draw your own conclusion to that too... (PS we know Trump is corrupt, we see the evidence constantly, and we see his lies: his latest:

 

H Clinton 2016: Trump wants guns in the classroom.

Trump2016: Crooked Hillary is a liar!

Trump Feb 2018: I want guns in every classroom! (Except presumably black teachers with a gun who be would shot immediately by any police standing outside the school while a white shooter lets loose) )

 

You really DO have problems seeing through lies don't you? Such a state of naivety is admirable (but not useful in discussions)

 

You really DO have problems seeing through lies don't you? Such a state of naivety is admirable (but not useful in discussions)

 

I would describe it as 'deeply ingrained cynicism' myself.

I would describe it as 'deeply ingrained cynicism' myself.

 

Totally not that. You are wildly optimistic when it comes to unproven claims, and utterly unconvinced when it comes to actual facts. That shows you have faith in your character make-up and the associated ability to blank anything that doesn't fit in with your faith.

Totally not that. You are wildly optimistic when it comes to unproven claims, and utterly unconvinced when it comes to actual facts. That shows you have faith in your character make-up and the associated ability to blank anything that doesn't fit in with your faith.

 

'Confirmation bias'

 

I think vid only accepts evidence which supports his own views - most of which no doubt have been shaped by the Daily Mail.

Totally not that. You are wildly optimistic when it comes to unproven claims, and utterly unconvinced when it comes to actual facts. That shows you have faith in your character make-up and the associated ability to blank anything that doesn't fit in with your faith.

 

You make it sound like Brexit is a religion to me. :P

You make it sound like Brexit is a religion to me. :P

 

welll.......

welll.......

 

To me, it is just pragmatism - although Remainers tend to see their own side that way, too.

 

To me, it is just pragmatism - although Remainers tend to see their own side that way, too.

 

See it how you want to see it.

 

Definition: the quality of dealing with a problem in a sensible way that suits the conditions that really exist, rather than following fixed theories, ideas, or rules.

 

Brexit is almost entirely theory, ideas, and moaning about existing rules (vague exactly which ones). The conditions and practicalities that actually exist are dismissed as Project Fear.

 

So, that's not how I see it. Feel free to provide examples of your way of dealing with the EU in a way that suits reality and conditions that actually exist, and our trade and world trade and conditions that actually exist and make a great case that we will be better off. 40 academics just had a go and failed despite front page hogging in the scholarly press, and the ministers involved have so far failed to agree anything much in concrete terms despite ludicrous promises. Not very pragmatic.

See it how you want to see it.

 

Definition: the quality of dealing with a problem in a sensible way that suits the conditions that really exist, rather than following fixed theories, ideas, or rules.

 

Brexit is almost entirely theory, ideas, and moaning about existing rules (vague exactly which ones). The conditions and practicalities that actually exist are dismissed as Project Fear.

 

So, that's not how I see it. Feel free to provide examples of your way of dealing with the EU in a way that suits reality and conditions that actually exist, and our trade and world trade and conditions that actually exist and make a great case that we will be better off. 40 academics just had a go and failed despite front page hogging in the scholarly press, and the ministers involved have so far failed to agree anything much in concrete terms despite ludicrous promises. Not very pragmatic.

 

I don't believe you need to formulate a precise plan in advance - the US Founding Fathers didn't have one when they declared Independence, yet 'winging it' turned out pretty well for that country.

You may not have noticed, but the world is a far more complex place than it was 200 years ago.

You may not have noticed, but the world is a far more complex place than it was 200 years ago.

 

No, really? :rolleyes:

I don't believe you need to formulate a precise plan in advance - the US Founding Fathers didn't have one when they declared Independence, yet 'winging it' turned out pretty well for that country.

 

No. It turned pretty well for SOME in that country.

 

Not for the slaves and their descendants. Not for women till they got the vote. Not for those killed in the Civil war. Not for the millions killed by guns of their fellow Americans. Not for those dying early deaths with no medical cover.

 

So, yes, winging it led to all sorts of deaths and misery. Wing it and 300 years from now you might just be the richest nation in the world - if you own a continent, dont mind slavery, lawlessness and no social care.

 

You certainly know how to make a convincing argument for something....

 

 

No. It turned pretty well for SOME in that country.

 

Not for the slaves and their descendants. Not for women till they got the vote. Not for those killed in the Civil war. Not for the millions killed by guns of their fellow Americans. Not for those dying early deaths with no medical cover.

 

So, yes, winging it led to all sorts of deaths and misery. Wing it and 300 years from now you might just be the richest nation in the world - if you own a continent, dont mind slavery, lawlessness and no social care.

 

You certainly know how to make a convincing argument for something....

 

I never claimed America is perfect, but I'd rather live there than anywhere else (except for Britain, of course).

 

They abolished slavery over 150 years ago, and as for lawlessness, that is not caused by *governments*...

Edited February 27, 20187 yr by vidcapper

On a side issue, if the Southern US had won their independence in the civil war, how long do you think it would have been before before commercial/political/social pressure forced them to abandon slavery anyway?

 

My guess would be - no later than the first decade or two of the 20th C.

 

What do others here think?