johnnybangkok

It's the same when they debate whether it was an insurrection or a riot! Either of these things should disqualify Trump but neither do in the eyes of your typical Trumper.

Well at least we are getting somewhere with your admissions. The problem with all of this is a normal 'disturbance, protest and at times violent, even riot' is exactly that - a riot. But when you aim that 'riot' at a building where Congress meets to write the laws of the nation, and where presidents are inaugurated, you open yourself up for accusations of insurrection - in·sur·rec·tion ˌin(t)-sə-ˈrek-shən: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government I personally don't think it was an insurrection as I don't think the Trump crowd are that well organised or clever enough to mount an insurrection and I don't think for one minute Trump thought things would get as out of hand as they did but he is culperable for the actions of that day by getting the crowd together in the first place, getting them all riled up, pointing them at The Capitol Building and then doing nothing when it was obvious things were getting out of hand. Call it an insurrection; call it a riot, either way it was instigated by Trump and perpetrated by HIS supporters. In that there is no denying and is why this man should never be allowed back into office. Hopefully the American people will now stick the final nail in his coffin and vote Biden come November.

You've got to be some Russian bot or maybe a nephew of Trump. None of your softly, softly 'well there's no smoke without fire' clumsy innuendo masks the FACT that Biden has been exonerated by the GOP for NOT 'using the position for financial gain from other countries' 'After months of investigation and many public accusations of corruption against Mr. Biden and his family, the first report of the premier House G.O.P. inquiry showed no proof of such misconduct'. House Republican Report Finds No Evidence of Wrongdoing by President Biden - The New York Times (nytimes.com) https://archive.is/4RQtP Fox had jumped all over this previously with their 'super reliable' FBI informant nonsense until they couldn't rant any longer after the GOP themselves said it was a complete load of bull$hit. And don't try and paint Trump out as some sort of free speech hero. The job comes with responsibilities and one of them is knowing when to keep your big mouth shut. Something Mr. Foot in Your Moth has a bigly problem with. NB:- 'He had some really good ideas to make the US better for Americans' - ok. Name 10 - alright too hard, l'll settle for 5.

I really don't get this 'they're all as bad as each other' viewpoint when Trump is demonstrably worse in every way. It wasn't Biden who has been saying the election was rigged for the last 3 years; it isn't Biden who has been fined $454 million for business fraud; it isn't Biden who has been convicted of sexual abuse and it wasn't Biden who defrauded his own charity. All of these FACTS (and many, many more) are laid solely at the feet of Trump and goes to the very essence of the difference between the two candidates; Biden may be getting on a bit (about the worst criticism Trumpers can say about him) but Trump is just a nasty piece of work with the morals of an alley cat. And I don't need the usual to debate any of these facts. I know I won't change your mind because if facts logic or appeals of decency influnced you, you wouldn't be a Trump fan in the first place.

More strawman. Please at least try to debate the points I made without resorting to nonsense.

Moving quickly past all of your strawman arguments with pensions, voting rights et al, you are arguing that someone shouldn't be awarded legal aid to contest the removal of their citizenship because they have already had it removed (what is actually being contested) or 'are in the process of having that privilege withdrawn' The fact you cannot see the irony in what you are professing speaks volumes to your bias. UK law stands proudly on the world stage for it's fairness and accessibility and you cannot just arbitrarily choose who does/doesn't get legal aid because of your personal prejudices. And the fact you are quite so willing to throw the baby out with the bath water negates any sensible argument you may have had. Oh and I mentioned pro bono because you insisted that all solicitors were just 'motivated solely by money'. The fact that pro bono exists completely negates that argument too.

So only people you deem 'worthy' should be allowed legal representation? That's a rocky road downwards for justice with that belief. And solicitors are not only 'motivated solely by money'. Ever heard of pro-bono?

You seem to forget the timelines involved here;- 'The federal government tried and failed repeatedly for more than a year and a half to retrieve classified and sensitive documents from former President Donald J. Trump before resorting to a search of his Mar-a-Lago property this month, according to government documents, statements by Mr. Trump’s lawyers, and a newly unsealed indictment. The documents make clear the lengths to which the National Archives and the department went before officials pursued a law enforcement action to recover the material' 'The documents in Mr. Trump’s boxes include information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; U.S. nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to foreign attack, according to prosecutors'. Timeline of the Trump Classified Documents Investigation - The New York Times (nytimes.com) And VERY importantly, the National Archives (with no political affiliation) 'warned Mr. Trump’s representatives that there could be a referral to the Justice Department or an alert to Congress if the former president continues to refuse to comply with the Presidential Records Act'. Why would anyone hold on to these things after numerous requests and a 'final warning'? This court case is completely self-inflicted and Trump only has his own incompetence to blame for where he is now.

My other favourite is:- “Arguing with Trumpers is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to $hit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.”

Very well put but I also love how the GOP in general always come up with the 'but the economy' argument in the belief it is better under GOP rule when the numbers just simply don't bear out that argument. I try not to argue facts with Trump/GOP supporters for the same reason I don't bother trying to teach my dog how to drive a car but here goes: Dems Vs Repubs by the numbers. *last 50 yrs Years held Presidency: - Repub- 28yrs, Dem-22 yrs Total jobs created:- Repub-24 Million, Dem-42 Million Stock market return:- Repub-109%, Dem-992% GDP:- Repub-2.7%, Dem-4.1% Income growth:- Rep-0.6% Dem-2.2% (source politico, bloomberg, USDL) Forbes magazine - 'It is simply a fact that since World War II, Democratic presidents have seen 24.4 million more jobs created on their watch—an average of 78.6% more jobs created per year of Democratic administrations—than have Republican presidents. Ditto real GDP growth, 44% higher under Democratic presidents. On the flip side, unemployment has been 18% higher under GOP presidents. https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/?sh=3181f8a06786 Oh and another VERY important point:- 9 of the last 10 recessions have been under Republicans.

Your obsession with 'owning the Libs' or 'Lefties' constantly blinds you to what are very obviously bad things. You are already seeing the influence these Christian Nationalists have had with the overturning of Roe v Wade and the numerous states who are now introducing even more restrictions on women, with Alabama now declaring that eggs used in IVF are actually children (what complete nonsense). Further influence from these people will only result in even more polorisation for women, ethnics and people of other faith, and Trump (probably the most unchristian of people) is gladly jumping on the band-wagon as he desperately needs their votes. This is yet another reason why this man is so dangerous and needs to be soundly beaten at the ballot box.

That's because there's a lot to complain about.

It's like listening to Fox News. Same ol' lame nonsense about inflation (worldwide problem), border control (when is there not a border problem) and dealing with wars (that 'Trump didn't start any wars' diatribe). You guys need to get some originality into your arguments as we have heard all these ones many, many times before.

There's an after hours nightclub in Soi Cowboy that's open until 4/5 am. It used to be called Penny Black but not sure if it still is. There's also one on Soi 11 but I can't remember what it's called. There's always a late night place open somewhere in Sukhumvit. You just need to ask a taxi driver. They'll know.

You make some good points and I think we both agree there were plenty of 'missed opportunities' to bring Russia into the fold but everything is easier with the benefit of hindsight and Russia today has gone down a path that allows very little reconciliation or a viable path back from where it finds itself. Worrying times ahead and I just can't imagine Trump as POTUS is going to make anything easier with his 'let's do a deal' mentality. Last time he had a chance to reprimand Russia he chose to tell G7 leaders that 'Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian'. This is the simplicity of thinking that comes from this man.

No need to throw your toys out of the pram - it's a debate - debate back. I understand your point, I really do and perhaps if I was in Putins shoes I would think the same but I also think he had many an opportunity to develop closer relationships with Europe and NATO but was waiting for Europe and NATO to make the first move. They didn't (a mistake in my books) and he went in another direction. There are plenty of people who will swear he wanted to be closer to Europe and even join NATO but as usual, different governments in Western countries also had their own agenda and because governments change so often in Western countries and don't in Russia, the messaging was confusing and contradictory. However it wasn't helped by his actions in Georgia, Chechnya, Crimea, supporting Bashar al-Assad in Syria and cosying up to Iran. I will withdraw the 'Putin apologist' as an unnecessarily provocative statement but can you also see that there were options available that didn't require a 'fortress Russia' mentality?

Your inane comments?

I think you're missing the point. Many countries have borders with other countries and don't see the need to have a buffer zone. There has been no indication from Europe, the US or any NATO country that they would want anything more than to have Russia as a closer ally and certainly no indication of any hostilities. It's all just Putins' paranoia and his desire to be seen as Russia's hard-man, resurrecting Russia's former glory as a significant world power. Coincidentally (not), this also plays very well with a large majority of Russians still smarting from the fact that (let's admit it), communism wasn't the way to go. Crucially, these are the votes he needs to keep his mafia state going. He could simply have said 'fine', let Ukraine do what it wishes - we won't attack and neither will they. NATO hasn't done anything aggressive to Russian for nigh on 60 years and has NEVER indicated any other desire other than closer collaboration. This doesn't seem to be a consideration at all. This idea that there is still a threat is entirely in his own head and you are just a Putin apologist if you think otherwise.

A well written thought but you miss one very important point; Putin did have a choice and could have just let the Ukraine join NATO as neither Europe nor The US is at all interested in “invading” Russia. He could have drawn Europe (one of his major customers) closer but his Napoleon complex got the better of him and he reverted to type. The Cold War was over a long time ago and there was genuine hope that “them V us” was over but being essentially a Mafia don, this didn’t suit Putins ego and he wanted all his territories back. He had a choice. He just chose this option so it’s rather disingenuous to blame the West.

I really don’t understand this idea that “Democrats love war and starting new wars”. Is your memory so bad or knowledge of history so myopic that you can’t remember who got America into Afghanistan or Iraq in the first place (clue: it’s wasn’t Obama nor a Democrat). Also, Biden didn’t start the war with Ukraine nor the current Israeli- Palestinian conflict. Whether you agree or not with how he is handling things, Biden was handed these conflicts and is serving American interests as best as anyone could in such extreme circumstances. On the other hand, Trump has now publicly stated that he will allow Russia to do what it wants to “delinquent” NATO countries (I don’t think he will but that’s what he is saying) which is literally playing into Putins hands. Putin wants exactly this and is just dragging out the conflict in the hope that Trump gets elected. Is that who you really want as POTUS? Trump is dangerous, VERY dangerous and I hope for the worlds sake he loses.

I'm in for 100k. God I hope he doesn't win.

For any of you thinking to mess with taxi drivers you might want to think again. This man lost his life over 50 Bhat!! https://www.nydailynews.com/2013/07/08/thai-taxi-driver-hacks-american-passenger-to-death-with-machete-police/ I've had more than my fair share of taxi drivers trying to change the price half way through a journey but after the above I NEVER argue with them. All I do is get them to take me to my condo, get out, pass the original fare and walk into my apartment. Granted I've got security gaurds to deter any trouble but the point is I never get in a situation where I am close enough to be harmed. If though I was in this situation where I couldn't be somewhere safe and could be 'got', I think I'd just pay the 150 THB. It really isn't worth losing your life over such small amounts.

Where's the eye-roll emoji?

Beat me to it.