johnnybangkok

2 hours ago, jimmyyy said:

The only hate involved here is the Left, violent property destroying thugs that need to be jailed along with Soros who pays for it all.

And there it is.

Your tin-foil hat is showing as soon as you mention Soros!!

Any other argument (valid or not) now diminishes as soon as you mention this often debunked theory.

18 hours ago, suaychat said:

question to ask yourself is:  despite the obvious swamp, why do 40% continue to support him.

I believe,  they sense the 'game is rigged' , and he is trying to do something different , despite the terrible incompetent results, they still prefer  someone in charge, who they believe is against 'big government' , because they have conflated government, taxes, etc, with the real evil which is neoliberalism.

 

opoid death crisis, is just a US twist on the 300,000  India Farmer suicides

Perhaps there is a genuine need to shake things up but this idea of “big government” is more akin to a conspiracy theory than anything else as there really is little evidence that parties in power are working against the good of the people except oddly enough, this Republicans administration and this incompetent POTUS. 

I do however agree that neoliberalism has gone too far and people get easily confused with what on the face of it seems a simple idea but doesn’t take enough account of people’s inherant greed and a “me, me, me” attitude that seems to be the norm these days.

But sorry, Ive no idea what your last paragraph means never mind what it’s trying to say. 

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

Using your own money to pay off those gals isn't a crime. He didn't use campaign finance funds. 

It must be absolutely exhausting Boon Mee to have to defend your Orange Messiah day in, day out, week in, week out, month in month out. I'm genuinely worried that you will run out of false equivalencies, straw man arguments and but, but....Hilary's.

Anyone other than the most blinkered of Trumpers can see the noose is tightening around your beloved leaders neck and it's now just a matter of time before one of the NUMEROUS legal cases take hold and the worst POTUS in history is relegated to the scrapheap of history.

Even Teflon Don is going to struggle to avoid Cohen, Manafort, Mueller and now the Trump Foundation investigation (amongst others).

And I for one cannot wait. 

And the noose tightens on the worst POTUS in history.

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

Don't sweat it Johnny, these Trump dudes are in desperate denial mode.  Personally, I hope there is a mass exodus of Trump supporters from America after Trump is impeached.  That would MAGA.  But impeachment is not enough.  I hope Trump the traitor gets indicted, goes to prison, and his entire criminal organization gets confiscated by the government.  Justice is a beautiful thing.   

I try not to 'sweat it' but it can be VERY frustrating the amount of willful ignorance that comes from many of the Trump supporters here. It just amazes me that so many people can still support this guy when literally every single day (and pretty much from his first day in office) we've seen scandal after scandal, lies after lies, deceit after deceit.

Whatever your thoughts on Obama were, he at least treated the office of POTUS with dignity and respect with his greatest scandal being the time he wore a tan suit!

Many Trump supporters call themselves patriots but I cannot see how defending this guy makes you that; in fact I would argue that by defending EVERYTHING this abomination of a President does shows that your own morals are highly questionable and you really don't care about your country as you pretend to do. I can assure you, this clown is NOT helping America in the slightest and this admission of Cohen is the beginning of the end for the worst president in modern history.

46 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Not at all I was for Bernie and think Trumps a megalomaniac but I want truth, not petty liberal 'get him at all costs'.  If he's done wrong let's see it in cold, hard facts.  Paying off girls is unsavory but endemic I want to see the BIG stuff like collusion.

How many times have you guys got to be told? I mean I’ve mentioned it at least 6 times in similar threads but I’ll do it one more time. The Mueller investigation is NOT about collusion in fact “collusion” doesn’t appear at all in the original mandate. It’s about Russian interference and so far has yielded many, many indictments and, as we are seeing with Manafort, the beginning of the major convictions.

The “collusion” part is actually a deflection by the Trump team as explained wonderfully by John Oliver in his episode entitled “Stupid Watergate”(sorry tried to download the link but it wouldn’t work). 

Please have a look and educate yourself to what this is all about. 

11 hours ago, Trouble said:

None of these guys were the swamp dwellers. They were all trying to ride Trump's coat tails.  This is just another case of lying to the FBI. He has not been accused of anything to do with the Russians.  For the life of me, I can't figure out why these people avoid telling the truth or just keeping their mouth shut when they really have nothing to hide.  I think they get intimidated when the FBI comes knocking.

I love how you just casually say “This is just another case of lying to the FBI” like this is the new norm and doesn’t warrant any reproach because under Trump this is now almost acceptable.   

This race to the bottom is a worrying trend perpetuated by people like yourself who think it’s no big deal. Whatever happened to integrity and morality? What happened to the good of the people over personal benefit? Whatever happened to doing the right thing and truth be out?

You really shouldn’t be questioning why someone wasn’t clever enough to avoid telling the truth. But I guess that’s as much a reflection on you as it is them. 

5 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

What a ridiculous statement.  It's full of corroborating evidence.  That's like saying "The dictionary has not produced any great works of literature".

 

 

Trump has now admitted his son met with Russians to get dirt on an opponent. That's collusion.  You need to keep up - you're supposed to be saying "collusion's not a crime" now.

 

 

At this point I don't know why I bother with you, since this is a bold-faced lie.  STOP LYING.

And just to add to this, the Mueller investigation is not just about proving collusion anyway. 

In fact the word 'collusion' isn't even on Muellers special council appointment letter. The investigation is about investigating links or co-ordination between the Russian government and the Trump campaign and covers 5 very specific topics:

Financial dealings

Prosecutors are scrutinizing the financial dealings of President Trump's associates, including his former campaign chairman's previous consulting work in Ukraine and the business practices of his personal lawyer (see Paul Manafort)

Russian interference

Mueller is examining how Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential campaign, including through the circulation of fake news and divisive Internet memes and the hacking of Democratic emails.

Campaign coordination

Investigating contacts between Trump's associates and people working on behalf of Russians to determine whether there is evidence that Trump's campaign conspired with Russia to interfere in the campaign (this is the closest part to collusion).

Transition contacts

Looking into communications between the Russians and Trump officials during the transition period after Trump was elected but before his inauguration.

Obstruction of justice

Prosecutors are focusing on whether actions by Trump and his associates after he took office indicate an effort to obstruct the Russia investigation.

And so far it has yielded 5 convictions and 27 indictments to include four former Trump advisers (all American), 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man (American), and one London-based lawyer. 

There have been no prosecutions regarding 'collusion' as that is not the primary objective of the investigation but with 5 convictions and 27 indictments, you can be damned sure that the proof that the  Russians interfered in the US election is absolutely solid and that it is just a matter of time before one of them rolls over and points the finger at Trump himself.

But hey, this is all just facts. Something we know you Trumpers have an aversion to.  

Money begets money and only when the masses start to understand that collective bargaining in the form of unions is their only leverage this will continue for the foreseeable future, especially under a Republican government and especially, especially under Trump who is in effect the CEO of CEO's right now.

12 minutes ago, JAG said:

I will start by stating that I am a practising Roman Catholic. (heaven knows I have to practice, I am not very good at it). 

 

These abuses are foul, and the cover ups also. They should and must be exposed and punished as the crimes that they are. They will, I  am certain also be punished when their perpetrators stand in judgement before Almighty God. That does not excuse them judgement or punishment on earth. Remember that Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and Pope's are human. They are capable of doing great wrongs, and if they do, then they should be accountable. They are also capable of sin, and if they sin must be accountable for that before God. 

 

These are wicked men, they have been exposed as wicked before society, there wickedness is undoubtedly open to Almighty God. Of course as a Catholic one is also aware of Satan and all his works. How many times in the performance of their priestly duties have these men pronounced that " they renounce Satan and all his works", yet they have done what they have done. This is NOT an excuse. It is an observation which underlines the evil which they have done. 

 

This business has certainly shaken my faith, and shaken and destroyed that of many others. That too is a great tragedy. 

 

Disbanding the Roman Catholic Church would simply not be possible. Apart from any spiritual considerations (1.2 billion or so) the same sanctions should be applied to many other religions and movements which have also had paedophiles and their protectors amongst their ranks.If you are a Roman Catholic, then you believe that the Church is Almighty God's creation, and not for man to dispose of. 

 

And please (not you SB)  let's not hear that "priests cannot marry because if they do their money will go to their families and not the Church", and " Confession will wash it away - three Hail Marys and off you go..." That merely displays a profound misunderstanding of the Church and it's Sacraments! 

Devout atheist here.

Don't you think this basically proves your god doesn't exist? I mean this is his 'chosen' ambassadors on earth yet they have been allowed to systematically abuse kids for decades (and probably even longer), covered up at the highest level. You conveniently put the blame at Satan's door when surely it's not his job to look after the competitions staff.

I don't want to give you too much of a hard time as you seem like a genuine guy and my mum was catholic and a better woman you couldn't wish to meet but perhaps you should consider joining the 'many others' whose faith has been destroyed as I (and most people) would rank this as unforgivable. 

57 minutes ago, gmmarvin said:

It is not uncommon to lose your security when leaving government service.  I lost mine on government retirement.  I don't know why these former government officials still have there's.  Once you go into the private sector there is no need for it.  This is a big deal about nothing.  Get a life and move on.

Did you know classified information that may help the current government with a terrorist attack? Were you personally privy to the ins and outs of a global intelligence community? Could you have advised Presidents and Congress on international criminals? In other words were you the ex-Head of the CIA?

No? Really. Well that's obviously the exact same comparison.

He had security clearance so that he could advice on matters that he personally knew about. It didn't mean he still got given top secrets and the likes. How difficult is this to understand? But please, do go on with your false equivalency.  

How difficult is this for you Trumpers to understand?

The guy is a vocal critic of Trump (for all the right reasons I may add) and instead of taking it on the chin like a normal, grown man, Trump decides to throw his toys out of the pram and revoke his security clearance to teach him a lesson. The revoking doesn't stop him from still criticizing Trump (and in fact might actually free him up to criticize him more) and the chances are he didn't really need the clearance (unless of course he is called in to advise on matters that he and only he is privy to in his old role as ex-Head of the CIA - then he will have to go through security clearance all over again) BUT it is widely seen as just petty and vindictive from a thin skinned buffoon POTUS.

This man (and many of the others Trump is now lining up for the same treatment) served the US with diligence, loyalty and with only the interest of the US at heart. Yet rather than criticise Trump for his petty actions, you are (yet again) defending the indefensible and trying to blame the victim rather than the perpetrator.

This is why it gets so frustrating debating with you guys as this man can literally do no wrong in your eyes when the undeniable facts tell you that he is doing an awful lot wrong.

You guys seriously need to have a look at your moral fortitude as it appears to be VERY lacking.     

You know what, this really reminds me of the time Obama had that situation with his ex-CIA...… actually no, sorry, I'm getting mixed up.

Or the time Obama called one of his ex-employees a dog....wait no, sorry wrong person again.

Or the time Obama threw his own intelligence services under the bus in favour of Russia ….wait...no....sorry...wrong person again.

Or the time Obama paid of that porn star with $130,000 no......wait..... sorry wrong person again.

Oh ok I've got, do you remember that time Obama wore that tan suit? Pff. What a scandal that was.

1 hour ago, rodney earl said:

She looks like a man in womens clothes (drag queen). He/she certainly would not get my vote.

Well if that's your only criteria rather than her policies and her abilities then the problem lies with you.