.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Usernames
-
Posts
2,430 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Usernames
-
-
1 minute ago, Thakkar said:
There is little hope of Dems gaining control,of The House. There is reasonable hope of them controlling the Senate. It won't help a lot, but it will help some. That's why it's such a dim, pathetic little light at the end of that tunnel.
I hate being a pessimist, but the GOP power grab is almost complete. Every poll and study tells us that the majority of Americans want some form of gun control, maintain women's right to choose, more liberal Canabis laws, less stringent sentencing over minor offenses, equal pay for all genders, progressive taxation and higher taxes on the rich, universal healthcare, equitable gay rights, and a host of other issues. Yet the GOP is on the wrong side of each of these. Yet, due to gerrymandering, dirty tricks and voter suppression, misinformation, shrewder tactics, more willingness to outright lie, a disengaged, apathetic, low-info electorate—they continue to beat Dems in elections.
American democracy is dying by a thousand cuts. I can only hope that I am wrong.
Off topic rant about the american electoral system that has nothing to do with the topic.
-
4 hours ago, smotherb said:
No smoke? Flynn was fired for his lying about his Russian connection; Sessions recused himself from the investigation because of his Russian Connections, Kushner has been defended by the WH because of his back channel attempts using Russian intelligence communication; the numerous ties with the Russians by Trump's people is well documented, were they overt or covert? Comey claims "there was no fuzz" on the evidence confirming Russian hacking of our 2016 elections; that will certainly be resolved with Muellers' investigation. If Hillary would have won, would anyone want an investigation of her contacts with the Russians? There is smoke, dagnabbit!
It is not illegal for Americans to talk with Russians.
-
2 hours ago, Scott said:
The child, who now has one parent, cannot be deported. You want to have the US government pay for the cost and maintenance of the child in foster care (about $350,000 per year) until he/she is 18?
There is nothing to stop the child accompanying the parent back to the parent's country. Depending on the status of both parents, this also gets to the issue of birthright citizenship. The children of parents who are not US citizens should not be given US citizenship. Too many people from India and China are flying into the US just for that purpose.
-
22 hours ago, DeeMak9 said:
Meanwhile he keeps cashing. Views = money
Unless all his Youtube videos are in English (including English subtitles whenever Thai is used), then he isn't making money. Youtube pays much, much more on videos that are in English. Somebody told me a Thai language video by one of the universities in Thailand generated nearly 100,000 views and only "earned" about US$5.
-
2 minutes ago, Scott said:
People marry a US citizen, enter on the appropriate visa and the US citizen dies. They are then here on a invalid visa. They may have a job; they may have a child who is a US citizen. Should they be deported?
Yes, they should.
-
2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:
So many voters seriously disliked the open immigration policy - but I'm pretty sure it will now be part of the soft brexit agreement
On top of that, EU politicians now know that the UK is divided - so we're looking at the softest brexit possible (i.e. acceding to all EU demands, and still paying them a lot of money to continue the status quo) - or no brexit at all, but with none of the 'rebates' payable in the past.
Well, it's not my country, so I don't know how things work in the UK. But it seems to me that with her majority reduced to a plurality, May is much more beholden to the pro Brexit crowd. Give in on immigration and her ability to govern not only goes poof but the Conservatives credibility with their own voters disintegrates and the party with it.
-
12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:
As I recall it needed and still needs a lot of those immigrants to staff it.
Sure. Needs more immigrants to take care of all the new immigrants.
-
6 hours ago, Phuket Man said:
Well played Tessa. Lol.
Let's get Jeremy in and get my stolen pension back.
Maybe the UK does need Labor in power. Then, the UK can become another Venezuela.
-
1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:
I think it was Brown, but no matter who, it was mostly wasted on administrators and fancy new buildings. I was working in the NHS when that happened and it was a farce. Lots of new management level nurses and the rank and file still exploited and treated like s***. They couldn't even clean the hospitals properly.
Didn't the UK need more money for the NHS to fund all those immigrants/refugees that Labor was bringing into the country?
-
2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:
Can't see it happening. Non confidential notes from a private citizen.
Also, it would be incredibly stupid politically to do so.
Disagree. He took notes regarding his questions of the president on an investigation. He had his FBI hat on. He wasn't at home making a grocery list. He was on FBI time, doing FBI work, and he leaked it.
-
The big question is going to be if Comey is indicted and convicted for leaking. He admitted leaking his notes to a source that passed them to the NY Times. As this concerned the Russia investigation more broadly, it could be construed that Comey leaked documents dealing with national security. A felony.
-
16 hours ago, Cadbury said:
Maybe they have moved, become bored with the repetitive banter or died or ill or have just been moderated into history by enthusiastic moderators.
Yes.
-
9 minutes ago, stevenl said:
See post number 6. Your links don't show that. So again, where is the statement from credible media that Trump was being investigated?
Good God, man. It's in the quote. Don't be obtuse.
-
2 minutes ago, stevenl said:
The earlier CNN report stated that Comey would not state that Trump was not being investigated, now they state that Comey will claim that Trump was not being investigated.
Tortured prose. Do you think you could express that a bit more clearly?
-
3 minutes ago, stevenl said:
AFAIK nobody claimed Trump was being investigated. His campaign was and probably is.
"An earlier version of this story said that Comey would dispute Trump's interpretation of their conversations. But based on his prepared remarks, Comey outlines three conversations with the President in which he told Trump he was not personally under investigation." http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/06/politics/comey-testimony-refute-trump-russian-investigation/index.html
-
4 hours ago, webfact said:
Comey said he had told Trump on three occasions he was not being investigated, confirming an earlier account from the president.
So, all those times that the NY Times and CNN said he was being investigate turned out to be outright lies.
-
4 hours ago, darksidedog said:
So Donald did try to get the investigation into Flynn stopped.
I am looking forward to hearing him explain why he tried to stop the investigation and also why he subsequently lied about it when questioned.
Here is the quote: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
First, can you prove intent from this statement???
Second, is there any corroboration? Or is it just Comey's word?
Frankly, that's a fairly weak statement from Trump--if he actually said it. There is no obstruction in the statement.
-
2 hours ago, pegman said:
Seems his not knowing was a smoke screen. Turns out his partners, the Russians, set this up. If he is taking credit he obviously requested Putin do the fake news hack .
Yea, looks like those Russian hackers can do everything. Maybe they can cure climate change while they're at it in their newly redecorated THRUSH headquarters.
-
On 6/3/2017 at 6:53 AM, rooster59 said:
France said it would work with U.S. states and cities to keep up the fight against climate change. The governors of New York, California and Washington State have announced creation of a "climate alliance" committed to the Paris goals.
Lots of luck with that one. Not only is it illegal for states and cities to conduct their own foreign policy, but California LEADS the US with six of the top ten most polluted cities. Whatever they are doing isn't working.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/04/19/most-polluted-cities-california/100615102/
-
It's going to be a permanent bloodbath in the UK until the moslems eventually take over everything and ban all other religions and outlaw alcohol, dogs, and everything else they don't like. Bad future.
-
27 minutes ago, simple1 said:
The Chinese have committed to invest US$350 billion over the next ten years in renewal energy.
So they can sell it to other nations? What is their record on polluting rivers and oceans? Did you know that the biggest sources of pollution in California, Oregon, and Washington state is . . . China? Did you know that the US has seen an INCREASE in forested lands since 1963, some 42 years before the Paris Treaty? And that 70 percent of America's originally forested territory remains forested? What is the record in China, India and Europe, and all those other countries "worried" about climate change? Not only has Europe decimated its own forests but leads the world in decimating other continents' forests. https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/ForestFactsMetric.pdf
-
2 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:
How is one man able to make a decision as big as this? No mention of Congress or any legislative process in the OP. Surely this is matter for lengthy debate within government?
One man, Obama, made the decision to enroll the US in the Paris Treaty through an Executive Order. So why can't one man undo it?
-
21 minutes ago, Srikcir said:
The mechanisms for each nation to accomplish such goals would be decided by each country according to the state of their economy and level of technology.
This to me sounds like a toothless, useless "accord" that could then be ignored by anyone who wanted to. Are you telling me the Paris Treaty was a completely worthless piece of virtue signalling?
-
Just now, Rob13 said:
Huh?....he's increasing the US's dependency on foreign oil by cutting off funding for alternative energy/solar R&D. That alone should tell you he's not looking out for the US. The more you dig the more you'll find. Anybody who thinks trump is a conservative has missed the bus.
The US now exports energy, both oil, natural gas, and electricity. Things have changed.
Trump still standing, but damaged by Comey's testimony
in World News
Posted
Utter silliness. So, every time I am introduced to a Russian, I must ask if they are member of the Russian "Secret Service," before I can talk with them. The absolute hysteria about anything to do with Russia being grounds for treason makes McCarthyism look like a mild walk in the park on a sunny afternoon.