Chomper Higgot

Partial quotes are by definition ’Out of context’ https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/out-of-context

Here’s a claim that he boasted of killing 25 Afghans followed by Harry’s response and the full context of the quotation to put it back in context : The Sun: “Harry, 38, writes in his book Spare that killing 25 Taliban fighters in Afghanistan was like “chess pieces taken off the board”. The BBC: "It wasn't a statistic that filled me with pride but nor did it make me ashamed," he writes. "When I was plunged into the heat and confusion of battle, I didn't think about those as 25 people. You can't kill people if you see them as people. "In truth, you can't hurt people if you see them as people. They were chess pieces taken off the board, bad guys eliminated before they kill good guys." https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/20966702/prince-harry-put-british-troops-danger-taliban-killing-boasts/ https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64231560

I’m not ‘blaming the gutter press’. I’m simply making the factual observation that the ‘gutter press’ (that which hounded William and Harry’s mother) are in the habit of sensationalism and quoting out of context. I stand by my first comment on this matter: I haven’t made any excuses for Harry’s behavior, I’ve not even mentioned his behavior.

Not a fan at all, but if he did at least read the book I strongly suspect he’s done more in that respect than most here who are denigrating him. I neither praise nor denigrate him, I don’t know the man, and everything I do know of him is at least third hand reports, none I would as from the UK’s gutter press, or at least not directly so. As for your presumption that I am a fan and your statement: ’’That would make a lot of sense actually…’’ That’s clearly two presumptions on your part.

Biased towards Ethical behavior of those in Congress.

“What a vile human being he has become . ” Know him personally or was that something you got thirdhand from the gutter press?

The Bill represents the power grab that motivated the rightwing political elite to back BREXIT. Your eagerness to ditch Parliamentary sovereignty for reasons of expedience is noted.

It doesn’t beg the question at all.

“But do keep in mind [Alleged] Biden corruption is now the focus”. Not in this thread it’s not.

Let’s pretend this isn’t very bad news for Trump, why don’t we?!

And yet you yourself had this to say a few short moments ago:

Of little concern to anyone other than those fixated on gossip of the rich and famous.

No, I’m suggesting the UK’s gutter press are doing what they always do, making sensational headlines out of stuff that really doesn’t matter. Here’s my statement: I doubt you’ll find many people in the UK who are not reading the gutter press who hold any strong sympathies towards or against Harry. It’s all low end celebrity gossip to distract from the things Brits need to be concerned with.

I doubt very much you have read that particular book. So no, you are not getting your views straight from the horse’s mouth. Nor is anyone else who have not read that book.

Let’s have no more talk of BREXIT returning power and sovereignty to Parliament from you then.

Normally I wouldn’t…..

It depends which papers these Brits read. If they are reading the same papers that hounded Harry’s mother then yes, they’ll very likely hold the views they are being fed.

Excellent news. A clear example of environmentalism at work and of the need for international cooperation, and regulation to protect the environment. Well done science, engineering and environmental activism.

One can, but one should not.

Good to see President Biden’s lawyers acting decisively to report this find. Good to see USAG acting decisively to investigate the matter. If criminality is found, then indict. The criminal holding, withholding or concealment of classified documents should always be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If criminality is not found, make a clear unequivocal statement to that effect.

I don’t think Hillary popping out of your head would be the defense your lawyers would advise. Your lawyer would advise you that you can have no certain knowledge of what’s on the computer because: A. It was not in your custody for a protracted period of time. B. During the time it was not in your custody other people accessed the computer.

If you arrived the US and your laptop went missing at the airport but turn d up months later with evidence of having been accessed by multiple people since you last saw it. What would be your defense if something illegal was found on that lap-top. Think carefully before answering, the question is a trap.

And that’s all that is needed for ‘Reasonable Doubt’.

I’m not making wild assertions, you are. I’m referring to that centuries old judicial maxim (brace yourself)…. ‘Reasonable Doubt’.

Hunter Biden certainly can’t. He doesn’t even know who has has access to this computer since he allegedly last saw it. What is indisputable is, lots of people had access to this computer before it was taken under the custody of the FBI.