2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The UK didn't give anything away after WW2. 

 

US post war planning included holding the UK to its war debt to hobble the UK economy and hasten the end of empire and commonwealth. 

 

It worked. 

 

And now those who hark back to Empire and dream of Empire2 believe the US will offer the trade deals the UK hopes for post Brexit. 

 

 

Fair enough. America is no friend of the UK, and never was post WW2. Look no further than how they sabotaged the French/ British attempt to reclaim the Suez canal from Nasser. The mystery to me is why Britain continues to be America's poodle.

 

However, whatever the reason, the UK did give it all away, including the oil fields of eastern Arabia and Iraq. What a different world we'd live in had they kept those. They may have given them away before WW2 though. I'm not sure of the exact date.

trump's legal team on the tax front has been boxed in, mostly through their own ineptitude.

 

Claiming executive privilege at this point, after having made a completely different argument (no legislative reason) in court just makes them look like eejits.

 

That the IRS's own internal lawyers have arrived at the same point spells disaster for the orange one.

 

They didn't even put up a good fight.

 

mnuchin has been made to look unusually toady-like, the perfect sycophant.  

 

trump does that to people.

 

 

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Having lived in the <deleted><deleted> UK a few years ago, I give them zero credit for sense, having descended into rabid PC and barking politics.

 

Whatever, I think flying stupid balloons is about all the UK is good for now, having given all the good stuff away post WW2.

 

 

Not to question your powers of observation, but surely you've noticed the post I was replying to and the context in which the comment was made. Something to do with Trump's popularity. Nothing to do with WW2, or the credit you give Britons.

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I hope the leaders of the Dems understand they are at the edge of a political precipice that could see the end of rational political discourse, should they cross the invisible line. They should always remember that it could be them at risk, in a future government.

It was the GOP in the form of Newt Gingrich which abandoned "rational political discourse".  It's not something new.  Obviously it does require two active participants for a decent tango.

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Fair enough. America is no friend of the UK, and never was post WW2. Look no further than how they sabotaged the French/ British attempt to reclaim the Suez canal from Nasser. The mystery to me is why Britain continues to be America's poodle.

 

However, whatever the reason, the UK did give it all away, including the oil fields of eastern Arabia and Iraq. What a different world we'd live in had they kept those. They may have given them away before WW2 though. I'm not sure of the exact date.

Way off topic, but are you arguing that the UK should have tried to maintain its pre-war empire after WWII?

 

When you state "the UK did give it all away", are you implying the UK owned all those countries?

4 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

trump's legal team on the tax front has been boxed in, mostly through their own ineptitude.

 

Claiming executive privilege at this point, after having made a completely different argument (no legislative reason) in court just makes them look like eejits.

 

That the IRS's own internal lawyers have arrived at the same point spells disaster for the orange one.

 

They didn't even put up a good fight.

 

mnuchin has been made to look unusually toady-like, the perfect sycophant.  

 

trump does that to people.

I don't think claiming executive privilege for financial affairs that the President claims he has separated from the office (by turning the affairs over to his children), and for documents that preceded his Presidency, will stand up in court.

mnuchin didn't exactly acquit himself well in Wednesday's testimony.

 

"How many times did the president say he would release his tax returns?

"I don't know."

"At least twenty-four times."

 

D'oh.

 

 

 

The classic tell preceding a lie, "Can you please repeat the question?", learned from barr no doubt.

 

 

On 5/22/2019 at 10:59 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Good grief, do you not realise that would set a precedent which would be happily taken up by the GOP next time there is a Dem president and a GOP house?

One should be careful what one wishes for in politics.

I hope the leaders of the Dems understand they are at the edge of a political precipice that could see the end of rational political discourse, should they cross the invisible line. They should always remember that it could be them at risk, in a future government.

Mind you! If there had been this precedent before, the GOP would have been able to force Obama to release his tax returns! ????

1 hour ago, candide said:

the GOP would have been able to force Obama to release his tax returns! 

 

President Obama made a point of releasing his tax returns on or before the annual filing deadline in April each year. That's what leaders do.

 

For the record, this law has been on the books since 1924.