| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus 13:50 - Jan 15 with 12906 views | unstableblue |
Just consider this:
1) Trump hired a group of lawyers to prove the election was 'rigged', they reported no evidence. He hired a second group to do the same, and not only did they not find any evidence on wrongdoing, they turned into an-anti Trump group highlighting the fallacy of Trump's position.
2) Trump is facing 91 felony charges across 4 prosecutions
3) He without doubt instigated the Capitol insurrection
He has lied 1000s of times, and on all of the issues above. He is out of control in court, seemingly thinking he has impunity. He has radicalised huge swathes of the American public to be anti-State.
If he is put up against Biden.. he will A) Win and/or B) further radicalise and polarise the American population.
Trump for me is one of the maddest events/movements we have ever seen in our lifetimes.
BONKERS |  |
| |  |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 13:57 - Jan 22 with 1346 views | BlueNomad |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 13:51 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
You'll have to quote me saying that I think DeSantis is a moral person. I said that he has more fixed morals than Trump or Hillary Clinton. Morals are very subjective, but it's not subjective that he and Hillary care more about winning than sticking to moral principles.
I'm sure you can understand the concept of the lesser of two evils. DeSantis is supporting Trump over Haley. He actually believes that he himself is a better option, but realizes that he doesn't have the support. |
DeSantis moral? The man who wants to have control over women's bodies? He is a nasty, evangelical man who does not consider all people born equal. To cap it all he supports Trump who has derided him as DeSantimonious which must be some achievement! |  | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:00 - Jan 22 with 1330 views | Blueschev |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 13:57 - Jan 22 by BlueNomad |
DeSantis moral? The man who wants to have control over women's bodies? He is a nasty, evangelical man who does not consider all people born equal. To cap it all he supports Trump who has derided him as DeSantimonious which must be some achievement! |
His stance on immigration is also highly immoral, and his views on healthcare. |  | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:12 - Jan 22 with 1298 views | BlueNomad |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:00 - Jan 22 by Blueschev |
His stance on immigration is also highly immoral, and his views on healthcare. |
And the list could go on! | | | |
| Wow! on 14:15 - Jan 22 with 1291 views | Europablue |
| Wow! on 11:17 - Jan 22 by unstableblue |
What parts of the internet and what sites are you getting these views from?!
Whilst there is real merit in the concept that the majority were just a bunch of Trump supporters who got fired up by the ex-President to storm the Capitol, and it was more a tourist jamboree. I get that.
But if you actually watch the footage, you realise that this was the STORMING of the Capitol, that there was real violence, and it is clear there were organised groups. Who should rightly have the book thrown at them.
Imagine if people turned up at our Parliament, and rushed it in that manner, with a police officer dying. Watch the fricking footage man?! What kind of society doesn't bring consequences for this kind of action, it would just be anarchy.
But why I'm replying is this:
'Still, he technically didn't condone the behaviour because he told them to go home and be peaceful. '
You are so off the mark here - Trump does not give sh1t about those protesters or the consequences of his words. He's a narcissist. Of course he condoned it initially, and egged them up. How can you even have close to this opinion. |
The police officer didn't die because of the rioters, though did he? He died around that time of unrelated circumstances.
The only person to die was the one female Trump supporter. The officer didn't need to shoot her, but I agree that it was a justified shooting in the law as she shouldn't have been there.
You can go and find footage of Trump giving a speech telling protesters to go home. That is a fact. My opinion is that a responsible politician does not let it escalate to the point where a problem is probably going to happen. I still don't see any evidence of Trump doing anything legally wrong. That's the kind of person he is. He doesn't really care about his supporters and doesn't seem to have a moral code. So when you say "You are so off the mark here" you are filling in the gaps of what I said with what you think I believe. |  | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:34 - Jan 22 with 1260 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 12:23 - Jan 22 by BlueNomad |
Read yesterday's Observer.
Trump is a fascist. He wants unchallenged power, has a disregard for the law, identifies enemies within, distorts religion, has always engaged in criminal (or at least borderline) behaviour, is a nationalist / racist female abuser / user who relies on his supporters' feelings of powerlessness through his lies. He has made the world a more dangerous place as he has given the far-right and autocrats the green light across the globe.
You have done nothing but apologise for him and his ilk for quite a while now. [Post edited 22 Jan 2024 12:25]
|
Disagreeing with wild assertions and putting across contrary views is not apologizing for Trump. I didn't even say that I like Trump. You are trying to set me up as a Trump defender. The only thing I said that vaguely supported Trump is that I prefer him (constrained by the Republican party and the fact that it is his final term) to Biden.
I really don't think you understand what a fascist is. Trump is fighting a third election. I don't know of any fascist that gets elected and then continues having elections that aren't just for show. I don't see you putting any proof forward that he wants unchallenged power. That kind of allegation requires proof. Even if I don't like someone, I'm not going to accept an accusation like that at face value.
Being a nationalist is actually a very important requirement for the office of the President. If you don't believe in your own nation, you have no business being in government.
A lot of people just have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
There is a reason that Trump came to power and that is because politicians have been ignoring the legitimate concerns of the people for too long. The other problem is that the politicians on both sides are very similar. Trump is just less discreet. I would love to have a morally upstanding president and to have some moral standards. I'm not sure how you can have moral standards to disqualify someone from office without denying people their democratic rights. If the people demanded moral standards, then the politicians would have to display them. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:37 - Jan 22 with 1246 views | StokieBlue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 13:51 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
You'll have to quote me saying that I think DeSantis is a moral person. I said that he has more fixed morals than Trump or Hillary Clinton. Morals are very subjective, but it's not subjective that he and Hillary care more about winning than sticking to moral principles.
I'm sure you can understand the concept of the lesser of two evils. DeSantis is supporting Trump over Haley. He actually believes that he himself is a better option, but realizes that he doesn't have the support. |
You're a hugely disingenuous poster.
SB |  | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:42 - Jan 22 with 1238 views | Blueschev |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:34 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
Disagreeing with wild assertions and putting across contrary views is not apologizing for Trump. I didn't even say that I like Trump. You are trying to set me up as a Trump defender. The only thing I said that vaguely supported Trump is that I prefer him (constrained by the Republican party and the fact that it is his final term) to Biden.
I really don't think you understand what a fascist is. Trump is fighting a third election. I don't know of any fascist that gets elected and then continues having elections that aren't just for show. I don't see you putting any proof forward that he wants unchallenged power. That kind of allegation requires proof. Even if I don't like someone, I'm not going to accept an accusation like that at face value.
Being a nationalist is actually a very important requirement for the office of the President. If you don't believe in your own nation, you have no business being in government.
A lot of people just have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
There is a reason that Trump came to power and that is because politicians have been ignoring the legitimate concerns of the people for too long. The other problem is that the politicians on both sides are very similar. Trump is just less discreet. I would love to have a morally upstanding president and to have some moral standards. I'm not sure how you can have moral standards to disqualify someone from office without denying people their democratic rights. If the people demanded moral standards, then the politicians would have to display them. |
Due to the 3 pillars of government, it's very difficult for any one party to assume absolute power in the US. Trump did his best though by denying the result, asking officials to change the results, and calling for insurrection. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:43 - Jan 22 with 1232 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:37 - Jan 22 by StokieBlue |
You're a hugely disingenuous poster.
SB |
I hate to play the "I know you are so what am I card", but all you do is post pejoratives without engaging in a discussion or giving counter points. You are the text book disingenuous poster. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:47 - Jan 22 with 1213 views | StokieBlue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:43 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
I hate to play the "I know you are so what am I card", but all you do is post pejoratives without engaging in a discussion or giving counter points. You are the text book disingenuous poster. |
Well, you'd be right except all the times I've directly engaged your nonsense and you've ignored it and posted verbose nonsense in response in an attempt to hide the fact you've ignored it. You've done the same to other posters as well.
I'm sure there are other forums where this standard of debating is acceptable, I suggest you try one of those.
SB | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 15:09 - Jan 22 with 1186 views | BlueNomad |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:34 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
Disagreeing with wild assertions and putting across contrary views is not apologizing for Trump. I didn't even say that I like Trump. You are trying to set me up as a Trump defender. The only thing I said that vaguely supported Trump is that I prefer him (constrained by the Republican party and the fact that it is his final term) to Biden.
I really don't think you understand what a fascist is. Trump is fighting a third election. I don't know of any fascist that gets elected and then continues having elections that aren't just for show. I don't see you putting any proof forward that he wants unchallenged power. That kind of allegation requires proof. Even if I don't like someone, I'm not going to accept an accusation like that at face value.
Being a nationalist is actually a very important requirement for the office of the President. If you don't believe in your own nation, you have no business being in government.
A lot of people just have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
There is a reason that Trump came to power and that is because politicians have been ignoring the legitimate concerns of the people for too long. The other problem is that the politicians on both sides are very similar. Trump is just less discreet. I would love to have a morally upstanding president and to have some moral standards. I'm not sure how you can have moral standards to disqualify someone from office without denying people their democratic rights. If the people demanded moral standards, then the politicians would have to display them. |
Proof?
Have you not watched and listened to Trump since 2014?
Did you not witness his antics in Washington, both before and after January 2021?
Did you not notice how he praised dictators for the way in which they ran their countries when he was in power?
Did you not notice how he tried to overturn the last election (in several ways)
Have you not noticed how he admitted he would act like a dictator on Day 1 in order to bring down retribution on all his political and legal foes?
Did you not notice how he packed the Supreme Court with like-minded Judges?
Did you not notice that he recently claimed that a president should be above all laws?
You can wrap your argument up in academic jargon if you like (I have a politics degree) but it isn't necessary. He appeals to people's basest fears, particularly the poor and less-well educated. Who did that in the 1930's? We could go into them all but, frankly, it would take too long. So, lets turn this on it's head - you provide evidence that he is a democratic politician. [Post edited 22 Jan 2024 15:11]
| | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 16:41 - Jan 22 with 1099 views | BlueNomad |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 15:09 - Jan 22 by BlueNomad |
Proof?
Have you not watched and listened to Trump since 2014?
Did you not witness his antics in Washington, both before and after January 2021?
Did you not notice how he praised dictators for the way in which they ran their countries when he was in power?
Did you not notice how he tried to overturn the last election (in several ways)
Have you not noticed how he admitted he would act like a dictator on Day 1 in order to bring down retribution on all his political and legal foes?
Did you not notice how he packed the Supreme Court with like-minded Judges?
Did you not notice that he recently claimed that a president should be above all laws?
You can wrap your argument up in academic jargon if you like (I have a politics degree) but it isn't necessary. He appeals to people's basest fears, particularly the poor and less-well educated. Who did that in the 1930's? We could go into them all but, frankly, it would take too long. So, lets turn this on it's head - you provide evidence that he is a democratic politician. [Post edited 22 Jan 2024 15:11]
|
No response. Shame | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 16:53 - Jan 22 with 1072 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 14:47 - Jan 22 by StokieBlue |
Well, you'd be right except all the times I've directly engaged your nonsense and you've ignored it and posted verbose nonsense in response in an attempt to hide the fact you've ignored it. You've done the same to other posters as well.
I'm sure there are other forums where this standard of debating is acceptable, I suggest you try one of those.
SB |
I haven't purposely ignored any of your points. Actually, I directly responded to most of your posts.
You made a random comment "Can I ask why you say "we have a proud history in Britain" whilst continually writing in American English?" then ignored my response.
There have been some genuine attempts at debate, but I'm convinced you are a troll. You've done a good job at keeping me on the hook, so well done.
I only came on here because I wanted to kill some time waiting for news on signings, then it took up too much of my time to respond as I have a full time job, a family, and a house to take of. Anyway, it's not a good use of my time to be on here. Maybe I could post and reply to the reasonable people and ignore the idiots? I don't know. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:08 - Jan 22 with 1031 views | eireblue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 10:12 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
It's possible to be proud of our history when we were better than our contemporaries (such as pushing for the ban of the slave trade) and at the same time not be proud that we behaved very much in line with the common bad behavours of the time. It's not the same as ignoring our embarrassing history, we just have to consider it in the cultural context of when it happened and also remember that all humans are fallible.
We can also be proud of our cultural heritage of the concept of free speech, fair play, and democracy that compares well to many other parts of the world. |
I think it is a very strange thing to be proud of something you had no part in achieving.
Fairness, free speech and democracy have been in evidence in different societies for thousands of years, from Greeks to Celts, it isn’t a property of any nationality. It is something humans have regularly done.
Primates live in societal structures, as did hunter gatherers.
Why be proud of something a dead Celt managed to do a long time ago?
It’s just history. |  | | |
| Double Wow!! on 17:27 - Jan 22 with 991 views | unstableblue |
| Wow! on 14:15 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
The police officer didn't die because of the rioters, though did he? He died around that time of unrelated circumstances.
The only person to die was the one female Trump supporter. The officer didn't need to shoot her, but I agree that it was a justified shooting in the law as she shouldn't have been there.
You can go and find footage of Trump giving a speech telling protesters to go home. That is a fact. My opinion is that a responsible politician does not let it escalate to the point where a problem is probably going to happen. I still don't see any evidence of Trump doing anything legally wrong. That's the kind of person he is. He doesn't really care about his supporters and doesn't seem to have a moral code. So when you say "You are so off the mark here" you are filling in the gaps of what I said with what you think I believe. |
"The police officer didn't die because of the rioters, though did he? He died around that time of UNRELATED CIRCUMSTANCES"
.....sorry I just don't think the FIVE law enforcement deaths happen without the riots, period, so they are related. But if that's your view. You stick with it. But please read the below from fullfact.org.. and also consider why did Trump have flags lowered for two of them, if they were just unrelated circumstances.. when hundreds of similar officers die each week?
You also really need to look into Trunp's behaviour, you really do. The Trump speech was forced, and was done way too late and after hours of pleading for him to intervene -
https://time.com/6199490/trump-jan-6-oath-dereliction-duty/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Enforcement Death Overview from fullfact.org
A stroke victim: A Capitol Police release the day after the riots said that USCP Officer Brian Sicknick “passed away due to injuries sustained while on-duty.” The report stated that Sicknick “was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed.”
The New York Times, citing unnamed law enforcement officials, initially reported that Sicknick was struck by a fire extinguisher, but later updated its story to say that medical experts said he did not die of blunt force trauma.
The Washington Post reported on April 19 that District of Columbia Chief Medical Examiner Francisco J. Diaz found that Sicknick suffered two strokes nearly eight hours after being sprayed with a chemical irritant during the riot. Diaz told the Post that Sicknick died of natural causes, but “all that transpired played a role in his condition.”
That day, US. Capitol Police released a statement that read: “The USCP accepts the findings from the District of Columbia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner that Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes. This does not change the fact Officer Sicknick died in the line of duty, courageously defending Congress and the Capitol.”
Four suicides: Four other police officers committed suicide in the days and months after the riot.
The first was U.S. Capitol Police Officer Howard Liebengood, 51, who had been guarding the Capitol for 15 years and was on duty at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He took his own life three days after the riots.
The following day, Trump ordered flags at the White House be lowered to half-staff in honor of both Sicknick and Liebengood.
Several days later, D.C. Police Officer Jeffrey Smith, 35, who was injured in the riots on Jan. 6, also committed suicide.
Smith’s wife, Erin, told the Washington Post her husband related to her the fear and panic he experienced the day of the assault on the Capitol, and that he was afraid he might die.
In defending the Capitol, Smith was struck on the helmet by a metal pole thrown by rioters. Later that night, his wife said he went to the police medical clinic, where he was prescribed pain medication and put on sick leave.
Smith’s wife said he “wasn’t the same” in the days after the riot and seemed to be in constant pain. After visiting a police clinic on Jan. 14 and being ordered back to work, Smith shot himself on the way to work, the Post reported.
The families of Liebengood and Smith both sought to have them recognized as “line of duty” deaths, which would afford their families enhanced benefits. | |
| |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:40 - Jan 22 with 957 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:08 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
I think it is a very strange thing to be proud of something you had no part in achieving.
Fairness, free speech and democracy have been in evidence in different societies for thousands of years, from Greeks to Celts, it isn’t a property of any nationality. It is something humans have regularly done.
Primates live in societal structures, as did hunter gatherers.
Why be proud of something a dead Celt managed to do a long time ago?
It’s just history. |
I agree that you should be proud of something that you achieved, but it's also reasonable to be proud of something that you family members achieved. I'm definitely proud of my children, and to think what my mother and father did for me I suppose it is more gratitude. Whatever you want to call it, you should certainly not squander your inheritance thoughtlessly.
I think we are proud of our history (only the good parts not ignoring the bad) because we have a part in maintaining the good parts while working from a solid base to fix it. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:43 - Jan 22 with 952 views | Blueschev |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 16:53 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
I haven't purposely ignored any of your points. Actually, I directly responded to most of your posts.
You made a random comment "Can I ask why you say "we have a proud history in Britain" whilst continually writing in American English?" then ignored my response.
There have been some genuine attempts at debate, but I'm convinced you are a troll. You've done a good job at keeping me on the hook, so well done.
I only came on here because I wanted to kill some time waiting for news on signings, then it took up too much of my time to respond as I have a full time job, a family, and a house to take of. Anyway, it's not a good use of my time to be on here. Maybe I could post and reply to the reasonable people and ignore the idiots? I don't know. |
This posting style is very familiar. Eloquently put forward an easily refutable point of view, ignore the points made by posters who refute said point of view, then claim to be a victim when other posters call it out. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:59 - Jan 22 with 930 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:43 - Jan 22 by Blueschev |
This posting style is very familiar. Eloquently put forward an easily refutable point of view, ignore the points made by posters who refute said point of view, then claim to be a victim when other posters call it out. |
It's just he said she said. I could say the same the other way. I don't trust you to engage in respectful discussion. Because from my point of view I am not reading many comments of substance. I'm trying to coax out what they are actually asking, but most of the time it is a flimsy counterargument that doesn't take what I said into account. For example, someone saying that Trump is a fascist and ignoring my point that Trump is taking part in a third election, which is very weird for a fascist. Then the point about Trump's joke that he would be a fascist on his first day after being elected! It's really a waste of time responding to disingenuous posts. It's fine that people have their blind spots. I can see positives and negatives about most people. | | | |
| Double Wow!! on 18:08 - Jan 22 with 908 views | Europablue |
| Double Wow!! on 17:27 - Jan 22 by unstableblue |
"The police officer didn't die because of the rioters, though did he? He died around that time of UNRELATED CIRCUMSTANCES"
.....sorry I just don't think the FIVE law enforcement deaths happen without the riots, period, so they are related. But if that's your view. You stick with it. But please read the below from fullfact.org.. and also consider why did Trump have flags lowered for two of them, if they were just unrelated circumstances.. when hundreds of similar officers die each week?
You also really need to look into Trunp's behaviour, you really do. The Trump speech was forced, and was done way too late and after hours of pleading for him to intervene -
https://time.com/6199490/trump-jan-6-oath-dereliction-duty/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Enforcement Death Overview from fullfact.org
A stroke victim: A Capitol Police release the day after the riots said that USCP Officer Brian Sicknick “passed away due to injuries sustained while on-duty.” The report stated that Sicknick “was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed.”
The New York Times, citing unnamed law enforcement officials, initially reported that Sicknick was struck by a fire extinguisher, but later updated its story to say that medical experts said he did not die of blunt force trauma.
The Washington Post reported on April 19 that District of Columbia Chief Medical Examiner Francisco J. Diaz found that Sicknick suffered two strokes nearly eight hours after being sprayed with a chemical irritant during the riot. Diaz told the Post that Sicknick died of natural causes, but “all that transpired played a role in his condition.”
That day, US. Capitol Police released a statement that read: “The USCP accepts the findings from the District of Columbia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner that Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes. This does not change the fact Officer Sicknick died in the line of duty, courageously defending Congress and the Capitol.”
Four suicides: Four other police officers committed suicide in the days and months after the riot.
The first was U.S. Capitol Police Officer Howard Liebengood, 51, who had been guarding the Capitol for 15 years and was on duty at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He took his own life three days after the riots.
The following day, Trump ordered flags at the White House be lowered to half-staff in honor of both Sicknick and Liebengood.
Several days later, D.C. Police Officer Jeffrey Smith, 35, who was injured in the riots on Jan. 6, also committed suicide.
Smith’s wife, Erin, told the Washington Post her husband related to her the fear and panic he experienced the day of the assault on the Capitol, and that he was afraid he might die.
In defending the Capitol, Smith was struck on the helmet by a metal pole thrown by rioters. Later that night, his wife said he went to the police medical clinic, where he was prescribed pain medication and put on sick leave.
Smith’s wife said he “wasn’t the same” in the days after the riot and seemed to be in constant pain. After visiting a police clinic on Jan. 14 and being ordered back to work, Smith shot himself on the way to work, the Post reported.
The families of Liebengood and Smith both sought to have them recognized as “line of duty” deaths, which would afford their families enhanced benefits. |
Thank you for putting all that detail in there. That is a very fair and reliable set of information.
The thing is how you interpret it.
I think you have to consider that Sicknick was considered to have died of natural causes after going through some stressful days at work. The thing is being a police officer is a very stressful job. You could say policing a protest added to his death. Correct me if I am wrong. No-one has been held accountable for his death.
By definition, suicides are not perpetrated by another person. They are always tragic and there are always contributing factors. Undoubtedly, being a police officer is very stressful and police officers disproportionately commit suicide. The one due to pain medication has a much clearer cause and that is probably linked to opioids.
Even if there is not one clear perpetrator or one clear cause. Fallen Police officers deserve to be given due respect and the families deserve to be taken care of.
You could definitely argue some moral responsibility even if you can't argue legal responsibility. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 18:29 - Jan 22 with 861 views | Europablue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 15:09 - Jan 22 by BlueNomad |
Proof?
Have you not watched and listened to Trump since 2014?
Did you not witness his antics in Washington, both before and after January 2021?
Did you not notice how he praised dictators for the way in which they ran their countries when he was in power?
Did you not notice how he tried to overturn the last election (in several ways)
Have you not noticed how he admitted he would act like a dictator on Day 1 in order to bring down retribution on all his political and legal foes?
Did you not notice how he packed the Supreme Court with like-minded Judges?
Did you not notice that he recently claimed that a president should be above all laws?
You can wrap your argument up in academic jargon if you like (I have a politics degree) but it isn't necessary. He appeals to people's basest fears, particularly the poor and less-well educated. Who did that in the 1930's? We could go into them all but, frankly, it would take too long. So, lets turn this on it's head - you provide evidence that he is a democratic politician. [Post edited 22 Jan 2024 15:11]
|
This will be my last try.
No, we're not going to turn around the burden of proof which is a founding principle of our civilization.
Trump is an immoral person and his personality and behaviour leave a lot to be desired. It doesn't make him a fascist.
He praised fascist dictators for being strong leaders. It doesn't make him a fascist.
There is a lot wrong with the electoral system it is definitely fixed in a few ways, but it isn't a winning strategy to call the result into question like Trump and Hillary both did. I see way you would accuse them both of being fascist in that respect, but Trump taking part in three elections where he could lose, suggests that he only has fascistic tendencies at worst.
He made a joke about being an elected dictator (dictators are not elected, hence the joke).
It is an unfortunate political norm at this stage to make political appointments to the court. If this is evidence for being a fascist, it applies to all recent Presidents.
There is an argument that the President should be above certain laws, especially while in office. Sadly, both sides in America seem intent on using the law to stop their political opponents. The argument is that a President has to be successfully impeached to be turned out of office and then he will be subject to prosecution thereafter.
You could colloquially call him a fascist like the way the characters on the Young Ones called people fascist when then disagreed them. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 18:36 - Jan 22 with 841 views | BlueNomad |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 18:29 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
This will be my last try.
No, we're not going to turn around the burden of proof which is a founding principle of our civilization.
Trump is an immoral person and his personality and behaviour leave a lot to be desired. It doesn't make him a fascist.
He praised fascist dictators for being strong leaders. It doesn't make him a fascist.
There is a lot wrong with the electoral system it is definitely fixed in a few ways, but it isn't a winning strategy to call the result into question like Trump and Hillary both did. I see way you would accuse them both of being fascist in that respect, but Trump taking part in three elections where he could lose, suggests that he only has fascistic tendencies at worst.
He made a joke about being an elected dictator (dictators are not elected, hence the joke).
It is an unfortunate political norm at this stage to make political appointments to the court. If this is evidence for being a fascist, it applies to all recent Presidents.
There is an argument that the President should be above certain laws, especially while in office. Sadly, both sides in America seem intent on using the law to stop their political opponents. The argument is that a President has to be successfully impeached to be turned out of office and then he will be subject to prosecution thereafter.
You could colloquially call him a fascist like the way the characters on the Young Ones called people fascist when then disagreed them. |
You are Tucker Carlson and I claim my £5!
Btw - Hitler stood in and won elections. It’s how he gained power. [Post edited 22 Jan 2024 18:37]
| | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 19:05 - Jan 22 with 809 views | eireblue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 17:40 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
I agree that you should be proud of something that you achieved, but it's also reasonable to be proud of something that you family members achieved. I'm definitely proud of my children, and to think what my mother and father did for me I suppose it is more gratitude. Whatever you want to call it, you should certainly not squander your inheritance thoughtlessly.
I think we are proud of our history (only the good parts not ignoring the bad) because we have a part in maintaining the good parts while working from a solid base to fix it. |
“ Whatever you want to call it..”
It isn’t what I want to call it, unless there is some agreed definitions in place, there is no basis for a discussion, otherwise you maybe talking about cats and I maybe taking about spaghetti, and boiling one of them for 12 minutes is not good.
We weren’t talking about children, we were discussing the passing of a specific set of cultural values, from history, based on a sense of pride.
You have been talking about preservation of “something” that should be applied generally across Britain. I maybe be mistakenly proud, since I did nothing, of my Great Aunt Jemima for unicycling through Poland, backwards. But that is no reason to extend that to society in general and have generations attempt to replicate that, as “King Eireblues countrywomen values”, and pass it down as something special.
Seems to me all you are talking about is generic application of human rights. Nothing more nothing less.
The French may bang on about “egalite fraternite liberte”. But I don’t think there is a special French fraternite that is different to what an Amazonian tribe would do.
I think anthropologists have done tests that show humans across the globe tend to make the same type of ethical decisions. | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 19:18 - Jan 22 with 798 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 10:04 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
It would be very easy to describe them as political prisoners which is similar to hostages.
Look at what the people did and the charges that they got. There is just no consistency with similar cases. There was no armed insurgency. The behaviour was not acceptable, but to pretend that it was an attempted overthrowing of the government when they used no guns and didn't really plan or coordinate it, is disingenuous. It was clearly a protest that got out of hand and Trump should also have done more not to whip up the protesters who turned into a mob. Still, he technically didn't condone the behaviour because he told them to go home and be peaceful. The problem in America is that both sides are waiting for the other side to do something bad so that they can then exaggerate it beyond recognition to score political points. |
Fk me. You’re in deep  |  |
| |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 22:46 - Jan 22 with 710 views | reusersfreekicks |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 09:50 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
The simple answer is weak leadership. Like Biden's campaign, he has either been absent or his leadership has been lacking during his time as President.
The enemies of the West have been waiting for an opportunity to push further. In 2014 the response to Russia annexing Crimea was too weak and Putin was biding his time until a weak leader was in charge of the US.
Biden demonstrated his weak leadership in the shambles of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. It was the right policy, but the execution was a national embarrassment.
That emboldened Putin. Then Hamas took the opportunity to attack Israel while America was distracted.
It can only be a hypothetical exercise, but I am confident that Putin wouldn't have attacked if America was governed by Trump. Trump was also brokering deals in the Middle East that gave Israel international recognition and made Israel safer from the Sunni countries. You may argue that provoked Iran and Hamas.
China needs strong pushback and Trump will do that better than Biden (or whoever is pulling the strings) would. |
Just nonsense from start to finish. Russia helped Trump get into power.
You are dangerously deluded |  | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 23:05 - Jan 22 with 703 views | reusersfreekicks |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 18:29 - Jan 22 by Europablue |
This will be my last try.
No, we're not going to turn around the burden of proof which is a founding principle of our civilization.
Trump is an immoral person and his personality and behaviour leave a lot to be desired. It doesn't make him a fascist.
He praised fascist dictators for being strong leaders. It doesn't make him a fascist.
There is a lot wrong with the electoral system it is definitely fixed in a few ways, but it isn't a winning strategy to call the result into question like Trump and Hillary both did. I see way you would accuse them both of being fascist in that respect, but Trump taking part in three elections where he could lose, suggests that he only has fascistic tendencies at worst.
He made a joke about being an elected dictator (dictators are not elected, hence the joke).
It is an unfortunate political norm at this stage to make political appointments to the court. If this is evidence for being a fascist, it applies to all recent Presidents.
There is an argument that the President should be above certain laws, especially while in office. Sadly, both sides in America seem intent on using the law to stop their political opponents. The argument is that a President has to be successfully impeached to be turned out of office and then he will be subject to prosecution thereafter.
You could colloquially call him a fascist like the way the characters on the Young Ones called people fascist when then disagreed them. |
Remind me, how many law suits did Hilary take out? How many electoral officials fid she pressurise to change results.
Pathetic equivalence | | | |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 08:18 - Jan 23 with 625 views | matteoblue |
| The world has gone mad (part 78,957) - Trump to win by a landslide Iowa caucus on 22:46 - Jan 22 by reusersfreekicks |
Just nonsense from start to finish. Russia helped Trump get into power.
You are dangerously deluded |
Lol, people *still* believe this conspiracy |  |
| We are Premier League, say we are Premier League! |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
