US politics

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

US politics

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 570 of 706 < 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 >

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 09 Mar 24 11.14am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I know all of that. One thing that Mueller complained about was the lack of cooperation and openness from Trump and his advisers. That rumours are either unsupported or unproven doesn’t mean they aren’t true or that the evidence doesn’t exist to support them , or that it has been found but not yet released because it needs to be verified. Mueller knew the truth. He was unable to reveal it due to two barriers. One being Barr’s ruling that a sitting President could not be indicted. The second being the need to prove what he knew to the level where a conviction would result. A conspiracy of silence and the construction of plausible deniability doesn’t mean that nothing exists. Hence the removal of the papers. How the FBI will handle this remains unknown, but they will. Perhaps by holding a “Sword of Damocles” over Trump to curtail him. I am merely speculating though. It's called hearsay but what the heck? Hang him anyway. Red and Blue Army!
Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 09 Mar 24 11.14am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I know all of that. One thing that Mueller complained about was the lack of cooperation and openness from Trump and his advisers. That rumours are either unsupported or unproven doesn’t mean they aren’t true or that the evidence doesn’t exist to support them , or that it has been found but not yet released because it needs to be verified.

Mueller knew the truth. He was unable to reveal it due to two barriers. One being Barr’s ruling that a sitting President could not be indicted. The second being the need to prove what he knew to the level where a conviction would result. A conspiracy of silence and the construction of plausible deniability doesn’t mean that nothing exists.

Hence the removal of the papers. How the FBI will handle this remains unknown, but they will. Perhaps by holding a “Sword of Damocles” over Trump to curtail him. I am merely speculating though.

It's called hearsay but what the heck? Hang him anyway.

Red and Blue Army!

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 11.15am
Originally posted by ASCPFC I know exactly what happened - none of the rumours are substantiated at all. That didn't stop the fact-checking BBC publishing them. Trump has been ordered to pay the legal costs of a suit he brought. Nothing more. Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases. The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts. Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:- [Link] For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 11.15am

Originally posted by ASCPFC

I know exactly what happened - none of the rumours are substantiated at all. That didn't stop the fact-checking BBC publishing them. Trump has been ordered to pay the legal costs of a suit he brought. Nothing more.

Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases.

The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts.

Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:-

[Link]

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 11.22am
Originally posted by ASCPFC It's called hearsay but what the heck? Hang him anyway. Hearsay can still be evidence but not yet strong enough to gain a conviction. Hence the need for verification. Trump hasn’t been hung. He has repeatedly described everything as a witch-hunt when the truth is he is as obvious a witch as anyone who ever lived. There’s no need to hunt him. Unfortunately dipping witches into rivers to see if they survive is no longer sufficient proof these days. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 11.22am

Originally posted by ASCPFC

It's called hearsay but what the heck? Hang him anyway.

Hearsay can still be evidence but not yet strong enough to gain a conviction. Hence the need for verification.

Trump hasn’t been hung. He has repeatedly described everything as a witch-hunt when the truth is he is as obvious a witch as anyone who ever lived. There’s no need to hunt him. Unfortunately dipping witches into rivers to see if they survive is no longer sufficient proof these days.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 09 Mar 24 11.29am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases. The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts. Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:- [Link] The report exists but actually all it does is collate rumours about Trump. It has no standard of evidence - it is just every rumour privately collated and then leaked as possible fact. Yet, no facts have been found to come from it. If any of the events were facts with accompanying evidence then we'd be seeing it all over the newspapers and on our screens. The judge can make whatever remarks they like: they shouldn't be able to but they prejudice people all the time. We've all seen it ourselves. What more do you want? Search all you like for images of Trump getting a golden shower with Putin watching. There was absolutely no need, for example, for rumours like that to be published - yet the BBC has. Why have they done that? Because we need to know? Why would we need to know that? When the Taoiseach of Ireland was snogging a guy in a gay bar, despite being married, the BBC did not publish that. Not even the rumours - although that was a fact. They did not publish images of the Finnish PM partying in a nightclub, yet they'll publish rumours about Trump verbatim. Rumours that were initially gathered by a political opponent using party funds. I hardly think any of us, including you, need to be geniuses to see the agenda. You should be concerned about this as a direct attack on democracy and a subversion of our media but you refuse to see it. Red and Blue Army!
Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 09 Mar 24 11.29am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases.

The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts.

Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:-

[Link]

The report exists but actually all it does is collate rumours about Trump. It has no standard of evidence - it is just every rumour privately collated and then leaked as possible fact. Yet, no facts have been found to come from it. If any of the events were facts with accompanying evidence then we'd be seeing it all over the newspapers and on our screens. The judge can make whatever remarks they like: they shouldn't be able to but they prejudice people all the time. We've all seen it ourselves. What more do you want? Search all you like for images of Trump getting a golden shower with Putin watching.
There was absolutely no need, for example, for rumours like that to be published - yet the BBC has. Why have they done that? Because we need to know? Why would we need to know that? When the Taoiseach of Ireland was snogging a guy in a gay bar, despite being married, the BBC did not publish that. Not even the rumours - although that was a fact. They did not publish images of the Finnish PM partying in a nightclub, yet they'll publish rumours about Trump verbatim. Rumours that were initially gathered by a political opponent using party funds. I hardly think any of us, including you, need to be geniuses to see the agenda. You should be concerned about this as a direct attack on democracy and a subversion of our media but you refuse to see it.

Red and Blue Army!

Alert a moderator to this post

eaglesdare 09 Mar 24 11.32am
Imagine waking up on a beautiful spring Saturday morning with the birds singing and Palace are playing and all you can think about is Trump.
Alert a moderator to this post

eaglesdare

09 Mar 24 11.32am

Imagine waking up on a beautiful spring Saturday morning with the birds singing and Palace are playing and all you can think about is Trump.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 09 Mar 24 12.22pm
Originally posted by ASCPFC The report exists but actually all it does is collate rumours about Trump. It has no standard of evidence - it is just every rumour privately collated and then leaked as possible fact. Yet, no facts have been found to come from it. If any of the events were facts with accompanying evidence then we'd be seeing it all over the newspapers and on our screens. The judge can make whatever remarks they like: they shouldn't be able to but they prejudice people all the time. We've all seen it ourselves. What more do you want? Search all you like for images of Trump getting a golden shower with Putin watching. There was absolutely no need, for example, for rumours like that to be published - yet the BBC has. Why have they done that? Because we need to know? Why would we need to know that? When the Taoiseach of Ireland was snogging a guy in a gay bar, despite being married, the BBC did not publish that. Not even the rumours - although that was a fact. They did not publish images of the Finnish PM partying in a nightclub, yet they'll publish rumours about Trump verbatim. Rumours that were initially gathered by a political opponent using party funds. I hardly think any of us, including you, need to be geniuses to see the agenda. You should be concerned about this as a direct attack on democracy and a subversion of our media but you refuse to see it. The BBC's latest trick is to quote from Russiagate the gory details and then claim that the report has been widely discredited. This is their version of The old Sun trick "shocking nude photographs of celebrity taken without their permission. See pages 2,3,4,5,6,7,8" One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 09 Mar 24 12.22pm

Originally posted by ASCPFC

The BBC's latest trick is to quote from Russiagate the gory details and then claim that the report has been widely discredited.

This is their version of The old Sun trick "shocking nude photographs of celebrity taken without their permission. See pages 2,3,4,5,6,7,8"

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 2.42pm
Originally posted by eaglesdare Imagine waking up on a beautiful spring Saturday morning with the birds singing and Palace are playing and all you can think about is Trump. I am in Estapona on the Costa del Sol where it ought to be sunny and warm but it is actually cold and very wet. To top that Palace will be playing a friendly in Marbella, a few miles away, next week but as it’s behind closed doors I cannot go! At least I can watch the game in a few minutes. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 2.42pm

Originally posted by eaglesdare

Imagine waking up on a beautiful spring Saturday morning with the birds singing and Palace are playing and all you can think about is Trump.

I am in Estapona on the Costa del Sol where it ought to be sunny and warm but it is actually cold and very wet.

To top that Palace will be playing a friendly in Marbella, a few miles away, next week but as it’s behind closed doors I cannot go!

At least I can watch the game in a few minutes.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 2.51pm
Originally posted by ASCPFC The report exists but actually all it does is collate rumours about Trump. It has no standard of evidence - it is just every rumour privately collated and then leaked as possible fact. Yet, no facts have been found to come from it. If any of the events were facts with accompanying evidence then we'd be seeing it all over the newspapers and on our screens. The judge can make whatever remarks they like: they shouldn't be able to but they prejudice people all the time. We've all seen it ourselves. What more do you want? Search all you like for images of Trump getting a golden shower with Putin watching. There was absolutely no need, for example, for rumours like that to be published - yet the BBC has. Why have they done that? Because we need to know? Why would we need to know that? When the Taoiseach of Ireland was snogging a guy in a gay bar, despite being married, the BBC did not publish that. Not even the rumours - although that was a fact. They did not publish images of the Finnish PM partying in a nightclub, yet they'll publish rumours about Trump verbatim. Rumours that were initially gathered by a political opponent using party funds. I hardly think any of us, including you, need to be geniuses to see the agenda. You should be concerned about this as a direct attack on democracy and a subversion of our media but you refuse to see it. The BBC reported the report, it having first surfaced on Buzznews. Do you seriously think they should just have ignored it or filtered out details that might offend? They made it clear that Steele was unable to verify the contents. The report was first commissioned by some “never- Trumpers”. Decent Republicans aware of the danger posed by him. It was subsequently taken up by the Clinton campaign as oppo research. She suffered from this type of activity much more than Trump did. I know next to nothing about the situation in Ireland as I pay little attention to it. The USA has rather more influence on world affairs. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 09 Mar 24 2.51pm

Originally posted by ASCPFC

The BBC reported the report, it having first surfaced on Buzznews.

Do you seriously think they should just have ignored it or filtered out details that might offend? They made it clear that Steele was unable to verify the contents.

The report was first commissioned by some “never- Trumpers”. Decent Republicans aware of the danger posed by him. It was subsequently taken up by the Clinton campaign as oppo research. She suffered from this type of activity much more than Trump did.

I know next to nothing about the situation in Ireland as I pay little attention to it. The USA has rather more influence on world affairs.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen Hong Kong 10 Mar 24 9.53am
In the US and the UK hearsay evidence can only be admitted under exceptional circumstances, if admitted it carries the same weight as any other evidence in terms of securing a conviction. "Hearsay can still be evidence but not yet strong enough to gain a conviction. Hence the need for verification." The above is not correct surprisingly. Edited by HKOwen (10 Mar 2024 9.54am) Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.
Alert a moderator to this post

HKOwen

Hong Kong 10 Mar 24 9.53am

In the US and the UK hearsay evidence can only be admitted under exceptional circumstances, if admitted it carries the same weight as any other evidence in terms of securing a conviction.

"Hearsay can still be evidence but not yet strong enough to gain a conviction. Hence the need for verification."

The above is not correct surprisingly.

Edited by HKOwen (10 Mar 2024 9.54am)

Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

Alert a moderator to this post

Phil’s Barber Crowborough 10 Mar 24 11.16am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases. The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts. Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:- [Link] He’s still going to get elected. He will be the next POTUS.
Alert a moderator to this post

Phil’s Barber

Crowborough 10 Mar 24 11.16am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Steele’s report isn’t a rumour! It exists. He always added the caveats that what it contained was raw data requiring verification. Verification that the FBI already possessed in some cases.

The BBC reported what the report said, and the caveats. They reported the facts.

Trump has been ordered to pay all the costs of the suit he brought with the Judge making some pretty damning remarks when doing so:-

[Link]

He’s still going to get elected.

He will be the next POTUS.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 10 Mar 24 11.19am
Originally posted by Phil’s Barber He’s still going to get elected. He will be the next POTUS. He should never have run....but considering what they are trying to do to him I don't blame him. If he wins in November it'll be justice time. They will try to cheat every which way they can...Let's see if the GOP are wise to the dirty underhand tactics this time around. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Mar 2024 11.21am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

10 Mar 24 11.19am

Originally posted by Phil’s Barber

He’s still going to get elected.

He will be the next POTUS.

He should never have run....but considering what they are trying to do to him I don't blame him.

If he wins in November it'll be justice time.

They will try to cheat every which way they can...Let's see if the GOP are wise to the dirty underhand tactics this time around.

Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Mar 2024 11.21am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 10 Mar 24 6.57pm
Originally posted by Phil’s Barber He’s still going to get elected. He will be the next POTUS. There’s a very long time to go yet and a week is a long time in politics. His base won’t be moved. They would still vote for him if the Devil endorsed him. He needs more than his base though and there are more than enough swing votes available. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 10 Mar 24 6.57pm

Originally posted by Phil’s Barber

He’s still going to get elected.

He will be the next POTUS.

There’s a very long time to go yet and a week is a long time in politics.

His base won’t be moved. They would still vote for him if the Devil endorsed him. He needs more than his base though and there are more than enough swing votes available.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 570 of 706 < 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

US politics

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors