This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
steeleye20 Croydon 30 Sep 20 8.55am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Cpfc1861
Trump is the only US president in living memory to not cause a war do you just outright accuse him with nonsubstance to back up your claims. According to Bob Woodward (All the President's Men') Trump was on a tight-rope over nuclear war with North Korea. And Trump is at economic war with anyone he deems affecting USA interests.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 30 Sep 20 8.58am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I accept that the rich employ tax and business structure experts whose sole purpose is to legally minimise their client's taxation burden. This though is different, for two reasons. Firstly Trump is no longer just a "rich businessman". He is President of the USA. All the recent incumbents have released their returns. All were under audit at the time. None had huge debts, personally guaranteed other than Trump. He could easily have avoided this by simply releasing them. That he didn't gives the appearance he has something to hide. Which seems justified. Secondly is the scale. To have paid nothing at all for so long, and then very little for two years, isn't going to appear "smart" when so many are suffering. I certainly have mitigated my taxation, after taking expert advice, by postponing some, but have never "dodged" any. There are things revealed by the NYT which appear to be potentially illegal and certainly politically questionable. Fair enough. I understand your sentiments. I don't hold presidents in as high esteem as you do. Many have done plenty of illegal things and some have just been morally bankrupt, even downright stupid or just puppets. Make up your own mind as to who they are.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 30 Sep 20 9.15am | |
---|---|
I don't know why people have an issue with Trump's $70,000 hair-do. After all you have to consider the postage and transportation charges........
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The Dolphin 30 Sep 20 9.28am | |
---|---|
It seems that last nights debate was somewhat unsavoury.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 30 Sep 20 9.36am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
According to Bob Woodward (All the President's Men') Trump was on a tight-rope over nuclear war with North Korea. And Trump is at economic war with anyone he deems affecting USA interests. ? We are on a tight-rope over nuclear war with North Korea. They are testing bombs in the Japanese sea. I'm not sure what you think can be done about that. The fact is that Trump started no new wars and indeed has reduced US involvement. Let's not forget that Clinton wanted increased involvement over Syria. As for Trump looking out for the US economy....? He built a bigger better economy for his country. Do you think that's done by bending over to China and the EU?....Of course you do Steely, silly question. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Sep 2020 12.15pm)
'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 30 Sep 20 9.38am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It's not election interference unless it's untrue! It's elector information if it's true. Is it true? It has all the appearance of being true. Many previous stories and established facts support it. If found to be untrue the consequences would be catastrophic for the NYT, whose fact-checkers, lawyers and editors would all be implemented. I don't see them taking such a risk. Trump's response also adds weight to the likelihood it's truth. If it was not then there is simply no impediment, audit or not, to him releasing them and proving they are untrue. That their release has been timed to produce the maximum opportunity to damage him is undoubtedly true. If you are convinced, as I am, that his removal is an imperative, then choosing that timing is a duty. So essentially you're fine with election interference when it's from the side you agree with. Complete hypocrisy.
'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 30 Sep 20 9.43am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
But it will be OK if they vote your man in? Don't make me laugh. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Sep 2020 10.32pm) It will take a lot more than just removing Trump, but it's a start. Making sure that both Houses lie in the hands of the Dems is equally important but amending their Constitution, which is what is really needed, is a long haul. This requires a 2/3rds majority in both Houses to even propose an amendment and then for 3/4 of the States to accept it. The benefits will have to be very obvious and indisputable for that to pass. It's possible but it will demand an inspirational leader to make the arguments.
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 30 Sep 20 9.55am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
So essentially you're fine with election interference when it's from the side you agree with. Complete hypocrisy. Nonsense. Exactly the same standards apply to who-ever might be involved. It just happens to be Trump who is right now but if a Democratic POTUS adopted these tactics then they would receive, and deserve, exactly the same criticism. The truth is, of course, that no other POTUS, be they Republican or Democrat, has even tried this kind of thing. Trump has taken the office of President to a new low. Any newspaper who is in possession of information which enables the voters to be aware of the truth about their choice for POTUS has a duty to reveal it, who-ever is involved.
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 |
Stirlingsays 30 Sep 20 10.00am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I accept that the rich employ tax and business structure experts whose sole purpose is to legally minimise their client's taxation burden. This though is different, for two reasons. Firstly Trump is no longer just a "rich businessman". He is President of the USA. All the recent incumbents have released their returns. All were under audit at the time. None had huge debts, personally guaranteed other than Trump. He could easily have avoided this by simply releasing them. That he didn't gives the appearance he has something to hide. Which seems justified. Secondly is the scale. To have paid nothing at all for so long, and then very little for two years, isn't going to appear "smart" when so many are suffering. I certainly have mitigated my taxation, after taking expert advice, by postponing some, but have never "dodged" any. There are things revealed by the NYT which appear to be potentially illegal and certainly politically questionable. There are many on the centre left who are happy to be conservative over finances because it suits them. They always look to reduce or 'avoid' taxes that relate to them, but they hypocritically advocate for increased public spending by the state. They always look to increase their personal wealth and do better than the average....like every capitalist out there but when you listen to their commentary it's all about the downtrodden. It reminds me of the story of Jesus and the tax man. The difference is that Jesus rejected the tax man because he wouldn't match personal words with personal deeds.....The difference in today's society is that no one is there to hold hypocrites to account....So there's a huge class of people who behave like bourgeoisie bolsheviks and even celebrate that fact. They talk of principles yet the truth is that when it comes to themselves 'principles' are a virtue signal and a commodity. The reality is that, when it comes down to it they share more with those they criticise than they care to admit....with the difference being that the capitalists are much more honest than them. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Sep 2020 10.04am)
'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 30 Sep 20 11.11am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Nonsense. Exactly the same standards apply to who-ever might be involved. It just happens to be Trump who is right now but if a Democratic POTUS adopted these tactics then they would receive, and deserve, exactly the same criticism. The truth is, of course, that no other POTUS, be they Republican or Democrat, has even tried this kind of thing. Trump has taken the office of President to a new low. Any newspaper who is in possession of information which enables the voters to be aware of the truth about their choice for POTUS has a duty to reveal it, who-ever is involved.
As for the information itself, the truth or lies of what's presented is one thing. The timing of the release itself is political and hence deliberate election interference. And considering the huge play the Democrats have made upon interference it's yet another example of their pure one eyed hypocrisy. It's ok when they do it. As for Trump as a person....I don't really care that much. What I care about is how he runs the economy, his pushback against far left ideology and how which president in the office affects the UK with the EU. So, essentially you find yourself against the British parliament on that. As not only have the Democrats looked to interfere with the Brexit deal they have openly come out against the British in relation to the EU and trading. Whereas Trump is far more keen, both on Brexit and a trade deal. So, once again, I find you are against the national interest.
'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 |
steeleye20 Croydon 30 Sep 20 11.20am | |
---|---|
Just seen the 'debate' and the moderator was just bullied by Trump and he let him get away with it. The challenger realised he was not going to get heard and traded blows. 'The worst US president in history' clearly true, look at how he has dragged the USA down. Just a loud-mouth bullying dictator.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 30 Sep 20 11.26am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Just seen the 'debate' and the moderator was just bullied by Trump and he let him get away with it. The challenger realised he was not going to get heard and traded blows. 'The worst US president in history' clearly true, look at how he has dragged the USA down. Just a loud-mouth bullying dictator. Trump isn't a nice person...accepted. However, he isn't a dictator. And I'll say this Steely....when it does come to 'bullying dictators', the left are where the real authoritarians are right now....not on the right. Biden is a weak and feeble man, and what stands behind him is a wrecking ball. You might like that...and in some ways it also suits my side. But a large part of me still doesn't enjoy looking into a potential abyss. I'm a tad conflicted in that way....Then again, if Trump wins it'll happen anyway so feck it. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Sep 2020 11.28am)
'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 |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.